So earlier this week, I suddenly started receiving e-mail messages on my work account from eBay. Since I do not have an eBay account, I naturally assumed that these e-mails were "spoofed" messages that were part of some nefarious phishing scam, trying to trick me into giving away my precious bodily fluids personal information. "Ha ha! You can't fool me!" I thought to myself smugly, as I forwarded the offending missives to spoof@ebay.com.
Shortly afterwards, I received a message in my inbox from eBay. Cackling softly to myself "One down, ten thousand more a**holes to go," I went to open it, anticipating news of my victory over the hapless would-be crooks. Instead, I got a notice that the messages I had received were not spoofed after all, but were actually "legitimate" messages from eBay:
This email you received was sent by us. Please be assured that we do not want to send you any emails that you prefer not to receive. You selected your email notification preferences when you registered and you are in control of the emails you would like to receive. If you would like to view or change the email preferences for your account, you may do so by following the directions below.
This was followed by instructions on how to log in to my eBay account and change said preferences. But as you may recall, I don't have an eBay account. Grr.
I noticed there was a tracking number in the subject line of the reply, so I tried replying to the message explaining the facts mentioned. I received another copy of the same, automated response. Grrrrr.
I sighed deeply and decided to try to humor them. If they say I have an eBay account, I will try to log into it and see if I can delete it or at least change the notification preferences. On closer examination of the offending messages, I see that message is addressed to someone with the username associated with my e-mail address is "happyv123." (Now I am even more annoyed. I would never choose such a dorky username!). It appears that someone has created an account and fraudulently attached it to my e-mail address. Now I am getting someone elses spam! As if I'm not getting enough of my own spam! Grrrrrrrr.
Of course, I have no idea what the password for the account would be, so I click on the link supplied for those who have "forgotten their password." It takes me to a screen that asks me to verify my identity by entering in some information like birth date, zip code, street address, etc. But none of the information I enter in is correct, so I can't get the password sent to me. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
Grinding my teeth and mumbling curses under my breath, I start looking for some kind of e-mail address I can write to for help. There is a link for "customer service," so I click on that, and see that in order to get assistance, I must first log in to my eBay account!
I can literally feel my blood pressure rising, so I take a few calming breaths and consider my options. Apparently, if you are having a problem with eBay, you are SOL if you are not an official, registered customer. Needless to say, this experience is not exactly inspiring me to become an eBay customer any time soon.
Luckily, I do have one last trick up my sleeve. My cousin is a big mucky-muck at eBay. I e-mail him and ask him to intercede on my behalf. That'll teach 'em to mess with me. Ha!
Yesterday, there was a rally in support of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages at the Minnesota state Capitol. According to Michele Bachmann, the state senator who is sponsoring the bill to put it to the vote, with recent polls showing up to 70% of the state's population in support of the bill, there is "no more uniting issue." Furthermore, she predicts that if the amendment were put on the ballot, it would be supported by 75% of voters.
I am stricken. Truly, I cannot believe Minnesota has come to this. Is this to be the legacy of our generation, that the one thing we could all agree on is to stop one group of people from uniting their lives together in love, and enshrine that prohibition in the state constitution?
Can someone please explain to me why same-sex marriage is a threat to conventional, man-woman marriage? Are two women who get married some how preventing an opposite sex couple from doing the same? Where is the threat? If you don't want to marry someone of the same sex, then by all means don't, but how does it affect you if some other couple wants to do it?
Consider this quote from an an interview with Bachmann by the author of a blog called Residual Forces:
[Bachmann] pointed out that it was just 2 years ago that Canada’s courts struck down its own DOMA type law. Canada had a law protecting traditional marriage, but the courts said that same sex marriages must be allowed. So, the law put in place by the parliament of Canada was overruled by a court.Here are some very interesting facts about Canada that the Senator pointed out. Did you know that only about 1 to 2% of Canadians are gay? And only 2% of that 2% actually want to get married or have gotten married, a minority of a minority as she put it. That means that only 0.04% of the people in Canada can benefit from the law the courts made allowing same sex marriages. The other 99.96% are out of luck. Their entire country was changed for such a few people.
I don't get it. If only .04% of the population of Canada would likely take advantage of the opportunity to marry someone of the same sex, how is that changing the "entire country"? As the author points out, 99.96% of the population is completely unaffected. Even if these same sex couples really were an evil influence of some kind, wouldn't the "danger" presented by .04% of the population be pretty neglible?
Traditional marriage may indeed be in need of protection. The sanctity of marriage has long been under attack . . . but not from same sex couples. Personally, I can think of several celebrities whose serial marriages have done much more damage to the public perception of marriage as an institution. We live in a society that, for better or for worse (no pun intended) sees relationships much more fluidly than past generations. No one blinks an eye at cohabitation and quickie divorces.
Some of the other threats to marriage and "family values" that I see: the effects of poverty, racism, drug addiction, violence, and misplaced priorities. Couldn't we do much more to support marriage as an institution by addressing these much more pervasive and powerful ills?
But no, that would be too much work.
We decided kind of at the last minute to go see Cape Breton fiddler Natalie MacMaster in concert last night at the Fitzgerald Theater in St. Paul. I had heard sometime last week that she'd be in town, but since we're a bit short on cash these days and I'd seen her before (at the Cedar Cultural Center, one of the best, most intimate settings to see folk artists in the Twin Cities, I might add), I thought I'd pass. Then two things happened to change my mind.
Last weekend, we drove out to Madison, Wisconsin to attend a Scottish country dance ball. The featured musician for the dance was Hanneke Cassel, a fantastic young upstart whom I've had the pleasure of hearing at several Scottish country dance events around the country. She did a concert on Friday night, which was outstanding, or as she might say, "wicked awesome." Not only did she whet my appetite for more, she actually plugged MacMaster, who was coming to play in Madison the day before her St. Paul date.
Tuesday morning on my way to work, I was listening to the Morning Show on The Current, when suddenly I heard the opening bars of one of my favorite sets of tunes played by MacMaster. I don't actually know what it's called, but it's a set of jigs from her album Fit as a Fiddle which we use for a fun little dance in my Scottish step dance group. It turned out they had MacMaster in the studio for an interview. All signs seemed to be pointing in the direction of the Fitzgerald Theater.
This concert was quite different from the one I saw several years ago at the Cedar. She had five-piece band accompanying her much of the time, including electric guitars and bass, and a full drum set. Of course, there were traditional instruments, such as bagpipes, but even the piper switched over to some kind of electric bagpipe (looked like just a chanter with a cord coming out of it. Look ma! No bags!) for part of the time. Though she did a few sets of tunes unaccompanied or with just piano, most of the time she went with this huge, rock 'n' roll-infused sound.
My immediate reaction to this innovation was of skepticism and annoyance was that it less "pumped up" than "pimped out." I came to hear some Cape Breton fiddling, after all. But it grew on me and by the end of the evening she had me on my feet along with the rest of the mostly full hall. I am pretty reserved about standing ovations and the like, but this concert really blew me away. To again quote Hanneke (and some Swedes she once entertained), otrolig!
Hopefully, this inspiration will be enough to get me regularly practicing my own fiddle again. People are starting to look askance at me when I describe myself as a beginner and then explain that I have been "playing" (the term is used loosely here) for four years. Violins are definitely not the right instrument for someone who needs instant gratification. *sigh*