Michelle Obama, I got to get me some of that! WOOF!!!

When the country was first introduced to the First Lady, I think her credentials were touted. I knew she was a lawyer making six figures and I knew she was working in the highest echelons of the University of Chicago Medical Center.

I only really started hearing about her fashion in relationship to the exorbitant style of Mrs. Cindy McCain. When Michelle appeared on The View and was sporting that classy, yet unassuming number from White House/Black Market the country was captivated by her penchant for making "inexpensive wear" (I don't spend $150 on dresses but I can definitely see how that is frugal for a woman in her position) look appropriate and timely. On the other hand, when it comes to style I remember talking about how Cindy's ensemble for the convention was about a third of a million dollars (though she didn't look much more lovely).

I think the media had it set in their minds waaayyyyyyy in advance no matter who the First Lady was going to be, they were going to scrutinize her image. That's what they do. I don't see any inclination that she prompted this. Also, I like to she how she looks because she's gone through a bit of a transformation. Her look now is much more natural and appealing.

Though Michelle is beautiful (her stylish should be getting paid overtime because if you look at pictures back in 2007 and early 2008 she tended to look like a garish drag queen with too heavy of makeup and sever shape to her eyebrows) during the campaign her ensembles from J Crew, H & M, etc were nice, but didn't make her stand out or be the center of attention. I think that's commendable! There was an opportunity she could have capitalized on, but why? She didn't need to

I don't want the media to STOP talking about her style, I just want them to talk more about the other projects she's working on. It's a reoccurring theme, it’s unbalanced (The media could balance the situation a bit more if they didn’t just talk about Womenswear, but the Menswear too). The truth is, if you want to know about her, you can easily find out, it's just not as likely to be right their when you turn on the tube. Get a book. The biography Michelle by Liza Mundy is a good place to start. You have to be actively interested in the first ladies to know about them beyond the media which will undoubtedly present image and eventually if they are or aren’t keeping their promises for the country, in this case working with the military families.

Fashion Fashion Fashion

If you initially thought this was going to be about her "looks", here's my 2 pennies:

Swearing In

She wore a Cuban designer to the inauguration. I assumed she would wear American, but I have no issue with it. It was a memorable color, at first seeming gold, but then hues or yellow and green. The color literally was “brilliant”. The texture looked lush. I loved the neckline accent and the gloves were fabulous.

12 Inaugural Balls

She put the 26 year old Taipei-born New Yorker Jason Wu on the map with her Ball attire. At first glance, she looked stunning. I love texture, but on tv the dress kinda looked like it had a bunch of unwieldy puff balls all around. The light cream/bone color was nice, but I kinda wish it was echoed in the Presidents bow-tie instead of the pearl white he wore. I don't think I've ever seen an off white bow-tie, that could have been a unique plus. She had her hair down for the inauguration, so I would have liked to have seen it in a stately up-do for the ball. (A la Palin... just kidding) Obviously the dress was too long! That is a negative for the designer. Shame on your Wu!! The team had to know their were going to be dancing ALL NIGHT. They could have taken an inch off the bottom. It was totally distracting the way they were both tripping over it and she had to keep getting it out of the way. Total bummer. Now you know I've lived in Hollywood, because I was half expecting her to do a wardrobe change or two. Ha! I mean, she did go to 12 Balls (source: Countdown with Keith Olbermann, I only stayed up to watch 6), though they were late to most of them, she could have slipped in to a snappy red number? No?

Immigration Station

From visas to bank accounts, this blog is designed to help you brainstorm questions and find answers to export yourself legally. I look for everything online, but had trouble readily finding information on how to legally move to another country. In this case, (immigrating to Canada) mai best resources were the officers at the Canadian boarder, the Port of Entry personnel in Detroit, Michigan, and my school, the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine.

(This info is US to Canada specific. Though perhaps not your specific destination, the following points should help you develop your own Immigration Station checklist.)

