Fat Nightmare: Ousting the Overweight (also) On Street Bike Paths are a Parking Lot and The Naked and Famous

Issue 8, Volume 1

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Our On The Streets section is a photo from 113th street and Jasper Avenue at roughly 9:00pm. The photo is of Sarah and I going to coffee at the Second Cup at which we first went to coffee one year ago to discuss guitar lessons. That would eventually turn into a beautiful relationship. It was also the site of a pedestrian-car collision earlier that week. This was a much more joyous occasion, however. You might have noticed that we don't have our fashion issue this week, and for that I apologize. It will be coming next week. We'll be examining the latest trends in everything from clothes, styles, furniture, toys, cars, music and more, complete with a photo spread.

Fat Nightmare: Ousting The Overweight

This isn't the 80's, and being a railroad track of bones isn't attractive. But numerous campaigns that advertise beauty in any body type; to be comfortable in your own skin may be going over the top.

A friend of mine recently indicated that a coworker had made fun of her for losing weight. This is acceptable. But certainly, it is never acceptable to make fun of gaining weight. The very same point was a joke on the redneck comedy tour. It's okay to alienate smokers, but we don't alienate obese people the same way. We try to teach them that their bodies are beautiful. How beautiful is type II diabetes, congestive heart failure, COPD, hypertension, and early death?

It's not beautiful.

The fact is that the United States used to be the fattest nation in the world. Now its us, at a whopping 49% of the population that is overweight. And please, spare me the rhetoric of redefining what 'overweight' is - this is a medical thing, not an aesthetic thing. Curves are fantastic, until curves ultimately kill you.

This is a difficult thing to talk about. I am in no way trying to say that anyone who is overweight is a bad person, or isn't attractive, or isn't beautiful. But should we hold our tongues when it comes to making mention of their weight? It truly is okay to say, "hey, you look skinny, you should put some meat on those bones." Imagine going up to someone and saying, "hey, you look like you've gained some weight. Maybe you'd better get off your fat ass and get some running shoes on, and change your high sodium and sugar diet for a reasonable portioned dinner based on the Canada food guide!"

But, hey, get this! That 49% of people will likely be hospitalized more than a few times for the complex care they require, because they will likely have two, if not more, of the things I mentioned above that will lead to extreme complications by the time they are in their 40's. And since we have universal health care, that means a weight our system might not be able to bear.

We don't have to say overweight people are bad people. We don't have to say they are ugly if they're pretty, and we don't have to say they're stupid for being fat. But should we be saying, "be comfortable in your own skin?" Because ultimately you will be very uncomfortable in your own skin.

Just remember, BMI no more than 25; a balanced diet based on the Canada food guide, and an hour or so of physical activity a day. And no, I'm not saying I'm perfect and exempt to my own preaching.

On Street Bike Paths Perfect for On-Street Parking

I didn't steal this one from Metro, The Sun, The Journal, CTV, or any-freaking-where else, than driving down our own 106th street.

I mentioned a few issues back about the On-Street bike paths, and how it was just paint and signs. Oddly enough, a few days after semi-bashing the idea, some city councilors called the idea ridiculous because the paint was going over badly worn and pot-holed-heaving streets. What I saw was hilarious.

Signs that indicated 'single file' for cars and bikes were immediately followed by sings that said 'share the road' showing a car and a bike next to each other, completely contradictory. As for the dashed line that marked off the curb lane from the regular vehicle lane so that cyclists could have their on street path - residents took this a totally different way. It seems as though the lanes are roughly about 6 feet wide, or about the size of a standard parking lane. So the curb lane is now entirely resident parking. And with no 'no parking' signs, the city is without anything to do about the problem, whilst cyclists now either have to bike single file or share the road with cars on extremely thin residential roads.

Now I recognize that some sections are probably single file, and others are shared sections, but this isn't indicated too clearly.

Thank you, Edmonton, for that fail. Oh yeah, and the potholes still aren't fixed. But do we really want more construction?

