50 Shades Of Reading Nightmares: Emotional Porn Makes Its Debut

Those of you who have finished reading the “50 Shades...” trilogy are hungry for the movie's big reveal. It was a big deal – who's going to play each character, what are the producers and directors going to get away with? Whether most women know it or not, “50 Shades” is simply a mainstream version of erotica that slipped through the cracks.

How? I don't even know!

I started reading romance novels when I was about 14 years old. In addition to indulging in R.L. Stine teen horror novels, I delved into a few erotica books and romance novels that put the reader right in the seat of the main character – a scarce, independent woman who was afraid of giving in to that burly and delicious man who broke her social barriers (yes, that's a nice way of saying he took her virginity). All of these novels are typically written...Damsel in distress...Hard working girl not-yet-ready to give up everything for that muscular man who's got a “happy trail” to God knows where. Happy trail??


I truly can't stand this literary term for pubic hair that leads to a man's genitals. Women have a unique way of admitting they're horny creatures who just want a little excitement. Forget about getting romantically involved – because romance novels portray those “independent women” as not looking for something serious...and when they get involved in something serious, they want the man to be unsure about what's going on.

Are you a sexual creature or aren't you???

“Fifty Shades” of yawns provokes that question...But this kind of novel has been done soooo many times. E.L. James just found a legitimate way to bring it to women in a “clean” way that's acceptable to Hollywood.

How many women love to watch porn? We say it's demeaning...perverted...something only men enjoy. Well, thanks “50 Shades”!!! The story line behind 50 Shades justifies porn because it's a story of a couple...the story of an independent virgin who is asked to sign some sort of “contract” that resembles a marriage license!!! So this is how they're going to legitimize porn??? They're going to take a pure young woman who has a ridiculous “inner Goddess” speaking to her every 10 minutes and put her in a situation where she loves to be dominated.

It's not just about cleaning up porn for the modern day woman – it's about marketing a slew of products that come with the lifestyle Mr. Christian Grey represents. Ohhh...NOW it's okay for women to like to try sex toys... NOW it's okay to put out a line of pleasantries that women can bring to their man to try because the book says it's “hot.”

I'm really not sure what it is about “50 Shades” that's so different than other raunchy romance novels. The hype about the book lasted way too long when this genre was pretty strong already. Maybe it's the fact that the male character is more mentally screwed up than in other novels...Or that there's 3 books on sex...sex...and more sex...But why wouldn't a woman just pick up an erotica novel and get into one of those?

Now that the movie's coming out, everyone is wondering HOW they're going to pull off all the hot scenes that convert to a well drawn out porn. Well, what's the difference? The fact that the two main characters get married and the man is completely possessive over her? Is this what women want? Emotional porn? Maybe it's the combination of women getting excited over a situation they wish they found themselves in...mixed with wishing they'd meet a controlling sex freak who wants to marry them.

Any woman in their right mind would probably run away from a man like Christian Grey – unless they've been reading erotica, I'm sure.

Nothing says “it's okay to watch porn” like a story line that would never play out in real life. But now that they've broken the barrier, let's re-open those XXX adult shops that have been protested in communities for decades!!! Besides, it's not dirty any more if someone comes along and “emotionally” brings it into the mainstream. That's love!

Unpublished 9/21/14

Thinking Of New Fool-Proof (And Bullet-Proof) Ways To Live

When I wrote my column a few weeks ago about keeping students safe inside of schools, the last thing on my mind was leaving it to children to protect themselves physically from being injured. There isn't much a child can do to ensure their own safety until they're at least teenagers who can defend themselves. After the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut last month, everyone is talking about protecting our youngsters while they're in school. Unfortunately, even college-aged teens can't be prepared for mass murderers entering a building and killing as many people as possible.

I recently read about a Columbia firm that's looking to making bulletproof clothing for children. My first thought was: Is this what it's come down to? For over two decades, Miguel Caballero has reportedly been making bullet-proof clothing for politicians and other big shots who need protection in public. Now, sources say, he's aiming his market toward the U.S., – just as we're rethinking the safety of our children in light of the Newtown shooting.

There are so many reasons I think this concept is menial – besides the fact that bullet-proof clothing and backpacks are not 100 percent protection if a child gets shot numerous times in other places on their body that are not shielded. Will our children have to go to school looking like they're entering a minefield? Should they start sporting army helmets and storing glass and metal shields under their desks? Children are victims of so many other accidents – and some intentional injuries – we should arm them to be prepared for other situations on a daily basis.