Passports/Passcards: Do you have a passport? Since January 1, 2009 it is required to have a passport to go anywhere outside the US. Before, you could go to Mexico, Canada, the Caribbean and other destinations without one. They just required ID such as a drivers license, state id card, or birth certificate. Now you must have one to cross any boarder. Be careful, often times it is easier to leave the US than to enter back in! Partly, because of this new law they have "invented" the Passcard. I've been advocating this to all my relatives who must get their passport for the first time, or obtain a new one. Passports are $115 (You get $15 off if you are a AAA member-- go figure) Passcards however are only $45!! Of course, with a passport you can go anywhere you want in the world (or just about) but with a passcard you can only travel to other countries in North America, and you can only travel by land or sea. Yup no flights. Only car, train, bus, boat or ship. Interesting, no? Passports, and visas are costly. I actually kinda expected visas to be free, don't ask me why.

Visa: How long are you planning on staying? You can stay in Canada for 6 months before you have to attain a visa. This was surprising to me. Check with the individual country you are moving to to find what their specifics are. I found this info from my school and it was corroborated by the port authority in Detroit.

Work/Study Permits: Will you be allowed to work? I'm not allowed to get a work visa, only a student visa. My husband is allowed a restricted work visa by default because he's married to me. Honestly, this really bites. I guess they are worried that all the immigrates are gonna come and take the jobs away from the Canadians (wow, they kinda sound American to me--Paper Planes...). My husband's visa is restricted which means he's not allowed to work with children unless he takes and passes certain medical examinations. Do you already have a job? Often times when you are moved to another country by an employer they are your “sponsor” and often cover your passport and visa expenses.

Motor Vehicles: Will you be allowed to drive in this country? Going to Canada from the US you don’t have to worry about getting another drivers license, but that wouldn’t be the case if you where going to say... Europe. Metric system or no? Driving specifics: While driving in Canada you have to remember the us kilometers per hour not miles per hour like we do in the States.

Cell Phone Carriers: This was an unexpected bummer. I’m addicted to my sidekick. I’ve had a myriad of the Sidekick variations over the past 5 years. If you think you can keep Sprint, Nextel, Boost, Cricket, T-Mobile, or even the surprising one AT&T (I thought they were global, don’t ask me why) THINK AGAIN!!! In Canada, they have several carriers but NONE are international calling friendly ($$$$$) Also, you may be surprised to learn that your device may not work there. I have heard about perhaps having a device “unlocked”. I’m not quite sure what this process or expense would be but would like to know more. Supposedly, if you get your device unlocked your new carriers’ SIM card should be able to work in it. T-Mobile denies this is possible and maintains that only their SIM cards are designed to work in their devices. Blackberrys and iPhones are very popular worldwide. It maybe a worthwhile investment.

Banks: I can’t stand the banking system in Canada. It’s much more of an expense. In the States you can easily get free savings and checking especially if you have direct deposit (Chase, Credit Unions, and Bank of America are a few examples of this). How will you exchange your money?

Apartments: We’ve had a lot of success with this one, so I cant readily think of something to look out for. Perhaps find out if you will be able to rent a place without citizenship status.

Healthcare: If you have prescription drugs you should think about if you will be allowed to take them with you, and how you will get them once you are living abroad. Also, what is the state of their public healthcare? Will you be eligible for it?

Belongings: Find out what things you have to declare before you can cross the boarder. Sometimes you cant bring edibles, perishables, or organics from one country to another. Other times you have to declare money when you bring a certain amount or more (must declare $10,000+ to enter Canada).

BEST OF BLESSINGS & GOOD TRAVELS

another source:

Citizenship and Immigration Canada
www.cic.gc.ca

Blargue: Slanguage 103

BLARGUE- (blahr-ghyoo) to argue via text especially in a web log (blog) format.

This freewrite blog is an excuse for me to enter a new word into your vocabulary (blogcabulary?-ok maybe that's pushing it). I devised the two hybrid words: blargue & slanguage. Let’s talk about them...

Though it should never be encouraged, I don’t think there is any way around blarguing except ignoring the offending blarguments altogether. This is because too many misunderstandings occur. I've noticed this for years. First over AIM, then emails, now text messages, and blogs.

Blarguing goes a bit deeper than just arguing via text. While misunderstandings and miscommunications occur via voice in person, over the phone, etc. it doesn’t happen with the same frequency as via text. This is because of the inability to detect tone of voice and therefore tone of message. We try to compensate for this by using emoticons :) smiley :( frowny ;) winky and many many more, but even those never quite fully transcend the obstacles and hardships of the blargument.

Avoiding the blargument is made more difficult by those with the intention to incite blarguments. Sometimes people warp what they really believe just to play devil's advocate. I've never been a fan of this method, but I've seen other mature, responsible people employ this method with wisdom to much benefit. Advocating the devil can bring about thoughtful discussions. Of course, most of the time those playing devil's advocate go down that dark unwholesome path.

Is there significant difference between the terms "argue" and "blargue"? Do you think “blargue” is a valuable word? Will you adopt this term into your vocabulary? What do you do to mitigate blarguments?

I love language and that it develops every day. I enjoy examining culture, vernacular, colloquialisms, and slang. I sign (ASL), speak French, English, and have been working on Spanish. I began learning foreign languages at 7, took a 5 year hiatus, and resumed at 12. I only wish I had been introduced to foreign language at a younger age.

Slanguage 102: Slang On!!

SLANGUAGE: (slang-ooage) communication mainly comprised of colloquialisms and street or informal stripped down speech; decomposition

This freewrite blog is an excuse for me to enter a new word into your vocabulary (blogcabulary?-ok maybe that's pushing it). I devised the two hybrid words: blargue & slanguage. Let’s talk about them...

Slanguage is a word I've used here many times before. It is useful in communicating a style of communication. There are times when people use slanguage to communicate and it may be mistaken for poor speech and grammar. This is a BIG MISTAKE. Nearly all my friends are college educated, professional people who engage the use of slanguage on a daily basis.

Slanguage is often more useful and valuable than conventional language because it helps to convey and denote geography, attitude, culture, and swagger or self image. I warn, DO NOT SQUELCH others from using this form of expression. I also encourage all people to further develop their own personalized slanguage. This will help define a people and give diversity to all.

Slanguage often reminds me of my hearing impaired friends. Often times, families with hearing impaired ones develop shorthand signs. This is done to communicate quicker, be more to the point, and to individualize their language. One of my friends calls this "home SL" or home sign language. For example she may shorten or abbreviate the movements for “restroom”, “grandfather”, or any number of words. If she were to sign with her interpreter or other hearing impaired people they may not readily understand what she was signing, but her mother or siblings do. Therefore, she of course would use the more traditional signs with anyone not at home.

Develop the slanguage of your home, your family, your friends, your community, and your hood. Slang on!


THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GAME

I would be remiss if I didn't note that there is a time and place to use all manners of speech. Though I would discourage others to squelch the use of slanguage, there are obviously times when it would be inappropriate. Such as speaking to elders, (some) authority figures, work place, interviews, etc. I advocate the development of slang language but not all slang words/terms.

Is there significant difference between the terms "language" and "slanguage"? Do you think this is a valuable word? Will you adopt this term into your vocabulary? What terms have you developed?

I love language and that it develops every day. I enjoy examining culture, vernacular, colloquialisms, and slang. I sign (ASL), speak French, English, and have been working on Spanish. I began learning foreign languages at 7, took a 5 year hiatus, and resumed at 12. I only wish I had been introduced to foreign language at a younger age.

Transgender Secrecy

Recently, mai friend Jerry had a fun night where he “hooked-up” with a love lady named Karen at a party. These two ended up engaging in some heavy “necking and petting”. Jerry was devastated, angry, and hurt to later find out this chick was a pre-op transgendered woman. Jerry has a great fear that people will now question his sexuality and see him as a gay man. This, I’ve tried to reassure him, of course is a nonsensical fear.

