Memeriffic

Mar. 11th, 2006 09:54 pm
judith_s: (Default)
tagged by garandman

5 Guilty Pleasures meme...

1. Sleep. If I could, I'd sleep until noon every day.

2. Chocolate. I know, how very female of me.

3. Books. I know I should just go to the library, but I like owning books. They're so cuddly.

4. The Internet. I'm a compulsive Internet browser. I spend an inordinate number of hours doing random research & poking around on the Web.

5. Coffee. I don't feel very guilty about this, but a good latte is definitely a pleasure.


I don't like tagging folks, so consider yourself tagged if you like the meme.
judith_s: (Default)
The New York Times reports that the percentage of women in the workforce has plateaued. At the peak in 2000, some 77 percent of women in the prime ages of 25 to 54 were in the work force, but the procentage has dropped in the last six years. This is relatively interesting, but what I find particularly interesting is this tidbit:

Professor Bianchi, who studies time-use surveys done by the Census Bureau and others, has concluded that contrary to popular belief, the broad movement of women into the paid labor force did not come at the expense of their children. Not only did fathers spend more time with children, but working mothers, she found, spent an average of 12 hours a week on child care in 2003, an hour more than stay-at-home mothers did in 1975.

Instead, mothers with children at home gained the time for outside work by taking it from other parts of their day. They also worked more over all. Professor Bianchi found that employed mothers, on average, worked at home and on the job a total of 15 hours more a week and slept 3.6 fewer hours than those who were not employed.

"Perhaps time has been compressed as far as it will go," she suggested. "Kids take time, and work takes time. The conflicts didn't go away."


I'm also in the middle of a trend, it turns out. Women's participation in the labor force is being restrained by a side effect of delayed motherhood: a jump in 30-something mothers with toddlers.

That just feels like my life in a nutshell. Yup, we're all tired. But it's really nice to see that some researchers have found that working mothers don't walk to work over their children. Yay.

In other news, I need a nap.

No suprise

Feb. 22nd, 2006 11:07 pm
judith_s: (Default)
Who was saying that Roe v. Wade was so entrenched that it wasn't at risk even with Roberts and Alito? South Dakota just passed a near-total abortion ban. Proposed amendments to the law to create exceptions to specifically protect the health of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest, were voted down. It is obviously unconstitutional if Roe v. Wade is still good law, but they're hoping the new and "improved" Supreme Court will overturn it.

Did I mention my suggestion that the legislators who pass obviously unconstitutional laws pay for the litigation costs? This is going to cost South Dakota probably in excess of $20M.
judith_s: (Default)
None of this is particularly new, but I've often been tempted to do something like this annotated rant about various things. I like the idea a lot, and the execution is pretty well done too.
judith_s: (Default)
Score Love Language
5 Words of Affirmation
9 Quality Time
0 Receiving of Gifts
5 Acts of Service
11 Physical Touch

No surprise.
judith_s: (Default)
A link in case the image doesn't work, but this is why I hate Valentine's Day.

I love this card!

Thanks, [livejournal.com profile] lrc.
judith_s: (Default)
you get invited to the bat mitzvah of a college friend's kids. Wow! I guess it has been 13 years.
judith_s: (Default)
This article deconstructs the myth that the reason Americans are declaring bankruptcy, and the reason our savings rate is so abysmal, is because we like to buy too much stuff. Very interesting.

Magazines

Jan. 8th, 2006 10:41 pm
judith_s: (Default)
Someone whose livejournal I read regularly because of here interesting views on language [livejournal.com profile] ozarque just said: "If you've been reading this journal a while you're aware that I read every issue of Forbes, in order to get an idea of the worldview of the prototypical Rich Person -- and that I've learned a tremendous amount about the way an RP defines his or her terms."

Now I know that folks who really are well off don't particularly care for Forbes. But is there another, more real, magazine that is targeted at the person who is really rich, and not just a wannabe?
judith_s: (Default)
I'm a slacker. I don't have a single MP3 on my (work) computer. But I found a spiffy new site that's keeping me entertained, pandora.com. It's a music streaming site, that matches music to your initial entry. So for example, I'm now listening to a channel that was created by entering Thelonious Monk (feeling like swing-y jazz, Or, to quote these guys: block piano cords, solo piano performance, angular melodies, major tonality and quirky ideas. They even tell you why the songs are similar.). The "feel" of the songs slowly evolves from the first song title/artist you enter. It's really cool. And I have never heard of half the artists.

I'm taking bets that someone on my friends list knows one of the folks who started it, since it's in Oakland, and based on the "music genome project."

Anyway, I recommend it if you have good network and feel like exploring music a bit.
judith_s: (Default)
Yeah, my life is pretty good. But then, I knew that. here is a meme for you )
This looks even better, if you look at the statistics
judith_s: (Default)
Mediamatters has a beautiful deconstruction how a made-up allegation goes from small comments to being reported as observed truth. In this case, it's about throwing Oreos at a Republican candidate during a debate. The story gets embellished, by the candidate and his staff, every time.

In other words, don't trust what you read.
judith_s: (Default)
We had pondered doing a Holiday Cookie Bake on Sunday the 18th. There was some rumor that [livejournal.com profile] whumpdotcom might host. In any case, I wanted to ask if anyone would be interested in coming.
judith_s: (Default)
We're planning on:

1. Cleaning house.
2. Meeting with my ex-boyfriend and his kid, he has partial custody of his 1-year-old
3. Having coffee with someone. Anyone? Bueller?
4. Seeing a movie. Likely Aeon Flux, Narnia, or Good Night, And Good Luck. Recommendations? Interest in joining us?

What are you planning for the weekend?
judith_s: (Default)
So pinged a few friends today for lunch... and once I started, I just kept pinging. I was reminded that I suck at keeping in touch (by this meme from kawgirl), and I thought I'd at least say hi to some friends I haven't seen in way too long. Now I feel weirdly nervous. I wonder how many of the people will respond.
judith_s: (Default)
Swiped from [livejournal.com profile] d3l1r1um. This is the LJ Year in Review meme. Take the first entry from each month and post the first sentence/paragraph/whatever makes most sense. I added a note to it, classifying the entry. another meme all about me )
So yes, mostly invitations and memes with the occasional random link or point of amusement.
judith_s: (Default)
No one has time. I think we'll reschedule for January. That way we can pretend it is a birthday party, and maybe more people will come by.

In other news, I can't deciding what I consider humanity's worst invention to enter in this contest. Any suggestions?
judith_s: (Default)
We haven't been social in much too long. So we want to plan a leisurely brunch with cookie baking/swap in December. [livejournal.com profile] kawgirl planned one last year and it was fun.

The idea is to get together for brunch noon-ish, and then make & bake cookies starting around 2 p.m. We would, of course, still have bagels, random chats, games, etc.

The big question is which Sunday.

How many of you would come on Sunday December 11th, versus Sunday December 18th? Preferences? The last few times brunches were a little low on folks, so I want to make sure that people are available.