Child abuse: Youngsters are defenseless against adults who use their hands or blunt objects to impose “discipline.” For children who are tied to chairs, starved to death, beaten or whipped – where is their armor? Maybe they could invent clothing that activates an invisible bubble or barrier around a child. While this might seem like a joke, a lot more children are victims of abuse in their own home than they are victims of school shootings. Children are told to tell someone at school, or someone they trust, that they’re being beaten at home. Hopefully, shortly after that, they’ll be taken out of their destructive environment.

Bullying: Bullies are already equipped with the verbal and psychological tools to make their victims feel tinier than an ant. Threats often turn into cyberbullying, teasing and harassment. In extreme cases, victims sometimes commit suicide because they can't tolerate the pressure they're under for simply being themselves. Last year, Roy H. Mann student and Marine Park resident Kardin Ulysse's eye was taken out when he got into a fight with bullies at his middle school. Where was HIS protection? 

The Department of Education is supposed to protect children and make them feel safe in their buildings - and many legislators have been working harder to ensure that school administrators take bullying more seriously. However, most kids are told by their bullies NOT to go to authorities or something worse will happen. I'm not saying children should carry weapons on them if they feel threatened, but there's no physical armor available to stop the insults, torment, emotional and mental pain that is endured on a daily basis. Teaching conflict resolution to children is a nice idea, but once they leave school grounds and get the you-know-what beat out of them, what are their options for protection? Not every parent can afford to send their children to get karate, kickboxing or self defense lessons.

Hit and run accidents: Ovet the past four years, the Canarsie Courier had a few stories of children who were killed by hit-and-run drivers. One incident took place across the street from the Hebrew Educational Society, at East 95th Street and Seaview Avenue on January 21, 2009. Eight-year-old Elijah Thomas was struck by what appeared to be a Cadillac as he crossed the street with his mother and sister. Crime Stoppers' $2,000 reward failed to bring forth any suspects or information leading to anyone's arrest. Another hit-and run happened on East 54th Street and Flatlands Avenue on January 4, 2012. Fourteen-year-old Davonte Jeffers was killed instantly as he was crossing Flatlands Avenue with his mother. Police managed to catch up to 41-year-old Canarsie resident Paul Griffin, who was arrested a few blocks away.

Let's get real. Citywide, there are many more car accidents, abuse incidents and bullying situations that victimize children's lives than mass shootings. We also leave it up to other adults, who are guarding children for up to eight hours a day, to protect them. When those adults' lives are also compromised, what do we do? Start arming them with bullet-proof gear, too? Schools are supposed to be a safe haven, even if locked and secure doors are breached by intruders.

Creating a physical barrier every day around a child sounds sort of foolish, even if there's a slight chance it will prevent them from being killed. Wearing something as simple as bulletproof clothing won't increase a child's survival rate. But if we're allowed to buy these contraptions from our local retailer, I hope they're colorful, breathable and go seemingly undetected by someone who threatens a child's life. Besides, nothing creates an invisible force field like a bright red hoodie that mimics a turtle shell during the course of a normal school day.

http://www.canarsiecourier.com/news/2013-01-10/Telling_It_Like_It_Is/Telling_It_Like_It_Is.html

Who Will Be A Model For Your Sense Of “Professionalism”?

Those who know me already know I'm not “into” celebrity news – especially when it's gossip about others who are far more fortunate and glitzy than I am. Celebrity gossip doesn't get us little people anywhere but away from our pathetic lives and gives us something to talk about.

Another thing I didn't want to bring up, but feel professionally compelled to address, was the continued fashion reports on First Lady Michelle Obama – and THEN how wrong it was for Beyoncé to lip sync to her own song.

When I watched the news last week and “locals” offered their opinions on what they thought of Michelle's inaugural dress, it didn't sound like anyone was particularly WOW'ed. The question most reporters asked was, “What did you think of the checkered-patterned coat and dress by Thom Browne?”

I don't know about you, but I've never heard of Thom Browne and I probably can't afford anything his eyes have even laid eyes on! Have you heard of him before this event? What's more annoying to me, rather than focusing on the First Lady's plans for the next four years, was that everyone was talking about how “professional but elegant” she looked. Let's get real! Did anyone expect her to come prancing out in her pajamas? Did they think she'd sport one of the “nude” dresses that hip-hop artist J-Lo sports when she's making a grand entrance at an award ceremony? 

