S.KRAUSE

411 for information, 911 for emergencies, 419 for money

taken from CNN.com

With regard to the Mahmudiyah incident and the rape and murder of Abeer Qassim Hamza disagreement and confusion reigned for quite a until it was determined that she was 14—not 25 or so as claimed in some reports, though in some circles it is still a matter of debate (and after all, raping and murdering is okay if the victim is 25 and asked for it). In most early reports one notes a clinical dehumanization that took place: she was referred to as an “Iraqi female” ... not a woman or girl, but just a gendered thing. Now that the consensus is that she is/was 14, the debate is: do we call her a girl or a woman, and the decision to refer to her as a young woman has angered and outraged many. Sarah Elizabeth Richards states that “language matters, and journalists should take care to be precise when they can—or at least explain why when they're not.” That should be followed up with: language can matter, precision is not a moral-ethical imperative in all situations, and it has not been demonstrated that it in any way really matters here.

taken from CNN.com

In letters about the debate some felt that a 14 year old is always a girl (if female, that is), and a 14 year old male would obviously be a boy, and some cited the ways in which laws are written (specifically laws about child/teen sexual abuse, statutory rape, etc.), which refer to those ages 16 and under, sometimes 17 and under or even 18 as children. My favorite conclusion drawn from this is that if she is/was a child, then by extension that makes those who raped her pedophiles. Others went the other direction, claiming that of course a 14 year old is a young woman; simple googling and observations of how teens are referred to in media and pop culture would substantiate this. Yet others, on both sides of the issue, referred to personal experiences as to how they felt at that age and being called a young woman, etc. Back to Sarah Elizabeth Richards statement, which I quoted with little context above: forget language matters ... context matters. Even more, there is little inductive, deductive, or abductive value to this argument, but what is interesting is the range of rhetorical tools and devices on display.

And it is sad when that overshadows a human tragedy.

Let us contrast this briefly with something as sad but in a different and materialist way: How to pack for college without hiring an 18-wheeler. Three of us drove to California across the Nevada desert (almost running out of gas at one point) in 1993 to bring me to Claremont. One car, all my stuff. The room was partially furnished (bed, desk, chair). Four years later two of use drove to the Midwest across plains and hills and through national parks, but again, one (slightly) smaller car sufficed, though we went shopping after arrival for a small stereo, microwave, and some dishes, pots, pans, and silverware. I know the headline exaggerates, but I would have to mention that even when I had a room of furniture (bed, desk, lamps, many bookcases, bike, and so on and so forth) nothing more than a 14' truck was used, and a 10' one would have done the trick with tighter packing, and in those instances years and years of packratting had caught up with me.

But my real reason for posting the link and thus linking it to the previous section has to do with the rhetoric of the article: it is for parents, and parents have children, even when those children are 17, 18, and 19, and so all these college-age adults are children in this article. The text does carry it a bit to extremes, or perhaps it is the type of parents to whom this is addressed who carry it too far, for the advice “Give your child a voice in the process” is only necessary as a corrective measure when dealing with controlling parents (or immature, indecisive teens, perhaps).

I am glad that the Microsoft Mega Jackpot Lottery Promotions folks think so highly of me. Alas, it appears it is or was for “prominent MS WORD user [sic]” and as someone who does not use MS Word I would feel quite guilty if I attempted to collect my “WINNING PRIZE,” not that I want to turn down “1,200,000.00 POUNDS in Cash”—for poor little me that is no chump change, let me tell you.

This is an amazingly international competition, sporting 42,000 names, “6,000 names from each continent”—who ever knew that Antarctica had that many people living there?

Alas, I fear I am too late, for the email is dated July 5, and requests that I email “Smith Kenneth” “all at once,” which I have not done.

Shame on me.

If I were to take these money making opportunities more seriously I am certain that I would be on sounder financial footing. More solid fiscal ground.

In my microcosm of electronic communication the near light speed of electrons does not limit me to one language, character set, continent, or scam. The post in postmodern is for the post office, postal service, and going postal.

Delia, with whom I shared a room at the Black Sea in 2003, learned English the international way—by way of American pop music. The internet way is my new method of learning languages and brushing up on old ones, such as French. Whatever the language, a 419 is always the same, and refreshingly international in its own way. Linear B for beginners, the Rosetta Stone of bytes, bits, and modern languages. The source email address is Italian, the destination French. The text is French and invokes the Ivory Coast, but notice the Philippines are along for a ride, too. Who needs soldier deaths revenged in an Israeli-Palestinian-Lebanese conflict or an Iraq war-for-oil when this email already has it all: death, war, and money?

It is a pop-culture literary tome.

Joss Whedon would or should be proud.

—July 13 2006