Living at home does not make you a bum, Judge Judy.

I only watch Judge Judy (and other judge shows) with my mom. I couldn't stand them by myself.

On today's episode, I only paid attention to the beginning. She asked somebody where his brother was. Turns out the brother was back home. Not because of work, since he doesn't work. He's 19 and lives with Mom.

Making him a bum.

Judge Judy is very rude to people who live at home beyond what age she deems appropriate. I remember many episodes where she ends it by saying, "Grow up and move out of your mom's house! *bangs gavel*"

Then there is the joke of "nerds" in their mother's basement. (Never their father's, or their parents'. Always mother's.)

It's a shortcut to calling somebody immature.

So I read Slate - I like the ad and shopping reviews - and this caught my eye a couple weeks ago. The headline is "Prudie counsels a husband-to-be whose bride wants her own bedroom—and other advice seekers." The main issue I took away is not that the bride wants her own bedroom, but that she's never lived alone. And she's a "woman old enough to marry."

The comments were disgusting. Many people had no problem with separate bedrooms, but others called the bride (that they only know about through her fiance's letter) immature.

My first thought was hello, not every culture shoves their kids out at 18.

But as I started reading FWD/Forward and this entry, I realized the other problems with the response to the letter and the idea of living at home once you become an "adult."

There are many valid reasons to live at home after the magical age of 18. One of the many reasons is health - some of us cannot and should not live alone. I live in the dorm while I'm at school, but right now I am at home because of the kidney stone. For one thing, I'll be less tempted to try to go to class. It's not more convenient for Mom, but I feel miserable and I get to see my puppies! Mikey is a trip - he totally beat Mom up tonight. And right now he's sleeping on her butt, quite happy.

Then there is my mother's health - what if she were in my flipflops? I'd want somebody to be with her. I'd feel I should take care of her.

I think there is a problem with America - we place so much importance on certain markers of "independence" that those who do not follow the rules are "immature" and "weird." We also do not place a lot of emphasis on family. No, I don't want to move in my with husband's family, but I don't want to be demonized for living with my mom at 21.

And not having a job.

And not driving. (That is a pain. My sister drops the issue for a while, but it's back up again - "Why don't you drive?" "Because I don't want to" is not a valid answer in her eyes, and admittedly, if I were to stay here, I'd have to drive. But I don't want to - I want to live some place where a combination of walking and public transportation can do a car's job for me. Plus, I don't think I legally can drive, thanks to all my medications.)

It is nobody's business why people live like they do, and as long as no one is being hurt or any laws are being broken, no one has a right to judge.

I am not a bum because I live with my mother.

I am not immature, either.

And it is none of your business why I do it. (Except I already told you. Eh, shut it.)

Time for a Bollywood movie!

It's so nice when one pic sums up your day

see more dog and puppy pictures

I couldn't walk, sit, or stand without pain today. It led to some... interesting contortions in the waiting room. (They don't like it if you lay on the floor - however, if you lay on the floor *and* barf, you'll get seen sooner, or at least shoved out of the waiting room so you don't scare people.)

Spoon Theory and Me (It's all about me)

I've been reading about the Spoon Theory and kinda going, yeah, that doesn't apply to me. (Basically, we all have a number of spoons that represent what we can do that day. Healthy, temporarily able bodied people (age will get us all!! Run!!) have an unlimited amount. Those not so able-bodied do not.)

Thinking about the Spoon Theory and applying it to my life is scary because dammit, if I write down that it hurts, then it really happened and it just won't go away. If I don't classify it, it's not there. Denial is awesome unless WILL YOU STOP STABBING ME. See?

But I do use it, I realized today.

I had a terrible night, could not fall asleep or stay asleep. Went to my 8 am class (hello Arabic!) in pain, a bit disoriented, just not steady on my feet. It was worse when I got out of class about an hour later.

So I laid down, planning to rest until lunch and then go to my one o'clock class.

Ate lunch around noon, no problems, a bit of pain, whatever.

But as I walked out, I was like, hey, hey, HEY! It's not supposed to hurt to walk. And this class is relatively far away when it's raining or I'm in pain. And then there's the hour and 25 minutes of uncomfortable sitting, followed by a bolt across campus to my next class.

I just sat down and cried. I still am. I hate it.

But I'm in my room, comfortable (though still in pain) on my bed, and I will go to my 2:40 class and hopefully make it through that hour and 25 minutes in one piece. Last Thursday, maybe I should have done that, because I reached a point in the latter class where thought escaped me. (Especially putting thoughts into French words.)

Maybe I'm not thinking of it as little spoons, but I know that if I went to my one o'clock, I couldn't go to my French class. And we're watching a movie in there. And the other class is all online - podcasts of the lectures, powerpoints, everything. Except on Thursday, I have to be there because I'm giving a presentation that I have totally started on.

Totally.

Gotta go.

"Responding to your message"

Dear Kaitlyn,



Thank you for taking the time to contact my office about Senator Franken's amendment to the FY2010 Defense Appropriations bill dealing with arbitration. Your input is important to me, and I appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts.