Why are people talking about Michelle's attire when she is SUPPOSED TO represent everything that's wholesome, classy, intelligent and welcoming as an American woman. She is supposed to be a role model that all little girls look up to and want to be – a woman who stands for values and respects herself enough not to show boob while she's making a speech.

The only reason I can see the media making a big stink of her wardrobe is to demonstrate to women in politics - and civics – on a local level what a “professional woman” should look like.

Let's spare each other the details of what Kate Middleton and Hillary Clinton sported at their first “big” public appearance. You rarely, if ever, hear the critics saying how “god awful” soand so's attire was. These fine women are dressed by designers whose job is to bring out the “professional” in whoever wears their clothes. Do YOU have a personal assistant who tells you what to wear when you’re heading out?

And if you DO hear people criticize a woman's wardrobe (because all men have to do is throw on a tan t-shirt and dress pants and they're fabulous no matter what event they're attending), it's usually about someone who usually doesn't do a good job at looking “sane” half of the time. Your Katy Perry, Nicki Minaj, Lady Gaga fashion 'don'ts' are no surprise – and who cares! These women, as inspirational as they are to our young girls, are NOT lawmakers. I don't think they're close to being professional idols who we want our daughters to emulate.

The week after Michelle's extravagant violet gloves were idolized, the media turned their attention to the Beyonce debacle and what she did with the Star Spangled Banner. Is THIS yet another woman we want our youngsters to look up to? I mean, she was lip syncing to her own song – but WHO CARES? We know she can sing - and it's not like she didn't show up at all. And she didn't pull an Ashley Simpson (remember her sudden “ho-down” performance on Saturday Night Live in 2004 when the audio went haywire?).

Unfortunately, I can bet that more girls look up to Beyonce than they look up to First Lady Michelle Obama. We know that women in our community have their own style (and some should learn from the First Lady instead of wearing a blindfold when they're getting dressed).

The media is also sending mixed signals about what constitutes “successful.” You might not like how, but some of these women didn't go to Ivy League colleges and they weren't born into money. They didn't strive to get into politics and they're not “proper” like Michelle.

So why is everyone pining over a fabulous, elegant red dress that fits like a glove on the First Lady when most women are looking to make a bold statement when they get a chance to make an appearance at a big event? Of course, they SHOULD dress presidential when they're going on a job interview – and the message is clear: How you dress is a message of success.

This isn't always true, of course. But is all the hype over fake singing and elegant attire enough to change the way young girls represent themselves?

If you ask me, all the attention given to the inaugural gossip took away from important news that was seemingly a simple distraction just a few days before.

We KNOW that the First Lady can wow us with her wardrobe. We KNOW Beyonce can sing.

We also KNOW most women aren't showing up at local meetings wearing something designed for them by a gay European man whose million-dollar collection was just shipped overseas. Whether or not YOU'RE inspired by all the inaugural shenanigans is your business. I guess my standards are fashionably different...Ha!

http://www.canarsiecourier.com/news/2013-01-31/Telling_It_Like_It_Is/Telling_It_Like_It_Is.html

Six Months Later, There’s Still A Struggle To Feel “Normal"

Back home after Hurricane Sandy.

“We must define ourselves by the best that is in us, not the worst that has been done to us.” –Edward Lewis 

Looking back at where my life was six months ago is difficult.

I’m sure it’s hard for many Canarsiens like myself, who are still getting back on their feet after Hurricane Sandy took away everything they held near and dear. It took me awhile to think about how I wanted to express – in words – where I am now in comparison to where I was on October 28, 2012.

The weekend before the storm, as forecasters were predicting how Hurricane Sandy would tear across the Atlantic, everyone conducted themselves as normal. I spent most of the weekend cooking and enjoying time with my friends. Forget about not living in “Zone A,” my home wasn’t really even in “Zone B” to consider making any preparations.

When I remember the fear that washed over me the night of the storm, I thank God that I’m alive to talk about it. However, the sensation of not being able to do anything – and the feeling that we’re all so much smaller than a natural disaster – still lingers in my mind.

