AOL Tech

bkwormsjv

Member since: Jun 9th, 2007

bkwormsjv's Latest Comments

Blog Activity
Blog# of Comments
Autoblog1 Comment
ParentDish42 Comments
Gadling3 Comments
Engadget2 Comments
AOL TV5 Comments
Cinematical11 Comments
Slashfood2 Comments
BloggingStocks1 Comment
That's Fit8 Comments
Spinner3 Comments
AOL Video Blog2 Comments
News Bloggers3 Comments
ComicsAlliance1 Comment
Switched11 Comments
Politics Daily20 Comments
Holidash News1 Comment
Asylum4 Comments
WalletPop8 Comments
PopEater11 Comments
The Boot2 Comments
Moviefone Blog3 Comments
Fanhouse MLB Blog1 Comment
Fanhouse Backporch1 Comment
Fanhouse Main4 Comments
Lemondrop11 Comments
AOL Jobs6 Comments
BV Newswire1 Comment
Fanhouse - Kevin Blackistone1 Comment
Pawnation OLD1 Comment
Just So You Know5 Comments
BV on Love1 Comment
Sphere Lite2 Comments
MyDaily3 Comments
AOL Travel News7 Comments

Recent Comments:

Students Fed Cold Sandwiches to Punish Them for Hot Lunch Disses (ParentDish)

May 17th 2011 4:50PM Umm, I believe that usually the educators march to the drum of politicians and parents. I have yet to hear of educators in the US allowed the leeway to determine their curriculum, much less anything nearing dictator-making status. I believe politicians and budgets determine the lunch menus as well.


...or did you mean something else by "educators"?

Teenager Fakes Pregnancy to Teach Lesson on Prejudice (ParentDish)

Apr 22nd 2011 4:53PM Interesting. I wonder what the impetus was, and what sorts of results she got. Was it a research project? A personal one? I wish there was more information in the article. It seems pretty sparse, especially when one considers the subject matter and potential implications.

I also find it interesting how a startlingly high number of respondents posting comments will admit that they don't know what was going through her head and then condemn her and her efforts in the next breath. Does anyone else find that ironic? Until we know details on why she was doing her experiement, what she hoped to accomplish, and what the results mean to her and us, it's pretty premature (and in my opinion, immature) to rush to judgment.

'Mommy! I Got to Touch a Breast Implant in School Today!' (ParentDish)

Apr 9th 2011 6:53PM When I am given these sorts of choices, I tend to support knowledge. There are very few occasions where shading the truth or lying doesn't create problems down the road. Remember that in older times, children were working as soon as they could walk and holding their own as adults in their early teen years. We protect our children, but sometimes at the expense of their own intelligence and strength. Kids are smart and resilient- if things are presented calmly, factually, and if they have a chance to get their questions answered, I don't see why they shouldn't know about these things. Yes, breast implants included. Let them ask their questions so that they can get good answers... otherwise, they will assume or make up answers among themselves, and I don't see how that is an improvement.

I did see some posts along the lines of, "do you want prostitutes and strippers at career day, too?" My answer is that if it a legal occupation and someone from the profession likes their job enough to go to the fair, I would keep an open mind. Seriously, if prostitution were legal and a prostitute or stripper came to career day, don't you think that getting to know the job would be the best and most effective way to dissuade children from trying it themselves? Most will say that it is degrading and/or humiliating, not as glamorous as it looks, and doesn't get good health benefits. What do you want kids to learn, again?

My apologies for the length of the post- I just remember that when I finally got the answers to some of the questions I felt I couldn't ask as a kid, my reaction was, "Really? Why didn't someone tell me sooner? It's not that big of a deal, and/or it is a fact of life that I will get to deal with sooner or later."

Skinny Jeans and Spanx Lead to Pain, 'Tight Pants Syndrome' (MyDaily)

Apr 1st 2011 11:49PM I have another one for the collection... pantyhose! I would love to strangle the person who decided it is appropriate business wear.

Airport Security: the Past, Present, Future, the TSA and Tips (AOL Travel News)

Mar 6th 2011 4:08AM Yeah, and I notice that those Greyhound bus drivers don't rub my feet for me anymore, either. What is transportation coming to these days? I mean, it's not really fulfilling its purpose if I have to pack my own lunch and do my own foot rubs. Things are so bare bones now, merely getting to my destination seems hollow and meaningless. We should really take a stand, because it's not like anyone is trying to bomb us or anything. It would be perfectly safe to dispense with these irritating safety measures and put the budget back on the important stuff!

Airport Security: the Past, Present, Future, the TSA and Tips (AOL Travel News)

Mar 6th 2011 3:59AM This reply is for Peg.

1. A head-wrap or Burka does not a terrorist make. Recognizing that many of those "suspicious" people are US citizens, the TSA cannot single them out unless they have a reason. (Hint: bias is not a reason.)
2. Blond, blue-eyed people with Irish ancestry are not necessarily angelic by nature.
3. They were probably reacting to your sweet personality.


Happy flying!

