The Pony Express

A few weeks ago, someone asked me my opinion on merging two LinkedIn accounts.  Turns out this person (like many) created a LinkedIn profile many moons ago, and made another one, meanwhile had connections on one account they still valued but no longer wanted to use their old account.  How to merge the accounts into one?  Doing a quick search on their Help Site, you can shoot them a quick email, answer some questions and bang-o.  You have one new account and then you're good to go.

But are you?  I was reading an article in the Times this morning about how a gentleman who opened  a Twitter account to promote a charity devoted to his daughter was locked and couldn't talk to anyone about why it was such.  What could have been a simple phone call to determine a) why it was blocked (never found out the reason why) or b) to discuss options if it was blocked for a reason (it was later reinstated after a few emails) was avoided because - ta da! - these new social networking sites don't offer a customer service number for its customers.

On one hand, I can understand, almost.  For the most part, these are free sites for the public (with the exception of LinkedIn, which has a premium account that you can opt into), and the cost of adding a help desk situation can be prohibitive.  Especially in the case that most of the questions can be answered by clicking around the Help Desk or FAQs of the site.

But it still makes me question the lack of responsibility or passing of the buck by these organizations.  I find that the most successful corporations or organizations on these sites are also coincidentally the most socially responsible.  So it would be nice to see them practice what they preach. 

I find that for myself, it's easier for me to make appointments over email or texting friends, but the reality is, it's tough to blow off a phone call.  I'm in the network marketing business, and you can email people to your heart's content.  Yet at the same time, it's easy to delete or blow off those messages. 

But the lack of phone support for many companies, not even the big three in social networking, is mind-blowing, especially when you are paying for a service. 

If I have a bad experience somewhere, anywhere, I can make the conscious decision to never use that product or patronize that establishment again.  You're kind of stuck in a consumer rock or hard place with technology based companies, however.  I mean, where else are you going to go?  Facebook?  They have your pictures or your company page profile!  Twitter?  All that content you've invested in? Good luck leaving it.  LinkedIn is what gets me though -- when I first lost my job a few months ago, I invested in a premium account.  I found it did not give me a competitive advantage.  I tried to cancel it, but it was not that easy.  If I did what they suggested in their Help Center, I would essentially lose my contacts, the contacts I've built up over a five year relationship, contacts that I still keep in touch with and use for potential business deals.  So as they would say, they have me by the balls. 

What I would normally do is call and try to eliminate the charges, give me my basic account and call it a day.  But hey, look at that, no 800 number, no customer service.

Whatever happened to that?  Customer service, you know the "Customer is always right" credo.  I find that these days, technology companies embrace Shannon Hamilton's philosophy that "the customer is always an asshole."

What's more is that places that you're spending money seem to take their customers for granted.  What I've found is that maybe over the past decade or so, companies have either outsourced or eliminated their help desks to the extent that it's almost impossible to talk to anyone.  What's worse?  In the event you DO get help, turns out that one department doesn't know what the other department is doing.  Then there are those synergies where you need to explain 900 times why you're calling.  It's not even places you are a consumer -- I have a friend who has been dealing with pension issues for the last four years or so, and still cannot get a straight answer from anyone. 

I am an AT&T customer.  Cell phone companies are a bit curious because it's like they're in collusion with one another.  Either way, you're locked into a contract, either way you've got a phone that unless it's "jailbroken," it's not translatable to another company.  So if I theoretically wanted to move my business elsewhere, I'd lose my phone number (that everyone has), I'd have to sign a contract, I'd have to spend a gazillion dollars on new phones.  The cell phone companies, in a sense, have your balls in a vise and they know it.  So what incentive is there to, you know, treat their customers with respect?

Because of their lack of customer service on the phones (for a PHONE COMPANY, for crying out loud), I've had to resort to sending letters to the CEO.  No, seriously.  This is the most effective way of getting the answers you need.  I feel like sometimes, the Pony Express would be more sufficient than trying to get someone on the phone who can actually answer your questions. 

Luckily for me, I'm the queen of letter writing, and can subsequently get the answers I need that way.  But why does it come to that?  Would it kill these companies that make their money off consumers to invest a little in customer care or better yet, a premium service that can answer a doggone question when you have it?

