A Gay Revue: 2011 Nissan Altima

Introduction: I drive a lot for work (13-16 weeks per year). I rent a lot of vehicles. In the past six months, I have operated over a dozen different vehicles (SUVs, cars, vans). Some are good, and some are dreadful, but they all leave me with an impression. Therefore, I'm introducing a new feature where one queer dude will review automobiles with arbitrary critiques and observations, in this new segment: "A Gay Revue."

The Basics:
The Nissan Altima is a four-door sedan. It existed.

Magic Moments:
Outstanding fuel economy. It was a decently comfortable vehicle to drove with a good amount of storage space. Handling was fair and I didn't feel like I was going to die while driving it. The CVT was an interesting feature and provided seamless shifting in automatic or semi-automatic modes.


Tragic Moments:
This car has one of the most sadly utilitarian designs I've ever seen. What characterises the design as "sad" is the fact that controls are not arranged in a way which connotes utility. For example, controls which dim the console or operate the information panel are cramped behind the steering wheel and in a very unsafe place should one discover the console is extremely bright when driving at night.

This car is a 2011 and yet it still does not have steering wheel-mounted audio controls. As a mid-range (non-economy) sedan, this is an expected feature. While the sound system was superior to most cars I've driven, little seemed to have been undertaken to properly implement it in the vehicle. Automatic volume levelling, for example, was not included in the Nissan Altima.


The Verdict:

"War on Christmas" Irony

On the surface, I can appreciate why many groups have moved that retailers and other companies use the term "Merry Christmas" to recognise the (primarily) Christmas season over the more politically correct "Happy Holidays" and the likes. Then, I started to think upon it a bit more and found it completely unsuitable.

In the past, vocal criticism and threats of boycotts have forced Walmart, Sears and Kmart to move from using the more generic "Happy Holidays" term into a prominent use of "Merry Christmas." These threats and criticism have tended to be tactics employed by Christian groups and churches, who demand that the Christmas season be honoured to celebrate the birth of Jesus. Of course, they are correct, Christmas, by its very name, is about the birth of Christ, a hallowed religious holiday.

Indeed, there could be no better way to celebrate a religious event than with religious activities like high-pressure shopping, crafting lists of presents expected of your friends and family, and spending lots of money on biblically-themed decorations like Christmas trees, robotic Santa Clauses and inflatable reindeer. In fact, God wanted nothing less for celebrating the birth of his only son than chopping down and killing a living tree for use as home décor and putting up icons of a fictitious, obese bearded man who delivers presents. Santa's obesity, itself, is a symbol of gluttony, which the Bible graciously endorses.

The Christmas that the retail environment presents has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus, Christianity, religion or goodwill unto others - unless goodwill unto others is watching customers get trampled when you open the shop doors on Black Friday. Retail Christmas is all about generating revenue, moving product, and maximizing the number of dollars that each human being entering your shop spends. It represents greed and a lust for material posessions.

So, therefore, to all the crazy fucktards who batter retailers and demand that they use the term "Christmas" while appealing to your greed and lifestyle excess, just remember that you, personally, are the ones truly taking "Christ" out of "Christmas" with every Tickle-Me Elmo that you snatch from another shopper, every demand you make on your Christmas list, every person you trample, and every parking space you steal to get into the shops faster.

In Jesus' name.

Are U of R Students Getting Fucked?

CORRECTION: According to this Leader-Post article, the disparity works out slightly less awful than I initially concluded here. In 2009-10, the University of Regina recieved $9,377 per student after adjustments, versus over $13,000 for a student at the University of Saskatchewan.

I'd like to thank Kent Peterson, University of Regina Students' Union President for peaking my interest on this one.

There's been talk, for years, of a disparity between provincial government funding for the University of Regina and the University of Saskatchewan. I was not aware just how grave the problem was until I did a little sleuthing. It didn't take long until it felt like I was getting fucked by the Province of Saskatchewan. Not the nice kind of getting fucked, either.

I'm open to someone fact-checking this in case I've missed any grant funds or important data in either direction.

Let's look at some numbers:

University of Regina
2010-11 Provincial Operating Grant:  $89,629,000.00 (Source)
2010-11 Fall Enrolment: 12,267 students (Source)

University of Saskatchewan
2010-11 Provincial Operating Grant: $261,885,000.00 (Source)
2010-11 Fall Enrolment: 19,918 students (Source)

Provincial Funding Per Student
University of Regina: $7,306.51
University of Saskatchewan: $13,148.16

The University of Saskatchewan appears to be receiving nearly double the provincial operating grant funds versus the University of Regina. For every $1.00 the province feeds the Cougars, it's giving $1.80 to the Huskies.

No wonder they call themselves 'Huskie.'

Where the F*** Have You Been!?

Still, some people don't seem to understand this concept:

I travel for work.
I travel for work a lot.

So, without detailing my stops for coffee, gas, or snacks, what communities across Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario have I been to this year?

I'm back now, bitches. For a little while, at least.

Environmental Impact & Public Funds

As an employee of a university, my salary is ultimately paid by students and taxpayers. We are responsible, as a unit and as an organisation, to use our funds in a manner that is prudent and respectable, and I'm proud of knowing that we are successful in doing just that.

I got to thinking about this topic after a couple of conversations about my job, what I do, and what I spend. In the interest of transparency, when I am travelling on University business, my food, lodging and fuel are all paid for by the University. I use a company charge card for these purposes, and we have a very well-defined system for reporting and being individually responsible for the decisions we make. There are reasonable and prudent thresholds set for meals and lodging, costs when I am proud to say we normally stay well-below. Unlike others in similar job roles for competing institutions, we don't simply claim daily per diem amounts for our meals - if I don't eat a lunch, I'm not reimbursed for that non-expense; if my breakfast is included in my hotel stay, I also don't get reimbursed for that prepaid expense.

The returns on investment for the jobs done by myself and my trusted colleagues go beyond numbers. If each of us attracts just few new students each year (and we do far better), the new funds we attract to the University will more than pay for our costs. Such increases in enrolment attract new investments of public and private research and endowment funds to our University, further benefiting the students studying there and in turn making the University an even-more enticing destination for the next generation of students. It's a win all-around.

The other cost of what I do is environmental. My job involves driving and flying and driving - activities which cost money, burn fossil fuels, and emit greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. This is an issue we're fully aware of, and we do take steps to reduce our impact. Unlike many of our competitors, we stick to driving intermediate and mid-size cars, rather than SUVs, for as long as the weather and road conditions permit. We also strive to plan our travel in the most effective manners possible - visiting the greatest number of schools possible in one region in a period to reduce back-and-forth trips to-and-from Regina. I also endeavour to use the most fuel-efficient driving routes possible, thanks to an "Eco-Route" feature built into my navigational system.

I am proud to do a job which I enjoy, which benefits people, and which I can do efficiently and effectively. Best of all, I get to do it with a fantastic group of people I call my colleagues and my friends.

Canada's Public Broadcaster

Although not uncommon at any time, recently we have seen extraordinary amounts of criticism being levelled at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - the CBC. People are criticising the corporation's costs, cultural merits, political leanings, and journalistic standards.

The CBC receives $1.1 billion in annual public funds (Ottawa Sun). Considering there are 34 million taxpayers in Canada (CTF), this works out to an average cost of roughly $35 per person per year, or under three dollars per month. I pay more than than monthly just to get one cable channel, never mind three national radio services, the main CBC Television network, Radio Canada, CBC News Network, and all of CBC's outstanding online services. I would be happy to pay double to maintain the same quality and calibre of programming I receive from the CBC.

Canada's public broadcaster employs over nine thousand individuals from coast-to-coast and around the world. The CBC has been a starting point for many of my friends in their journalism and broadcasting careers, and adds in immeasurable value to the cultural, artistic, and social fabric of our country. In my opinion, the CBC takes on challenges in producing brilliant Canadian content that most for-profit broadcasters wouldn't dare touch, it grows the careers of Canadian journalists, artists, actors, producers and writers, and it is a company which reinvests the public funds it receives to the public benefit.

The CBC has become an integral part of Canadian culture and identity, it reflects who we are as a nation, it tells our stories and in turn we influence and shape the CBC. I am proud to know we have such a brilliant cultural entity and I would be devastated to lose our public broadcaster or see it slowly dismantled.

To inspect how the CBC invests its public/advertiser funds, see this document: cbc.radio-canada.ca/about/pdf/who.pdf

Stop. Fucking. Driving.

The other day, I was driving behind a very old man in an old car. The roads were clear, as was the weather. He was stopping to pull into the casino. To do this, he started braking two blocks ahead of the casino. The braking pattern - watching his brake lamps - went something like this:

Tappa-tap. Tap-tap-tap. Tappa-tappa-tap-tap. Tap-tap.
Tap-tappa-tap. Tap-tappa-tap. Tap-tap. Tap-tap.

I playfully imagined he was transmitting a Morse Code message to the world. Again, the roads and conditions were clear... So that can only lead me to one of two presumptions:

a.) His driving skills are awful and he knows it.
b.) This car's brakes are awful and he knows it.

The only conclusion I can ascertain from both of these is:

Stop. Fucking. Driving.

You don't need to go to the casino. If the issue is your car's brakes, invest the money in car repairs rather dumping it at the casino. If your driving skills are awful, you need to pull over, throw your car keys and license in the garbage and walk away. You are a danger to other drivers, you are a danger to children, you are a danger to pedestrians, you are a danger to animals, you are a danger to property. Stop driving.

