Dancing With the Stars is Setting a Shining Example

That's right. The popular TV show "Dancing With the stars" is indeed setting a shining example, and I am not referring to the bling of the costumes or the mirror ball trophy.

It's because this show has proven that the ability to succeed, to strive and to achieve your goals has nothing to do with race, colour, ethnic background, physical shortcomings or sexual orientation. It shows that a goal does not always involve winning. It's an example to everyone that there is more to a person than what is on the outside.

Just think about it. DWTS has featured a wide assortment of folks whose only common denominator is that, for some reason, they have become famous for doing something. The show has featured actors, singers, Olympic athletes, comedians, models, politicians, entrepreneurs, television personalities and advocates for various causes. There was even a bull rider, a lawyer, a female boxer, a chef, a magician, a snowboarder, an astronaut and a race car driver. Ages have ranged from 16 to 70-something.

Not many shows can claim to have featured people who were very tall or short, fat people, skinny people, straight, gay and transgendered people, plus those who are American, Canadian, British, European, South American, Asian and Australian. The show has included people with backgrounds that are Japanese, Chinese, African, Hawaiian, Caucasian and probably a few more I can't recall, plus people with mixed racial heritage. One competitor was deaf, one had an artificial leg, some were cancer survivors, at least one was a victim of childhood abuse and one was disfigured. Some had metal plates and screws holding bones together from injuries suffered long before they began to dance, but none of them let that stop them from trying.

Does it matter?

Yes, but not for the reasons one might think. It matters because the audience found out who these competitors really were and learned to see them as real people. We saw J.R. Martinez as the person he is inside, not just the veteran with the burned face. We learned that a person can be beautiful regardless of physical appearance. We found out that a deaf person can dance well, that a victim of abuse can overcome a terrible start to life and become successful, and that dreams can come true, as they did for Jane Seymour, robbed of a ballet career by an injury while in her teens. We discovered that people can step outside their comfort zone and discover more about themselves than they ever dreamed possible. Who would have thought that a football player or a WWE wrestler could have a dancer hidden inside him?

I guess the bottom line is that DWTS celebrates both our differences and our similarities.  It shows that, underneath, people share many of the same joys and sorrows, fears and courage, regardless of background or social standing. And it has shown us that, yes, Chaz Bono is a different kind of man, and Carson is outrageously gay, and J.R.'s face looks different, and that none of that really matters.

So kudos to Dancing With the Stars. You've entertained us, but you've also taught us to took past the outside of a person and to take on challenges without letting a fear of failure stop us from trying.

Built-in obsolescence is driving me crazy!

A few years ago, I bit the bullet and replaced my aging Mac computer with a brand new iMac G5. I loved it! It was fast enough for me. It had lots of storage space. All my old, tried-and-true programs worked fine on it.

Computers kept evolving, but I had no reason to change. Everything still worked perfectly. I did have browser issues and had to switch from Netscape to Internet Explorer and finally to Firefox, but otherwise everything was copacetic. I had no need to keep changing operating systems or buying new software. Why should I? Everything I used every day was still suitable for my needs and my computer still had plenty of storage space, even after several years. The software still did everything I needed it to do.

Then the worst happened. Firefox changed one too many times. Suddenly going on-line was a big bundle of bombs! The final straw was having three years worth of emails totally vanish. I mean GONE. Eaten alive. Disappeared. Abducted by aliens. Panic city!

So, reluctantly, I upgraded to a new-to-me computer with Intel. Still a Mac, but despite being less than a year old, it was already obsolete of course. I had to get a replacement, because I needed Internet access for my on-line writing and artwork. Then, to my horror, I discovered that not a single one of my old programs would run on on the new machine!

As a result, I still have to use my older "new" computer for all my graphics, then transfer it over to the newer machine to post anything on-line. It's a pain in the butt (to put it mildly). I have to keep switching my printer back and forth between the two. The scanner is still with the older computer. Oh yes, and I still have my really old computer, because that one still runs floppy disks but won't burn CDs, and the middle-aged one will burn CDs but has no floppy drive. With tons of stuff still on floppies, I now have three computers, all needed for different reasons.

I understand changing technology. Honest! But I DO have a problem with forcing people to buy new just because a company decides to "upgrade" its product every year or two. If you have a 10-year-old car kept in good condition, there is no one saying you have to buy a new car just because because the roads have been upgraded. You can still drive your car on public roads. You don't have to replace perfectly good tires because someone has invented a newer, more perfect tire.