I get that there are some nuts in the world.  I get that there are people who will spend all day calling a help desk just to talk to someone.  Trust me, when I worked on a help desk, I used to deal with those people all the time.  That doesn't mean, however, that those customers are less valued.  In fact, some of them have the best suggestions, it might just take them awhile to get to the point because they are so starved for human interaction.  You just don't know.  And wouldn't it be ultimately better for the bottom line of these companies to engage their customers?  Isn't that the very root of social responsibility?

At the root of it all is a denial of basic customer service perks for your customers.  Saving money for your shareholders may be attractive to your bottom line, but customers can get stronger in numbers if you deny them this action.

Fair Game

Fair or Foul?

A few weeks ago, I was using Twitter, like many in this universe, and I heard from several people that my Tweets were found on GardenVision, and I see them scroll during games on MSG Network.

When they pop up on the screen, it gives full attribution and your Twitter handle. 

So my question is, what is fair game in the world of Twitter?

It's been well-documented that employers can use social media or Google to check your social media history.  So if you're posting anything illegal, they can certainly see that.  Free speech is certainly protected, so think of Twitter as another means of using information and a soapbox that is constitutionally protected (though you may be outed as an idiot). 

But where do we go?  I guess when I was growing up, I was so fearful of plagiarism, or taking items that weren't my own and representing it as my own I knew was not cool and most importantly, ILLEGAL and grounds for me to get kicked out of school.  Or at the very least, failure in my courses.

So I'm careful that if I take information on Twitter, or anywhere really, I do my damndest to give proper attribution.  It's something called the "Retweet" on Twitter, that you may agree with and share the same views (or you may be outing someone else as an idiot, but that's neither here nor there).

I ask this question because two of my friends were affected by a reported on a major network.  Now, attribution is tough in Twitter, especially since there is a chicken-or-egg thing going on.  Since things happen so quickly, and you can't possibly be following everyone available in the Twitterverse, you could say something and five people could see it or 1000 people could see it.

I have a friend who was retweeted ad nauseum for a picture she posted, and she won an award for it.  Everyone knew it was from her.  Yet, over the weekend, my two friends had used a term and tweeted it, only to have it appear on a major news network with, you got it, NO attribution,  According to the reporter, Twitter is fair game. 

Is it?

Look, I know if there is something not really clever that's being posted and several people use it, chances are it's not easy to figure who came up with it first.  But at the very least the Twitter handle could be used or an image of the Tweet could be used in the broadcast.  Neither of them were used.

At the end of the day, a major news network with its own marketing and sales team, and worldwide recognition was using information or creative control from a schmoe on the Internet.  When we're in school, we learn early on that plagiarism isn't just wrong, it's illegal.

What about Twitter though?  Can we use things with reckless abandonment that are on the Internet without proper attribution?

And By "Green," I Mean "Cash"

Does anyone carry cash around anymore?

Last week, I attended a luncheon with some successful local businesswomen.  Lunch was almost secondary to making contacts and networking our businesses.   Yet, when the bill came, several women had to pay with their credit cards.  Luckily, restaurants are accommodating to people looking to split a bill via credit card.  However, with close to 10 women splitting the bill, wouldn't it have been advantageous for them to all carry extra cash, so there was no awkwardness at the end of the lunch?

I get that we were business women, and some like to keep track of their business expenditures and travel/entertainment expenses by isolating their spending habits.  But this seemed like a good a time as any to discuss -- how are we splitting the check?

It's times like those that I wonder just how far we've come with credit in this world.  I got my first credit card in college, probably like many, and quickly found myself reaching for the plastic soon after without really knowing the consequences behind it.  See, that's where they get ya!  In college, when you want to do stuff and your cash flow isn't exactly kicking in yet.  When I graduated it wasn't much better.  Besides the student loans, I had a lot of credit card debt.  Again, not an uncommon story for young folks making their start in the world. 

Yet, I start to wonder, what got me to that point?  I remember when I was in high school, and I worked at the mall, when I wanted stuff, I paid in cash.  If I didn't have the cash, I just didn't buy it.  Novel concept, right?  Yet, credit is doled out like candy on Halloween to some people, most people, actually.

I wonder if sometimes the greening movement that's going on right now is one that would require us to carry cash around, and try to conduct more transactions using good old fashioned currency.  Chances are, you can survive without cash more than without a credit card.  Shocking, I know.  But if you think about it, many places are equipped to take credit cards to give their customers more options.  Like taxi cabs in New York City.  Just a decade ago, if you didn't have cash, you were relegated to walking or hitting an ATM before getting in one.  Now it's almost expected to pay with a card.  You get something on a revolving basis, you need a credit card.  Want to travel?  Give your credit card number.  Need to pay for your pet's vet visit?  Break out the plastic. 