Senator Franken's amendment stemmed from a truly horrible crime committed against Jamie Leigh Jones, an employee of a company performing work in Iraq under a contract with the Defense Department. Please know, this amendment had no impact on law enforcement's ability to pursue criminal prosecution against anyone involved in committing these crimes, and dealt only with the agreements between employers and employees to resolve civil claims in arbitration rather than through litigation. What happened to Ms. Jones in this case is abhorrent and the culprits should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.



Separate and apart then from any criminal prosecution, Ms. Jones filed several claims in court in a civil suit against the company. The company argued that Ms. Jones could not sue in court because the employee signed an arbitration agreement to bring any claims against her employer to arbitration instead of being tried in court. However, the court ruled in favor of Ms. Jones by nullifying the arbitration agreement as to her claims of (1) assault and battery, (2) intentional infliction of emotional distress arising out of the assault, (3) negligent hiring, retention, and supervision of employees involved in the assault, and (4) false imprisonment. The court therefore said that employers can not require that civil claims of sexual assault be resolved through arbitration and that employees like Ms. Jones retain the ability to sue in court.



The Franken amendment sought to codify this court ruling in favor of Ms. Jones by requiring that contractors with the Defense Department exclude those four claims from their employee contract arbitration agreements. However, this amendment went much further than the court ruling by also requiring the exclusion from arbitration agreements of many of the possible employment claims an employee can bring against an employer. First, it is important to note that the Obama Administration opposed the Franken amendment because of its broad application and the problems associated with enforcing it. Rather than a targeted attempt to prevent the types of obstacles that Ms. Jones faced when she fairly sought restitution for the horrific acts that occurred, this amendment went well beyond in an effort to make a sweeping change to existing law among issues that never impacted this employee and that the court never addressed in this case.



I agreed with the court ruling and believe that the civil claims arising out of the sexual assault should not be arbitrated. However, I believe the amendment was too expansive, and went well beyond the situation the amendment was trying to remedy. I believe that arbitration can provide employees with a more efficient and cost-effective avenue for resolving their claims against their employer and I do not believe it should be largely eliminated as an alternative to what is sometimes a very lengthy, contentious, and expensive court process.



Thank you again for your letter. I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me.



Sincerely,

Bob Corker
United States Senator

The fact that both sent me quite similar letters tells me I'm not the only one to write them about their vote.

And I'm quite sad - where's the snail mail? You wanted my street address for a reason.

"Correspondence From Senator Alexander"

Senator Alexander (I hate that I share a name with that man!) has responded by e-mail.

Dear Kaitlyn,



Thanks very much for getting in touch with me and letting me know what's on your mind regarding arbitration agreements.



Arbitration is a better option than litigation for many employees, but the courts can step in where arbitration doesn't sufficiently protect the rights of workers. Arbitration is neither designed nor intended to address criminal matters, such as sexual assault, but rather to provide an opportunity to resolve civil matters in a more timely, less expensive way than pursuing them in court.



What happened to Jamie Leigh Jones was deplorable, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit made the right decision by saying her case should be resolved in the courts. Specifically, the appeals court held that Ms. Jones' injuries were not related to her employment and thus not covered by the arbitration clause in her employment contract.



On October 3, 2009, the Senate passed the Franken amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill, which would prohibit the Pentagon from contracting with any company that requires its employees or independent contractors to sign mandatory arbitration clauses regarding certain claims. The Defense Department opposed the Franken amendment and was right to do so because it was too broad and banned arbitration in too many cases. When arbitration is inappropriate, the courts should overrule it as they did in this deplorable case.



I'm grateful you took the time to let me know where you stand. I'll be sure to keep your comments in mind as this matter is discussed and debated in Washington and in Tennessee.



Sincerely,



Lamar

Sure.

Justify it.

I just wish that the democrats in this state had BALLS. Maybe this is about arbitration in his mind (ha!), but I wish his opponents would say it was about rape. If the parties were switched, the Republicans would be all over calling him a rapist. I mean, they ran an ad against Harold Ford Jr saying he would steal all the white ladies!

Why do we have to be so nice and wimpy? Swear to god, when I watched local TV in 06 and 08, I could not tell the "pro" Democrat from the Republicans until the end. (The anti... ooh, this one Mississippi anti-Democrat ad was hysterical! It showed the groups of people who had donated to the candidate in the worst light possible. Unfortunately, I don't remember the names or the year.)

One priceless pro-Republican ad for a state senator/something on the state level... it showed the candidate shooting guns with her family while the voice over talked about the sanctity of life!

I love it, I wish I didn't have to live it.

The Franken Senate Defense Appropriations Amendment

You are a disgusting, vile piece of humanity. I am ashamed that I did not get to vote against you in 2006.

You voted against Sen. Al Franken's amendment which would protect RAPE VICTIMS. Surely, rape is an issue both parties agree is bad?

But no.

Franken is a Democrat. This interferes with business.

You disgust me.

I just sent this to Bob Corker and Lamarr Alexander, who are 2 of the 30 Republican men who voted against the amendment.

I am so glad it passed, but damn, what is wrong with people?

Corker wanted my phone number, but Alexander didn't. I'll probably get a form letter in reply. I have before.

I watched Dor last night.

It is an amazing movie! Om Shanti Om introduced me to Shreyas and I can't believe it's taken this long for me to see him in another movie. He was so cute!

Of course the female actors were amazing as well.

Go see Dor! Netflix has it...

A sweet scene from the movie: