• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary navigation
  • Skip to footer

The JackB

"When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun'." Groucho Marx

  • About Jack
    • Other Places You Can Find Me
  • Contact Me
    • Disclosure
  • About Jack
    • Other Places You Can Find Me
  • Contact Me
    • Disclosure

Archives for June 2005

What We Can Learn From Einstein’s Brain

June 16, 2005 by Jack Steiner 2 Comments

I have been waiting for several hours to blog about this story. You can find it on the Los Angeles Times here or on Yahoo! here.

The title of the article is actually Deep, Dark Secrets of His and Her Brains and I found it to be fascinating.

“Sandra Witelson had studied scores of brains looking for gender differences. Then she found one that made a difference: Einstein’s.
By Robert Lee Hotz, Times Staff Writer

HAMILTON, Canada — The invitation curled from her fax machine, a courtly question scrawled above the signature of a man whose name she did not recognize.

“Would you be willing to collaborate with me on studying the brain of Albert Einstein?”
It was signed Thomas Harvey. Sandra Witelson did not hesitate.

She wrote “yes” on the piece of paper and faxed it back.

“It never occurred to me that it might be a joke,” she recalled. “I knew that Albert Einstein’s brain had been preserved and that it was somewhere where someone was looking after it.”

Part of me is a little putoff by this, but I imagine that a scientist like Einstein would appreciate it.

“For 40 years, Harvey, a retired pathologist from Princeton, N.J., had been the quixotic custodian of the 20th century’s most famous brain.

In 1955, he had conducted a routine autopsy of Einstein after the 76-year-old physicist died at Princeton Hospital. The remains were to be cremated. Harvey, however, decided to preserve the organ responsible for the theory of relativity and the principle of the atomic bomb.

It was not such an unusual thing to do. Einstein’s ophthalmologist had removed the scientist’s eyeballs and put them in a safe-deposit box. Earlier acquisitive anatomists had preserved Galileo’s finger, Haydn’s head and Napoleon’s penis.

For Harvey, however, more than morbid curiosity was at work. He believed that the slippery worms of Einstein’s brain tissue, pickled in warm formalin, embodied some clue to the mystery of intelligence. He held on to that hope through 40 years of indecision.

Eventually, it led the soft-spoken Quaker to Witelson, a raven-haired Canadian psychologist with a taste for black leather and red showgirl nails.

She had brains, dozens of them — the largest collection of normal brains in the world.”

This is a long story, but very good, or so I think.

” When Witelson began acquiring human brains, sex was the last thing on her mind.

Inside her walk-in refrigerator at McMaster University here in Ontario, her collection filled three walls of metal shelves. The 125 putty-colored specimens sat in frosted jars and snap-top plastic tubs like quarts of boiled shrimp and wedges of cheese.

Every one posed a riddle that had shaped her research for 30 years: How does the structure of the brain influence intelligence?

A professor of psychiatry and neuroscience, Witelson grappled with such a fundamental mystery by studying a somewhat smaller one: why certain abilities develop on one side of the brain rather than the other.

The two hemispheres of the brain are almost symmetrical physically but can seem to be separate minds when it comes to awareness and mental processing. They even have different problem-solving styles, researchers report. Yet they work together seamlessly to produce a single mind.

By 1977, Witelson was trying to learn why language skills developed on the left side of the brain for all right-handers but on the right side for many left-handers.

To compare the two sides, she needed normal brains — more than anyone had gathered before.

For 10 years, she worked through a network of doctors and nurses, hoping to persuade terminal cancer patients to make a last contribution to medicine. Her research was funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

By 1987, 120 men and women had agreed to donate their brains after death. They all submitted to thorough psychological and intelligence tests so that each brain would be accompanied by a detailed profile of the mind that had animated it.”

I really wonder about so much of this. As people there are so many similarities between men and women, yet we are so vastly different that I cannot imagine that there are not fundamental differences in our brains.