Sites like eBay have PayPal as a means to exchange currency virtually and electronically, as opposed to waiting a week or so for a check or money order payment.  Yet, these are not without their faults.  If I sell something on eBay and the invoice is incorrect, I have to issue a refund.  That's not so bad, but I get levied a charge on interest to do a straight cash transaction.  It's cents as opposed to dollars but still...it does add up and it's nickel and diming from the corporation.

PayPal also has a means of taking the guess work out of splitting a bill for individuals, by allowing a mobile payment system to exchange currency by simply bumping your phones.  Fascinating, huh?

But wait - there's more!  There is an app for your phones called "Square," that makes it easier for those who don't carry cash around to exchange on a different level.  It's essentially a way to make your phone into a cash register...of course, without the exchange of physical cash and another way of using your credit cards to make exchange of service or splitting a check more feasible.

Oh and fear not...if you are a mobile business (think of those folks who do arts and crafts at fairs but only take cash), you can make your phone or tablet into a portable cash register by using an app called Swipe.  

After all, the greening of our economy and our lives AND our wallets is for convenience.  And the more options we have, it seems the more we gravitate towards getting away from using cash and paper money.

Since I was a kid, we've all been trying to convenience ourselves out of being personal and all business.  Smartphones, credit cards and portable entertainment have given us a way to retreat within ourselves to be more reclusive, yet forge relationships with others.  It's a paradox, but at the same time, it gives us options to be a more well-rounded society.  Isn't that somethin'? 

Dreaming Out Loud

My mind went off on a tangent as it is wont to do.  I recently read an article on why we daydream, and whether it can be good for us. 

I was daydreaming myself earlier, and I thought about this article.  Mostly, what started me off was thinking what, exactly, was the difference between a "hoarder" and a "packrat."  In my head, there is a slight difference.  A "packrat" may hold on to "stuff" for too long, but can toss it out when necessary.  A "hoarder" is that crazy person you see on TV.

Anyway, I would say I have a borderline packrat personality.  For a person who can't stand paper or clutter, I tend to let a lot of it take up my life unnecessarily.  Then I thought of how I once read that someone who has a clutter issue also has a "procrastination" issue, and all clutter represents is a manifestation of procrastination.

Fascinating, really. 

I got to thinking this because I had been putting off a semi-quick project for a while.  When I first moved to the apartment I'm in now, I famously tried my hand at being handy by putting together an armoire.  I lost.  It looked okay for about four minutes before shit started falling apart.  It had two bottom drawers along with two doors.  I've hated it since day one.  For a long time, I was left to just one door and one drawer, but now they are both gone.  This was part of my procrastination problem.  This meant I had to empty out the drawer and put the remains in a plastic bin.  Who wants to do that when there's real stuff to blow off, like dusting? 

So my motivation is that I have a guest coming to town, and she's staying with me.  I'm also hosting a party in a few weeks.  As I told my husband, we should probably straighten up so my friend doesn't actually think we're used to living in a trailer park. 

So while our clothes are in the dryer as I write this, I start the transfer.  The irony is that it was relatively painless.  I even got rid of some stuff -- you know, like the single socks that I SWORE I'd find its partner at some point.  Some underwear and tops I no longer use.  Was that so hard?

So now I can toss the bottom drawer out (well, when my cat gets out of it anyway).  Then my mind started to wander, and I thought -- why did it take me so long?  And why did I live like that for such a long time?

Better yet, why am I holding onto a crappy armoire that is literally on its last legs (a door hanging on a thread that I ended up just screwing off the hinges after wondering why I hadn't done it yet)? 

The evolution of my thoughts went there.  See, when you're living in a city, you're expected to move around.  I think I've bear the average by staying here for over three years. 

I haven't replaced the armoire because I may move.  I keep telling myself till I get too lazy and just sign the lease to stay another year to avoid moving.  I hate the armoire a lot but I hate moving more.  I could replace it...but then when I do move, what if my replacement doesn't fit?  I mean, isn't this just a waste of time and money? (At least the armoire was a waste of my time putting it together.)

The quandary is circular.

But then, I started to think, well, why haven't I moved?  Besides the fact that I've moved six times in the past 13 years.  Not to mention all those years I was in college, moving back and forth twice a year.  There's also this thing called a lease.  It's good for a few months.

