Monday, April 15, 2013

The House of Payne is Literally a House of Pain

This picture makes no sense.

So the Bulls game ends and the station cuts back to "House of Payne", the Tyler Perry sitcom, which was already in progress. The son was in ROTC and something made the mother upset and she tells the son he  can't do it anymore because it will lead to the Army, which is too dangerous for him.

The son tries to plead his case, and the mother essentially tells him he has no say in the matter. Perplexed, the boy tries to plead his case again, understandably frustrated.
The mother then says, "You were worried about getting hit crossing the street, you need to be worried about getting hit right here!"

And she meant it. How dare her son voice his opinion, and about his future! His father had even warned him, told him not to go down that road. 

The debate over whether it's okay to hit children has been heating up recently. In 2011, a judge was shown beating his 16 year old daughter with a belt  because she illegally downloaded files from the internet. He received a year suspension from the bench(paid of course), and no longer oversees cases where parenting ability is called into question.

Ohio father Greg Horn was arrested after whipping his two daughters with video cables for sneaking out. They were visiting him, and when their mother get them back into her custody, she noticed the welts and contacted the police. 

I don't understand why people are able to hit their children. You can't hit an adult, why are you allowed to hit a child? Furthermore, why would you want to? You can't beat someone into seeing things your way. You can only instill fear that makes them too afraid to disagree with you.

Shawn says don't hit your kid because talking is what mature people do; hitting is what bullies do.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

A letter to Tommy Chong(in response to his Apple rant)

The way I see it, Tommy, you were both right and wrong. You were right to be upset that a high end store like that doesn't have a bathroom for customers.
And the security guard?
What the hell, man? That's just overkill.
It's filled with expensive merchandise, but why is he guarding the bathroom?

First place you went wrong was in assuming that because you're a celebrity(it doesn't matter what grade, not to me at least) they should have given you preferential treatment. Your third paragraph starts out fine(letting go for a moment that you had already informed the security guard that you were the famous guy who was in there not too long ago who got to use the bathroom), but you don't get out of the first sentence before you lose it again(see, told you it was only going to be for a moment) by referencing your celebrity status to the guard. In that single action you instantly showed that your issue wasn't with the unfairness of customers not being able to use the bathroom, but with the unfairness that you wouldn't be able to use the bathroom.

And then we have the cherry on top. This article's pièce de résistance, if you will. You said, "I'm keeping up the Apple Store toilet issue until they apologize to me and change their policy. Better yet, they should install toilets for the public as crowded as their stores are."

Those two sentences together seem to be saying(and I'm paraphrasing here)"Hey Apple, I'm gonna make noise on this issue until you guys decide to let famous people like me who sign autographs and take pictures with the staff use the bathrooms! Oh, and I guess you should do the same thing for everyone else too."

Your last thought on the issue really confuses me. You say that "without us Apple stores don't exist!", yet you never even so much as hint at the idea of taking your business elsewhere. Why would Apple give you or the other, non-famous customers a bathroom? You didn't seem to care all this time that there is no customer bathroom, why should they?

Shawn says a little humility goes a long way.
Oh, and happy 72nd man!