“The brains in Witelson’s freezer are contested terrain in a controversy over gender equality and mental performance.

Her findings — published in Science, the New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet and other peer-reviewed journals — buttress the proposition that basic mental differences between men and women stem in part from physical differences in the brain.

Witelson is convinced that gender shapes the anatomy of male and female brains in separate but equal ways beginning at birth.

On average, she said, the brains of women and men are neither better nor worse, but they are measurably different.

Men’s brains, for instance, are typically bigger — but on the whole, no smarter.

“What is astonishing to me,” Witelson said, “is that it is so obvious that there are sex differences in the brain and these are likely to be translated into some cognitive differences, because the brain helps us think and feel and move and act.

“Yet there is a large segment of the population that wants to pretend this is not true.”

Sometimes people misunderstand that equality does not entail homogeneity.

No one knows how these neural differences between the sexes translate into thought and behavior — whether they might influence the way men and women perceive reality, process information, form judgments and behave socially.

But even at this relatively early stage in exploration of the brain’s microanatomy, battle lines between scientists, equal rights activists and educators have formed.
Some activists fear that research like Witelson’s could be used to justify discrimination based on gender differences, just as ill-conceived notions of human genetics once influenced laws codifying racial stereotypes about blacks, Asians and Jews.

Other experts argue that the physical differences Witelson observed may result not from the brain’s basic design but from conditioning that begins in infancy, when the brain produces neurons at a rate of half a million a minute and reaches out to make connections 2 million times a second.

Spurred by learning, neurons and synapses are ruthlessly pruned, a process that continues in fits and starts throughout adolescence, then picks up again in middle age.

“The brain is being sculpted gradually through sets of interactions,” said Anne Fausto-Sterling, a gender studies expert at Brown University. “Even when something in the brain appears biological, it may have come to be that way because of how the body has experienced the world.”

As Witelson’s research helped establish, however, the mental divide between the sexes is more complex and more rooted in the fundamental biology of the brain than many scientists once suspected.

In the last decade, studies of perception, cognition, memory and neural function have found apparent gender differences that often buck conventional prejudices.

Women’s brains, for instance, seem to be faster and more efficient than men’s.

All in all, men appear to have more gray matter, made up of active neurons, and women more of the white matter responsible for communication between different areas of the brain.

Overall, women’s brains seem to be more complexly corrugated, suggesting that more complicated neural structures lie within, researchers at UCLA found in August.

Men and women appear to use different parts of the brain to encode memories, sense emotions, recognize faces, solve certain problems and make decisions. Indeed, when men and women of similar intelligence and aptitude perform equally well, their brains appear to go about it differently, as if nature had separate blueprints, researchers at UC Irvine reported this year.

“If you find that men and women have fundamentally different brain architectures while still accomplishing the same things,” said neuroscientist Richard Haier, who conducted the study, “this challenges the assumption that all human brains are fundamentally the same.”

Yet, for the most part, scientists have been unable to document such patterns conclusively.

No one, however, had scrutinized as many brains as Witelson.

Detailing Differences

She began by studying the corpus callosum, the cable of nerves that channels all communication and cooperation between the brain’s two hemispheres.

Examining tissue samples through a microscope, she discovered that the more left-handed a person was, the bigger the corpus callosum.

To her surprise, however, she found that this held true only for men. Among women there was no difference between right-handers and left-handers.

“Once you find this one difference,” she remembered thinking, “it implies that there will be a cascade of differences.”

As a Jewish man I can appreciate the concern about using science to try and justify discrimination, but at the same time I cannot justify not engaging in research that has so much potential to help people.

Since this article is so long I am only going to post a couple more sections, but I encourage you to read the whole thing.