The next question is -- why haven't I bought a home?  Well, I'm a commitment phobe (just don't tell my husband).  I'm afraid when I commit to a home, something better will come along.

There.  I said it.

Then I tell myself, I'm also missing out on a place that could be better than where I live now.

But then I'd have to throw all the shit I've accumulated out before I do that.

See?

Then I just had this circular reasoning about this whole thing.  I don't want to move because I hate it.  I should buy but I rent, and that's what I do in New York.  I've told some friends that I see myself buying soon.  But I'd hate to move just move again.  But that's what I keep on doing.

Can you see why I even blow off dusting?

This is the trouble I get into for dreaming out loud.  See, Bono once sang, "You can dream/So dream out loud/And you can find/Your own way out." 

I suppose I'll find my own way out eventually.  But now, I've got just a shell of an armoire that I once was proud of building, but now eager to toss out with the rest of the clutter in my life and in my head. 

I Ain't No Nomophobe

Nomophobia -- an abbreviation for "no mobile phone" -- is the fear of being without one's cell phone.  And scarily enough, 66% of those surveyed recently say they fear being without their phones, up from 53% last year.  In fact, the average person checks their phone 34 times a day.  And if you can't go more than ten minutes without checking your phone, it's probably even more than that.

So why the fascination?  Most people are addicted to their phones because of the instant gratification it provides them.  They need a certain kind of attention that they can't get anywhere else.  And while it may seem rude or disconnecting when spending quality time with family or friends, the addiction is very, very real.

It's not a fear of being without your phone.  The last thing you are thinking of is needing to make a phone call in an emergency.  But that's the first excuse you'll give when you're late for work because you had to turn around and go back home to retrieve your forgotten phone.  You feel like your life is on hold until you have that phone once again in your hands.  And while you may not feel like it is impairing your life because it is bringing you enjoyment, any reliance upon something so insignificant as a phone can't be healthy.

Cell phones today connect us with so many people on so many levels.  Texting, Facebook, Twitter and Instant Messaging are just a few ways to keep in touch.  And whether you're connecting with different people via different means, or the same people via all means, being without your phone means missing out.  And no one wants to feel left out.  

The biggest population of nomophobes is among 18-24 year olds.  They make up 77% of the total people who admitted being joined at the hip with their phones.  Probably because as people get older, their priorities change and the need for certain types of attention decreases, as it's either no longer important or the need has been satisfied.

Try It On Their Own

When I heard of Whitney Houston's death on Saturday evening, I was shocked.  I had heard stories recently that were not flattering, and some downright scary.  The thing with Whitney and celebrities like her is that you want them to eventually come back out on top, and that they eventually will. 

Whitney was the pop music darling in the 1980s when I was a kid.  Now she's just a tragic tale of "what ifs" and "what could have beens."

That said, there's nothing like a good drug addiction to make people rush to judge others, especially in the case of a celebrity. 

Addiction is not a laughing matter, but it is deeply personal.  What makes it so personal is that the person with the issue has to want to be clean.  Interventions don't work unless the person wants "it," meaning they "want to be clean."

I know because I have addiction in my family.  I had an incident hit close to home, when my dad told me that he and another friend had to check one of his best friends into rehab last night for painkiller addiction.

It's deeply personal, but his friend is getting the help he needs.  Not to mention, he wants it to happen.

I am a sports fan, and possibly the biggest cautionary tale was the duo of Darryl and Doc on the 1980s New York Mets.  Darryl Strawberry and Dwight Gooden were, as Whitney would have sung, "the children of our future."  Drugs and excesses of stardom and the 1980s got the best of them.  We are very lucky to have them with us today.  The operative words are that they WANTED to have help, it just took them years to get to that point.  Their road to clean-up wasn't always wrought with success, with many publicized efforts of trying to get clean to no avail.

On the flip side, there are people like Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson, who had people around them willing to do anything they asked, including keep them sedated and supplied with painkillers, pills, bad food or alcohol to provide an effort of escapism, ultimately leading to death.  Enabling is a big part of addiction, but again, if a person is on a path to self-destruction, taking it away from them also makes them more determined to hurt themselves and find other suppliers.  Sometimes, there are people who do not want to be helped.

Celebrities, sports figures and anyone living in the public eye deal with real human problems such as addiction and going into rehab to get themselves cleaned up, but we lay people on the outside looking in feel the need to judge their paths.  The sad reality is that unless they want to be clean, it's not going to happen over night.  My dad has been a recovering alcoholic and drug addict for over 20 years now.  This could not be possible without his support network to keep himself clean, but also with determination that he won't end up like that again.  He'll be the first to tell you that it's never ending.  The struggle doesn't get easier and it's hard work.

That said, the rush to judgment of Whitney Houston's death is typical and expected.  While it wouldn't be surprising if we found out drugs had something to do with it, it still doesn't mean we're not allowed to be sad over the talent that has been lost and what could have been.

A Bronx Tale said tellingly that the worst thing in this world is wasted talent.  The truth is, artists like Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley or Whitney Houston will always be alive somehow because their art will never die.  Yet, the world might have been a better place had they been around to contribute.  Addiction is ugly and painful for those around to watch, but if they had realized how valuable they've been to this world, perhaps it would have been motivating for them to stick around.

In the meantime, if addiction isn't something that you're intimately familiar with, we shouldn't be rushing to judge those who can't get out of that vicious cycle either. 

Party of One

I attended a matinee on Sunday morning, and noticed an interesting trend.  While there were plenty of "couples" in the theater, I saw plenty of people by themselves.  I was one of those people.

Movies are "quiet" time, and I always wondered why it was essential to attend a movie in pairs.  When you're teenagers, I can see.  Basically that's a cheap, legal date...it's not like you're going to go to a bar when you're 15 years old.  But when you're an adult, why is it so taboo to attend the movies by yourself?

I can tell you right now that I've dragged my husband to enough movies that he's hated or really aren't his "thing" to know that I'd rather go by myself than with him.  Nothing against my husband; we just have different movie tastes (ask me how I feel about "slasher" movies).  Is it a perception thing?  "Aww, poor lady, sitting in the theater by herself."  I looked around and actually felt that the number of people sitting in singular seats was very empowering.  I'm an only child, so I can handle alone time better.  And you can't talk in a movie, so what's the necessity? 

I noticed a trend that people are not afraid to do things by themselves, especially in a city environment.  I see people dining by themselves frequently.  There's plenty of opportunity to do so, by sitting and ordering at a bar or a diner counter.  I do that a lot, especially when my husband and I have different interests on the weekend. 

Yet, I have to ask is if it's the picture of a larger trend.  Carrie Bradshaw had some defining moments on Sex and the City, when she had a "date with the city," and when a guy she was interested in started to put it down, she said, no one messes with my boyfriend. 

Later, when a friend she always came through for on wedding, baby and gift registries didn't come through for her when Carrie's Manolos were stolen at a party where shoes were left at the front door, she announced that she was getting married...to HERSELF!  And was registered at Manolo Blahnik for her marriage. 

The summary of the episodes was that Carrie, in her quest for the perfect relationship with a significant other, found that her most important relationship was with herself.  And if you find someone who loves the you YOU love, then that's fabulous, she tells her audience. 

The larger picture is that highly evolved people can have relationships with people, but can also be totally comfortable doing activities by themselves without any fear of being perceived as "weird."  I went on vacation by myself in 2009, to do a West Coast baseball trip.  I went because no one wanted to commit.  And never at any time did I feel lonely.  I met some really wonderful people out there.  But I was dependent on myself for many things, and mostly, the fun of it.  I was completely cool with it.

My point is that the next time you are afraid to do something that is seen as a "couples" or "friends" activity by yourself, overcome your fears.  There's nothing wrong with attending a movie by yourself.  Working on your self-relationship can help you be a better partner in mutual relationships. 

Talk Amongst Yourselves

I will give you a topic!!

Rhode Island is neither a "road" nor an "Island."

Discuss!!

This is the story of my life.  Making sense of is all while using pop culture colloquialisms.  I tend to use Sex and the City, Golden Girls, John Landis movies, and Saturday Night Live to fill in the blanks when I need to make an analogy.  Sometimes, I use my own life, as my mother, grandmother, and father can usually provide some fodder for figuring out the ambiguities of life.

Because of the in-your-face nature of popular culture, women's emotions are put on display quite a bit.  Like "crying at a Hallmark commercial" as an example of women being "emotional" because of that "time of the month" or whatever.  Feh. But I've become cognizant of that perception, and maybe I can poke fun at myself because of it.  No, I won't cry during commercials.  But I do cry during movies.

