The Last One to Find Out What Grindr Is

I have the location feature on the Facebook ap on my iPhone turned on, so it gives me a notification when one of my friends who also have that feature turned on is nearby.
The other day:

ROB: (checks phone) Hey, “Eddie” is near here. (Eddie also happens to be very openly gay)

COLLEAGUE: What do you have on that phone, Grindr?

ROB: What’s Grindr?

COLLEAGUE: You don’t know what Grindr is?

ROB: No……

COLLEAGUE: HE doesn’t know what Grindr is.


OTHER COLLEAGUE: Tell him what it is

COLLEAGUE: (whispers in my ear what Grindr is)

ROB: Ohhhh……….


Unfairness of Life

RULE: You are allowed to acknowledge that life is not fair. That’s true, at least some of the time.

RULE: Acknowledging and saying that immediately removes your right to knowingly and deliberately contribute to life’s unfairness. If you have already deliberately and knowingly contributed to life’s unfairness, you have lost the right to acknowledge/say life is unfair.

Stop Using the Term “Binge Watch”

While we’re on the subject of words I can’t stand, “binge” is another.

A binge is a compulsive activity that is a symptom of a mental illness.
It is an unhealthy activity and part of a greater illness.

So we shouldn’t be using it as an off-the-cuff term to mean “to do a lot of” (example, to “binge watch” a TV show).

Because it’s not funny. It’s a compulsive activity.

You wouldn’t take a symptom of another illness and turn it into a slang term for recreational activity.

It is really insensitive to people who have eating disorders or problems with drugs/alcohol.

I get it that sometimes words evolve from their original etymology.
But we should be using words for their intended purpose, rather than use them to make light of other people’s illness.

(And if you find that kind of thing funny, perhaps you should be getting that looked at. Or improving your character)

Lifestyle vs Life

Another word I have grown to dislike is the word “lifestyle”.

Nobody ever talks about someone’s “lifestyle” if they fit a mainstream demographic. Then it’s just their life.

Describing someone’s life as a “lifestyle” implies that not only does it have diminished worth, but also implies that it allowed to be held up for public scrutiny and censure.

The term is used with an element of high-horsed disapproval, opprobrium, distaste. It implies something illicit, and we are doing a HUGE favor by tolerating it (read previous post about the word “tolerance”).

It implies that it must meet the approval of the mainstream in order for it to have any, albeit diminished, legitimacy.

If you look at it objectively, you’ll notice that most people’s “lifestyles” are pretty boring. They look just like your “life”.

So if your sense of moral superiority is fueled from an implied prurient interest in how somebody else lives………. now, a study of why people feel the need to do that…… that would be interesting!

Quick Study Cockroaches

MARY: Poor cat. We can’t leave cat food out for him or it’ll attract cockroaches.

ROB: I ought to design a pet dish that is only cat accessible.

MARY: And how would you do that?

ROB: I don’t know, maybe voice recognition. The cat would meow, and a panel would open.

MARY: Cockroaches are adaptable enough that they would just learn how to meow so they could get at the food. Then we’d have a meowing cockroach problem

ROB: God, could you imagine meowing cockroaches……..
new fodder for nightmares.

You have three cents left

COLLEAGUE: [event x] almost never happens. If I had a nickel for every time it happened, I’d have thirty-eight cents.

ROB: That’s impossible


ROB: It has to be a multiple of five. Thirty-eight cents is not a multiple of five.

COLLEAGUE: It was before I gave my two cents on the subject.

ROB: Touche.

Be an Intolerant Bastard. It’s OK

I’m tired of the word “tolerance”.
I am tired of how it is waved around to promote a particular way of thinking/acting.

I am tired of the term being thrown in people’s faces. And I’m tired of “tolerance pissing contests”. I am tired of groups demanding tolerance from everybody else while engaging in intolerable behavior.

You know what? You don’t have to tolerate everything. It’s ok to be intolerant. Seriously. If something flies in the face of common decency, you don’t have to be tolerant of it. It’s not a rule and it shouldn’t even be a social expectation.

Besides, why would you even want to settle for tolerance?
Tolerate is something you do while having a root canal. You have to tolerate a hemorrhoid. You have to tolerate a mosquito that you can’t catch buzzing around your bedroom. Social etiquette dictates you have to tolerate an obnoxious guest (up to a point). To tolerate means to endure something because you have no choice.