I am happy to see more of society being represented on television and in the world. Transgendered people are becoming more of a topic in American society. Recently, Isis was the first transgendered model on America’s Next Top Model, Katelynn is the first transgendered personality on The Real World, and there is at least one transgendered character on a daytime drama. Because of intolerance, I can understand why many transgendered people want to keep privacy about their sexuality. However, I think a line is drawn when they enter into romantic relationships without disclosing this information to their partner.

Arrogantly, at first, I thought everyone would share this opinion. En mon avis, ideally no judgment should be passed on anyone for choosing to live their life in a way that isn’t harmful. In mai undergraduate Human Sexuality Seminar class, Dr. William Bradley expressed his position during our section on the transgendered community. He believes that once transgendered people have their bodies operated on to match their mindset, they are for all intents and purposes their reassigned gender. I agree with the majority of this position. However, it is their obligation to make this information known to anyone they want to be romantically involved with. I do not feel transgendered people should be made or pressured legally or otherwise to disclose information about their sexuality to employers, landlords, schools, or any other public or private organizations. It’s simply not anyone’s business besides those who they are planning on being intimate with. Dr. Bradley, however did not agree with me. He just kept asking me, Why? Why do they have to tell anyone? The are now their new gender.

If you listen to The Pharcyde you may have heard Fatlip talk about making out with a woman only to find out she was transgendered. In their documentary Cydeways: The Best of The Pharcyde, Fatlip goes into a bit more detail explaining that he was embarrassed by the situation for years. He only felt comfortable enough to talk about kissing the woman in the lyrics of his rhyme. However, in the documentary we learn he also received fellatio.

Most (if not all) people would agree on the importance of discussing sexual history with a new partner. This is something we’ve been advised to do as long as we’ve been advised to use a condom or get regularly checked for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Discussing sexual history consists of asking a new partner how many partners they’ve had in the past, if they know the sexual history of those partners, if they know if their past partners STI status, if they know what their STI status is, and how often they get tested. When applicable, knowing if whether the partner is transgendered (post or pre-operation) should be included in this checklist.

Knowing a partners sexual assignment/reassignment past should be seen in the same category as knowing their sexual history. Just as sexual history questions serve to protect your body from harm, this additional question helps protect not only your body but your emotional and mental health as well. That is “why” Dr. Bradley.

Its not a good idea to have any degree of secrecy and deception that may lead to mistrust in a committed relationship, short or long term. Just as it is a transgendered persons right to adjust their body as they see fit, it is everyone’s right to know the chromosomal makeup of a sexual partner.

Sacred Feminine: Reclaiming Women in HipHop

Its no big secret that the image of the woman has been dragged through the mud in hip hop over the past 17 years. In the July 2008 edition of Rolling Stone, President Elect Barack Obama call Russell Simmons, Jay-Z, and Ludacris "great talents and great businessmen." He went on to say, "I am troubled sometimes by the misogyny and materialism of a lot of rap lyrics...It would be nice if I could have my daughters listen to their music without me worrying that they were getting bad images of themselves."

We have seen this trend move from name calling "bitch" and "ho" to images of women being led around on leashes like animals in the 50 cent video "P.I.M.P.". However, I think the image of women as conveyed through hip hop is back on the upswing. Artists are realizing that not only women and our elders, but the majority of the population is really getting sick and tired of hearing misogynistic themes and side-notes in music. While flipping through the radio (which I try to do as little as possible) you may hear more positive depictions of females like in Independent by Webbie featuring Soulja Boy and Lil Phat from 3 Deep:

"Independent do you know what that mean?
She got to her own house
She got her own car
Two jobs work hard you a bad broad"

Or perhaps in Ride by Ace Hood ft Trey Songz:

"See mama, all I want you to do is hold it down for me
I want you to be my ride or die
while I go get this money, I promise Im get us out the hood baby"

I know what them girls like by Ludacris ft Chris Brown is another positive example. No these examples are far from perfect and generally don't leave out their eagerness to get them into bed, but hip hops got to start somewhere.

