V-Day or D-Day?

Expensive gifts hidden in secret places, dinners for two, candle-covered bedrooms, rose petals on floors, chocolates in heart-shaped boxes: all the things that should get you in the mood for the most romantic holiday around. Valentine’s Day.

Anybody else still waiting for the warm and fuzzies?

Valentine’s Day is not a day for love or romance, it is a day for spending entirely too much money.

Every year on Feb. 14, couples are pressured into showing how much they care by spending money on each other. They must make plans, buy gifts, be extra sweet and sentimental. But where exactly is all this motivation coming from?

Turn the TV on in January or February and you will find the answer.

Hallmark advertises their cards, balloons and stuffed animals. Jewelers promote their special rings, lockets and tennis bracelets. Television networks even dedicate many primetime shows and movies to the day.

It seems quite silly that normal, sane people would suddenly allow corporations to influence them to into putting so much emphasis on one day.

Or maybe this is the incorrect way to approach the holiday.

Maybe people actually do feel Valentine’s is more romantic. Maybe they feel it’s so special they have to spoil their loved ones. Maybe they realize they take each other for granted the rest of the year, so they make up for it on Feb. 14.

If this is case, V-Day does not seem as horrible. But the fact of the matter is, people should not be waiting until then to make their loved ones feel important, it should be happening year-round.

A coworker told the story of her relationship.

She and her boyfriend were dating for eight months when Valentine’s Day rolled around, and things had started out strong. The first few months could definitely be labeled as the “honeymoon period:” no arguments, just bliss. The following three months saw minor disagreements, but nothing too serious.

However, by month six, he began to ignore her phone calls, miss dinner plans, and he even forgot her birthday. She became so fed up with him that she was ready to end their one-sided relationship. Then he Valentine’s Day-ed her.

He showed up at her job with flowers and a little jewelry box. He had a card that said how much he loved and appreciated her, and that he had “something special” planned for the evening. His “something special” turned out to be less than spectacular, but she was blinded by the glow of Valentine’s Day, so she played right into his game. She felt so special that she forgot about the months of mistreatment and fell into the glamour of his gesture. Unfortunately, the very next day the glamour faded and he was back to taking her for granted. Over the next couple of days she tried getting the romantic boyfriend back, but it seemed he was gone for good so she eventually broke up with him.

Valentine’s Day is the day of love, but does that mean people do not have to say “I love you” any other day of the year? Should husbands only surprise their wives with gifts once a year? Are candlelight dinners planned by girlfriends exclusive to Valentine’s Day?

The obvious answer to these questions is no, but sadly that is not always the case because too many people use this holiday as a way to redeem themselves for 364 other days of neglect.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could go back to the days of elementary school when we would bring a generic card and a piece of candy for everyone in class on Valentine's? There was no pressure of impressing one another, it was just an innocent gesture between friends.

Man, those were the days.

Living under the radar

Ever wondered what it would be like to live at the mall?

Well eight artists in Providence, R.I. experienced it first hand when they illegally made an unused space in the Providence Place mall into an apartment.

On Sept 26, mall security took Michael J. Townsend and a companion, who was later released, into custody after the two entered the apartment. Townsend, his wife Adriana Yoto, 29, and six other artists lived in the space off-and-on for almost four years.

So why did it take so long for mall security to discover this secret?

The eight illegal mall tenants put great effort into staying under the radar. They created a wall from cinder blocks and added a door that concealed the apartment from its storage room neighbor. All that could be seen from the storage room was a ladder leading to the locked door.

The area lacked running water, a toilet and a refrigerator, but Townsend, 36, and his accomplices stayed there for up to three weeks at a time. They equipped the apartment with large amounts of water, a coffee table, lamps, a couch, love seat and dining table with four chairs, and decorated with a rug and paintings. Electricity came courtesy of an extension cord to an power outlet in the storage room. They even watched TV and played video games on a Sony Playstation2. In order to relieve themselves, they snuck out to use the mall’s restrooms.

It seems as though they were living pretty well at the mall’s expense. Without utility bills or rent, all they had to do was buy food and clean up after themselves. Not a bad deal, until they were caught and punished.

Townsend pleaded no contest to a criminal charge of trespassing, which was reduced from the original felony charge of breaking and entering in the daytime. The courts sentenced him to six months of probation and ordered him to pay restitution and court fees. He was also banned from the mall.

A punishment lacking jail time seems awfully generous for a man who made his home on someone else’s property. I don’t know about you, but if somebody moved onto my property without my knowledge, I would want him in a jail cell for at least a few months. I mean, it wouldn’t be that harsh of a punishment since I would still be partially funding it, right?

Although most people would assume the tenants had to force their way into the building, the concept was debated. While police and mall security reported that the unwanted residents broke in, they claim the door was either unlocked or ajar when they entered.