“Researchers at the Moscow Brain Institute measured dozens of the most brilliant brains. Vladimir Lenin, the leader of Russia’s Soviet revolution, had a brain weighing about 3 pounds, they determined. The brain of writer Ivan Turgenev weighed 4.4 pounds. That of satirist Anatole France was 2.1 pounds.
At Princeton Hospital, Harvey weighed Einstein’s brain on a grocer’s scale. It was 2.7 pounds — less than the average adult male brain.

He had the fragile organ infused with fixative and dissected it into 240 pieces, each containing about two teaspoons of cerebral tissue. He shaved off 1,000 hair-thin slivers to be mounted on microscope slides for study.

For years, Harvey agonized over how next to proceed. His odd pursuit inspired two books: “Possessing Genius” by Carolyn Abraham and “Driving Mr. Albert” by Michael Paterniti. Through the decades, however, he drifted in obscurity.

Finally in 1985, pioneering neuroanatomist Marion Diamond at UC Berkeley persuaded him to part with four small plugs of brain tissue. Diamond discovered that the physicist’s brain had more cells servicing, supporting and nurturing each neuron than did 11 other brains she studied. These unusual cells were in a region associated with mathematical and language skills.

When they published their findings, the researchers speculated that these neurons might help explain Einstein’s “unusual conceptual powers.”

Critics contended the study was riddled with flaws, its findings meaningless.

Eventually, Harvey mailed bits of Einstein’s motor cortex to a researcher at the University of Alabama, who reported that the cortex appeared to be thinner than normal but with more tightly packed neurons.

Had it simply been compacted by time and storage conditions?

DNA testing revealed nothing. The preservative fluids apparently had scrambled Einstein’s genetic code.”

Still intrigued? Keep reading.

“Witelson and her colleagues carefully compared the 40-year-old tissue samples with dozens of normal male and female brains in her collection. She also compared them with brains from eight elderly men to account for any changes due to Einstein’s age at the time of his death.

She found that one portion of Einstein’s brain perhaps related to mathematical reasoning — the inferior parietal region — was 15% wider than normal.

Witelson also found that it lacked a fissure that normally runs along the length of the brain. The average human brain has two distinct parietal lobe compartments; Einstein’s had one.

Perhaps the synapses in this area were more densely interconnected.

“Maybe this was one of the underlying factors in his brilliance,” she said. “Maybe that is how it works.”

She took it as confirmation of her suspicions about the anatomy of intelligence. If there were differences affecting normal mental ability, they would show up in the arrangements of synapses at particular points in the brain.

Einstein, she was convinced, had been born with a one-in-a-billion brain.

“We suggest that the differences we see are present at birth,” Witelson said. “It is not a consequence of environmental differences.”

She turned again to the brains in her refrigerator. Wherever she looked, she began to see evidence of how microanatomy might underlie variations in mental abilities.

As she matched the brain specimens to the intellectual qualities of their owners, she discovered that differences in the size of the corpus callosum were linked to IQ scores for verbal ability, but only in women. She found that memory was linked to how tightly neurons were packed, but only in men.

Witelson determined that brain volume decreased with age among men, but hardly at all among women. Moreover, those anatomical changes appeared to be closely tied to a gradual decline in mental performance in men. “There is something going on in the male brain,” she said, “that is not going on in the female brain.”

So what I have taken from this article is a number of things. 1) Men and women have significant differences in our brains- no cracks please- and Einstein’s brain was literally different than other people.

So what did you think?

Filed Under: Uncategorized

I Have Pac-Man Fever

June 16, 2005 by Jack Steiner Leave a Comment

Folks we have reached the auspicious occasion of Pac-Man’s 25th birthday. The little yellow fiend has been dazzling us for a quarter of a century now and here at the Shack we are proud to shake his hand whisper congratulations.

For a more comprehensive story you could read this or rely upon my selections to feed your famine.

“But there was more to Pac-Man’s broad appeal than eating dots and dodging on-screen archrivals Blinky, Pinky, Inky and Clyde.

