When we got Kyra a year ago, we knew we were about to get a small glimpse of what parenthood would be like. And Kyra hasn’t let us down. I mean, I know a cat’s different from real children . . . but caring for a creature that’s helpless and doesn’t understand the meaning of “no” is pretty close to human kids, right?

On Sunday night John and I vacuumed the area around Kyra’s kitty litter and food dish in the basement so it looks really nice again. Afterward I dumped out the dirt (we have a bagless vacuum cleaner) and washed out the filter. The filter is a grey foam cylinder that takes several hours to dry, so I left it on top of the kitchen sink to dry overnight.

The next day I noticed the filter was missing. Now, Kyra knows she’s not allowed on the countertops, but like I said, cats and kids don’t always remember the meaning of “no.”

I looked all over the first floor and then the second floor. No filter anywhere. I had to go to work, and when John and I were home together last night we checked out the basement. Sure enough, she had dragged the foam filter downstairs to her little habitat. Why? I have no idea. In addition, we noticed that she had learned how to open her cat food bag and had helped herself to a little kitty feast. We rolled up the bag real tight to keep her out, but this morning I noticed she was in it again.

Parenthood? No. But it’s close enough for now.

Tonight it was time to–da da dummmm–give Kyra a bath.

She hates baths. I mean, she’s a cat. They’re hard-wired to love attention and hate water. Especially submersion in water.

But John is a tough man and I’m a good helper, and together we can accomplish the bath without too many scratches on our arms and other unprotected body parts.

John’s job is to catch Kyra and hold her down while I soap her up and rinse her off. Tonight, thankfully, Kyra was somewhat peaceful. John and I both came away wet, but with no blood run-off.

Here’s a couple pictures of Kyra just after her bath.

Looks kind of like a porcupine, huh?

Afterward we took her downstairs and fed and watered her and generally tidied up her kitty living area. While we were doing this, Kyra was off in the shadows licking herself down. She made it very clear she wanted nothing to do with us anymore. If we came near her or tried to turn on the light to find her she meowed in a very distinct, angry way that inferred, “How could you do this to me, you evil cat-haters?!”

So we left her alone. She’ll have all night to dry off and cool down, and maybe tomorrow she’ll feel ready for more attention.

Today I did two unusual things: 1) got a manicure and 2) became an Ebay-monger.

Some guys might wonder why girls feel compelled to pay someone $15+ to paint their nails. Sometimes I wonder that myself. But only until I get into the salon and my hands are soaking in nice, warm water with bubbles on top and therapeutic pebbles at the bottom. Then you forget all about the $15 and think only how lovely everything feels.

And tonight I logged into Ebay (which is rare) and started browsing jewelry (even rarer). I’ve been looking for a solitaire cz pendant necklace to replace one I lost a while ago, and I found one being sold by igem.tv on Ebay. You can see the necklace here, but I assure you I didn’t pay $249. I paid 99 cents, plus about $11 in shipping and insurance. $12.33 for a necklace isn’t bad. And this necklace isn’t cubic zirconium, it’s briolite (synthetic diamond). Most reviewers left positive feedback saying the jewelry was gorgeous, and a few said it looked cheesy fake. So we’ll see how I like it.

The problem with Ebay is that it’s addictive. You start looking at one thing and then you look at another, and suddenly you’re thinking, “I could do with a pair of fourteen-carat white gold cubic zirconium-studded hoop earrings. They’re only $25.” And then you’re thinking, “I could do with a fourteen-carat gold ¼ carat diamond anniversary band ring. It’s only $325.” There is so much beautiful jewelry out there, and it’s frighteningly easy to point and click “BUY.”

I’m happy to say that I restrained myself with the one necklace. And the one manicure. Although I have to admit while I was sitting in the salon getting my nails done, my eyes kept wandering to the hair color charts on the wall. Maybe I could do with highlights in my hair . . .

I should probably clarify, lest any of you think that I’m a terrific intellect, that this blog is shared by John and me. (Hence the picture of us both at the top.) Here’s how you can tell our blog postings apart:

If the entry is brilliant, thought-provoking, and deeply intellectual or somehow related to current world events, technology, or science fiction–it’s probably John’s.

If the entry is brilliant, thought-proviking, but not quite so deeply intellectual and somehow related to current personal events, relationships, or witty snarkisms–it’s probably Shannon’s.

Also John’s initials always follow his postings. I usually opt for cartoons ripped off the Internet.

On Tuesday night (Valentine’s Day, in case you didn’t register that fact) John and I got off work early and he took me to dinner at Olive Garden in Provo.

I’ve never noticed it before, but on Valentine’s Day suddenly couples are everywhere. I bet you didn’t even know that so many people dated or were married in the world. Everywhere I looked, people were walking hand-in-hand, cuddling up, smooching. Walking hand-in-hand with my wonderful husband, I actually felt like I was part of a special, secret club–the Secret Society of Lovers.

Sometimes, on a regular day, when you see two people expressing PDA (whether it’s hand-holding or arms around the waist or kissing), you think, “Gah! Get a room!”

But on Valentine’s Day it’s different. You see a couple engaged in PDA and it’s like, “Hey, look! You’re in the Secret Society of Lovers, too! You go, girl!” It’s an instant bond with people you don’t know.

Members of the SSL come out just once a year, the one day it’s acceptable and even a status symbol to show your love for someone else. I want a card embossed with gold script that says

Shannon
Honored Member of the Secret Society of Lovers Since August 2001

(Present this card at any ice cream establishment for 15 percent discount!)

I’ll keep wishing…

In the meantime, here are two tips for anyone (i.e., guys) planning to take their sweetie out for a special dinner next V-Day:

1) If you want to take her (which, translated, means that she wants to go, so you’d better take her) to a fancy schmancy place like Chef’s Table in Orem, you’d better call for reservations at least three weeks in advance. John wanted to take me (which, translated again, means that I wanted to go and told John he’d better take me) to Chef’s Table, so in late January I suggested that he call to schedule a reservation. Here’s the gist of his phone conversation with the Chef’s Table employee:

John: Hi. Um, I was wondering if I could make a reservation for Valentine’s Day.

Chef’s Table Employee: Sure, no problem. We’ve only got two reservations so far.

John, thinking to self: Phew. Good. My wife won’t hate me, and maybe I won’t even need to get her flowers if I take her here.

Chef’s Table Employee: Let me just go grab the reservation book. Do you mind if I put you on hold?

John: N– (Hold music cuts off his response . . .)

John, fifteen minutes later, still on hold, thinking to self: Hmmm. Maybe I’ll have to get her flowers after all . . .

To sum up, after being on hold for fifteen minutes John finally hung up. He called back a week later, and guess what? The only spot still available was for 9:30 p.m., and if you know me, you know that 9:30 p.m. is practically equivalent to 2:30 a.m. I’m pretty sure I have a trip switch hidden somewhere deep inside me that flips on sleep mode starting between 8:30 and 9 at night.

So, needless to say, we didn’t go to Chef’s Table this year but opted for Olive Garden instead.

Now for tip #2:

2) No matter where you take your sweetie for dinner on Valentine’s Day, be sure you go early. We arrived at Olive Garden at 4:30 and already there was a ten-minute wait. This was nothing compared to when we left Olive Garden at 5:45–a line was coming out the front door and couples were strewn everywhere, waiting to be seated. We’re glad we got in and out early.

(Obviously, this guy’s not a member of the SSL club . . .)

Been a while since I’ve posted, but I’ve heard several people wonder why people are reacting the way they are to these Mohammad Cartoons and don’t under stand the stir. I saw a good article from IHT which summed up much of the press perspective, and decided to add a little recent history so that we can understand better the whole WHY behind all of this. The IHT article I refer to can be found here: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/17/opinion/edwright.php

Going backwards, cultural columnists for a small Danish newspaper by the name of Flemming Rose commissioned the production of several cartoons of the Islamic prophet Mohammad in various forms, including terrorism related situations. Among the most infamous being the bomb under the prophet’s turban with knives in his hands. Now, there are several important things to under stand here. In Islam, any image or likeness of Mohammad is specifically forbidden. Ie, its akin to a Thou Shalt Not. The IHT article draws a parallel example by Hugh Hewitt, an evangelical Christian, for other religions such as “a cartoon of Christ’s crown of thorns transformed into sticks of TNT after an abortion clinic bombing.” From the christian perspective of the God of Love, having Christ running around with a crown of TNT is heresy and any advocating such shows a lack of social responsibility and respect for the hundreds of millions of ‘good’ christians.

Hear, hear!

It is also important to understand why the Rose commissioned these cartoons in the first place, and why they were published by the newspaper. ( See http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/10/news/cartoons.php )

“The crisis began in early September when Rose came up with the idea to commission the cartoons after the Danish writer Kare Bluitgen, author of a children’s book on religion, complained that she was having difficulty finding artists to illustrate a book about Muhammad because of fears of violent attacks by extremist Muslims.”

“Rose, a former war correspondent in Afghanistan and Iran, known for his fearlessness and trenchant views about immigration, was incensed. Colleagues say he railed at the growing self-censorship and political correctness in Europe since Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered by a Muslim radical because he had made a film critical of Islam.”

“Rose invited 25 newspaper cartoonists to draw a picture of Muhammad “how they saw him.” Twelve cartoonists responded and had their pictures printed on Sept. 30. As a former correspondent in Iran, Rose said he knew that Sunni Islam bars depictions of the prophet from the Koran because of concern that such images could lead to idolatry. But he says nothing prepared him for the reaction that followed.”

So Rose was frustrated that there were some taboo topics that shouldn’t be addressed, and felt that extremists Mulsims were limiting Europe’s free expression. I could see how he might see Europe’s reaction to Theo Van Gogh murder and the riots in Paris, France would make it seem that the extreme Muslims were ‘winning’.

Theo Van Gogh, for those who may not remember, was a controversial Dutch film director who was murdered by a self-proclaimed Muslim extremist in November 2004. Theo provoked death threats against him after he made the film “Submission” (which is what “Islam” means in English) telling the story of four women abused under the guise of Islam. The movie was perceived by the Islamic community as an inaccurate perception of Islamic teachings. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director) )

The Paris Riots, See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Paris_Riots , were sparked by the death of three high school teenagers who “allegedly ran and hid when police officers arrived to conduct ID checks. Three of the teenagers, thinking they were being chased by the police, climbed a wall to hide in a power substation” where they were electrocuted. “A friend of the three stated that Clichy-sous-Bois “has three principal communities, the Arabs, the Turks and the Blacks. The three victims represented each one a community”. […] Protesters told The Associated Press the unrest was an expression of frustration with high unemployment and police harassment and brutality in the areas. […] An unemployment rate of 5% for French university graduates can be compared to the unemployment rate of 26.5% for university graduates of north African origin (BBC). Racial and social discrimination against persons with dark skin or Arabic and/or African-sounding names has been cited as a major cause of unhappiness in the areas affected.”

These major incidents, and many other less notable all point to the frustrations of these communities. But where are the frustrations coming from? The Paris Riots seem to indicate that social discrimination may play a significant role. The major news outlets are blaming it on the huge “chasm” between Western and Muslim cultures.

Western and Muslim cultures certainly have a history of conflict. From the Crusades to re-capture Jerusalem and then the rise of the Ottoman and Roman empires, to the carving out and creation of Israel after WWII. Even the Cold War didn’t spare the Middle East as Communism and Democracy forcibly struggled to topple governments and control resources. Many of the leaders of modern Muslim extremism were molded in the resistance against invasions of Soviet forces. Many of those living in these areas see recent aggression (“invasions”) of foreign forces as the equivalent of the Soviets. That, said, I’ve heard from soldiers actually in Iraq that they constantly are thanked for getting rid of Saddam, but that many are suspicion of American motives and whether they will actually leave. Those in neighboring countries, however, have been stirred by governmental and religious leaders and are more outraged than those actually affected. There are few things as effective as preying on people suspicions and prejudices–and that’s not limited to any subset of cultures.

So how does all that factor into the cartoons? Well, physical struggle is part of it. Another part is the cultural struggle. Western societies have constantly been pushing not just for new governments, but also for liberalization. A friend once told me how when he was in Washington lobbying on the traditional family values side of some debated proposal in the United Nations, that they had little support from American representatives and no support for European ones. Those who would champion traditional causes would be the Muslim and other Middle East nations. It was those nations who constantly felt attacked on moral grounds through imported television shows, movies, radio programs, CDs, even the great Western clothing and toys shout Western values far more liberal than extremes in the existing cultures.

Is that a huge chasm, as the media pronounces?

No. Its not a chasm at all, its really frustration at hypocrisy.

All they want is the right to say what they want to say, and live how they want to live. That’s a very Western and liberal idea. But the Western media, instead, proclaims how backwards and radical they are because they want to live in a different way and that there is a chasm separating the cultures, making them incompatible. These so-called journalists who insist they are above social taboos or “self-censorship” are incensed that they cannot ridicule whomever they want, how ever they want. “Yes, you are legally free to publish just about anything, but if you publish things that gratuitously offend ethnic or religious groups, you will earn the scorn of enlightened people everywhere. With freedom comes responsibility.”

Instead, we have Rose’s comments: “I think if any religion insists that I, as a non-Muslim, should submit to their taboos, then I don’t think they’re showing me respect. I think they’re asking for my submission.” ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179140/site/newsweek/ ). I thought Western philosophy was supposed to be “enlightened tolerance”?!

As is often the case with those who proclaim that their ‘freedoms’ are being infringed upon, it is a one-sided and selfish viewpoint. Muslim nations seek much of what African Americans sought for in the mid 1900 in America–a little respect and equal treatment. Yes, they want a little “self-censorship”. Taking what is sacred to one person and dragging it through the mud just to make the point that you can doesn’t make the other person happy. Think of the last fist fight you saw. Chances are that was exactly how it was started (one’s self being ‘sacred’ often being the catalyst). I mean, really. What do we expect?

One last comment. The reason this whole thing got blown up even bigger is that other newspapers (thanks France Soir) wanted to show their support. “Hey, look at me! I don’t respect you either! Oh, and give everyone more freedom too!” The Danish Prime Minister certainly knows where the gasoline is too. “After the cartoons were published on Sept. 30, right-wing Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen reacted to the angry response by refusing to meet with ambassadors from Muslim countries and sternly lecturing Muslims on their need to put up with the caricatures.” ( See http://www.juancole.com/ )

Yeah. Nothing like throwing the kerosene of Western politicians on the fire.

JR