Where were you the night of the storm? Safe in your home with a few rolling blackouts? Did you lose electricity for a couple of hours or days? Those of us who scrambled, as sewage and salt water crept up into our basements and then burst through pipes, wish we only suffered a few days in the dark. For residents who had to wade through flood-ravaged streets and leave their cars to float away, they’ll never feel the same while looking at the creek or inlet near their home. Sure, we’re strong enough to recover and rebuild our lives, but the fear that’s instilled in us has changed our lives and took away more than just material items we can “easily replace.”

An avid walker, I often trek to Gateway Mall on the weekends and I wind up walking through areas of Canarsie that were hit hardest by the storm. Avenues along East 105th to East 108th streets still wreak of disaster – garbage piles of moldy furniture and walls are piled up on the sidewalk. Six months later, homeowners who probably haven’t yet collected on their insurance still have messes in front of their properties, including downed trees and fences. Passersby can still see contractors working hard to replace sheetrock and various amenities that probably came with the home decades ago.

I have to admit, whenever I pass a house that’s being worked on – or one where storm-soiled household trash is piled up nearly five feet, I become saddened and teary-eyed. Everyone is lucky to have survived the storm – even if they were displaced and had nothing but the clothes on their back. For many having to face what we lost, rebuild and start over, is the hardest part of moving on with our lives.

I’ve lived in Canarsie all of my life. But for those who have only lived here for 10 or 15 years, you might not understand how much our community has been through and how much has gone into improving our infrastructure – how much money has gone into revitalizing our streets (I doremember dirt roads that were dangerously flooded every time it rained). To see a disaster in my community is like seeing years of hard work go down the drain.

That’s the same way I feel about having lost everything when my apartment was flooded with 14 inches of water. Even though the sewage water receded 12 hours after the storm, there was still an inch of water in my apartment the next day. I know people say you shouldn’t or can’t get attached to material things – or places – but it was heartbreaking to throw away precious documented moments of my life, such as letters to and from old friends, journals written during my father’s last days and historical memorabilia that sculpted my professional development.

The week of the cleanup, I was physically sickened and exhausted from wringing putrid water from my clothes, breathing in the stench of mold-destroyed furniture, sorting out what was salvageable and lifting hundreds of pounds of garbage to the curb. When you looked at each block impacted by the storm and how many people’s lives were out on the street, it hurts to think that everything you worked hard to preserve and attain can be demolished in a matter of minutes.

Everyone, including myself, is a different person as a result of Hurricane Sandy. No longer feeling secure and safe in their home, victims will now panic each time they hear that a storm is heading our way. We will think about what valuables, if there are any left, we should save. When do we evacuate and who will we stay with if we’re forced from our homes? It’s not enough to have candles and water and emergency medications if we have to fear leaving our homes to begin with.

Already, I’m going through the motions in my head of how to prepare in the event of another flood. My emotional security has been breached, as I’m sure many others dread the news of hurricane season’s arrival – which is only a few months away. Some of us no longer look at our homes like we used to. We will always remember where that water line reached and how we struggled to get our lives back together.

Growing stronger, in an ideal world, means moving on and being thankful for the little things. But when even the little things are taken from us, it makes it that much harder to keep our strength alive for next time.

My living room after Hurricane Sandy hit.

All of my belongings on the street after Sandy.

http://www.canarsiecourier.com/news/2013-05-09/Telling_It_Like_It_Is/Telling_It_Like_It_Is.html

Heartless Babysitters

Here's your babysitter!

When I was growing up in Canarsie, summertime fun included playing hopscotch, jumping rope, writing with chalk on the sidewalks and going to local, crummy parks where the sprinklers were as close as we were going to get to 'amusement park-type' of water fun. Some went to camp, but most neighborhood kids – even those with parents who worked – hung out together all day at a “spot” where some of the best memories were made.

Before I was a teenager, I mostly tagged along with friends or amused myself outside. At 13 years old I was spending a lot of hot days at Kings Plaza Mall with my friends or at Canarsie Pier. However, there was A LOT more to do in the community - as I'm sure every community in the city in the 1980s had more recreational things for kids to do and more places for them to just chill and not have to spend money.

In addition to the “times-they-are-achangin'” mentality, we now have more competition than ever to keep youths – and even toddlers – in the community busy and out of trouble. Luckily for many parents, there's an answer: technology! Yes, heartless, emotionless, yet intelligently programmed technology!

