Suicide is a very touchy subject, but one that is close to me.

My father committed suicide 5 days before my 12th birthday by intentionally crashing his car. (My family told me he died in a car accident, not completely the truth, to protect me. I found out it was suicide when I was 18.) He had bi-polar disorder, also known as being manic-depressive, and I remember visiting him a couple of times before he died at Griffen, the mental hospital down in Norman. Because of this history, I volunteered at a suicide hotline during college. I wanted to help people try to avoid the same fate my dad had, by being someone neutral they could talk to. Someone they could be anonymous with, and tell what was bothering them without fear of judgment or reprisal. Only if I determined they were in immediate danger of hurting themselves or someone else would I have had police or our crisis teem intervene. Those times were very few, as most people just needed someone to talk to.

A documentary about people who commit suicide by jumping off the Golden Gate bridge has peeked my curiosity, despite the grim subject. Called The Bridge, filmmaker Eric Steele captured jumpers on film, and interviewed their friends and family to try and understand what brought them to the Golden Gate Bridge to end their life.

There has been controversy surrounding this film, however. When Steele put in for the permit to film at the bridge, he did not disclose his intent to film people committing suicide. He did not want people to use the cameras as an opportunity to get their suicides onto film, therefore he saw it as saving lives. The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention was invited to a screening, and they do not endorse the film. They worry that it could encourage vulnerable individuals to imitate what they see and cause more suicides. But other mental health organizations in San Francisco welcomed the film, and are glad it has brought the morbid subject about the bridge to light. There is an excellent article showing both sides here.

Despite the controversy, I feel it is a good thing to bring suicide, and what people who are going through thoughts of death are thinking, into light. Too often in our society we tell people to just toughen up, or don’t think about it, or more commonly, pop meds and you’ll feel better. But what happens when the meds don’t work? Or what happens when people take the pills, but do not address issues or circumstances that are making them depressed to begin with? We’ve come a long way from when my dad was seeking treatment, but there is still a stigma attached to mental illness.

Oh, and for those of you who think the title is crass…it’s a nod to the cult black comedy Heathers. Check it out if you haven’t seen it!

If you saw this billboard, you wouldn’t be surprised to hear there was at least one complaint. But you’d be surprised to hear what the New Zealand pizza company, called Hell Pizza, was censured for.

The caption says: Hell. Too good for some evil bastards.
It wasn’t about using Bush’s picture, or saying he was too evil for
hell. It was that the word ‘bastard’ is used and seen as offensive.
Yep, you can call him evil, even more evil than the devil himself, but
just don’t call him an evil bastard.

In Atlantic Beach, Florida, a woman was so horrified and offended to be forced to answer the question, “What is a vagina?” from her niece, she complained.  The girl saw the word on a sign advertising The Vagina Monologues.  The woman who complained got Atlantic Theaters to change the name to what a child calls a vagina, a “hoohaa”.

It never ceases to piss me off when just one or even a handful of complaints prompt the removal or changing of wording.  I am offended by a lot of the church signs around here, but I don’t ask them to remove or change them.  It is their right to be able to display what they want.  Freedom of speech doesn’t mean you have to please or not offend.  But really, does she get offended when her doctor asks about her monthly breast exam?  Or what happens if she has to say the word vagina?  This is just really crazy to get offended.  It’s not like the sign said any of the other, more risque or offensive, terms for a vagina.  That is the correct term!

Which makes me think of a monologue I’ve heard, I believe it was George Carlin.  A word is a word, no matter what it is describing.  It makes no sense why some words are offensive, but others, really saying the same thing, are not.  Take shit.  Kids can say poop, dookie, or number two.  I say crap a lot at work.  But really, those are all just “nicer” replacement words for shit.  Just like Christians who say dang, gosh, golly, gee, etc.  They are really saying god damn, without *really* saying god damn and “breaking a commandment”.

Why can’t we just say words we want to?  Well, I think one reason to keep some words as vulgar is a good thing.  Otherwise they lose their impact when you are pissed or excited or want to “talk dirty” with your partner.

Anyway, in a related vein, don’t let the lady in Florida ever see the restaurant Pink Taco…

I am both excited yet peeved. With my tax refund this year, I am going to get a new laptop. I’ve been wanting one for a little while, and have been looking around at different models, finally settling for an HP v6000z (unless something equivalent or better goes on sale when I get my money). I’d like a Mac, but I just can’t afford their high prices. My timing for this isn’t ideal, however, as Windows just launched their new operating system, Vista. Now, unless I opt to get a refurbished or used laptop, I am stuck with Vista as an OS.

I don’t want Vista, and for a few reasons.

First, it just launched. It’s never good to get the first release of anything, be it an OS or new hardware. There are always bugs, like the overheating problems of the Xbox 360, and the need for patches and fixes in *insert program/game here*.

But my biggest gripe is their strong use of Digital Rights Management (DRM). Dwight over at Two-Headed Blog did a post about how the Metro Library is DRM-ing its audiobook downloads, and it fueled my already growing irritation at Vista and DRM.

Microsoft is deciding what I can do with MY music that I purchased. Say I buy a CD, bring it home, and want to rip it onto my computer. In the Vista version of Media Player, there is no way for me to uncheck the box that says to “protect my music with encryption”. So even though I legally bought that music, I am unable to do with it what is in my rights under Fair Use. Hell, even Steve Jobs came out the other day favoring DRM-free music. Although he has yet to instruct iTunes to start selling it DRM free…

Another restriction, according to a coworker who has been toying with the latest Beta version of Vista, is that the DVD Shrink program doesn’t work. What that program does is make it possible to have a dual layer DVD fit onto a single layer. i.e. more stuff can fit on a DVD. Microsoft must be assuming that people using this program are copying DVD movies and burning them. Again, that is within my rights if I own the DVD to make a copy for personal use. How many disks have gotten scratched and no longer play, that you wish you had another copy? I shouldn’t have to go out and buy a new disk. That program also has other legitimate uses. Say I had several home movies I transfered off my digital camera of my baby grrl, but it was more than 4GB. I could use that to shrink it down to fit onto one DVD.

Yet another DRM restriction is that in order for a driver to work, it wll need to be digitally signed by Microsoft. No more open source drivers. Small companies who can’t afford to get their drivers signed won’t be able to do business to Vista customers. It pisses me off to no end that Microsoft is being so proprietary and such a monopoly.

I’ve found a Wiki for putting Linux on the model of laptop I’m looking at, and am determined to get it working. My big hurdle will be the wireless, which still doesn’t have native Linux drivers. But I will give it a go, since I really want to run Linux and not get stuck with DRM covered Vista.

Technorati tags: defective by design, mafiaa, freedoms, drm, microsoft,

Something is very wrong with the state Congress in South Dakota.
Even though the voters rejected an abortion ban, the House of Representatives think they know best and are going to do what they want anyway. They have introduced a revised ban, with harsher penalties. Sure, they have provisions for rape and incest this time, but there are restrictions and reporting requirements.

What the hell? The people voted, saying they don’t want it. The politicians are elected by the people, and are supposed to represent them. Not do what they want… Oh. Wait. I guess they have such a great example of just doing whatever the hell they want in the Bush administration.

The other piece in the dual South Dakota Congress stories, is a member of the South Dakota Senate was censured for fondling an 18-year-old legislative page in a motel bed. The Senate didn’t expell him. Oh no. Just a censure. And two congressmen voted against that!

So apparently it’s ok to fondle someone inappropriately, but forget using freedom of choice what a woman can do with her own body.