I have no problem with people wanting the newest and latest and fastest. I just want computer companies to recognize that many of us can't afford costly upgrades every few months or even every couple of years, and that when dramatic changes force customers to buy new equipment and then spend weeks redoing or transferring data, it costs us more than just the price of the computer or software — it costs us lost productivity and therefore even more money. When lack of money is the reason we didn't keep buying new to begin with, it's like a kick in the head.

Would it be so hard to create some kind of interface to allow old programs to run on newer computers, or new software to work on older computers? That should be a no-brainer for a society that can send men to the moon, build space stations, invent things like multi-function cell phones that allow you to take pictures and play games on the Internet, or build cars that can park themselves.

I can park my own car, thank you very much, and I have no desire to walk on the moon, but something that would let me keep using a computer and software for a reasonable amount of time without having to keep buying new would be a dream come true.

Judge calls beating his child "discipline"

On the news today, there was a video of a Texas man physically beating, manhandling and verbally abusing his teenage daughter. The incident took place in 2004, when the girl was 16 years old. The YouTube video of the beating shows the father striking his daughter Hillary at least 17 times on her arms, legs and body with heavy blows of a thick leather belt that has been doubled over. He is seen grabbing and restraining her so he can do a better job of flailing away on her while she screams and tries to avoid the blows. The scary part is that the man is a Family Court judge.

And here is what is even scarier. Judge William Adams told the media November 2 that the video "looks worse than it is" and said, "In my mind, I haven't done anything wrong other than discipline my child after she was caught stealing." He said he had found her downloading music and games that she hadn't paid for. But he told her he was sorry, and that makes everything okay now, doesn't it?

Here is a man whose job it is to make rulings on child abuse cases, but he sees nothing wrong with beating his daughter Hillary with all his strength and threatening to hit her in the face with a doubled-over leather belt! Gee, if he does this for downloading games and music on-line, I wonder what he would have done to her if she had come home drunk, missed curfew or went joyriding in his car?

One also has to wonder how many beatings she had undergone previously. There must have been a lot, otherwise she wouldn't have known to have a webcam set up to record him doing it.

Although Hillary secretly taped the beating, she waited seven years before posting on publicly. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to read between the lines here. Like most abused children, she probably thought A. "He's a judge and no one will believe me, even if I tape it;" B. "If I go public, it will destroy my family and it will be all my fault;" C. "My mother will never forgive me" and D. "If I make it public right away, I don't know what he might do in retaliation." Maybe she had tried to tell someone in the past and had not been believed.

In a story in the Daily Mail (UK),  reporters Daniel Miller and Louise Boyle state that, "According to Judge William Adams, all children are 'fantasizers' and their testimony should just be ignored." Does this Adams guy even have a clue about the realities of child abuse? How on earth did he ever get elected as a judge, never mind one dealing with families?

Now here is the kicker. The local police chief said he has asked the state police to assist in investigating the video to see if anything criminal happened.

Hello! A guy beats his daughter with a doubled-over belt, using all his strength in each swing. The entire beating is caught on tape. There are witnesses to the beating. And yet there may not be anything criminal happening? Looks like this particular police chief needs the proverbial rocket scientist to point out what he can't seem to see: a teenage girl being beaten.

If it wasn't her father who beat her, would there be any question it was an assault? If he wasn't a respected Family Court judge, would there be any question it was an assault? If he was beating someone else's child instead of his own, would there be any question it was an assault?

It is no surprise to learn that Hillary's mother left the judge several years ago after undergoing years of abuse at his hands. She is one of the lucky ones. She is still alive. Many women who are abused by their spouses or boyfriends are maimed or killed when they try to leave an abusive relationship. According to the National Organization for Women, more than a thousand women are killed and 4.8-million are injured and/or raped by abusive partners every year in the USA alone. That's right, every year.

You did read that, didn't you? An average of three women die every day and nearly five million are injured each year by a boyfriend or husband. And don't forget, that is just in America.

Here's another stat for you from NOW: "Women who experience physical abuse as children are at a greater risk of victimization as adults." That means that beating your daughter could lead to her being abused by others for the rest of her life, assuming she doesn't either die while in a relationship or as a result of trying to leave an abusive partner.

I hope Hillary Adams escapes that fate. And I hope Judge Adams is never allowed to be in a courtroom again unless he is the one being charged.