rm: cannot remove ‘cascading_menu_HR’: No such file or directory
rm -rf cascading_menu_HR
rm: cannot remove ‘cascading_menu_HR’: No such file or directory
sudo rm -rf cascading_menu_HR
rm: cannot remove ‘cascading_menu_HR’: No such file or directory
sudo rm -rf cascading_menu_HR\ <- there's a space at the end that you can't see
ls --long --escape
ls: unrecognized option '--long' Try 'ls --help' for more information.
ls -a -s
ls -s -a
Argh. Yet again, I find myself stymied by the stupidest things. I want to understand it …and when it doesn’t make sense it frustrates me. Greatly.
And so I end up feeling like “if something this ‘easy’  has stymied me, then (a) I must be very stupid and (b) this is probably something I shouldn’t mess with anymore.
I was a candidate for braces when I was twelve: my teeth were a little crooked, so it would have been a primarily cosmetic procedure, but my orthodontist at the time was pushing hard.
I, however, said “nope” The way I figured it, I was already four-eyed and terribly unpopular, with standing memberships in both the science club and the A/V club. I did not need any additional “markers” of nerdiness, thank-you-very-much. I told them “No,” and said that if I needed them when I was a happily married grownup, I’d get them then.
Which brings us to two Thanksgivings ago when one of my lower front teeth cracked right down the middle. The tooth-cracking thing has happened before, but it’s always been in an easy-to-get-to tooth, which has meant that the ensuing root canal and crown was simple enough, if not painless.
This time was different, as the tooth that cracked was nearly perpendicular to the two teeth on either side of it, a fact which hadn’t bothered me in the day-to-dayness of life, as my lower teeth just didn’t show when I smiled. However, that tooth’s unusual orientation posed a challenge for the root canal, as there was no way to get to the back of the tooth to make the needed hole, as the back of that tooth was smushed up against the side of the tooth beside it. You can see it especially well in the middle right photo above.
I’d be totally ok just doing the root canal and crown and going about my business, but the crooked tooth is preventing that. My dentist suggests I visit an Endodontist to see what she thinks, and she thinks the tooth should be straightened out before doing the reapair work, so she sends me to an Orthodontist.
The Orthodontist, Dr. Brogden, felt pretty sure that Invisalign would straighten them out. Well, as I’d said when I was twelve: if I need them when I’m older and happy and married…
Dr. Brogden predicted 2-2.5 years with Invisalign, assuming I was compliant and wore them as directed. I had 47 trays, each of which was to be worn for two weeks, plus there’s sometimes some extra time needed on the end for stabilizing.
They weren’t as bad as I had feared. I think a couple of things helped on that front: each set of trays was only painful for 48 hours or so, and by the end of each set of trays I could tell that they’d done their duty and I was ready to move onto the next set. In addition, it helped to know (from a not freaking out mentally standpoint) that I could take them off any time I wanted to.
Because I was so compliant, my orthodontist said I could switch my trays out more quickly than the standard 14 days. I could feel when each set was “done” and that’s when I’d switch them. Sometimes I’d leave a set in slightly longer than 14 days too, as I wouldn’t want to switch trays on the first day of a trip.
And because I *waited* until I was a grownup, the technology got better! Less than two years of braces — and ones that were *invisible* and *removable.* So, so, soooo much better than the options that I had at age 12.
I have really sensitive skin, and having hard plastic rubbing against my gums was not a happy thing. I became a copious user of dental wax, which I discovered that you can buy in 20-packs on Amazon.
Taking out the trays is awkward, especially in situations where it’s not feasible to sneak away to the ladies to take my teeth out. I got pretty good (I think) at having the tray ready under the table and popping the teeth out really quickly and sliding them in the tray.
And before putting them back in, you’re *supposed* to brush your teeth. I was adamant about that at the beginning but eventually I figured out what reasonable compromises I could make.
And then there were the “tooth barnacles” (my term. I think they were properly called “attachment points”), which are little…barnacle-like things that help give the trays something to grip to. Those little boogers were sharp! Sharp enough that they’d cut up the insides of my lips, and thus I discovered another use for the dental wax. (And, I must admit, it was good incentive to get the trays back on sooner rather than later so as to prevent scraping and tenderness).
My teeth!! Not even 1.5 years and WOW! They’re so straight! I feel like it’s still going to take me a while to get used to being able to actually bite into things (my prior approach was more a grab-with-teeth-and-tear thing). Check ’em out!
The Final Verdict?
I approve. Invisalign is a Good Thing and I approve. Also I think Dr. Brogden rocks :-)
Edited to Add: Lessons Learned
- For me, it worked best to switch trays right before going to bed if at all possible. Usually the first hour or so with new trays wasn’t so bad but around two hours in they started *ouching* — and if I could sleep through that, it went better.