I can mock cry at situations that actually do mean a lot to me.  Once, my mother and I were watching a Behind the Music featuring Cher, and we both started tearing up at Cher's eulogizing of Sonny Bono.  Something so silly, that doesn't affect either of us in real life. 

Yet, I can sometimes compartmentalize my feelings on situations, to make them funny.  This may be a defense mechanism.  But when I was out celebrating our mutual birthdays with Dee, her mother (a woman I affectionately refer to as my "aunt") said that she looked on me like a daughter.

And I got verklempt.  The Yiddish substitute for "emotional" that Linda Richman, character made famous by actor Mike Myers, that I like to say from time-to-time.  Okay.  I say it a LOT.  I like to say it because in happy situations, even if you want to cry tears of joy, it's all silly.  I like to keep life light.  So even if there is a reason to be emotional, it shouldn't be too overwhelming.  By saying something in Yiddish, I can deflect a lot of it, but still get the point across that it means a lot. 

Why do I get "verklempt" to begin with?  Sometimes, I get overwhelmed with the bigger picture.  I know there is a world that's a lot bigger than me, but I can only just take care of me and those closest to me.  I've been around for over 30 years, but people come into my life whom I thought I got along without just fine until I met them.  Post-It Notes were a "happy accident" by 3M.  My "happy accident" was meeting Dee and her mother.

I don't want to trivialize our relationship by calling it a post-it, but it is truly special and unique.  It's something that even at times that I do get really verklempt about things, it's something that can make me smile.  Which gets me even MORE verklempt.   

That gets me back to the reality that maybe women are more emotional creatures, maybe bigger picture things can hit us harder because we might be more conscience of the idea that we're just little specks on Earth, really. 

But in our universe, these specks can be huge to those of us who are the world to us. 

From Day One, we know our families.  We consider ourselves lucky if we are born into a cool one.  They help craft a lot of our humor and our overall personality.  Every day after, we use that and go around in life making our own family, taking existential pieces and making an authentic existence.  The family you choose is something that you have control over, and it's essential to find people who get the real you.

As Carrie Bradshaw said in the last episode of Sex and the City, "If you can find someone who loves the you YOU love, then, that's just fabulous."  I'm lucky enough to have found those people in my life.

Now, isn't this just like buttah??  Discuss!

COOPed Up In DEEcember? Not Us!

It's no secret that I've never been thrilled with having a birthday in December.  So close to Christmas and at the start of winter, it's kinda hard to fully enjoy.

When I was a child, it was Christmas wrapping paper on my birthday gifts or one card for both my birthday and Christmas(although not from my immediate family, the ones who really mattered).  But now it's on a different level. I can't hang up my Christmas cards until after my birthday because I don't want to take anything away from my birthday (and I don't have the room).  I have to wait a whole year before getting presents (although my mother would swear otherwise, and she's kinda right).  And people are too broke from all the holiday spending to come out and celebrate with me.  (Not to mention they have other obligations this time of the year and simply can't make it.)

Being a huge Mets fan, I could never spend a day at the ballpark, watching a game and cheering on my favorite team (and hoping for a win!).  But this year, I decided to try something different.  Not only did I attend my very first Jets game (I'm a huge Jets fan too), but my first professional football game ever!


Coop and I decided to spend one of our birthday weekends at Met Life Stadium, rooting for the J! E! T! S! JETS JETS JETS!  And since they beat the Chiefs 37-10 yesterday, I'd say we accomplished our goal of seeing a victory by one of our teams (although Coop is a NY Rangers fan too, so I'm sure they've won games on or near her special day) on our birthdays.  Well, sort of.

The game was two days before my birthday, and 11 days before Coop's. Since the only other home game in December was on Christmas Eve, this was really our only option. (Besides, we'd rather do it before both our birthdays than after them.)  And up until this day, we had weekends with temperatures near or just above 60 degrees.  So goes my luck.  But as so many reminded me as the weekend approached, it's not football if it's not cold.

As I said, this was my very first football game ever.  I had no idea what to expect.  I was a little anxious -- yes, anxious -- over the whole tailgating experience.  But it turned out to be a lot of fun!  Hosted by our friends, the Chapmans, there was more food than could be eaten, and more alcohol than could be, well, eliminated.  (That's another story.)  It didn't stop there.  More tailgating after the game with our friend Alan, another December baby, who is known in the social networking world as "Woo" because of his catch phrase of the same name.