“This was the first time a player took on a persona in the game. Instead of controlling inanimate objects like tanks, paddles and missile bases, players now controlled a ‘living’ creature,” says Leonard Herman, author of “Phoenix: The Rise and Fall of Videogames.” “It was something that people could identify, like a hero.”

It all began in Japan, when Toru Iwatani, a young designer at Namco, caught inspiration from a pizza that was missing a slice. Puck-Man, as it was originally called, was born. Because of obvious similarities to a certain four-letter profanity, “Puck” became “Pac” when it debuted in the U.S. in 1980.”

I love this kind of trivia.

“Billy Mitchell, the first and only person known to play a perfect game of Pac-Man (he racked up a score of 3,333,360 after clearing all 256 levels in more than six hours in 1999, according to video game record keepers Twin Galaxies) says Pac’s popularity was in its nonviolent simplicity.”

Ok, I could go for the obvious slam at Billy, but I won’t because that could have been me. But I will say that I haven’t ever heard of Twin Galaxies, not that they care because they probably haven’t heard of me either. But there was a time in which I would have given my eyeteeth and my allowance to work in a place that let me play video games for a living.

Billions of quarters later, Pac-Man’s influence continues.

As part of a final project for a class in New York University’s Interactive Telecommunications graduate program last year, students with cell phones and Wi-Fi Internet connections mimicked the game, tracking their movements on a grid spanning several city blocks.

They called this analog re-enactment, where four people dressed as ghosts searched for Pac-Man on the streets around New York’s Washington Square Park, Pac-Manhattan.

“We never had anyone clear the entire board,” said Frank Lantz, a game designer who taught the course.”

Sounds like fun. I wonder if we couldn’t duplicate this on a national level and call it Ultimate Pac-Man live. It could be reality television at its finest.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

The Answer To Victoria’s Secret

June 16, 2005 by Jack Steiner 2 Comments

The Answer To Victoria’s Secret is quite simple. Victoria is actually a man named Victor. He is 47 years-old, wears a very thick black beard and is around 5’8 220 pounds. That should explain why you never see him wearing his own merchandise.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

A Few Odds and Ends To Share with you

June 16, 2005 by Jack Steiner 5 Comments

Here are assorted odds and ends to share with you, the reader.

I stumbled across a show that I think is just ridiculous, but funny. I could not help myself, I had to watch bits and pieces of it. It is called Dancing With the Stars and it just made me chuckle.

Dancing with the Stars is a totally unique and original series that pairs a celebrity with a professional dance partner as they train and then compete in front of a studio audience in a televised dance competition. The pairs will be judged by a panel of experts and also by viewers at home, with one couple being eliminated each week.”


Just what I wanted to see, a parody of The Surreal Life in which stars who no longer have it try to strut their stuff. Let me tell you, this is no Dance Fever and certainly no Solid Gold. Somewhere Deney Terio is tearing hair out. For that matter if you looked at the Deney Terio link you’ll see that the man had a couple of interesting roles in his post Dance Fever life such as playing Khan`s Crewman #11 in Star Trek- The Wrath of Khan.

BeFrank was accosted by Michael Jackson fanatics. Show him some love and let him know that he would have been justified in laying some of these people out. The only person I find stranger and scarier than Michael is the woman who released the doves as the verdict in the case was read. Ok, scratch that, I find the whole lot of them to be unhinged. Who quits their job to sit in front of a courthouse to pray for his being exonerated. I still enjoy a few of his songs. I am not afraid to admit it, but the only thing harder to watch than this spectacle is Evander Holyfield on Dancing With The Stars.