Townsend, who began his stay in order to observe modern mall behaviors, denied allegations of force entry by saying he is not a “lock-picker.”

Throughout the whole ordeal, Townsend and Yoto did not seem to be remorseful about the choices they made. In fact, the only disappointment mentioned was in regards to the early termination of their research.

It is probably quite easy to remain guilt-free when your only discipline for this type of crime is a six month timeout and some monthly payments. Maybe all the homeless people in the world should research the blueprints of their local malls, find the empty rooms, and have a place to stay for at least four years. Then if they were ever caught, they would be fined, miss the payments because they wouldn’t have money, and get sent to jail. The plus of this is they would still be living off the streets.

*Story details obtained from an article by Gregory Smith and Philip Marcelo in The Providence Journal.
http://www.projo.com/news/content/Mall_Dwellers_10-02-07_1F7B9KA.34baf91.html

Do YouTube?

You walk into class while everyone is talking about the Britney Spears MTV Video Music Awards disaster and how they “cannot believe she made such a fool out of herself on national TV,” and you immediately start to panic. You missed the awards show because you had to work, but you hate being the only one that can’t give input on celebrity gossip. After pouting for a second or two, it hits you like a Mike Tyson knockout punch…YouTube.com. You pull out your laptop, watch the performance, then comment right along with everyone else.

For those of us who do not YouTube, it is a site where people post videos for their own and other people’s enjoyment. On YouTube.com, you can watch an assortment of clips ranging from a random girl singing in her living room to Beyonce’s latest music video. But what is its real purpose? Does it even have one?

Created in February 2005 by Chad Hurley, Steve Chen and Jawed Karim, YouTube quickly grew into a popular site that was purchased by Google Inc. in November of last year. Since its creation, YouTube has become a widely known and used site that allows people to share videos they feel everyone should see. By simply joining the free Web site, anyone with internet-access can view and comment on millions of videos; members can even add their own.

So if billions of people post their videos, is there a sole reason why?

Maybe YouTube is a place for people to express and share a piece of themselves. If you have a dance performance on tape that you are proud of, you can put it on YouTube and share it with the world. If your baby just took his first steps and you want everyone to know, then put it on YouTube.

Or maybe YouTube is a place to share funny mishaps. People post videos of themselves dancing around their living rooms. They put up clips of themselves acting like superheroes in homemade costumes. You might even find one of a stranger falling off a curb and rolling into a pack of school children.

Is YouTube a way for people to send a message? It was for Chris Crocker who has become semi-famous for his video where he was in tears, telling everyone to leave Britney Spears alone. The video was even shown on the Jimmy Kimmel Show.

YouTube could be entertainment for when you are bored or you and your friends are surfing the web, looking for a laugh. It could even be an exciting new tool used by an educator to give out a homework assignment. Or as sweet revenge. Maybe it’s a complete waste of time.

Perhaps it is one of the most innovative websites in the world. Time Magazine must think so since they awarded them with “Best Invention of the Year.” Entertainment Weekly might agree because they made them the first Web site to receive “Entertainer of the Year.”

Overall it seems that YouTube does not serve just one purpose. It has numerous purposes based on the user. So if you have never YouTube-ed, it couldn’t hurt to check it out, right?

An order of news, with a bit of sarcasm and wit on the side, please

What could possibly be better than reading a hard-hitting news story? How about a hard-hitting news story that also brings a smile to your face?

In this day and age, journalism seems to be a shrinking profession because of the lack of people interested in reading genuine news. Most readers (mainly my generation) want to hear the facts, but would prefer to hear them dressed up with wit and humor.

However, it isn’t always so easy to find good quality writing of this style.

Fortunately, Steve Lopez of the Los Angeles Times gets the job done.

On The Times’ staff since 2001, Lopez has delivered story after story that give readers the information they need to know, but also pulls them in with his clever-style of writing.

He has written on topics ranging from the Antonio Villaraigosa affair to a young boy getting run over by a car. But no matter what the subject, somehow he manages to almost make you forget you are reading about news.

Lopez started the car accident story, headlined “Strangers’ paths cross, and a boy’s life hang in the balance,” by introducing the people involved. He wrote, “Ten-year-old Danny White, red-haired and freckled, was riding his skateboard while his mother walked a friend's dog. Ron Dobson was on the corner after a day of revisions on a screenplay, enjoying the feel of the afternoon sun on his face, eyes closed and head tilted back. Myra Crowe was on her way to a ballet class for one of her three kids, all of whom were in her Honda Pilot as she headed out of her town house driveway and onto Palisades Circle at the very moment Danny approached.”**

After this intro, he explains how Crowe rounds the corner, hits the boy and how he hangs on to save his own life.