Let's rewind for a moment. Did I mention that we may be on tv?  Food Network was there filming a pilot for "best tailgate burger" something-or-other and they just so happened to be in L11, our section.  There were three "finalists" and after the taste tests, the winner was awarded the "Golden Spatula".

But again, we didn't stop there.

After a semi-annoying NJ Transit experience back to Manhattan, I had about 20 minutes to spare before my train back to Long Island.  I had been dying for hot cocoa all day. (Some people crave alcohol, I crave chocolate!)  Coop suggested heading outside to the Dunkin' Donuts about a block or two away.  I had time, but figured if I did miss that train, I'd just take the next.  And then it hit me!  How many chances do I get to be in the city at Christmastime?  And so, off to Macy's window and Rockefeller Center we went!

There really is no better place in the world at Christmastime than New York City.  Everywhere you look on Sixth Avenue, lights and fake Santas bring the Christmas joy to you.  I was like a foreigner (oops! Not supposed to use that word!) with my camera, like I had never been to New York City before. At one point, I even asked Coop and here hubby (who joined us at the tree) who was worse, me or our friend from Cali who had visited here last summer for her first time ever in New York. Without any hesitation, Ed said "You!"

But I didn't care.  I knew it was all in good fun. Besides, no one had to know that I lived a half hour from the city. No one had to know that before I became friends with Coop, I hardly went to Manhattan, except for when I worked there for a very short time several years ago, and was afraid to leave the vicinity of my building, even to grab lunch.  No one had to know that while I grew up a lot over the past few years, inside, I was still a little girl in total awe of what I was seeing.

For me, it's the simple things.  A Mets or Jets game every now and then.  The Christmas tree at Rockefeller Center. And a margarita and good conversation with Coop every now and again.  We both love to talk, which is why our blog posts are so long, you probably lose interest by this point.  In fact, blogging and sports, and blogging about sports, is how we met.  (Oh yeah, and Facebook may have had something to do with it too.)  But who'da thunk true friendship -- to the point of sisterhood -- could come out of all that?

Not only are we both December babies and love sports and blogging, but we're both only children.  We can relate to so many things that others with siblings can't.  We know the difference between being spoiled and our parents just loving us and being able to shower us a little more easily than parents with many children.  And we appreciate our alone time because we are so used to it.

So in addition to this blog, sis (that's what I call her) and I have started our own birthday celebration tradition -- the annual Coop Dee Ville Birthday Spectacular -- adding something new to the festivities each year.  This year it was the Jets game.  Next year, maybe a Jets game and a trip to Atlantic City.  Who knows.  Who cares!  I'm just so lucky to have the friend in her that I do, and the sister I never had.

Ass-Backwards

When I was a kid, I mean we're talking little, like first grade little, I chased boys around the playground.  Yeah, I said it.  I'm married now, but to deny my boy-crazy and pants-chasing self that I was a child would be to deny a huge part of my childhood personality.

If I behaved like that today, as a child who is being a "kid," I might be suspended from school.  No, that's no joke.  I read today that some nine year old child was suspended for saying his teacher was "cute."  Cute! 

Media may be over-sexualized these days, but when you're nine years old and talking about someone being "cute," it's not for being a babe-hound (although, who knows, he may be one in the making), it's because you're being HONEST.   I remember telling a female lead singer of a band that I thought she was pretty when I was five years old.  I chased boys around the playground when I was six (and probably was chased around too by the same boys).  I remember holding hands with an eight year old boy when I was seven, at a New Year's party.  It wasn't something "sexual," when I was that age I didn't even know what "sex" was.  Well, maybe I did, but when you're a kid there's no urge, no "threat."

And while we're waxing intellectual, think about what "harassment" means.  Harassment is using sex as power.  A nine year old child has "power?"  Exactly what "power" does a nine year old have over a teacher?  I could see talking to the parents or principal if there's prank calling or threatening notes...because that stuff needs to be nipped in the bud.

But hey, Mrs. Smith, I think you're cute?  Total threat.

I can see in an era of political correctness of being cognizant of other cultures, religions, races, creeds.  But where is the cut-off?  It seems like in this case, and I'm sure there are others like it around, that it's an overreaction to probably a kid who may be a bit of a "troublemaker" in class (I'm making a HUGE assumption, especially since it appears he was suspended at one point), and the teacher was wielding her power.  Suspended?  Get a grip.  Maybe they should be concentrating on making teachers AND children more tolerant of each other.  And ignore certain behaviors while encouraging others to grow, like tolerance.