Bringing Sexy Back

i have been inspired to resurrect my blog by, of all things, the lameness of others. i am a firm believer in it's-never-too-late. for example, it's never too late to eat a bowl of ice cream. it's never too late to pick up the book you started 6 months ago and put down 5 months ago. it's never too late to file some marginally-applicable authority (and well disguised argument) with the court in a desperate effort to get the last word in. thus, i feel no shame in picking up the pen after many, many months of saying nothing of my glamorous life.

arguably, if you even have time to update the internet on your goings-on, there is a problem. however, i promise i will never recount everything (or anything) i ate in the last 24 hours or blindly list every mannequin featured at madame tussaud's. i'll save those gems for after P checks me in to a nursing home, the posh-ness of which is a direct reflection on his assessment of my parenting. because in all seriousness, until that time i have many, many other things to report on.

the complete failure of humanity comes to mind. i've managed to keep 9 3/4 months of pregnancy (the perils of which will no doubt be the topic of a future episode) and the subsequent 4 1/2 months of motherhood pretty light-hearted -- although i should have anticipated that a baby who made his appearance at 4:55 a.m. would consider that an appropriate time to wake up every morning thereafter. at any rate, a judge ruled today that there is nothing inappropriate, dishonest, or outrageous about baiting an obviously mentally ill homeless man with cigarettes, secretly videotaping an innocent conversation, and spinning his responses to parallel the characteristics of a fugitive on the FBI's most wanted list for decapitating his family and setting his house on fire, and broadcasting these so-called "uncanny similarities "on a statewide newsbroadcast. is this easily-recognizable local homeless man actually a mass murderer? tune in at 10 to find out! . . . to find out that, although they both have blue eyes and attend prayer meetings, the answer is unequivocally NO because local legend, affectionately known as parkaman, is six inches too tall and has a verified identity (even if he's not sure what it is). no matter that he received death threats after the story aired. no matter that he was forced to relocate his "home" from the ditch in front of walmart store no. 1299 to an undisclosed location. again -- makes my stomach turn over, but, as a matter of law, not outrageous.

this is what we in america call free speech. you need not speak the absolute truth, even if you know unequivocally what it is, but only the "substantial" truth skewed in a way to maximize your ratings. you need not respect the space of a homeless man because "there is no right to privacy in a public park." the word "no" actually means "yes" when you lack the wherewithall to recognize when someone is duping you with tobacco. and oh yes, there's nothing wrong with secretly videorecording and publishing a conversation as long as one person -- presumably the person with the camera -- knows it's there. this is the america i must raise my son in and protect him from.

so i get it -- that's the law and it's a balancing act of one person's rights and responsibilities against another. and maybe it works well for the average person. being the outspoken author of a blog, i may myself have to rely on the substantial truth defense some day. but why does the law leave behind the people who need it most? the people who can't stand up for and protect themselves. the unsexy. imagine if someone compared me to a mass murderer on a statewide television broadcast . . . i'd make a career out of making bad publicity for those jerks and good publicity for me. use that as a jumpstart to write some legislation demanding the return of integrity to the news media, spend a few months lobbying in D.C. and finally be interesting enough to appear on the howard stern show. presumably to explain how my proposed legislation gels with my love and respect for howard stern. in fact, aren't there any hard-nosed journalists who would do just about anything to get a story out there that want to fabricate a story about me? i guess i'm not exactly an easy target.

in other news, P has a new trick: what i like to call the NEED IT NOW. this presents itself mostly when P is sitting in my lap while i am trying to get some work done at home. as long as i'm writing, P is happy to sit in my lap, grunting quietly and kick-kick-kick-kicking his little legs (and only every 6th or 7th one will hit my hand, sending my pen skidding across the page). but as soon as i pick something up -- my phone, my dictator, a sandwich -- P comes to life! he immediately perks up and i can hear the unformed thought screaming through his head: "i don't know what that is but i NEED IT IN MY MOUTH ASAMFP!" as he stretches his little arms and pants and groans with effort. (his little trick presents itself at the end of the video, after much wiggling and jiggling and giggling). so far, P is content with just wanting, and not actually having. this will not last long . . . but his excitement and curiosity at the unknown are uplifting.

today i feel the weight of both the bigness and the smallness of the world. and so, i am back.

get your sexy on

go 'head be gone with it.