This column could have easily been boring and factual, as many news-related columns are, but Lopez keeps you glued to the page with his unique brand of column writing. After reading the story, you feel as though you know the people involved and were right there watching.

He works the same magic in many of his other stories, as well.

But developing easy-to-read articles is not where his writing ends, Lopez is also the author of three novels, “Third and Indiana,” “The Sunday Macaroni Club,” and “In the Clear.” All of which have received memorable reviews, such as “…this book brims with humor in all flavors. Sarcasm sprinkled into witty dialogue…” from the mysteryreader.com on his second book, and "...Lopez is blessed with surefire comic timing..." from Dave Kipen of the San Francisco Times on his third.

In addition to these publications, his columns can be found in the book “Land of the Giants: Where No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.”

Lopez has also been recognized for his talent with numerous awards, both before and during his employment at The Times.

In his earlier career, he was a columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer and was awarded the H.L Mencken Writing Award, National Headliner Award, and the Ernie Pyle Award for his human interest and column writing.

Lopez later wrote for Times Inc. and helped to develop the Bonus Section, a narrative news series, for which he won a Society of Professional Journalists Award for national magazines.

His earliest career began with several daily newspapers in California, including the Oakland Tribune and the San Jose Mercury News.

According to LAWeekly.com, Lopez is currently working on his fourth novel, which is also his first nonfiction. It will detail a formally-homeless cellist and violinist named Nathaniel, who he met in Downtown L.A.

So much to my satisfaction, and hopefully yours, it seems we will be seeing a lot more of Lopez’s work.

I am positive we can expect just as much exceptional work as we have in the past, and I look forward to reading it.

**http://www.latimes.com/news/columnists/la-me-lopez30sep30,1,5683440.column?coll=la-news-columns
http://www.latimes.com/news/columnists/la-me-lopez7oct07,1,3012582.column?coll=la-news-columns&ctrack=4&cset=true

A trip to the mall or a day in hell?

Ever seen the “Problem Child” movies? Well, have you ever seen them played out in real life; while you’re in the mall trying to do some shopping? Unfortunately most of us have.

Does this sound familiar? While browsing through the racks of your favorite store, you notice a child, maybe around six years old, tagging along with his parent. At first, things seem to be normal, but as they approach you, you see a look on the child’s face that says “I don’t want to be hear and I’m about to make it known.” Before you even have time to consider walking away, the tantrum begins and you cannot help but watch.

Embarrassed, the mother tries to quietly calm the obnoxiously loud screams and flailing legs, quite unsuccessfully. Her next attempt is a threat to revoke his playtime privileges he was promised after their shopping trip. Still unsuccessful. Obviously flustered, the mother snatches the boy off the ground by the waist and you cannot wait to see what happens next. It’s like watching a movie. Where’s the popcorn?

But what will the mother do next? Will she: A. Give him a slap on the rear, B. Waive her finger in his face and say “No,” C. Simply ignore him and continue shopping, or D. All of the above?

Well this particular mother went with a combination of A and B. She gave him a quick tap on the bottom then shook her finger at him and delivered a stern “No.” Suddenly, the out-of-control young person, was a model citizen.

What would you have done? Would you have spanked your child? Should you spank your child?

The third is a question that has been asked over and over again, in case after case. But is there a real answer to this question? Probably not.

So here’s an answer for you: if a kid is acting up in the mall and will not give in to reasoning, there is nothing wrong with a minor spanking. A tap on the rear or slap on the hand, that is. When it crosses over to a smack across the face, a line should be drawn.

Why should we, as mall patrons, have to suffer because a parent decides to ignore their crying children to teach them their lesson? They shouldn’t. If you don’t want to spank your misbehaving offspring, then get them out of the mall because nobody wants to hear it, including mall workers.

Shemila Johnson, a mother and former mall worker, said she used to hate it when a child came into the mall “throwing a fit” and the parent just let the tantrum run its course.

“I never let my son act like that at home, so he would never get away with it in public,” said Johnson. The best way to deal with public disobedience, is to eliminate it at home.

Maybe malls should create a timeout area and play area in each store. The play areas would be for the well-behaved children, while the naughty children would be banished to the timeout area, where they would have to sit alone, in silence. That sounds pretty good, right? Any volunteers to pitch it to mall developers?

Or maybe, stores should hire a really tall person to dress up like the boogeyman and go around telling all the screaming children to quiet down, or else. Who wants to bet that there would be a lot less noise from these unhappy youngsters and a lot more smiling parents? Plus, it would create more job openings for the unemployed. Killing two birds with one stone is the best!

Allow 10-12 weeks for these changes to go into effect before enjoying hassle-free shopping trips.