?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Three Point Monday

The current plan is to finish this draft of Red Hood’s Revenge by the end of the week, then use next week to make final changes before turning it in.  This may or may not interfere with the blogging.  Today it does, so here’s your Monday quickie.

1. Thanks to everyone for your feedback and suggestions on the Red Hood teaser.  I sent that in this morning … only to learn there had been a miscommunication at the publisher and they actually needed it in mid-July.  D’oh!  But sometimes these things happen.  They’ll still be able to use the ad for other things, and they were very apologetic about the mistake.

2. What’s wrong with this ToC?  Take your time.  Here’s a hint: I was wearing my special PC Police Enforcer of Doom!* Underoos when I posted this.  (Thanks to squirrel_monkey for the pointer.)

3. Anyone who steals a Handicap parking spot but doesn’t need it should be caned.  But what are the rules about the handicap stall in the bathroom?


*Actually, that might make a fun T-shirt…

Mirrored from Jim C. Hines.

Comments

( 89 comments — Leave a comment )
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
suricattus
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:02 pm (UTC)
#2 -- *facepalm*

#3 -- I was taught that if there's a line, and it's available, you use it (to keep things moving along) with the understanding that anyone who has to use it jumps to the head of that line [also, IMO, anyone who is herding a young child, so they can actually help said young child].

I tend to use it when I'm traveling with luggage, because there's no way to drag my wheeled bag into one of the 'normal' stalls and close the door behind me, but I make sure there's nobody with a real claim, first.
jimhines
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:08 pm (UTC)
Possibly TMI, but I've also found myself trying to determine exactly how ... unsanitary the other stalls have to be in order to justify hopping over to the handicap one.

Boys are messy :-P
TMI zone - suricattus - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
Re: TMI zone - barbarienne - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:57 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cedunkley - Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - beccastareyes - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:14 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mrissa - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:22 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mrissa - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:28 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathshaffer - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:53 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathshaffer - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:57 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathshaffer - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:59 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - barbarienne - Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:02 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:02 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathshaffer - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:06 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathshaffer - Aug. 3rd, 2009 11:26 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:00 pm (UTC) - Expand
controuble
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:03 pm (UTC)
#2 - I take it this editor doesn't think females can write mind-blowing SF. Boo-hiss!

#3 - Suri has it down pat and that's my take on it, too.

Edited at 2009-08-03 06:05 pm (UTC)
jimhines
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:11 pm (UTC)
I can't speak to what's in the editor's mind. However, a friend pointed out that this same editor put out The Mammoth Book of Extreme Science Fiction in 2006. 1 female contributor out of 21.
(no subject) - cathshaffer - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:58 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:03 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:21 pm (UTC) - Expand
maevele
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:15 pm (UTC)
Women don't write the skiffy, don't be silly.

And as for the stall, I don't believe it counts as reserved, whoever needs it uses it. I would not stand and wait because it was the only open stall.
aitchellsee
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:24 pm (UTC)
Yes - IMHO the thing about a handicapped stall is that a person in a chair or scooter, or on crutches, MUST have that configuration in order to use the facilities, so it NEEDS TO BE THERE for them. There's no reason it can't be used by others --and it's not like a handicapped parking space where someone is going to fill it up and then *go away* so the handicapped person can't contact them and tell them it's needed :-)
(no subject) - barbarienne - Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:10 pm (UTC) - Expand
aitchellsee
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:21 pm (UTC)
Like Suri, I look around to be sure there's no one else who clearly needs the handicapped stall, and then, depending on how commodious the "ordinary" stalls are, I'll use it. I usually hang my cane so that it "shows" below the door as a hint that I might be there legitimately, too.

I'm a woman of size and I need the space. Also there were some months last year when I had a temporary ileostomy and really needed the space in order to deal with things - but nothing showed in my street attire so I suppose some rude person might have accused me of using a handicapped stall needlessly. However, I've never run into problems with anyone complaining, ever.
jimhines
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:23 pm (UTC)
That sounds perfectly legit to me. If you're using a cane to get around, it makes sense that you might also need the grab bars.