Housekeeping

I sleep in a lot of hotels, for a big chunk of the year. Earnestly, I do not get the complete differences, in the same hotel, one housekeeper will have over another. It's like they do two completely different jobs. I appreciate it's a tedious occupation, but there are a few things which just confuse me.

Toss Your Soaps: This is the housekeeper who takes the soap, shampoo, or conditioner you've only just started to use, and which is still 75%+ full, and throws it out. You come back to brand new ones, but the old ones are already on their way to the rubbish.

Odd Numbers: One day, you get four towels, the next there's six, then we're back to four. Four coffee cups but only two single-serve pods of coffee. The next day, there are three coffee pods and still four cups.

Plug All the Drains: Why do you close all the drains? It's completely weird to be surprised by water (or the coffee I'm pouring out) pooling in the sink.

Switch All Your Towels: Most hotels now have a little placard which indicates the hotel will only change your bath linens every few days. I am totally a fan of this - save water, energy and detergent. I re-fold them and hang them all up neatly per the placard; however, I've never had the same towels two days in a row. They are always completely replaced every day.

Move Your Stuff: Possibly the worst offender, I don't like when my stuff is re-arranged. I leave my hotel room reasonably neat each day. Most of my stuff is placed quite deliberately in certain places. There's no need for you to move all my stuff off of chairs and rearrange my desk... I like my things where they are, and I look for them where they are placed.

UR Guarantee: Liberal Arts Friend or Foe?

I might take on a contentious issue in this blog entry, but fuck it, here I go.

There is some debate about what the UR Guarantee Program, a academic/career success program offered by the University of Regina means for the job market and the direction students pursue when entering the University. One point of view is that the UR Guarantee does nothing more than drive the misconception that university is job training, and will only drive students in to "professional" fields such as business or engineering. I'd argue that this program doesn't do that, but rather opens the door to liberate the career-minded to pursue their academic passions within the liberal and fine arts by helping assuage the fear of failure.

Every week in my job, I work with students who are exploring their options for post-secondary education. Some of these students are completely certain what they want to study and where they see themselves. Others have no idea what they want to study, or even if there is anything in a university to strike their interest. I also meet many students who are under pressure from their parents to choose a "career minded" academic program: one that may make them financially prosperous, not one that will make them happy, engaged and passionate for the world around them. The conversations typically begin something like this:

Parent: Benji is interested in anthropology, but that's not going to get him anywhere, so he wants to apply to business.
Cue Phil looking Benji square in the eye to ascertain who actually wants him to choose Business.
Phil: That's actually a common concern. I think I can help us meet somewhere in the middle. Are you familiar with our UR Guarantee Program?

It's at this point that that I go on to (a.) explain the purpose of the UR Guarantee Program, and (b.) explain the value of a liberal arts education. My persuasive powers have, in almost all instances, won the parent over to see that their child can both develop the critical/analytical/communication skills needed for career success while pursuing their academic passions without judgement.

The fundamental theoretical framework that informs most professional programs: business, engineering, education, healthcare, etc draws directly from the sciences and arts. In business, where did the core of consumer behaviour theory originate from? Psychology, history and sociology, of course. Consumer behaviour theory is at the core of advertising and marketing. From that marketing research, a decision may be made on mechanical refinements to be made by an engineer to a product which will increase sales. The impact of those increased sales will touch the company's finance department, which engages a number of economists, each with a Bachelor of Arts in Economics hanging on their walls.

Let's play out another scenario of whimsy. A prison is dealing with issues of overcrowding, rioting and inmate disobedience. While engineers and architects may be able to refine space usage to overcome issues of crowding and to reduce the potential of a riot breaking out, it's the pragmatists of social research, psychology, sociology and other liberal arts area who will be called on to innovate and propose solutions for treatment and rehabilitation.

More examples abound us every day, from the journalists who write and research our news to our politicians, authors of public policy, and many leaders of major organisations. Their business savvy, their communication skills, and their drive came from the liberal arts.The arts inform and shape our world around us, they inform other professional and academic disciplines, and they are at the core of most that we see and do each day. It's high time we re-prioritise the liberal arts and recognise the economic impact that they have on our world.

Occupy

Fundamentally, I agree with the principle of the Occupy movement: Drawing attention to an unfair distribution of wealth worldwide. There are certain unfortunate facets of the Occupy movement, however, which are damning to its core causes and its validity, problematising the whole system.

Freeloaders: It's one thing to protest in a public space. It's visible, it is public, and it's a completely acceptable exercising of your rights. It's another thing to monopolise a space, causing it to be devalued, making it inaccessible to the public, and turning it into your rent-free home.