When I came across a blog posted on CNN Living, asking “What's Wrong With Using Tech To Distract Kids?” it made me realize how disconnected children are going to be from socialization now that iPads, tablets and other gadgets are serving as what some call “virtual babysitters.”

I have nothing against handing a child a portable computer so that they can busy themselves for a while and learn through interactive games. Even my 12-year-old sister is distracted by hundreds of YouTube videos which have been keeping her quiet and distracted for the past two years. But where do we draw the line between providing human interaction for children and letting them become drones who are drawn to rechargeable devices that keep them silently amused for hours at a time?

Special contributor to CNN Bunmi Laditan offered her opinion on the issue, suggesting that technology is a positive thing for modern children. She also expresses that there is a clear gap between current trends to keep children busy for a few minutes and the long-term effects of practically being “raised by technology.”

On one hand, when I think back to my childhood, I didn't learn anything from those few minutes of hopscotch or riding my bike up and down the block (but it kept me in shape). However, give a child a tablet where they can download a game of skill and they can be entertained for hours.

I haven't yet read into studies indicating whether children drawn to technology have less friends or if they communicate with children their own age less often. What will happen to them in years from now if they're so used to touching a screen that they're unsure of how to actually have fun with people their own age in real life? Personally, I sense that there's an unspeakable battle parents have given up fighting since the tablet, equipped with more information than any human being can provide, keeps their child quiet and out of trouble.

Sadly, many parents in the community – especially places where violence and crime rates are skyrocketing – aren't going to tell their kids to “go outside and play.”

My generation of Canarsie neighbors didn't worry about getting shot during a house party or stray bullets killing an innocent child in the middle of the street. While it's awesome for a child to be able to share their gadgets with their friends while they're enjoying the outdoors, there's also an increase in robberies and thefts associated with tablets and Smartphones. Some kids have no choice but to stay indoors and occupy themselves.

Let's get real! Adults aren't nearly as interesting or entertaining as a 'Paint Your Virtual Face' or 'How You Would Look As A Walrus' application. Why take your kids to the zoo or circus when you can watch them online whenever you want, in the comfort of your home where there's no parking fee and no need to take out your wallet for an expensive snack.

If we did a survey on how many parents in this area are taking their children to amusement parks, beaches or educational and recreational facilities, I estimate that the number would be quite low – and these children are probably wandering the streets or cooling off by an illegally opened fire hydrant before going back to their iPhones, iPads or whatever other iGadget is more amusing.

Sure, some kids are interacting with each other through these 'virtual babysitters' but it no longer seems natural for a kid to want to play outside. I enjoy going to Canarsie Park and seeing kids do what they did in the old days – laughing together, getting exercise and playing games in which they have to socialize with others. At Canarsie Pier, some parents take their children fishing, which is a great bonding opportunity for parents who still want to make time for their kids (remember parents who didn't need to work long hours so they spent plenty of time with their children?).

I don't see as many kids out and about in the community as I did when I was growing up - and you can't tell me there are fewer children in Canarsie now than in the 1980s. If a majority of kids are hiding in their homes all summer and keeping to their computers and other gadgets, where is their socialization skills being practiced? They're forced to be with other children when school is in session, so how are we preparing them for real world communication if all they're doing is swiping a screen all day? Some children love those nonsensical games where they compete against strangers or an inanimate player.

Even though there are many intelligent apps which help kids learn and develop different skills, the old school values of forming and keeping friendships, learning patients and tolerance, and developing street smarts have been lost in the shuffle – or the iPod shuffle, I should say.

http://www.canarsiecourier.com/news/2013-07-11/Telling_It_Like_It_Is/Telling_It_Like_It_Is.html

The Spaces In BeTWEEN Networking And Socializing

So, you young whippersnappers don't like Facebook anymore, huh?

According to a new poll, released by who else but “experts,” tweens are no longer turning to Facebook, the social networking giant, to connect with their friends on a daily basis. Time Magazine's article “Is Facebook Losing Its Cool? Some teens think so,” generated interesting conversation about Facebook, which is drawing in audiences of all different ages. That wasn't the original intent when it was launched in 2004. As you can tell, I enjoy writing my columns about the many layers and levels of Facebook's existence in our lives. There will never be a shortage of complaints or fairly obvious observations about how people are abusing Facebook – and many teens reportedly seem to agree.

My sister contends that she still uses Facebook, even though Instagram, Tumblr, Twitter and something called Snapchat – which I never heard of since this new report was released – is now the mainstream form of keeping up with friends. At the same time, let's face it, teens don't really have much to post on Facebook. They've only lived long enough to complain about their friends, parents and teachers. Since the networking site is now like a “news” feed for many people, including myself, there has to be a way we can make Facebook not only appealing to teens, but more helpful during their growing years. The new report did say that, as they grow up, teens will use Facebook more often.

Reports also said that teens want a more direct way to communicate with their friends that don't require too much explaining. Sites such as Instagram allow youngsters' social circles to be limited to only those who want to share photos and not elaborate on their lives. I'll admit, I have an Instagram account, which I never use because I only have two or three followers (I guess I’m not that popular). While thousands of teens may have a Facebook page, which they generated before they were even allowed to, it's reportedly “no longer a novelty.”

The older generation joining Facebook is likely one reason for youngsters being persuaded to go elsewhere for their social satisfaction. Here are some other reasons Facebook probably lost some of its flare because of the older generation's presence:

Less is more: People finally have a place to air their grievances, as we know, and sometimes they rant on, and on, about something that happened to them at work or while they were shopping. Tweens might not want to go through a news feed of long stories told by their family members. Some kids already roll their eyes when they're told a “war story” that has nothing to do with their lives.

The “cute” factor is not cool: Rather than getting comments from their friends and family about a photo posting – which could go on for days – it seems most teens just want to express themselves and move on. When you're friends with your grandpa and your uncle and he sees a cute photo that he can't help himself but comment on, suddenly, it's not so “cool” to be Facebook friends with all these family members. Adults: do you even understand Instagram or feel provoked to “tweet” on Twitter? Didn’t think so...

You're uninvited to send an invite: Now that adults, and organizations of which pages they “like”, have a wider arena to go public, feeds aren't simple anymore. Kids are no longer going on Facebook just to check out what their classmates are doing (although this was their original plan). They might be getting unnecessary invites for games and events from that one aunt, uncle or cousin. If you're annoyed at fake notifications from people wanting to add you to their “birthday list,” teens who simply want to do their own thing have to contend with all of these alerts that have nothing to do with their social life.

There's no shortage of boredom on Facebook: If you had a Facebook page in 2006 through at least 2009, you might remember all of those dumb quizzes that your friends/family asked you to partake in. With quizzes like “What Type Of Mushroom Are You?” and “If You Could Be An Egg, How Would You Be Cooked?” everyone's life seemed to depend on the menial details of some made up social exam. Plus, how many things going on on Facebook can youngsters relate to? Are they really interested in what's going on with their elders? Sometimes, just being able to post a photo for your friends, who you're close to, is impossible when hundreds of other distant contacts meddle in your business, too.

Reveling In Your Anonymity: On sites like Instagram and Twitter, you don't even have to use your real name or information. While I personally don't mind being found – even as a professional by random people who may have useful things to share – youngsters don't want to be overwhelmed by having to share their education and residence with friends who already know their basic information. Is it really anyone's business anyway? Most adults want to be found and have no problem showing links to their history, but teens might be onto something when it comes to remaining private.

No Shortage of Useless Connections: The best part of being on Facebook, for me, is being able to use social networking for the good of my career. I wouldn't find out about many events going on in Canarsie and the surrounding area if it weren't for posts on Facebook. Personally, the contacts I've made on the site generated many story ideas and sharing information with organizations in our community has helped me pursue events that, in the past, have gone unnoticed. For teens, however, making friends with their teachers - or past teachers – might not get them anywhere.

Adults Can Be Annoying: It's true. Even I can admit that I'm tired of seeing re-posts of those signs and jokes about people getting old or what it was like “back in my day.” As the older crowd gets the hang of social networking, they're sharing things that the younger generation may not have an interest in. There's a notable detachment – or disconnect – that teens have from adults that's emphasized through social networking. We're all busy sharing links and other people's posts (and once again, those annoying game posts), while teens seem to value what's immediately going on in their lives.

No matter how many teens/tweens have their own Facebook page, and no matter how many of them actually use it on a daily basis, there’s always going to be “underground” means of getting away from adults. On second thought, don’t you envy them?

http://www.canarsiecourier.com/news/2013-05-30/Telling_It_Like_It_Is/Telling_It_Like_It_Is.html

Sending Our Mailmen The Best – But Not On A Saturday!