The Naked And Famous - Passive Me, Aggressive You

I decided to check out if the Naked and Famous were legit, after the success of their most popular single off of their 2010 release Passive Me, Aggressive You. The late-coming single to North America (on local modern rock radio and Alt-Nation on Sirius-XM) is due to the fact that this 'indie rock' electro-pop quintet hails from Auckland, New Zealand. The digital download of the first single off of their album did not hit North America on November 14, 2010. The entire album was available in September of 2010 as a digital download in Canada, but not on actual vinyl or CD until March 14, 2011. The single Young Blood, still didn't hit charts until later though, but had many television appearances, including on the series Chuck and on Gossip Girls.

Young Blood reached #1 on the NZ charts, and as high as 10 on the Canadian alternative charts, and was certified platinum in NZ; very popular in their own country. For international success at this point though; with a top 10 single internationally and still on an independent label, that is phenomenal for any group, especially in alternative where there are so many different types and styles of music. Let's face it, it can be pretty hit and miss.

So how does Passive Me, Aggressive You shape up compared to the single Young Blood? Not too shabby. The entire album does not sound like the first single, although distorted synthesizers are a big part of this. The heavy drums you hear in Young Blood; distorted and pounding, reverberate in A Wolf In Greek's Clothing; an electro-punk romp that will make you think of some things you heard in the early 90's - very nearly sub-pop records material. In fact, the fuzzy synths and drums on most of the tracks will remind you of Trent Reznor and old NIN, which is a good thing here, just not as 'hurty' as Reznor went.

Funny; because their label is called 'Somewhat Damaged' - if you recall, a track from The Fragile. In fact, the beginning of Girls Like You - supposedly the third single from this album, sounds like Echoplex. Go even further, in the middle of the album you'll find a track called The Source, which is essentially a version, as I see it, as The Frail, although I've also been told it sounds very similar to Right Where It Belongs off of With Teeth.

But they aren't rip-offs of NIN. Just inspired. Couple that with the fact that they have a very nice Stars-type boy-girl thing going on, with a little 80's pop (the good stuff we remember), and you have a group that hits heavy. And the Naked and Famous wouldn't be so heavy if they were a one trick pony. Take Girls Like You, and what you might hear is a direct comparison to The Cure. Not all of it is upbeat though. Frayed is decidedly down tempo, whereas The Sun is downright dark. There is just enough here to appeal to a wide range of listeners, and The Naked and Famous do it well. Fantastic for a group that is only as young as 2008, and who's first album's singles didn't register on charts at all, not even in their home NZ.

There are some songs on here that are pretty much copies and could have been B-sided, however, and that definitely takes some points off the album; as it's not one that you can listen to without skipping a track or two that you're not interested in. But the solid effort by this New Zealand tribute to NIN and the Cure and any electro-synth-pop boy girl band earns them a solid 7/10 for their efforts.

Letters To The Editor

Soon we will have a frank discussion about the YEG Slutwalk. Until then:

rbw2@ualberta.ca if you have anything to add or discuss with me!

Next Issue Of Out My Passenger Window

-Fashion Issue: Clothes, Cars, Furniture, Martini Parties!

The Walterdale Bridge and BMO 63: Infrastructure vs. Heritage (also) Green on Go, Pushing Singles and Matthew Good

Volume 1, Issue 7

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Our On The Streets photo shows the first of 7 days of rain; the thunderstorm last week that occurred as I was driving home from work. Note the solid wall of water on the other side of the 97th Avenue Legislature Underpass. Edmonton finally emerged from the rain to three thunderstorms yesterday. This type of traffic is generally what I sit in every day. A recent poll done by CAA indicates that 86% of motorists feel that people have become 'rude' and 'in-courteous' whereas they rate themselves a 'B+' in terms of their driving habits while other drivers are a 'C+'. This indicates people are also unwilling to realize that the problem may be them. The question is continuously raised about why drivers in Edmonton have become so horrible. Could it be the infrastructure? Could it be that the city wants us to drive badly?

YEG Stupidity; Heritage versus Infrastructure Growth

Perhaps you've seen this:

This is a designer's rendering of what the new Walterdale Bridge replacement will look like if all goes as planned. But wait, whilst improving infrastructure, we will be throwing away a 100 year old piece of Edmonton history...(!)

The reports indicate that likely the bridge project will go ahead as planned, citing the Walterdale would cost $12 mil for a rehabilitation, and in spite of that $2 mil afterwards for upkeep each year. That is one huge money-sucking project when you think of ALL of the infrastructure in the city. The project was approved in April after costs were said to be $130 million for a new one; half of the original estimate. Considering you could probably get another hundred years out of the new bridge, that's a savings of $82 million over one hundred years, assuming the costs of

maintaining this bridge cancel out any other rehabilitative projects of the old bridge, and that the Walterdale would continue to cost $2 mil a year to fix. It's creative math, I know.

Ultimately I have heard some things like, "pieces of the bridge would be used in other projects." Or put in parks, around the city, what have you, to preserve the heritage. And then, just last week, a group of business owners said that the Walterdale should be kept open, but as a pedestrian bridge/cycling bridge. The great freaking hilarious thing about that is that the bridge would still require a $12 million overhaul, and $2 million a year in upkeep. Of course, the salon that patroned this idea did not say they were interested in ponying up any dough to keep the Walterdale going.

So if it's so cut and dry, why am I sharing an opinion about this? Well ultimately I feel like it's

the cries of the Edmonton Historical Board that the bridge has important historical value, specifically to native peoples (I'm not sure how this works out), and should be preserved. I feel that this is the cry of a desperate board that has let too many important buildings get destroyed in the name of expansion and are now trying to save ones that don't matter. It's an old bridge. Yes, that's kind of sad, okay, it's been there for 100 years, but let's face it, it's not an architectural juggernaut by any means. It's an old mess of scrap metal that the city has said has come to the end of it's usable life. Yes, the span of the bridge is over, heh heh. Joking aside, this is a piece of infrastructure, and as much as we love the historical here in Edmonton, it seems like fixing our failing infrastructure system should be first and foremost the priority. A new usable bridge that makes it easier to drive, bike, and walk, and costs less to maintain is probably exactly what we need there.

But It Gets Worse: BMO 63

You might also recognize this thing:

This is the tenement that stands on the corner of Jasper Avenue and 100th Avenue. It is the 1963 BMO building, which apparently has sat vacant since the early 1990's. There have been many petitions to save 'Edmonton's first modern bank' but unfortunately GE Capital, the owner of the building, is going to demolish it. The 'Save BMO 63' petitioner's website indicates the historical architectural value of the building as the reason for saving it, and that it was made of, "superior materials that will stand the test of time." Well, actually the building is a complete piece of shit, and no one wants it. That's why it won't be retrofitted, and GE Capital, to ensure there's no more blocks, have jumped the gun on taking it down. See the structure is not quite 50 years old, and if they wait until 2013, then it qualifies to be added to the city's heritage building inventory, and thus it'll be harder to knock down. The society has asked that the structure be revitalized and retrofitted into the current plans GE has for the space. But here's where the problem occurs. Representatives from GE indicate they've tried; and it can't be, because the granite and brick that hold the building together are actually decaying quite rapidly, and unfortunately the building is falling apart. In other words, they tried, they had plans to, but it won't work because it's structurally unfit.

That sucks, but such is buildings; sometimes they fall apart. Especially when no one wants to use them for up to 20 years, indicating that there must have been a problem with either Edmonton's commercial incentives to set up shop in a highrise here, or the Downtown Business Association, for not pushing to get someone in that space.

What really sucks is what GE is deciding to do with the location, and this, I think, should be intervened with by the DBA and the City of Edmonton. They plan, get this, to put up a two-story low rise with a parking garage. That's right, more fucking parking, and a two story building right in the heart of downtown. I think that if the plans say it can accomodate 30 stories on the new plan sheet that the city released after the airport runway closures; that's what SHOULD go in there, not a recommendation. So we lose a highrise to a two story and parking garage structure. That's disappointing. That's Edmonton as usual.