Rhythm and Blues (R&B) music has consistently been a more woman-loving, baby-making style of music, therefore this trend has not been nearly as apparent. However, songs like Ms. Independent, and the even better Ms. Independent/She got her own Remix with Ne-Yo, Jamie Foxx, and Fabolous has has overwhelming success and popularity as Ne-Yo attempts to bring focus back to the image of the gentleman. Let's all hope this is not a fad but is an new attitude that is going to stay.

Wordpress: http://maiweblog.wordpress.com/
Myspace: http://blogs.myspace.com/markmaiwords

ProgressiveU: http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/mai

Nuclear Weapons: American As Apple Pie?

Nuclear proliferation and testing of nuclear weapons should be coming to a more rapid end. Testing is too dangerously unpredictable, and the nuclear system of conduct the world has in place right now (explicitly and tacitly) set up under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is blatantly unfair to most of the world not in the nuclear club. The NPT needs to be ratified immediately.

The NPT was proposed by Ireland in 1968 and Finland was the first to sign. It is intended to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. The NPT is a great thing but it needs an immediate ratification including stricter rules on having and testing nuclear weapons.

There are 189 countries that are participants in the NPT, but of those 189 only 5 countries have nuclear weapons and are nuclear weapons states, NWS. Those are the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China. Four states are not parties to the treat but possess nuclear bombs, those are India, Israel, Pakistan, and North Korea.

In the first pillar of the NPT a rule states that one of the five NWS may use their nuclear weapons if attacked by another states with nuclear or conventional weapons. Therefore the non NWS who are attacked with nuclear or conventional weapons can only use their conventional weapons to retaliate or protect themselves. How this this fair? If the National Security Council owned all nuclear warheads then they could be used to defend non NWS states though not deployed from their state.

The second pillar of the NPT states that another purpose is to eventually end productions of nuclear weapons. However, the only plan for this to happen is by good faith action on the part of the NWS. This is ludicrous! I would not think any NWS would willingly give up its nuclear warheads. The should be made to surrender ownership of these and the NPT should be ratified to include active procedures to ensure that NWS terminate their advancements in nuclear proliferation.

Nuclear capability should be seen as a world responsibility and ownership. The world most notably has seen the capability of nuclear weapons as used by the US on Japan in World War II, the only instances of nuclear deployment in war in the history of the world. No doubt, nuclear capability has grown exponentially since the 1940s. There have been thousands of nuclear tests since then, and over a 1,000 of them have been demonstrated by the United States. Little Man and Fat Boy did amazing damage in the 1940s and because of this, it is clear that we don’t actually need the capability to do any more damage. We have sufficient nuclear knowledge by now.

Testing is too dangerous. More than once nuclear testing has caused deaths. In the 1954 US Castle Bravo test alone there was radioactive fallout, the explosion was 2 times what the scientists expected, the test changed the weather pattern, nearby island inhabitants suffered from radiation burns, cancer, and birth defects. Also, as a result of the Castle Bravo test a nearby fishing boatman died of radiation sickness, and the boat’s fish were contaminated and may have effected its consumers.

The NWS should no longer be seen as owners of nuclear weapons but only as storage sites for nuclear weapons. Any state’s head executive (president, prime minister, queen, dictator etc) who commissions tests or deploys nuclear weapons without the consent of the United Nations Security Council should be seen as a war criminal against the world, and therefore arrested. The United Nations Security Council should collectively have to decide if nuclear weapons can be tested or deployed.

Nuclear proliferation is a tale of the have and have nots. How can those who have no nuclear weapons feel anything but fear and the desire to have them when the haves only grow more menacing every day? It’s not a good situation if the world is tense on the subject of nuclear weapons. Also, citizens of NWS states often worry that they will be subject to attacks, such as the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, because their country is seen as a world threat due to ownership of nuclear weapons.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?