Idiots/Hypocrites: Every person in the Occupy movement who is clueless or ill-informed about what s/he is talking about is a liability to the movement. Worse are the ones who are adimently stupid. Among the statements which I am compelled to ridicule:

• Don't let corporations donate to political parties! Specifically noted in a context of Canadian protests. Corporations haven't been allowed to donate for years. Get informed!
• Public oversight of government! That's called an election. And Freedom of Information requests. Get informed!
• Don't waste taxpayer money! Like the added costs of policing and maintaining the public spaces being occupied?
• Save the planet! First: when it's being said by people who have perfectly good homes going unused while still remaining heated and using electricity and natural gas. Since you're living in a public park, why not sell, sublet or lend-out your residence to someone else? That's a redistribution of wealth right there. Second: there have been reputable reports that some "Occupy" camps are damaging the trees and flowerbeds in some of the parks they are occupying.

The Occupy'ers who have atrocious grammar and spelling when posting on public forums also upset me. It's hard to take someone seriously when they can't handle capital letters, punctuation, or homonyms. Do you want us to believe you're making a serious arguement, or are you a child having a YouTube rant because your mother took away your iPhone?

Continuing to occupy a public venue does send a message... But a group of people who have the strength of character to disassemble each night and reappear each and every morning send an even stronger message: We're coming back, day after day, growing stronger, growing smarter. Members could take advantage of their home time to develop tactics for the coming days, communicate, design campaigns, and spread their message (articulately) online.

And let the public enjoy their public parks. We're all paying for them.

A time to reflect

Yes, today is Remembrance Day; the eleventh day of November. This is the day when we pause to reflect on sacrifices made and battles fought for our liberties and for the liberties of others.

I am grateful to live in a country where movements like Occupy Regina can take place and we are able to speak freely, to disagree publicly with the state, and to arrange in peaceful protest. Across the world, people have lost their homes, their families, their lives for the freedoms that we benefit from and take for granted each day. I reflect on the "Arab Spring" movement that spread across Tunisia, Egypt and Libya as I think about the battles fought for freedom and a more just society.

Canada has a proud history of peacekeeping and of fighting for freedom and justice. As Canada's mission in Afghanistan winds down, I am looking forward to seeing, on the road, two of my recruitment colleagues from the Canadian Forces returning home from Afghanistan, one from his third tour of duty. I am looking foward to hearing stories of families reunited and stories of the positive impact the mission has had for the Afghan people.

Likely, I will never know what it is like to serve in the Canadian Forces. I can only imagine the challenge, the stress, the fear and the reward for serving one's country in the way our uniformed women and men do each day. I am grateful for their service to our country, and I am honoured to call myself a Canadian.

So, this day, I will wear a poppy with respect and with honour. I never forget what it means to be a Canadian and to live in a free and just society where I may have my voice and my liberties.

The Writ'n'Shit

The next Saskatchewan election will be on November 7. As someone who's politically-minded, nothing, provincially, has yet turned me on.

The Saskatchewan Party, which currently governs this province, have not done a bad job, but I also cannot laurel them with any great successes. The New Democrats, which I believe helped develop a sustainable and healthy economy during their tenure (1991-2007), haven't shown any bright shining reasons to be elected either. I believe there's a clearcut choice, but that's based on my own experiences.

I feel as though the Saskatchewan Party's approach to this province involves the expedited liquidation of our natural resources for the fastest "bang for your buck," a reduction to the holdings of public/crown services, and virtually no broad-based support for post-secondary education delivery/affordability in this province. At a time when tuition costs are rising faster than inflation, student housing is filled, and Regina overall has few vacancies, we haven't seen any real movement to support accessibility for higher education in Saskatchewan. Sustainable management of natural resources and a more clear commitment to public service are, I feel, traits more in line with the Saskatchewan New Democrats.

This election, I'm voting as our system intended: for my elected representative. In this case, I have a choice between NDP incumbent Trent Wotherspoon or Saskatchewan Party candidate Tony Fiacco. I've seen Trent at work in our riding, I've seen him at local events. He's a man who can speak about the issues on his feet, and who instantly connects with people in person, in correspondence, and online. Plus, an academic background in education and business are a good combination.

Unfortunately, not all Trent's compatriots at NDP HQ are the same way. Sandra Morin, the New Democrat incumbent just north of my riding, appears a bit dead in the water. One of my friends who lives in her riding says Sandra hasn't been seen at local events or out doorknocking. A quick drive counting lawn signs will show that the Saskatchewan Party challenger Warren Steinley has a good foothold on her territory. Perhaps an indicator of her inaccessibility, Sandra's Twitter feed (which has fewer followers than mine at the time of publishing) is simply a mouthpiece and doesn't engage in dialogue per the Twitter model.

A few friends have mentioned they see no key issues, no motivators, no standout personalities in this election. That may be the case, but I hope everyone remembers the essentiality of voting to the democratic process. If you're undecided who should represent you, contact their offices, look at their websites, and ask the questions. The choice if yours November 7.