Airport Security: the Past, Present, Future, the TSA and Tips (AOL Travel News)

Mar 6th 2011 3:47AM While I applaud efforts to keep me safe (I'm very fond of my own skin), I think it is inevitable that the TSA won't always succeed. The TSA is in an unenviable position of having to protect against everything. Terrorists, however, only need to overcome specific obstacles, and they have the opportunity to prepare specific strategies.

The article illustrated how terrorists will try something, and then security will be upgraded in response. So the terrorists find something new, and security again has to catch up. Sometimes they do catch the attempt in time, but sometimes it is just dumb luck. We are in a tail chase with the terrorists, and they have excellent motivation to find something we can't counter.

Rather than crawling under my bed or giving up, I'm going to suggest something radical: we remove the motivation for terrorists. I realize this might not be entirely possible, but trying may make a crucial difference nonetheless. Just think of how much of the world currently sees us: the vast, power-hungry, resource-wasting, arrogant bully of the world. I have been abroad to 6 countries on three continents in the last 7 years, so I can vouch for this. Why are we surprised that we make such a good target? So if we start being friendly, willing to share and play nicely with the other countries, reduce our waste, and try to cooperate (rather than get our own way) with other nations, the appeal of attacking America might decrease.

It's just a thought. But if we do what we've always done, we will get what we've always gotten. I would rather not get another 9/11.

Airport Security: the Past, Present, Future, the TSA and Tips (AOL Travel News)

Mar 6th 2011 3:30AM I see your point, but I still disagree. First, this industry is rather unique, and stricter security measures are not really out of place. Airplanes are particularly vulnerable due to the large number of people crammed on them, the lack of mid-air evacuation options, the small amount of on-plane security, the potential for a plane to become a huge, mobile weapon, and especially the altitude (that increases the danger if anything goes wrong). From a terrorist perspective, it is perfect. Given what a juicy target a plane is, I don't think the TSA is going over the top. They are responsible for our safety, and that is a heavy burden to carry.

Second, these security measures are necessary *because terrorists made them so*. Notice that every single security measure you endure at an airport is tied to a real-life terrorist attempt. Would you rather they ignore such glaring warning signs and hold onto bygone days of innocence? Until someone can invent a way to keep everyone safe AND let people maintain their privacy (which, to me, seem mutually exclusive), I suggest that we the public maintain a realistic expectation of the TSA. To me, asking to be assured of my safety and still not tolerate any inconvenience is hypocritical.

Third, if we object to the restrictions on flying, we can drive. Or take a train, or hitchhike. Our freedoms are not being abridged on a global scale. It's like walking into a courtroom or trying to get on a space shuttle. There are times and places where we should expect restrictions, in the interest of safety. In reality, America is just now approaching the security standards Europe has had for decades, and probably should have had all along. We're just a bit late.

Mike Huckabee Criticizes Natalie Portman for 'Glorifying' Out-of-Wedlock Pregnancy (PopEater)

Mar 5th 2011 12:40AM He may be speaking some truth, but the conclusion he draws is what is under fire. He seems to be claiming the following things:
1. Natalie Portman represents a highly glamorized demographic
2. Most single mothers are poor, uneducated, and can't provide for their children
3. People look at people like natalie Portman and are encouraged to have children out of wedlock
4. Marrying solves all these problems.

While I grant that #1 is true, the rest don't really hold up. Here are my rebuttals:
1. Not rebutting this one.
2. In today's day and age, I would argue that while many single parents have trouble providing, it is hardly true that they are all poor and uneducated. This is, at best, a highly simplistic view. (I would actually like to see some stats on this.)
3. Whether the idea of single parenthood is glamorized or not, I would hope that anyone old enough to procreate is also old enough to know that babies are expensive and disrupting... and a HUGE step to take. If people are making that decision based on pop culture, we have even bigger problems. If that is happening, it doesn't do any good to blame pop culture for such fundamental failings of judgment and intelligence.
4. Marriage is not necessarily the cure. It can be a great environment for kids, but what is really needed is financial support and a loving environment. If one person can provide that, I don't see a problem. A married couple can be just as poor and desperately unhappy as a single person, so his tendency to harp on formal marriage seems overly narrow-minded.

I, too, am a big fan of intelligent discussion. I invite you to reply with your thoughts.

The Word 'Retard': Stop Using It (ParentDish)

Mar 4th 2011 3:29PM For myself, I'm not really convinced that abandoning the word "retard" is the best way to go. It is a valid word to describe a group of people. Is it misused sometimes? Yes. But define "misused"... I consider it misused if it is used to cause emotional distress. Whether the subject is actually challenged or not is beside the point. In a lighthearted context, it is just like using any other insult to get at someone. So that brings up two questions:
1. In a non-deragatory context, what *actually* is the cause of offense?
2. Which stereotypes does it perpetuate, and how?

It is quite common for us to get upset over something that is really not a big deal (i.e. when no harm is done and no harm was intended). I do it myself. So, I am looking for a string of logic that tells me HOW the use of "retard" causes actual harm. I'm willing to adjust my position, but I need a little more.