Speed On Green: Blatantly Taking Your Money

I read an article in the Metro (yup) where city representatives finally said that the initiative to put 'green on go' or 'speed on green' cameras back into effect. The city had to return $16 million, according to CTV news, after supreme court judges found the 'checks' ticket processes went through were inadequate and quashed 105,000 tickets. The company that originally had the cameras up said the tickets went through 5 different checks before they were sent out, but judges at all levels saw it differently, when a ticket came through the system that indicated a man sitting in gridlock was doing 140km/h. Now the cameras are going back up, and there are 'several checks' that the tickets have to go through before being sent out. Wait, weren't they already going through 5 checks? Also, according to CBC, the problem with the cameras were a breakdown in insulation in the electric wiring, which caused the cameras to malfunction. Now the cameras are said to be '100% foolproof.' To me, saying something like that is setting yourself up for looking like an ass later. Why not say, "they are much more accurate and reliable." Or, "With the new retrofitting, the cameras are so reliable and accurate that we cannot find any fault in the system after rigorous testing." This is obviously the mistake they made the first time.

The city estimates it will take about a $1 million cut from the cameras per month, and indicated they were 'hemmorhaging' this amount. Pretty much blatantly indicating the cameras are required for proper functional budget. They tried to cover their tracks by indicating to CTV that the accidents at intersections since the cameras went down were about 10 times higher. Of course, we don't get to know what intersections those are, or if there's a seasonally adjustable variable. I have a hard time believing this stat, because you're not really supposed to know what intersections have speed on green cameras. So what the city is trying to say is without them, accidents at intersections are ten times higher, as if we all know all where they are, and all knew when they stopped working, for how long, and during that time, we were all speeding and it was causing 10 times the accidents. Really? That's kind of a stretch. The EPS actually indicated they did not have firm data to back up the city's claim, not ones to have their physical officers with radar guns upstaged by fixed cameras.

To me, I consider photo radar a 'speed tax.' Getting hit with demerits that up your insurance and potentially spiral into you getting your license taken away is an actual punishment and a way to remove repeat offenders. Traffic cams are simply cash cows. I don't believe they stop people speeding, but they sure shove money into city coffers. What makes me angry is that the city doesn't just admit this. Just admit that you make money off them. Publish what the accident rates are monthly and what they are at intersections before and after camera installations. If you're going to call it a safety measure, show us the data that it works. Otherwise, don't try to pretend. We're not that stupid. You only hope that we're that nonchalant and have enough disposable income to keep speeding through the damned things.

The city WANTS us to drive irresponsibly. If we didn't ever speed through intersections with fixed cameras, the city wouldn't ever make any money from us. Not even enough to justify spending on the cameras, because they wouldn't break even.

Think about it. If these things worked perfectly, they would cost the city money.

Pushing Singles - An Introspective into Current Music Industry Trends

Matthew Good, forty years old, recently was interviewed by Sonic 102.9FM's Rick Lee. The subject was his current single Zero Orchestra off of the album Lights of Endangered Species. His problem was the conceptual idea of modern rock radio playing a song that he called, "...[his] best shit..." but something that was entirely devoid of guitars, made up of piano, cello, keyboards, violins, and a horn section. Zero Orchestra in fact, does include an actual orchestra. Although it is conceptually difficult to play music like this, there is a reason that modern rock radio can get away with it; and there is also a reason that In Place of Lesser Men got bumped so fast for the second single. The same is true for Foo Fighters and Rope, which quickly was replaced with Walk. The reason, in my opinion, is that anyone need only know that these albums from these modern rock powerhouses (Matt Good at least in Canada) exist to go out and get them.

This is in stark contrast to groups like Foster the People, where Pumped Up Kicks has been on the airwaves since the snow was still flying. It takes a lot more convincing for individuals to buy an album now. We are back to the days of singles with iTunes, where people don't need to get entire albums to hear songs they want to listen to. They just have to pay $0.99, as if they were buying a 7", and have the song. The great thing about the 7" single is that it either always came with some other bonus, or introduced you to a different song that wasn't a radio single. There is a certain persuasion, or even duping if you will, that goes on by pushing one single for so long on modern rock radio. Take Middle Class Rut for example, who's song New Low has graced the airwaves for quite some time now. Listening to M.C. Rut's album, you find that their music is actually decidedly harder than that simple single. Foster the People's next single may not be at all similar to Pumped Up Kicks from what I listened to (that's really up to you to decide). People need to be tricked into buying albums.

How does this new industry trend fare for the larger acts? Not good. Each play on a radio station earns a couple of pennies worth of royalties. This means your favorite larger groups like the Foo or Good earn less money for their music by not being pushed on the air as heavy as brand new groups.