Treppenwitz wrote about the Carnival of the Blind Dates. I did a piss poor job of describing one of my worst, but enjoyed reading about the others, especially kakarizz who shared the following tale:

I still get a chill when I remember my worst blind date, It was the second. She was Ethiopian and came from a very insecure part of the city and I had to go get her from her dad’s place (even worsened the situation). I’m just about to reach her house, very much ontime (atleast I knew her place), when a gang of 10-13 hoodlums armed with crude weapons pounce on me [4 is manageable but anything more than a 6-man gang is def. not even worth raising an alarm for] – they took my new pair of jeans and my shirt. Yup! that left me half naked…oh! did I mention they took my shoes too, so after they leave(casually) and I walk up to the girls house – shock on me!! – the dad opens the gate and immediatley closes it, obviously thinking I was a mad-man, even after requesting to talk to the girl as he walked back to the house..I borrow some pants, t-shirt and tyre-made sandals(that’s all the charcoal dealer had to give) in sheer frustration and promise to return them (yeah right!!) and WALK all the way back to my house just to find 10 missed calls from her and a voice mail saying she’s no longer interested, I WASTED ALL HER TIME!!…..The rest is History”


The Shmata Queen survived a day with the doc and her daughter’s surgery. Glad to hear that. But it could have been worse, she could have been forced to move back to cleveland, which is as we all know the Native American term for Latrine. Cuyahoga is their word for toilet paper and it refers to the tree bark they used for, well you know.

I have been participating in a group blog over here. I have enjoyed it, but I am wondering if anyone besides those of us participating are reading it.

Vince is currently engaging in heresy and blasphemy. She has given up a car. WTF is up with that. Ok, I understand what is up with that, but I am a true Californian and I won’t give my car up ever and even then it won’t happen. I ran across an ’73 Fleetwood Convertible not so long ago and played around with the idea of buying it. I have great memories of driving a boat like that. It is Summer, good music blasting from the stereo and a dozen of the boys and I cruising up the coast. Good times.

One of these days I’ll have to blog about the time we rented two 31 foot Winnebagos and drove them from LA to San Francisco. I parked one of those bad boys at Fisherman’s Wharf. We barely made it through the gate, or should I say that I barely made it work. I was 21 and I had about 18 drunk college boys in the back. For a while there was a keg in the bathroom.

Let me tell you how much fun it was to tap on the brakes when some of those boys staggered into the head. Hee hee. It is stories like these that make me wonder who let me become a parent. My children are going to have to work hard to fool me, I have done so many different things. Of course they are both smarter than I am, so it may not be that hard.

Time to get some shuteye. Here is a list of what I have been listening to tonight. Sorry for the formatting issues.


Remember When Alan Jackson
Uninvited Alanis Morissette
Golden Slumbers The Beatles
In My Life The Beatles
Save a Horse (Ride a Cowboy) Big & Rich
Lean on Me Bill Withers
Knockin’ on Heaven’s Door Bob Dylan
Subterranean Homesick Blues Bob Dylan
Lay, Lady, Lay Bob Dylan
The Fire Inside Bob Seger
Whiskey Lullaby Brad Paisley
Born To Run Bruce Springsteen
Tunnel Of Love Bruce Springsteen
The Boys Of Summer Don Henley
Suspicious Minds Elvis Presley
Burning Love Elvis Presley
Cry Faith Hill
It Was A Very Good Year Frank Sinatra
My Way Frank Sinatra
If You Could Read My Mind Gordon Lightfoot
Boulevard of Broken Dreams Green Day
Good Riddance (Time of Your Life) Green Day
Ring Of Fire Johnny Cash
(Ghost) Riders In The Sky Johnny Cash
Ghost Riders in the Sky Johnny Cash & Willie Nelson
Mr. Brightside The Killers
Your Time Is Gonna Come Led Zeppelin
Nobody’s Fault But Mine Led Zeppelin
What’s Going On Marvin Gaye
Visions of Paradise Mick Jagger
Beautiful Moby
Float On Modest Mouse
Hard to Handle Otis Redding
Always on My Mind Pet Shop Boys
Come Talk to Me Peter Gabriel
Secret World Peter Gabriel
I Want To Break Free Queen
A Song For You Ray Charles
Crazy Love Ray Charles & Van Morrison
Young Turks Rod Stewart
Forever Young Rod Stewart
Crying Roy Orbison
Walk On [Live] U2
Where the Streets Have No Name (Live from Rotterdam) U2
Love Ain’t for Keepin’ The Who
Hey Jude Wilson Pickett
Mustang Sally Wilson Pickett

As Good As I Once Was Toby Keith

Filed Under: Bathroom Stuff, Random Thoughts

Blogging and Your Employer

June 15, 2005 by Jack Steiner 7 Comments

I thought that this article on USA TODAY was interesting, but not earth shattering.

“Like a growing number of employees, Peter Whitney decided to launch a blog on the Internet to chronicle his life, his friends and his job at a division of Wells Fargo.

Then he began taking jabs at a few people he worked with.

His blog, gravityspike.blogspot.com, did find an audience: his bosses. In August 2004, the 27-year-old was fired from his job handling mail and the front desk, he says, after managers learned of his Web log, or blog.

His story is more than a cautionary tale. Delta Air Lines, Google and other major companies are firing and disciplining employees for what they say about work on their blogs, which are personal sites that often contain a mix of frank commentary, freewheeling opinions and journaling.

And it’s hardly just an issue for employees: Some major employers such as IBM are now passing first-of-their-kind employee blogging guidelines designed to prevent problems, such as the online publishing of trade secrets, without stifling the kinds of blogs that can also create valuable buzz about a company.

“Right now, it’s too gray. There needs to be clearer guidelines,” says Whitney, who has found another job. “Some people go to a bar and complain about workers, I decided to do it online. Some people say I deserve what happened, but it was really harsh. It was unfair.”

Wells Fargo declined to comment, but a spokeswoman said in an e-mail that the company doesn’t have a blogging policy.”

I have intentionally been very careful not to reveal any specific details about my employer and or job because I just don’t want to have to deal with this. I find much of this to be truly distasteful.

By much of this I mean that to include internet and email policies as well as blogging. It is the impingement on my ability to express myself that irks me, but at the same time I recognize that due to liability issues few companies if any will allow an anything goes environment.

But during these early days there is a real problem in not having clearly established policy.

“Employers are just beginning to wake up to the potential risks that blogs pose.

“The law is trying to catch up with the technology,” says Allison Hift, a telecommunications and technology lawyer in Miami. “This is like what we saw a few years ago with employers passing polices about e-mail. Now we’re seeing it with Web logs.”

The concerns are myriad. Employees who create blogs set up a direct way to communicate about their company with the public, because customers and clients can stumble across a blog. (Blogs often jump to the top of search engines because they are updated often.) Bloggers may spill trademark or copyright material on their sites, they may post pictures of yet-to-be-released products, and they may libel or slander another employee or a client.

A blogger can even get the ear of Congress. Douglas Roberts, a computer scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M., started a blog (lanl-the-real-story.blogspot.com), and anonymous posters blasted management as incompetent. During a House subcommittee hearing in May, the blog was mentioned in a discussion about the fate of the nuclear research facility.

“I was quite surprised. I had no idea it would be this popular,” Roberts says, adding that lab management has been supportive of his blog and that he believes blog policies in general are unnecessary.

Says lab spokesman Kevin Roark: “Open, honest, constructive discussion of issues is a good thing … (but) the personal attacks were unnecessary and disappointing.”

A number of employment lawyers, such as Hift, and bloggers, such as Whitney, are urging companies to enact guidelines and communicate blogging rules to employees. Some companies are doing just that: In May, IBM unveiled blogging guidelines for its 329,000 employees. The guidelines state that employees should identify themselves (and, when relevant, their roles at IBM) when blogging about IBM.

“You must make it clear that you are speaking for yourself and not on behalf of IBM,” the guidelines state. They also say bloggers should not use “ethnic slurs, personal insults, obscenity, etc.” and that they should “show proper consideration” for “topics that may be considered objectionable or inflammatory — such as politics and religion.”

Others such as Microsoft have no formal guidelines specifically on blogging, but do encourage blogging as a way for employees to reach out to customers and clients. Says Jeff Sandquist, a group manager at Microsoft: “It’s great. It’s instant feedback. … We give a lot of support to blogging and on how to be a good blogger.”

I do not agree with the doom and gloom crowd that says that this is the end of free speech. To begin with, if you are blogging at the office there are a multitude of issues and ethics involved in that, not to mention that you are telling your IT department and company all about your blog. In effect you open yourself up and invite comment.

It is possible to blog from other places and to speak about the office, but you have to be careful with the details and specific information in your posts. Nothing profound there, just common sense.

Filed Under: Blogging

Frustration And Violation

June 15, 2005 by Jack Steiner 6 Comments

Earlier this week I wrote about the theft of my wife’s purse and the anger we felt, especially in regard to the attack on my children. They were not physically harmed, but a piece of their childhood was taken, a little chunk of innocence.

I promised myself that I would not spend too much time harping on this and for the most part I have been successful, but there have been a few frustrating moments at the office.

My office is small so it is hard to keep a secret. The incident is not a secret, but not something that I have run around telling people because I just don’t feel the need to do that. However word has gotten out and people have strolled in and out of my office to let me know that they are sorry about this.

I appreciate the sentiment but have a bone to pick. Several of them have made comments to the effect of “you did the right thing but I would have made a big scene and not allowed them to leave the store.”

It irks me because I don’t appreciate the subtle suggestion that I could have prevented things if I had handled it differently or the lack of appreciation/understanding about how fast it all took place. And it bothers me because to a certain extent I feel like I failed in my responsibility and obligation to my family.

So I have decided to vent a little and express a few thoughts about what I could have done differently.

When I confronted the couple I could have been more aggressive and insisted that they empty their pockets to prove their innocence. Of course had they refused I would have had little recourse other than to resort to a physical struggle.

The vibe I got from the man involved here made me think that I was moments away from a fight. I am not proud to say that I have had a number of fist fights in my life, I have. I know how to take care of myself. But it has been a good 16 years or so since the last time I really got into it with someone and this situation was entirely different.

I have responsibilities now. I don’t know if he or someone in his party had a gun or a knife. Maybe they did or maybe they didn’t. And even if I jumped on top of this guy and punched his lights out there is no telling what could have happened. Store security or bystanders could have gotten involved and made things worse.

In short a fight would have meant risking my safety and could have even resulted in my being arrested and or prosecuted because this would not have been a fight on the schoolyard. A fist fight in the real world means that you go hard and fast and you assume that your adversary is going to try and maim/kill you. People are crazy, you just don’t know.

Since there was no physical threat to my family or myself there really was no reason to get into a fistfight over this. And from a sidenote but probably even more important to me, I don’t want my family to see me like that. I don’t want my son to be frightened or to think that fighting is going to be an appropriate way to solve a problem.

But let me also make it clear that I do have some regret that I did not get a chance to introduce his head to my fist and his body to the floor. The police have video footage of him and if it is possible to catch him I will do everything that I can to see that he his prosecuted and that he reaps the fruits of his labor.

I work too fucking hard. I bought my house without any assistance from anyone. I bought my cars, furniture and tons of other stuff on my own. And the few loans that I have now or had in the past are always taken care of because I am not some kind of lowlife, dirtbag, scum sucker in dire need of a good asskicking.

So if you encounter me in person and you offer your condolences know that I appreciate it, but also know that at some point I am going to bite someone’s head off if they return to that stupid comment about what I could have or should have done.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Page 7
  • Page 8
  • Page 9
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 14
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

Things Someone Wrote

The Fabulous Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Jack Steiner

 

Loading Comments...