- I found that new sets of trays did make me lisp a bit, which was problematic when
I was supposed to be presenting at a conference. Thankfully, since they were trays, I could pop them out before I spoke (advantage: Invisalign).
- I must admit, I ate less. Taking out the trays, brushing your teeth before putting them back in, knowing that every time they came out it counted against my “time out of mouth” and that on any given day that had to be less than four hours — that all added up to wanting to take them out less, which meant eating less.
- I mentioned above that the trays can cut into your gums and tongue (depending on how sensitive they are)…well, the trays can also be ground down by your orthodontist so they aren’t so sharp. Theoretically they can also be filed down at home using an emory board, but I never had much luck with that.
- The sharp tooth barnacles can also be smoothed some (though so so much that they are no longer barnacle-y)
- You can also use normal tooth whitening gel in the trays, which is kind of nifty — cleaner and straighter for the win!
Things I learned today, while sorting through my Granny’s thread stash:
- I love knolling (although technically this wasn’t knolling, as I wasn’t arranging everything at 90 degree angles..but they were round things, so some leeway would apply, yes?)
- I have a peculiar affinity for button thread — every time I find a spool I squee inside. I have no idea why.
- I desperately want my thread spools to be tidy so it angers me beyond reason when manufacturers don’t put that little slit in for the loose end of the thread to go into. It’s such a tiny thing! Why wouldn’t they just do it always? (I forgive the wooden spools, but the plastic ones have no excuse!)
- Very little orange thread, despite much of this coming from the 70s. Though I did hate the orange crayon, I don’t know why Granny had so little.
- I have such a sense of knowing her through this ritual– so much of her love was expressed through sewing (and cooking)
Also, I have a veritable museum of thread types:
- American Thread Co.
- Geneva Glace Finish
- Star Mercerized (Will Boil) – I am getting the sense that boiling thread was a big deal?
- Belding Corticelli Pure Silk Buttonhole Twist
- Brother Embroidery Thread (Made in Japan) — I think this one must have been mine
- Centennial 100% Spun Polyester Sewing Thread Best Value in 200 Yrs
- J&P Coats
- Dual Duty Plus – NEW! Dacron Cotton Wrapped 25¢
- J&P Coats Dual Duty Plus – Mercerized Cotton Covered Polyester 99¢
- Coats & Clark
- Mercerized Sewing – Boilfast (™) 15¢
- Pure Silk Twist
- All Purpose – Dual Duty
- Super Sheen 15¢
- Fruit of the Loom Spun Polyester
- 100% Polyester
- Dekor 100% Viscose
- Nylon Seaming Size A 25¢
- Quilting Cotton Mercerized
- Silk Finish Cotton Sheen
- Molnlycke Spun Syntet
- Molnlycke Wrights 100% Polyester (Did someone buy someone else?)
- Stitch N’ Time Polyester
- Suisse (™) Symbol of Excellence Long Fiber Polyester 60¢
- Super-Spun (™) Polyester – The Perfect Thread for All Fabrics 75¢
- Polyspun Permanent Press
- PolyPlus 100% Dacron (for permanent press knit stretch)
- Mercerized Sewing Colorfast 25¢ (and 15¢ – both 125 yards! Price hike!)
- Trusew 100% Spun Polyester
- Zayre Dept. 94
When people raise issues like this, maybe consider just listening and trying to understand instead of just brushing it off or saying “it was just supposed to be funny.”
I think this is where the “reasonable” humans part comes in. I don’t think that a lot of racist (or sexist or homophobic or (…) speech is *intended* to be insulting or hurtful (or illegal, for that matter).But *intent* and *outcome* are different. I guarantee you, I’ve never *meant* to get into any fender bender that I’ve gotten into. But that doesn’t mean that I’m not responsible for the outcome of those fender benders (or wrecks), as I clearly am. Can you imagine how this would turn out:Nice person who I’ve just rear-ended: “Um. You read-ended me!”Me: “Yeah, but I didn’t mean to, so you shouldn’t be upset.”Nice person: “Well I am upset!”Me: “Well, it doesn’t *look* like your car is damaged, so let’s just go on our separate ways, ok?”Nice person: “I know it doesn’t *look* like my car is damaged, but I felt the impact and I suspect there is damage, so I need to get your insurance info.”Me: “*I* can’t see any damage, so there isn’t any damage, so I am not going to do that.”And just like it’s reasonable to expect adults to take responsibility for the outcomes of their behavior, it’s also reasonable to expect adults to want to learn when they are causing harm — even if *they don’t see it* — so that they can avoid doing so in the future.And, yes, one could argue that everyone should simply beef up their bumpers and expect to be hit every now and again and to not take everything so personally all the time……but do you really want to be the person who makes everyone else feel like they are in danger?Think about that. As easy as it is to write off all of this concern as “political correctness,” the outcome of your behavior when you treat issues around (racism or sexism or homophobia or transphobia [or]) as something that is *their problem* (because they’re weak, or take things the wrong way, or because you didn’t mean it that way, or because you were just repeating something someone else said, or because you thought it was funny [or]) rather than your mistake to be corrected and learned from, that’s exactly what you are doing.You are making all those other folks feel like you can’t be trusted. That you don’t have their best interests at heart. That you would intentionally hurt them, even after having been told “hey – this hurts. Please stop.”If you’re ok with that, then carry on.
- Eggs: just useful to have on hand — nice protein, necessary for many recipes, probably don’t have any in the freezer.
- Bread: necessary for french toast and grilled cheese sandwiches.
- Milk: necessary for cream of tomato soup and snow cream 
- pop-tarts: every family has their weird snow thing. This was ours.
- milk (assuming a large mixing bowl, figure on needing 1-2 c milk total, depending on how wet the snow is, but start with only 1c),
- vanilla extract (some. More is often good. 1 T)
- sugar (again, some. “To taste” — I add 1/2c but I have a huge sweet tooth)
- smidge of salt
In the past I’ve been asked to explain the meaning of “all y’all” (or “all of y’all” if you’re feeling fancy).
“All y’all” is the Southern Inclusive Plural — specifically, it means *all of you* as opposed to “y’all,” which just means “you plural”.
“Do y’all want to go to the movies” means “Do you plural want to go the movies” and *doesn’t* require everyone’s response. “Do all of y’all want to go to the movies,” on the other hand is asking if there’s a *collective desire” to attend the movies.
In my experience “all of y’all” is particularly useful when, for instance, you’ve come to a large gathering with a small group of friends. You don’t know everyone, but you want to indicate that everyone (even those whose acquaintance you haven’t yet had the pleasure of making) is included in an invitation.
We’re going to walk over to the park to see the movie. Do all of y’all want to come?
The converse is equally useful:
When speaking to one’s family and requesting departure from a large gathering: “Are y’all ready to leave?”, meaning not “is everyone at the gathering ready to leave,” but just “are you, my near and dear ones, ready to go?”
(“All y’all” is written as such, but pronounced “alla y’all”. This oughtn’t be surprising, as much of Southern would look the same if written phonetically ;-)
Here in Philly. Having a blast. Learning about Teaching Open Source.
Really short version:
It’s the saddest, most pitiful piece of scared-because-progress-is-coming piece of embarrassing legislature that I think I’ve seen passed in NC in my lifetime, and I’m ashamed that the NC government passed it.
You remember the old advertising jingle “I like calling North Carolina home”? I used to fully believe that, but this bill makes it awfully hard.
None of the arguments *for* the bill make any sense to me.
Women need to be protected from transwomen (born as men, but identify as women) in bathrooms
This one is just redonk. If anything, the evidence suggests that transgender individuals are the *subject* of sexual violence far more often than is the norm, not the perpretrators (see http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/forge/sexual_numbers.html).
I’ve also seen the argument that women shouldn’t have to see “men’s genitals” in their restrooms. This has to have been an argument made by a man, because women know that we have stalls, we shut the doors to those stalls, and we don’t pee in the sinks!
Women need to be protected from straight men who will pretend to be transgendered and crossdress in order to go into the Women’s room and attack women
I don’t see bathrooms as becoming the “go to” place for predators, no matter what law is in place, for a couple reasons:
- In women’s rooms, you’re talking about a stall situation… if the stall door is locked (which you have to do to make the door stay shut), then it’s locked, meaning a predator is going to have a hard time…predating (?).
- If you’re positing a random “he grabs her at the sink” scenario… why the bathroom? Seems like that would be an extremely risky venue for a predator:
- there’s only one way out; and
- there’s no lock to keep more people from coming in, so
- almost anywhere else he could go, it would be easier to randomly grab someone.
- For a man to use a women’s room under the Charlotte ordinance (as written) he would have to “identify as being a woman.” I am imagining that in most women’s rooms, that would mean that we’re going to be looking for some attempt at “girl-dom”: some sense of femininity (whether it’s clothes or bearing or makeup or ….).
I am *guessing* (no research to back this up), that being *manly* is important to sexual predators, as sexual predation is all about _power_ at it’s root (and the sort of people who do this don’t think women are powerful).
So, I would posit that the likelihood of a gender normative man who is a sexual predator *choosing* to play a transgender person so he can slip into a women’s room to commit a crime, when there are about a million other ways to do it that wouldn’t require that… are pretty slim.
Cities shouldn’t be able to pass this sort of law
If you’re going to claim that the law was passed because the State is the only “correct” place for this legislation to live…why? It seems completely random to me to say that the Federal Government is too big and City governments are too small — based on what?
And the result is really silly, as it means that a city cannot, for example, recognize that, for example, its cost of living is higher (and taxes are higher) and raise the minimum wage accordingly. Boo.
Having transgender individuals in the restroom of their choosing will make people uncomfortable.
Ok, I fibbed. This one does make *sense*, in that I understand that this will probably make some people uncomfortable — I am just ok with the idea that there will always be people who are uncomfortable with changes that bring society towards a more inclusive ideal. Whether it’s women getting the vote, blacks being released from slavery, the right of black and white people to marry, or saying that “separate but equal” was not OK, there have been people every step of the way who have been *uncomfortable* with the decision.
And that’s ok. Being in situations that make us uncomfortable is how we grow.
Let’s say you read the following article in the paper:
Yesterday Sulyane Smith was driving home from work on Hwy 64, when a drunk driver crossed the median and slammed into her car. The police have been able to determine that she was on no illegal substances, doing the speed limit, and driving in the far right lane. Ms. Smith, age 26, was huge Earth, Wind & Fire fan and was listening to "September" when the oncoming vehicle hit her. Doctors at the local hospital say that she will likely be paralyzed for life.
I’m guessing your responses would range somewhere from:
“Oh God, that’s terrible!”
“I hate drunk drivers! Is the guy who hit her still alive?”
Which are all, I think, really reasonable responses and indicate that you’re a compassionate person and you think young Sulyane was the victim of an *awful*, terrible, crime.
I’m guessing that no one…not a single one of you…would say:
“Had she taken a defensive driving course?”
“Didn’t she swerve to avoid him”
“If she hadn’t been listening to music this wouldn’t have happened!”
“Didn’t she see him coming?”
Because we don’t tend to blame the people who are hit by drunk drivers for not being *better drivers* or not being able to anticipate and avoid the situation.
Yet, that’s exactly what we do to rape victims.
So when this graphic started making the rounds on Facebook (and I reposted it because I think blaming the victim for being raped is rediculous) it provoked some interesting discussions amongst my friends.
One friend said that she too does not believe the victim is ever at fault, but said “there are things you can do to lower your risk of being raped.” She continued by asking: “What would you tell your daughter?”
As in, wouldn’t you tell your daughter that wearing short skirts or walking around alone at night is more likely to put you in danger of being raped.
Ugh. I mean, yeah. I would, if I had one. Just like I don’t walk through dark, abandoned parking lots in a late at night by myself if I can avoid it.
And yet, I still Very Much Agree with the graphic. And I realize I can mostly reconcile those two things by the word “cause,” as in “correlation does not imply causation;” however, I still have troubles with that, because as a woman, anyone making a statement about what women should or shouldn’t do to lower their risk of being raped still *feels like* it puts the impetus for not being raped on me.
And I tend to figure things out by analogy (working through similar situations and finding out where the math doesn’t work anymore), so last night as I was not sleeping while worrying through this I came up with the drunk driver analogy.
We don’t blame the victims of drunk drivers for
- not having taken defensive driving class
- not being better drivers (and being able to swerve to avoid being hit)
- listening to the radio or
- not seeing the driver coming
…even though there’s a decent chance they could have avoided being hit if any (or all) of those things were true.
Think about the last time you took extreme measures while driving to avoid someone who did something bat-shit-crazy and nearly hit you.
That person could have been drunk. And if they had been drunk and they had hit you, No One Would Ever say that “You could have avoided this, if only…”
We don’t blame the victims of drunk drivers.
And that’s the difference. Because we never blame drunk drivers, it’s totally cool to say “Hey, defensive driving class is a thing you should do — you can never tell what kind of drunken idiots will be on the road.”
But saying “Hey, dressing conservatively and not drinking are things you should do, because you never can tell what kind of vicious rapists are out there,” is not.
I *know* this isn’t a black-and-white situation. It’s shades of grey, like everything else. But the kind of thinking that tells women to not wear skimpy clothing (so men don’t want to rape them) leads straight to women being clothed head-to-toe with no skin showing at all.
(BTW, I would *love* to see statistics that correlate % of women who are raped with % of their body covered by fabric. I am guessing that if you look back through history and across cultures, you’d find that there’s no correlation at all between amount of skin and incidence of rape. I don’t have the metrics to back up or refute this, but please holler if you do.)