How does this fare for the new acts? Also not good. The overplaying of one song, and flooding the market constantly with new music inundated and barraged into listeners could turn them off of the group completely; not to mention possibly making the songs irrelevant and disposable.

My solution would be to let the best man win on the countdown charts. Instead of pushing certain new singles more; trying to get other people to buy into the idea of new groups like Foster the People, Awolnation, and the like, play all the singles equally, and let the better songs be voted upon. But then, I believe that people will like pretty much anything you feed them. For example, how the hell did Christian Hansen get popular? That one will never make sense to me.

Matthew Good - Lights Of Endangered Species

Since 40 year old Good nearly offed himself with ativan and beer (by accident) after his divorce, spawning the release of Hospital Music, he has been riding a wave of success and a somewhat new wave of sound. His latest album, Lights of Endangered Species is a continuation of that. In this album you will hear songs that could be B-sides from Vancouver, such as Extraordinary Fades. Then there is some new, great stuff, like In Place of Lesser Men, and What if I can't see the stars, Mildred? that show a clear progression in Matt's work under his 'new' sound. Finally, Zero Orchestra doesn't even feature an acoustic guitar, which is what we've been expecting from Mr.Good lately, and instead features a real orchestra. In fact, Matt's credit list is 19 people long of musicians that joined him, mostly classical.

Ultimatley we're starting to get used to this sound from Matt since Hospital Music, and it's really working. Unfortunately, Matt stands in the shadows of some great acts this year, like The Black Keys, Foster the People, and on the other side of the coin, the return of Blink 182, making his music get buried in the lists of other stuff that take a back seat to his time tested and well honed song writing. You don't consider your own stuff, "the best shit you ever wrote" unless it is really, really, really, really, really, really fantastic. To a bipolar perfectionist like Matt Good, he really means it. I give this album a solid 8/10. I hope that it doesn't get lost.

Letters To The Editor

remember to hit me up at:

rbw2@ualberta.ca

if you have something you'd like to discuss. I'll post your thoughts right on the blog.

Speaking of which, we actually released our second most popular issue last week, showing our new circulation date is working great. Thanks to all that are reading.

Next Issue

-Rockabilly Retrospective: The Fashion Issue

Clothing, furniture, decorating, cars, music and more from the hottest new trends. Plenty of photos, plenty of style ideas.

Female Leagues (also) Distinctly 70's Vette

Volume 1, Issue 6

Monday, July 11, 2011

As you can see, we've changed our circulation to Mondays. I feel like people read a little more during the week, then over the weekend. Especially time-wasting-at-work blogs. So Monday it is. This week's On The Street comes courtesy of Londonderry Mall's parking lot. It's difficult to tell the exact year of this Corvette, other than the fact that it was built between 1968-1982. A few things would make it a little easier; for example, from 1968-1973, The Corvette had a gaping hole in the side of the front fender for a vent that was somewhat like a '#' if I can describe it correctly. From 1973-1974, although this vent was gone, the car retained a flat tail panel. In 1974 the car got the tapered tail panel. Unlike C4 (1984-1996) models, the C3 models did not have a removable panel here, it was part of the entire fiberglass body structure. But outside of that, we can't really tell. It has a custom hood, and custom headlights, the 1980-1982 'euro' nose, which could have been added after. The tail-lights had been replaced with old bullet style lenses, and the wheels and sidepipes are straight out of the 1970's. Same with the paint job. It's not rare to see a custom Corvette, but it is rare to see one that looks like it was owned by Hyde from That 70's Show. Who is harbouring these vehicles?

Female Leagues - An Introspective Into Female Sports

I was walking through West Edmonton Mall on a little shopping excursion this past Thursday, and was able to watch a little of the Brick Invitational hockey tournament. Specifically, it was the Boston Jr. Bruins against the California 2001's in tournament play. If you are unaware, the Brick Invitational is a hockey tournament, put on by overzealous hockey-dad Bill Comrie since 1990, pits 'super novice' teams of 9-10 year olds against each other. I imagine it's a hell of a lot of fun to travel across country and play other teams in a tournament like this, fueled by parental cash from other rich hockey parents and ex NHLers like Doug Weight, who coaches one of the teams. And on California, plays Scott Niedermayer's kid, who even wears his #27.

As I was watching the game there were a few things that occurred to me. One was that these kids were obviously in the process of being groomed for NHL careers. The other was a lot more upsetting; that the 10 year old, little redheaded girl playing for California would never see a career like most of these boys would.

NHL is a funny league, because it's one of the few sports leagues that you don't get a college grant for going to play. You don't play NCAA before you get drafted into the league, because there's so many other minor leagues. That means, generally, hockey players in the NHL can be complete morons. The bottom line salary for an NHL player, whether or not they have a 1 way, 2 way contract, or continue playing in the minors after drafted is $500,000 a year. Look, I'm not saying they didn't work hard to achieve that, spending their entire lives focusing on being better at hockey than anyone else rather than, say being mediocre in university level Calculus and English or whatever to get your average joe-schmo job and live an average life. The thing is that one little girl who was kicking ass up and down the ice could spend as much time and energy on her craft as anyone else, and she's not going to achieve that type of salary.

It, quite simply, broke my heart.

At the Olympics, or international tournaments, we cheer on the women's teams. In curling tournaments we remark at how attractive they are. When it comes to the big bucks, they're shit out of luck.

I have to think, if we really loved hockey as much as we say we did, we would have no problem with decent-money women's leagues. We get MORE hockey, right? What's wrong with that?

The little girl in super novice is the general problem we're still facing in society today regarding the feminist movement. It's cool for her to be there, but it's still odd for her to be there. And where she can go in that career is basically, well, nowhere that makes any decent money, or could even support a household, let alone make $500,000 a year. The fact is, many careers are still seen as 'man jobs' in spite of there being no reason for this. At the top ranks of hockey, sure a guy can generally skate faster and hit harder than a woman because physically they end up larger. I'm sorry about basic problems of anatomy. But outside of that, why are there so few women in engineering?

We support that girls can do anything, and then go, hey, a girl in super novice hockey, well she's good now but she'll never go anywhere. And it's sad that she doesn't know that now. I'm glad she gets the support she needs to play super novice, but it'll be a sad day when she realizes that society is going to take a giant piss on her dreams because of a strange gender inequality that needs not exist.

What's the solution; at least at this level? Well luckily new generations of people are being taught that boys and girls are equal. Being taught you should make the same and can do the same as a boy as a girl should make you demand it. And a large demand often results in change. However, on super novice hockey teams do we employ affirmative action? Like the CFL makes Canadian players required, should a girl on your roster be a rule rather than an exception. Or does that effectively move us backwards? Let the girls play who've practiced and earned it, and really want to be there, rather than have teams reluctantly select one and bench her. This girl was second line and got a lot of ice time, I should mention. She played her way into that position.

I'm always a proponent of non-affirmative action 'the best person for the job' but unfortunately in society we may not have reached that time where we can all adequately compete with each other without some sort of distorted view fucking that up. We still have people who believe 'the white person for the job' or 'the best man for the job' and then you bring in affirmative action and you might get 'the brown person for the job as subject to minority percentages' which to me, is about as inappropriate. Why didn't you get hired for a job? Because I was a white male, and there are some people who still exclusively hire white males for any job and give them higher pay and more respect, so now instead of having an equal paying job, I have no job at all? All of us majority, we're not especially blessed to have been the privileged for so long, only to become part of the problem, and then part of our own problem. I don't want to be hired because the boss was an old-boy-club-smack-ass-white-power-womanizing asshole. I don't want to be not hired because I'm not a minority.

Disregarding that, I'll still have a lot of opportunities in my life. Labour and Delivery Nurse may not be one of them. But I didn't practice my whole life to become that. The little girl on California's super novice team, she has practiced her whole life to be a hockey player. What does she understand of the opportunities available to her?

Pushing Singles - Pushed

I apologize to everyone, due to some issues with streamlining blogger and the new Google+, I lost most of my work from this week. Next week:

-Pushing Singles: The state of the music industry

-Matthew Good: Lights of Endangered Species reviewed

Letters To The Editor

rbw2@ualberta.ca

Let me know what you think of the new distribution date!