But there are lot of thing you do have a choice of whether or not to tolerate.

I don’t want to tolerate you.
I want to endorse you. I want to support you. I want to build you up. Enlighten you and let you enlighten me. I want to work together to make us both the best human beings we can be.

Tolerate you?

But if you are engaging in intolerable behavior, you should not expect your behavior to be tolerated. That’s not an entitlement.
It does’t mean that people have a right to go around and harm you because you are doing intolerable things. But they absolutely have the right to make their disapproval of your intolerable behavior known.

What constitutes intolerable behavior?


Any behavior that harms (physically, emotionally, mentally or legislatively) another being, especially one who has not harmed anyone themselves.
Additionally, one who stands idly by while someone else harms another being.
Tolerance, as the term is being used today, is tacit approval of intolerable (read harmful) behavior.

So I’m tired of the term.

There is a lot of intolerable behavior going on today, and a lot of it happens behind a computer screen (example: trolling), while many of us vicariously enjoy it. That is intolerable.

How about engaging in behavior that harasses, alienates, ostracises, humiliates, or flat out causes physical harm (beating someone up) to someone on the basis of their race, sexuality or economic position? Of course we would agree that is intolerable.

What about voting for, or approving of legislation that allows that? Or failing to vote against it?
That’s intolerable too.

Having hateful views and acting on them is intolerable, but pandering to those who do this is also intolerable. Contributing money or otherwise supporting or enabling those who act on hateful views is, of course, also intolerable.

Failing to keep ones self abreast of new findings, teachings, or social developments, and failing to form a thoughtful and well balanced opinion on those is intolerable. Failure to critically think, even if the finding moves beyond your comfort level is intolerable. And forcing others to be bound by your closed mindedness (especially as relates to academia), even in the face of new developments is intolerable.

Why? Because it harms others. How? Because you are letting your narrow view of things sabotage their development. And you are sabotaging your own development.

Making yourself a martyr by passive-aggressively maintaining that someone and their “lifestyle”(another word I can’t stand) is sinful and an abomination, yet claiming you “have” to tolerate it (gee, thanks so much), is intolerable simply because it is disingenuous.

And another reason that it is intolerable is because it tacitly approves violence, discrimination and stigmatization. It takes away legitimacy from another human being and dictates their worth as less.
That is harming another being, who has not harmed anyone else.

If you are following a faith and you are using it, not to become a become a better person, but as an excuse to be a worse person, that is intolerable.

If, in the face of an occurrence of violence, threat of violence, intimidation or harassment of another being, you try to justify it by throwing red herrings about the first amendment and “quid pro quo” equations around for the purpose of derailing the disapproval of the fact that other beings were harmed, that is intolerable.

And if you engage in domestic violence or sexual assault, or fail to convey your disapproval (or try to stop it, if you can) when it happens or is in danger of happening, that is intolerable.

And you make jokes about it, or laugh at them; that also is intolerable.

Many reality shows are rife with intolerable behavior. Remember that obnoxious little prat, Simon Cowell? And how people were entertained by the cheap shots he made on people?

Lok at the numbskulls on Jersey Shore. Would you call their obnoxious behavior tolerable?

And what’s worse is that we watch it for our amusement, thus conveying tacit approval of intolerable behavior.

Bottom line is we must always strive to be better human beings. And the first step is not harm others, nor tolerate those who do.

Your behavior and your outlook is a reflection of your character. Failure to develop both of those to strive for the best possible product is intolerable.

So, you know what?
You are free from the mandate to be tolerant.
Don’t tolerate intolerable behavior form yourself. Don’t tolerate it from others.

It’s ok to be an intolerant bastard in the face of intolerable behavior.

It’s really easy.
Don’t harm others.
Don’t tolerate those who do.

And if that makes you intolerant, ok.

It seems that those who demand tolerance the loudest these days are those whose behavior is the most intolerable, anyway!

Captive Audience and Rodentia

Two random and unrelated MTA observations I formed on my way home today:

A) A performance OUTSIDE the subway car (as in on a platform) is usually pretty good. A performance INSIDE the subway car is usually terrible. This is because the performer outside the subway car does not rely on holding you prisoner and forcing the fruits of his overinflated perspective of his talent on you. You can vote with your feet.

B) At the Dyckman/200th Street Station (my stop), if you hear a woman shriek, it is usually because there is large rat wandering around the platform.