I was going to complain about the amount of time taken up and the destruction of a social schedule that happens working overnights, but you know what?

I’ve done that before. Instead, I’m going to go to sleep.

I’d rather be watching Fawlty Towers.

Tonight at work, I was sitting there minding my business when I noticed my boss was there for something. He was walking in and out, minding his own business. So I decided to use some skillz against him, namely my kung fu:

SECRET NINJA POWER INSUBORDINATION!!!!!!

He had caused the programs such as freecell, solitaire and others to be ‘uninstalled’, but I’ve also got the kung fu of SECRET NINJA POWER COMPUTER DERING-DO! So I found the programs, and for much of the time he was walking around clueless, my secret insubordination was taking place.

That I lost the game of freecell is of small importance, merely the act of playing it while he stood unknowing gave great pleasure and much satisfaction.

My kung fu is strong…very strong.

To Whom It May Concern:

This is in response to Mr. Turk’s column about the Gothic movement and its participants. The way Goth was defined struck me as flawed, and so did the conclusions about its elevated dangers. I agree with his final conclusions about parental involvement, but I found the method he used to reach them distasteful and unfair.

There is a danger from quoting sites on the internet, especially in order to define a movement which has so many. Out of these, Mr. Turk chose two definitions that simply supported his view on the subculture as dangerous and subversive. Mr. Turk’s process of defining Goth can be seen as starting with 684,098 sites, down to two sites, to his own boiling down of what they are. There is a fallacy with doing this, as it over generalizes.

Mr. Turk then says that the Goth movement (based on his definition) allows its followers to become more depressed and angry, leading in the worst case to suicide. I know that the gothic movement has its share of troubled teenagers, but is this the sign of the movement, or the sign of the times?

Mr. Turk says that “Goth fuels the negative thoughts and feelings” of the youth attracted to it, and that it “provides evidence that life is hopeless…”, but so do movies(violence), popular magazines(impossible body image), politics(leaders don’t listen to the people), and many other parts of society. I would say that the problems of the youth are caused by the main culture, and that Goth subculture gives, as Mr. Turk said, some sense of belonging for the disenfranchised. Whether or not this leads to one outcome or another is debatable.

Mr. Turk is correct in saying that as adults we must become “more aware of the issues facing our youth”, but I hardly think an intervention to force a child away from the Goth movement is needed. Ignoring the effects of popular media is just as dangerous (i.e. bulimia and anorexia). More parental and societal support for youths and teenagers, whether for sports (to stop the dangers of doping) or for gothic dressing (for whatever reason the individual chooses it), is needed. The Goth Subculture is only as dangerous as parents and society let it be, by ignoring it, blowing it off, or in opposing it so much that it drives the youth away and further into despair that society won’t ever understand them.

The youth of today’s culture are facing more choices and changes than before, and to target one subculture over others is unfair and unjust to the youths who have chosen to take part in it. Parents need to be aware and supportive their child’s life, actively participating in it, only then are the dangers that Mr. Turk attributes to the Goths headed off. Demonizing Goths by highlighting their looks and defining them with bias is wrong, even if it leads to the right conclusions.

Sean “Blue Jeans Wearing Conservative” Froyd
(yes that’s how I signed it when I sent it in, whether or not they’ll publish it is anyone’s guess)

on the virtual PC, so I can play my EVEN older games! woohoo!

man, my laptop is sooooo cool. and I’m not just talkin’ computers!