The "but you don't *look* handicapped" issue could be a whole other blog post all by itself...
(no subject) - damhan_alluidh - Aug. 4th, 2009 07:34 am (UTC) - Expand
kenllama
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:23 pm (UTC)
#2 - *sproing*
#3 - i recently heard someone refer to the accessible stall as the "luxury suite"
melissajm
Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:05 pm (UTC)
Yeah- because for those of us who need it, being able to use whatever bathroom's available is a luxury. ;)
greenmtnboy18
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:24 pm (UTC)
Re Bathroom: That's a harder one to call.

If someone pulls into a handicapped parking space and jumps out of their car and sprints across the parking lot, that's an obvious misuse.

But I don't assume that someone doesn't need the handicapped stall just because they aren't in a wheelchair. There are other (physical) reasons - that are not obvious - that may mean someone bypasses a urinal and uses the last open stall, even if it is the only handicapped accessible one. Technically, yes, this person could wait for another stall to open up given they are not in a wheelchair, and perhaps the going opinion is that they should do so. However, if an individual is physically unable to use a urinal, which means his options have been limited a GREAT deal in some restrooms, I call that a pass into the handicap stall whether he is in a wheelchair or not. Should another stall be open, obviously, that is the preferred one to use. :)

Also, frequently, the only baby-changing table in the men's room is in the handicapped stall! :-D
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - greenmtnboy18 - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:31 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
wulfsdottir
Aug. 3rd, 2009 06:44 pm (UTC)
As a woman of a quite average size, I find that the regular stalls have often been designed in such a way that I either need to squash myself between the toilet and the wall or stand on the toilet just to shut the door.

This being the case where I work, I have decided that the designers consider me handicapped by virtue of not being a size 0, so I use the bigger stall when it's available. I do yield to those without the option of standing on the toilet.

Edited for holyrunonsentenceherrfledermaus.

Edited at 2009-08-03 06:45 pm (UTC)
(Deleted comment)
jimhines
Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:00 pm (UTC)
I wish the grab bar was mandatory. I'm close to people who can get around without the wheelchair, but get a great deal of pain sitting or standing without something to hold on to for support.

It scares me to think how much less accessible this country would be if not for that law.
(no subject) - jhetley - Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:21 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - jhetley - Aug. 3rd, 2009 09:58 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - aitchellsee - Aug. 4th, 2009 12:32 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jhetley - Aug. 4th, 2009 12:42 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - aitchellsee - Aug. 4th, 2009 12:55 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jhetley - Aug. 4th, 2009 02:01 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jhetley - Aug. 3rd, 2009 11:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 4th, 2009 12:10 am (UTC) - Expand
margaret_y
Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:24 pm (UTC)
re: point #2

(holding finger and thumb a milimeter apart) I am this close to asking my agent to sub my sf novel under a male pen name. Just to, you know, see what will happen. But would I then become part of the problem?
jimhines
Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:39 pm (UTC)
I am *so* not going to answer that question :-)

I do know some authors still write under pseudonyms or gender-neutral versions of their names. (J. K. Rowling?) But I can't say what would be best for your career. It might be something to bounce off of your agent and see what s/he thinks.
(no subject) - bookdraco - Aug. 4th, 2009 11:59 am (UTC) - Expand
georgmi
Aug. 3rd, 2009 07:24 pm (UTC)
A way to extract the answer to #3 without recourse to the PC Police is to compare the percentage of handicapped bathroom stalls (frequently as high as 50%) to the percentage of handicapped persons in the local population, and then do the same analysis for parking lot stalls (rarely as high as 5%). Then compare the relative costs to handicapped and able-bodied persons of not being allowed to use each stall type.

One finds that the likelihood of denying a stall to a handicapped person, times the cost to the handicapped person, minus the cost to the able-bodied person of not using the handicapped stall, is much, much higher for parking stalls than bathroom stalls.
(Deleted comment)
controuble
Aug. 3rd, 2009 08:27 pm (UTC)
Oh wow - I wasn't going to say anything about the hoop skirts (ren faire - Moi?) so I'm relieved to hear that's on the approved use list.
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:14 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - kyrielle - Aug. 4th, 2009 04:19 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - aitchellsee - Aug. 4th, 2009 03:41 am (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - aitchellsee - Aug. 4th, 2009 04:00 pm (UTC) - Expand
temporus
Aug. 3rd, 2009 08:23 pm (UTC)
I've noticed that often, the handicap stall is where they put the baby changing station*, at least in the men's room.

*Don't even get me started how often there isn't one in the men's bathroom at all, but there is one in the women's bathroom. I find that obnoxious, especially in such cases where there is an abundance of open wall space. They aren't terribly expensive.
barbarienne
Aug. 3rd, 2009 09:06 pm (UTC)
I imagine men with babies and no wife/girlfriend handy are extremely vexed by this as well. What are they supposed to do when a diaper needs to be changed?

I've seen a couple of malls that have, in addition to the usual men's and women's multiple-stall facilities, an individual bathroom with separate entrance. This bathroom door usually has a handicapped symbol and a little "family" symbol on it. It is equipped with assist bars and a Koala Kare station.

People whose children are toilet trained but very young have similar difficulties. My sister was once asked by a gentleman if she would be willing to escort his five-year-old daughter into the ladies' room at Shea Stadium. I could understand how he might not want to bring his little girl into the men's room with possible drunken rowdies, and clearly he could not walk into the women's room.
(no subject) - jonhansen - Aug. 4th, 2009 01:58 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kyrielle - Aug. 4th, 2009 04:24 am (UTC) - Expand
bondo_ba
Aug. 3rd, 2009 09:04 pm (UTC)
I'm going to make myself very unpopular here and state the naive view that the only valid way to judge a ToC is by the quality of the stories. Yes, I know that this is a completely outdated point of view, and that every single ToC must be inclusive.

As I said, I may be naive, and the editors of this volume might indeed be misogynist, racist fail-ers. But I seriously doubt it.

And if they chose the stories on merit, or because they like the way those authors write or whatever, then it's a perfectly acceptable ToC. I really don't want to live in a world in which an editor has to say "oh, no! We've selected the stories we like and there are no minorities / women / white people / aliens from alpha centauri in the mix. Get rid of one of the good stories and put a lesser story in that fits!"

That would be very bad - just as bad as rejecting a story because a minority wrote it or a woman. I know this is an emotional subject, but please people, THINK before you scream fail.
barbarienne
Aug. 3rd, 2009 09:15 pm (UTC)
I think the question is: what are the odds that the 21 most mindblowing SF stories are all by men? Including the five that were commissioned specifically for this collection?

The very best possible interpretation would be that the editor happens to like a particular sort of story, and that sort of story, for reasons that may or may not have to do with societal pressures, tends to be written by men.

However, when collecting stories for an anthology, an editor is supposed to think of his (or her) target audience, and choose stories that will appeal to them. So does the editor think that fans of mind-blowing SF stories would not find Nancy Kress, Elizabeth Bear, James Tiptree Jr, or Ursula LeGuin as mind-blowing as everyone else on that list?
(no subject) - bondo_ba - Aug. 3rd, 2009 09:29 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 09:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bondo_ba - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - melissajm - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:17 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 3rd, 2009 10:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bondo_ba - Aug. 4th, 2009 01:12 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 4th, 2009 01:25 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bondo_ba - Aug. 4th, 2009 01:59 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - jimhines - Aug. 4th, 2009 11:24 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - livia_llewellyn - Aug. 4th, 2009 12:08 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bondo_ba - Aug. 4th, 2009 12:59 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - livia_llewellyn - Aug. 4th, 2009 10:26 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - (Anonymous) - Aug. 4th, 2009 11:51 pm (UTC) - Expand
margaret_y
Aug. 3rd, 2009 11:49 pm (UTC)
The most mindblowing SF story I ever read was "Bloodchild" by Octavia Butler. I read it years ago and am still haunted by it. Were I to edit an anthology (of my own opinion of) mindblowing SF, that story would be included.
wyjoe
Aug. 4th, 2009 02:09 pm (UTC)
To that I would add "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," by Le Guin. As problematic as that story is, it is mindblowing in its own way.
melissajm
Aug. 4th, 2009 12:06 am (UTC)
I never would've even thought of that as including hand tags. Whaddaya know.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( 89 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

Snoopy
jimhines
Jim C. Hines
Website

Tags

Latest Month

November 2018
S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow