Today my youth pastor preached, and in the course of his sermon he shared a story about meeting up with another youth pastor from a church two hours away and having breakfast with him sometime last week.

"I'm a manly man," he said. "I have no problem hugging guys. This doesn't mean I'm homosexual or anything."

This snippet isn't really relevant to the point he was trying to get across, but it caught my attention.

Do you often find yourself admiring someone of the same sex for his or her looks?

I do. All the time.

It's not for comparison's sake, and I'm pretty comfortable with my own sexual orientation to not make anything of it, but I'm wondering if I'm the only one who feels this way. I compliment other women because they dressed nice or because of a particular physical feature.

Maybe it's because a person's sexuality makes such a big difference nowadays to certain people that this seems like a taboo, since some of us don't want to get hit on by someone of the same sex...I'm not bashing lesbians here, but it's happened.

Sometime during the next several days I'll post the link of the "set-up" episode - or part of it, anyway - to this story. In the meantime, read this. Please note that both are rough drafts. Note also that since I have to revise these stories for the writer's workshop I'm in, you'll be able to read the (first) revisions later next month. I got some pretty good feedback that'll help me shape those versions of the story, but that's the point of revising anyway, right?

My Shakespeare professor decided to send us off to Thanksgiving weekend (Shakespeare was my last class for this week until Monday! Woohoo!) by playing a rotten trick on the folks who started their vacation early and didn't come to class today. He passed out a class exercise for the play we're reading right now, and next week we'll be turning the exercise in for points. Watch the AWOL Shakespearean scholars start screaming.

However you celebrate Thanksgiving, I hope you have a great time. Me? I'm gonna get crackin' on a 12-page (minimum) whopper that's due next week, plan for Thursday's lunch with the family, and finish reading George Orwell's 1984.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING, Y'ALL!

UPDATE: A couple links for your perusal. Cam Edwards takes on some college grinches who want to pour gravy on Turkey Day (methinks they've been smelling too much ink in the newsroom). I mean, I can get pretty cynical/sarcastic, but I still enjoy the turkey. And the WSJ published a nice Thanksgiving tribute to our troops by Karl Zinsmeister on their op-ed page.

(links via Jay and the Instaman, respectively)

UPDATE II: Uhh...HELLO? I pronounce it as Nev-AH-da, and it's certainly allowed. California memo to the reporter who wrote this stupid article: you're doing a poor job trying to make the prez look dumb. Try harder next time. (via Jay again!)

Okay, okay, I'm gone for real. See ya on the other side.

Lileks says it well enough:

Please, please, please Corporate America: do not put the Cat in the Hat on any more products. The sight of that thing gives me nightmares. It should not be. If in olden tymes such a beast sauntered into town, the menfolk would pick up shovels and beat it to death.

I parodied one of his poems once, but otherwise, I wasn't a big fan of his work.

And I certainly didn't like that cat.

Turkey & Gravy Soda.

Yes, really.

Occupation: Housekeeper, reading Shakespeare homework
Mood: Ambivalent/Grouchy. In other words, don't mess with me.
Music: None. Ahh, sweet silence...
Sleep: 7 Hours
Food: Alfredo Fettuccine and chocolate. Separately, of course.
Remaining: Class tonight and laundry

(This post format was secretly stolen from this dude. Lovely blog, eh?)

...to help you start your weekend.

WESTMORELAND: O that we now had here
But one ten thousand of those men in England
That do no work to-day!

KING HENRY V: What's he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin:
If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires:
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more, methinks, would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.'
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day

King Henry V
Act IV, Scene iii

Rev. Donald Sensing has been posting a lot of goodies lately. Here are two of them: "War and reconciliation: only in America?" and "Beware the compassion police."

And here are some kool links about a remarkable historical figure. (This may be indirectly related to the topic, but it sounded very familiar.)

It is SO not a good idea to browse Amazon nowadays.

Nearly a year ago I questioned voting on a certain law based on the morality of the law. Well, tonight I've been skimming past news reports about the Massachussetts state supreme court decision on same sex marriage, and that question came up again.

For the record, I will not support state recognition of gay marriage or the allocation of benefits to same-sex couples. Why? Because I believe homosexuality is a sin. I don't think that view necessarily makes me a homophobe, however, because I don't hate homosexuals. If you think otherwise, that's your problem. Of course, I also agree with the people who ask why marriage, both heterosexual and homosexual, should be any of the government's business.

James Joyner has a good post on the topic, and I'm quite sure there's more commentary out there in the blogosphere.

P.S. And yes, I know voting to support a law or regulation is different from a judicial ruling, but it concerns the same issue.

No, really. These new twenties look rather funky. I thought the one my mom just handed me had gotten bleached by accident in the laundry.

Sometime yesterday, I ran across this post by Matt Welch that, despite the late hour, has gotten me thinking on the generalizations being made by both liberals and conservatives about "the other side."

I've said this before, but I think it bears some repeating: on a personal level, this is why I get disgusted and upset everytime a right-winger suggests to my face that a nuke needs to be set off in the San Andreas fault. I, like Matt, am surrounded by liberals - I mean, this is San Francisco - but just because their political ideals and aspirations are completely opposite from mine does not make liberals any less human than conservatives. Not every liberal was against the Iraq war, and not every conservative supported it. Does that mean they're not true liberals or conservatives? Of course not. There's a lot more to the party platform than just national security and foreign policy. If you'd like an example, ask this dude.

So put away the paintbrushes and THINK before posting a sweeping generalization about a certain group of people next time.

P.S. I wonder if Matt's comments apply to individual posts, as well? I only ask because a certain Christian blogger will now probably be notoriously known to the politically left side of the blogosphere as that "religious right wingnut who fantasized about assassins killing some Democratic senators because they opposed the war." There is a lot more to Dr. Mark Byron than one dark fantasy, and as a commentator put it, "What is disregarded is that you 'put such thoughts on the table in order to reject them.' The ensuing discussion is ripped out of context and held up as an example of a 'stereotypical Republican/rightwing Christian.'" (And I think a certain rightwing blogger should be called on this for taking Dr. Byron's post out of context for the sake of discussing conspiracies, the "other side" and national security. For crying out loud, read the follow-up posts. Here's a suggestion: don't rely on just first impressions to judge a person.)

Here's a nice way to kick off the weekend.

Jay pointed me to a post by Steven Den Beste on Osama bin Laden's strategy plan, which, strangely enough, led to a thought-provoking conversation on fundamentalism and grace. I don't think I can add much more to what Jay's said, so go give his follow-up post a read.

Today one of my classmates from Transfer Lit Mag gave her final presentation on who she is as a writer and reader. Because she teaches science to little tykes, she brought in the necessary ingredients to make "Mad Scientist Slime." (I'll leave it to you literary geniuses out there to figure out what slime has to do with literature.)

I helped her pass out the little cups filled with neon yellow polyvinyl alcohol, and then I went around and poured a little blue sodium borate in, enough to turn the resulting mixture into, well, green slime.

It's been getting all over my hands tonight, and it reminds me of The Ooze, Slimer from Ghostbusters, Odo from DS9 (even though he was that boring tan color), and the gluep the kids got to make whenever the labs where my parents work had a Family Day.

Fun stuff, but I can't believe I stayed up this late just to play with slime. I'm expecting a miniature hand to materialize from this glop at any moment to wave at me. Now where did I put all of those fake eyeballs?

Yes, I'm pulling another half-nighter.

It sucks being poor when this gets dangled in front of a big LOTR fan's eyes. Oy.

It's even crazier to realize that I'm putting off a two-page paper because I can't concentrate on the freakin' material. Oy. Again.

Rich has a great post up at DYL about intersecting Christian beliefs and American ideals:

You may argue that a moral foundation is a means to the ultimate need of Christ. That somehow, laws based on biblical principles will lead our nation to acknowledge Christ as savior and lord. I say, hogwash.

Don't worry, I didn't forget, even if I did have a regular weekday schedule. Even then, it's right to honor those who have served in our country's armed forces and defended our freedoms.

But some people are far more eloquent than I am, so I'll just point you to them.

And belated birthday wishes to them Marines. Semper Fidelis!

Some of you folks have obviously never seen a Samoan guy walking around in a lava-lava.

Men in skirts ain't a newfangled fashion fad.

(link via R. Blood)

Is my school the only one that doesn't celebrate Veterans Day?

Ah, well. More vacation time in January for me!

C'mon. You know you want to.

Yes, you may indulge in this silliness when you're more awake 'n I am. G'nite.

(link via Michele)

Let me get my mind around that first, mkay?

Orlando Bloom I can definitely see as Paris. (Pretty elf, pretty soldier, pretty pirate's son, now a pretty prince. Uh huh.) And I wonder who Sean Bean is gonna play.

But Brad Pitt as Achilles?

Oy.

This seems rather harsh, but it does remind me of one thing: that scene in Patton where the general slaps a soldier in the med tent for crying out of fear. Well, it was more than one slap, but he was reprimanded and told to apologize by Gen. Eisenhower for that...

By the way, that cowardice charge has been dropped. However, the staff sergeant's commander has filed "dereliction of duty" charges.

This story came via Tacitus, who has his own story to tell. No cowardice at all in that tale, either.

Anybody else seen the conclusion to the Matrix trilogy yet? I'm seeing it in a few hours with some friends, but I really ain't as enthusiastic about this film as I am about, say, Return of the King.

Nevertheless, Michael Williams offers some insight on the philosophical bent of the Matrix movies, following up on James Lileks's review of the third film.

I'll post a review of my own when I get back from the theatre. In the meantime, here're Daniel and the Gator's takes.

UPDATE: Okay, my review - it was a lot better 'n Reloaded but still not as good as the first one. [SPOILER ALERT] I wasn't expecting to see the Frenchman again in this one and I would've liked to see him taken care of once and for all - I wonder how the "peace" between the Architect and the Oracle (the reps of the two warring factions) will affect him, if at all. Great special effects, of course...but I think I can wait till it comes out on video/DVD before I see it again. I'm waiting for ROTK.

Here's some background info on the position of the United States Poet Laureate.

I sooo want to visit the Library of Congress someday.

And John Tranter is visiting my Transfer Lit Mag class today. Woot!

UPDATE: Some of the managing editors from McSweeney's also dropped by to talk to us and showcase some of their work. I had no idea these guys were based in the Mission District, but their stuff is fantabulous. Also check out 826 Valencia.

And John Tranter was koo-el, too. He talked about his online lit mag, Jacket, and fielded questions about his work both online and offline.

Yesterday Kim du Toit posted an essay on his website that sent his web traffic through the roof and prompted outrage on a few other blogs. The topic? Well...go read it for yourself. Or not.

So far, I think I like Jay's response best: "Maybe in the end, sans any rabies from anyone, we all know what being a man is all about: we don’t let anyone tell us what to do or how to be."

But I'm still curious: what makes a man?

(And please don't tell me it's 'cause his anatomy is different from a woman's - I knew that...)

UPDATE: Kim's gotten a lot of varying responses from other bloggers, but right now his site can't handle the traffic from the Instalanche and whatever-else-link-storm his essay's prompted. I had to switch links above while his hosting service deals with the traffic and ensuing server problems. Just an FYI.

...and I will not start the day off by cussing.

Though the people responsible for this make that temptation rather difficult to avoid.

Nope. Won't do it.

Grrr.