Nor rain, nor sleet, nor snow...Nor whatever the hell else the post office claims their employees work through...They can now exclude 'nor only weekdays.’ Some residents living on the second floor of a private house don’t get mail until their downstairs neighbor passes it along – whenever that is, since most mailmen don't want to attempt to climb up stairs. Some mail gets delivered to a wrong address altogether. There are plenty of other reasons you haven't gotten your long-awaited utility bill (wasn't it worth the wait?) or that special edition of the Canarsie Courier where your advertisement was published (um, two weeks ago!).

We know post offices in general aren't the most reliable, but now we won't be getting our mail for sure – especially during the weekend since Saturday deliveries will stop this summer thanks to the agency's attempt to save millions of dollars. It's understandable that mail isn't delivered on Sunday. Sunday's long been thought of as a non-work day, with banks and other government offices closed.

However, I'm not crazy about the idea of mail not being delivered on a Saturday. Come ON! There are enough problems getting the mail to us on time during the week and now they're going to hold off mail delivery on a Saturday? Some may argue that mail delivery on a Saturday won't make a difference or even impact us...and that conventional mail is extinct since you can pay bills online, send e-mails, shop and do your banking online. Whoop-dee-do!

We can no longer keep the classic form of communication exchange going. When you mail Aunt Catherine her birthday card, you'd better send it out a week before to account for the one less day it will be in transit and the chance that it will wind up in your neighbor's (across the street) mailbox.

What if you’re expecting important medical papers, prescriptions, documents or checks? If you put something in a mailbox on a Friday, it's surely not going to be rushed to its destination until Monday morning – that’s if the mailbox you dispense the envelopes in gets collected in the morning hours.

With postal service many already deem “incompetent,” this move is adding insult to injury. Should we prepare now for this cut in delivery?

Head honchos at the postal service don't even consider the fact that many senior citizens are among the population who are not going to be able to prepare for the cut, as many are not internet savvy enough to set up an online account to manage their finances. Those who are internet savvy and have to pay bills online and create dozens of accounts, also run the risk of completing more transactions that could compromise their information. You're soon going to be inputting your credit and bank accounts all over the place online since you can't mail a check out on a Saturday. Yeah, they sayyour bank information is secure and that most companies are safe holding your information. Let's get real! Identity theft has risen remarkably since customers have ceased mailing out money orders to pay their utility bills (remember buying all of those money orders?). If your bill is due near any given Saturday, you're out of luck in hoping it makes it to its destination on time since there is always some delay in transmission.

In my opinion, the post office is making it harder and harder for us to use their services since they're offering less and less to us for waaaay too much money. I forgot to mention that First Class postage stamps and Priority stamps just increased in cost with no added benefit. They don't promise us more for paying more. What has the post office improved for its customers? So, we can print shipping labels for our packages and we can purchase stamps online. BIG FRIGGIN' DEAL!!

Even though we've got a city agency like the MTA charging us more for transportation this year, let's give them a little credit. In the past decade, they've rehabilitated dozens of stations, added more trains to various lines with “accurate time” countdowns at the stations, and when you think about big projects, like the addition of the Second Avenue line, at least the proof is in the pudding. No, our commute may not be worth more than $2 per ride, but at least we can see a lot of “work being done” as opposed to the post office, where there's no physical proof our money is going toward any projects to improve service.

Let's say they were going to build super robots to deliver our mail – with ultra long arms that would reach up and ensure that everyone on the second and even third levels of every home gets their mail! That would be worth every cent! Mail delivery persons won't be happy. But since they've already cut a day from their schedule, and I'm sure local post office closings are next, mail carriers are going to get less and less from this government job.

On a realistic level, if the post office were to invest in more security measures for their employees or open more “satellite post offices” within communities – even having more mobile post offices stationed in different neighborhoods – then I could see a reason for other cutbacks and a raise in postage being necessary.

Making improvements costs money – so where are the improvements within the post office that implemented this insane cutback? Show us where the money is going or give us our Saturday delivery! Put that in your envelope and mail it!

http://www.canarsiecourier.com/news/2013-02-14/Telling_It_Like_It_Is/Sending_Our_Mailmen_The_Best__But_Not_On_A_Saturda.html