Alphabet Challenge Round 3

I have completed another round of the challenge. Since my social calendar is fuller than usual, I may have to update this one book at a time. Progress is progress at least. This time is the letter N with the anthology Naked City.

I loved the concept for this collection. Paranormal urban fiction has considerably grown in popularity in recent years. There is a wide pool of authors and potential material to choose from which may have been why I liked this collection instead of loved it. The hard part was that the unifying element was also the primary difference element.

Urban was varied enough to mean New York, Chicago, Seattle, Las Vegas, and Butte. There were also great divides in time such as turn of the century Manhattan and a 1800s mining town. With the natural difference in styles, characters, and supernatural rules, this collection was left feeling a little jumbled and disjointed.

There were some real gems here like Curses, Priced to Sell, Underbridge, Guns for the Dead, Noble Rot, and The Bricks of Gelecek. These were my favorite parts of the collection. Although Bricks didn't jibe as perfectly with the idea, it was a fantastic story with powerful imagery.

As a fan of this sub-genre, it was a good way for me to discover new writers and what they have to offer. If you’re not big on paranormal urban fiction, I don’t think this will be what converts you. Overall I enjoyed it but it wasn’t the greatest anthology I’ve read.

A
B
C
D
E
F
G - The Great Fables Crossover by Bill Willingham
H
I
J
K
L
M - Mennonite in a Little Black Dress by Rhoda Janzen
N - Naked City edited by Ellen Datlow
O
P
Q
R - Reality Bites Back by Jennifer L. Pozner
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z


Current Music: Be Not Daunted - Jaymay

No Dog for You!

This must be a hot topic because I've seen 2 articles about it in less than a month. I have not adopted a pet. The dog I had growing up was purchased from a breeder when I was seven. I haven't gotten another pet since but I would like to once I'm more stable. I plan on getting a 'certified pre-owned' dog when I do get another animal. Apparently, it's a lot harder than those SPCA ads would have you believe.

I've heard some groups would give you a hard time but it seems to be the majority rather than the minority. Some of the reasons Prudie of Slate.com (a fab advice columnist from Slate) and others weren't allowed to adopt animals is crazy. They included but weren't limited to: living in an apartment, being over 60 (for a cat), allowing a border collie off-leash, leaving a dog in a fenced yard unsupervised, having the wrong kind of flooring, having children in the next 10 years, and working full-time. It's not just Slate writers who go through this either. One of the Cracked.com stafferswrote a similar article about his ordeal trying to adopt a dog. 

I understand seeing the horrible things people do to animals can harden humans against other humans. All of my friends know better than to get me started about that worthless, remorseless son of a bitch Michael Vick. But taking out frustrations about abusers on families who want to adopt animals isn't fair because it's keeping animals from getting adopted. Several people in Prudie's article were either rejected or gave up and went to breeders.

I understand interviewing people and doing a background check. I don't think people like Michael Vick should be allowed to own fish. I can see an FYI at a young couple that certain dogs are not for young kids. I can see asking an older person what they plan to do if something happens. I can even understand a home visit since not everyone knows how to prepare for a dog. But at some point, these 'advocates' are hurting their cause more than helping. I've had more than one friend say they'd rather just buy a dog from a breeder than go through the ridiculous hoops. I think that means what they're doing isn't working.

Current Music: Howl - Florence + the Machine

Apparently Jesus Hates Girl Scouts

The Catholic Church seems to be a magnet for bad press as of late. Between the Girl Scouts and contraception in general, I guess it’s a good time for them to hate women.

The Girl Scouts were the focus of an article in the Washington Post a little while back about how all Catholic churches are refusing to allow the troops to meet in their facilities. Their reason is that Girl Scouts support abortion.

More than once, the organization has clearly stated they have no position on those issues and those are best discussed with the girls and their families. I think this is the perfect stance for them given the highly personal nature of these issues. Yes, a majority of the national leadership is probably pro-choice but there are many participants (girls and troop leaders) who aren’t.

The Catholic church’s stance reminds me of an ultimatum one of my nuttier roommates when she declared war on one girl and some of us wanted to stay out of it: “By not taking a side, you’re taking her side.” By not taking a side,you’re not taking a side. That’s kinda how that works.

Barack Obama has been lobbying for Catholic run organizations like hospitals and a TV network watched by 334 people to include contraception in their health care plans. They say it’s a violation of their rights. I say they’re full of something other than the Holy Spirit.

Yes, the primary point of contraception is to not get pregnant. However, it also has these handy side effects of limiting the length of your cycle and severity of your symptoms. The primary reason I stay on it, despite being single, is so I can plan when I might get one of my rare but debilitating migraines. Some women get cramps so severe walking is difficult or flu-like nausea.

Not all women have extreme symptoms and some women who do don’t get them all the time. You can’t know which month Mother Nature decides you’re going down. The pill is the primary way I know to treat some of these fun and unpredictable aspects of being a woman.

Plus, not everybody who works in these places is a Catholic. In this economy, a job is a job. You might be a Jewish nurse who needed a paycheck and St Mary’s was hiring. You might be an atheist ex-con who learned how to work a camera serving your time and Catholic TV is willing to take a chance. You might kick it Jesus-style but also believe children are better off planned. It is completely unfair for your employer to decide whether or not you can afford to do that.

According to these groups, denying their employees access to contraception for medical reasons is their constitutional right. What about the rights of employees who are having their healthcare dictated by a religion they don’t follow? Isn’t that a violation of their rights? Yes, these are religious organizations but if that’s allowed to stand, several business will grab a religion just to save money, employee welfare be damned.

Every time a ‘Christian’ group pulls something like this, I can’t help but think WWJD? Who would Jesus deny full healthcare to? Who would Jesus turn away? So far, I have no good answers to those questions.

Current Music: Storytime -Nightwish