ape hangers

I learned about something new today. It's a style of motorcycle called an "Ape Hanger." Here's an example:



Obviously you can see why the call it an "Ape Hanger." The handle bars are way up high, and the feet are spread out. Now consider the antithesis in the biking world of the "Ape Hanger," the SuperBike:



It's the polar opposite. For the ape hanger, the higher the handle bars, and the wider the feet, the better. For the superbike, the more compressed and tight, the better. Check out this dude's extreme ape hanger:



My question is this: Is one a response to the other? Do the ape hangers want to go higher and wider because the superbikes are lower and tighter, or vice versa?

Here's another thing to consider. Check out the way emo/punk (not sure what they're called now) people dress:



Now consider their antithesis, the thug/rapper/gangsta (again, not sure what to call them):


(it's lil wayne!)

So while the emo people go tighter and smaller (to the point of boys wearing girls jeans), the thugs go bigger and baggier. Again, is one a response to the other? Do the emo people go tighter because the thugs are baggier?

I'm not sure what I'm trying to say with this, but it just seems interesting how both of these examples show opposite extremes, and it just doesn't seem coincidental. But maybe it is. I'm just wondering if each style is a response to be as different as possible from the other.

Maybe a flaw of what I'm saying is that these four groups are not in competition or "rivals" of each other, so the link I'm trying to make is illegitimate. But maybe it's not.

Any thoughts?

still divided

The presidential election on November 4, 2008 was an historic event for our nation. Given our painful history, an African-American president-elect is a step in the direction of reconciliation. Yet we cannot ignore the deep divide that still exists not only in our nation but in the Church. We hear some believers as they express excitement about a president-elect who is decidedly against unnecessary war and believes we are not doing enough to address poverty in our nation and a broken health care system. At the same time, there are other believers who see a president-elect Obama as a sign the end is near. They believe his tax plan hints of socialism and his ethical views are sinful. Make no mistake: we are deeply divided, and this divide goes beyond race.

As believers, or in a more general sense, as human beings, I fear we have lost our sense of humility and our tolerance for ambiguity. Without hesitation we promote our opinions as if they were not frail human creations but absolute truths from God. It is a sad time when we cannot or will not admit we do not know all that we claim to know with any certainty. No matter where we fall on these issues or for whom we voted on November 4, we have to be willing to admit that we are not as “right” as we think we are. Too often, it is this attitude of certainty that alienates our brothers and sisters who believe differently. Until we are willing to reach across the aisles of the church and dialog with those who follow the same Jesus but supported different candidates, we will continue to perpetuate the great divide that says, “I’m right and you’re wrong and I will treat you poorly because of it.” Now is a time for a humility that admits human weakness and a perfect love that casts out fear of one another.

CPBS

Wherever you stand on the election, one thing is clear. Both candidates have been completely silent on an issue that plagues America every day:

Creamy Peanut Butter Supremacy.

That's right. Forget the financial crisis and the environment. This is a serious issue. Every grocery store near my house AND the Target show blatant texture bias toward creamy. A consumer can find cans of creamy peanut butter in every size, from the personal to the family size. But try to find a fair representation of chunky. You're lucky to find a tiny little can of it shoved way back on the shelf.

It is a sad day when chunky peanut butter lovers are not treated equally, and that day has come. I dream of the day when peanut butter will not be judged by texture and consistency but by those who love the product.

Please, end creamy peanut butter's reign on the peanut butter isle. Support chunky. That's change we all need.

Why I Love LA

Tonight, the day after St. Patrick's Day, I'm going with a French guy, two Belgian guys, a guy from Indiana, and a Mexican girl to hear some Latin Jazz at a place that only makes Baked Potatoes just across the street from Universal City. What?

diversity and soda (from xanga)

Here's a blog I originally posted for xanga. Not new, but worth reposting:

I think diversity (in terms of racial/ethnic/cultural/etc diversity) is a lot like soda. Think about how many different kinds of soda are out there: Coke, Pepsi, Dr. Pepper, Sprite, Mt. Dew, Cherry Coke or Pepsi, Fresca, Grape, Birch/Root Beer, and on and on. And each kind has a diet version. In some cases, there are kinds that have extra caffeine versions. So the possibilities are endless.

But in terms of color, there aren't very many sodas: brown, clear, yellowish, purple, maybe a few more. So if we look at the diversity of soda in terms of appearance, we are really looking at it in a limited sense. But when we consider flavors, the possibilities become endless. Sure, Dr. Pepper and Diet Coke might both be brown, but they have very different flavors. Sprite and Sierra Mist Free (or whatever it's called) may both be clear, but one has a ton of sugar and the other has caffeine (at least I think...). So to just talk about the color of soda really limits the discussion of diversity.

I'm sure you figure out where I'm going here. A lot of people may look at a group of people and say, "I see a lot of white people. That's not very diverse." But is this really fair to say? Pick any two of the white people from that crowd and you will find two very different cultural backgrounds. And really, isn't that what diversity's all about? Or should we just limit it to color?

So the question could become, "What is diversity, really?" Is it different skin colors? Or is it different cultural backgrounds. Think of it like this: there are many families that have adopted children of a different race when they are very young. These children then grow up in a certain culture that may be very different than the culture of their specific ethnicity. Say a family has one child and adopts another of a different ethnicity. Are those two children very different from each other just because of skin color? Or does the culture in which they were raised determine who they are?

I guess what I'm getting at is that we have really limited the discussion on diversity by making it about color. In one sense, you could say this actually works against diversity since it limits it to a kind of stereotype. It may cause someone to look at a group of people who appear to be the same "color" and consider them all to be pretty much the same.

I guess I'm not ok with that.