David Raffin

A haircut story

A few years ago I got a haircut at a home salon which advertised with a homemade sign planted at the side of the driveway.
I was sat in the chair and prepped. She started cutting. Within seconds she attempted small talk.
“So, you have a girlfriend?”
“No,” I said.
“Why not!” she said loudly. “Are you the gay?”

That is my friend Jodi‘s favorite story about me getting a haircut. But, in all fairness, it may be my only story about me getting a haircut.

(see also this story about a robot barber)

When I was but a lad.

An excerpt from Shards, WIP.

When I was but a lad. My cat killed a rat. The rat was left outside the door. I stepped outside the door, wearing no shoes, and ended up with the rat attached to the bottom of my foot. I hopped about on one foot. The other foot, with rat attached, hanging in the air. The rat, dead though it was, would not let go.

Obama meets with Bush – a meeting of the minds

Obama meets with Bush to get advice about how to proceed in Syria.

Obama: I don’t understand. I mean, you made it all seem so easy. How do I get approval for military action in Syria?

Bush: Your mistake is in asking for permission. If you want to bomb a country, you just do it.

Obama: I see. You’re saying “it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission.”

Bush: Exactly. (Pause) What’s forgiveness?

Love, Rejected

By David Raffin
My petition for love was denied by the central authority which handles such petitions.

It used to be that these standard rejections came by certified mail and were printed in ornate script on fine paper. Today they all come by text message. Still, they carry with them the same tradition. They are summary rejections. And they are form letters.

If someone were to travel forward from 100 years in the past they would recognize them immediately. “That is a standard rejection of a petition for love, sent by the bureau that handles such,” they would say. But then they would add, “Where is the ornate script and fine paper?” And they would look sad. Because 100 years ago we were a more tactile people appreciative of ornate flourishes. Even if there was, as today, a shortage of love.

A traveler from 500 years earlier would not recognize either rejection. Modern love had not yet been invented. It is a bittersweet fact.

At least in the electronic age one need not stand in the terrible lines at the petition office. As early as a decade ago people still had to queue up in line for hours to qualify for the chance at rejection. People did this, as today, for the slim hope that their petition would be granted.

The form rejection lists a reason. The reason is never revealed outright but instead a reference is made to a number. The number corresponds to a large reference which holds all the reasons rejection may be made. There are 100 volumes in question. The reasons for rejection are, some say, innumerable, but in reality they mostly break down to endless variations on three reasons which no one likes to discuss. Most people do not bother to look up the reference number listed in their rejection.

Mine was V.21.12.91. “Rejected for tendency to look up and contemplate facts and figures.”

We all know people whose petitions for love have been, or seem to have been, granted. It is commonly thought that some petitions are granted only to make the system seem viable. In fact, these successful petitions have a high failure rate. There is a complaint bureau. It is housed on the top floor of the tallest building in the world. There is no elevator. When you arrive at the single window you find it empty with a sign that says, “No Returns.”

There has always been a shortage of love and that is why a system of rationing has been set up. To preserve love by careful denial.
The truth is there has been no new love manufactured since 1992. All the love in the world is used. And second-hand love has a resale value which can only be classified as pitiful.

http://davidraffin.com

“Non-human electoral candidates”

Our old friend Wikipedia provides a page listing non-human electoral candidates, including Pigasus who was a candidate for president of the United States in 1968.

Pigasus and the Yippies were charged with disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, and bringing a pig to Chicago. At the trial, defense counsel William Kunstler accused the Democratic Party of doing exactly the same thing.

The trial transcript provides this exchange between Kunstler and folk singer Phil Ochs.

MR. KUNSTLER: Did you have any role yourself in that?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I helped select the pig, and I paid for him.
MR. KUNSTLER: Now, did you find a pig at once when you went out?
THE WITNESS: No, it was very difficult. We stopped at several farms and asked where the pigs were.
MR. KUNSTLER: None of the farmers referred you to the police station, did they?
THE WITNESS: No.
MR. FORAN: Objection.
THE COURT: I sustain the objection…
MR. KUNSTLER: Would you state what, if anything, happened to the pig?
THE WITNESS: The pig was arrested with seven people.
MR. KUNSTLER: When did that take place?
THE WITNESS: This took place on the morning of August 23, at the Civic Center underneath the Picasso sculpture.
MR. KUNSTLER: Who were those seven people?
THE WITNESS: Jerry Rubin. Stew Albert, Wolfe Lowenthal, myself is four; I am not sure of the names of the other three.
MR. KUNSTLER: What were you doing when you were arrested?
THE WITNESS: We were arrested announcing the pig’s candidacy for President.
MR. KUNSTLER: Did Jerry Rubin speak?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Jerry Rubin was reading a prepared speech for the pig—the opening sentence was something like, “I, Pigasus, hereby announce my candidacy for the Presidency of the United States.” He was interrupted in his talk by the police who arrested us…
MR. KUNSTLER: Do you remember what you were charged with?
THE WITNESS: I believe the original charge mentioned was something about an old Chicago law about bringing livestock into the city, or disturbing the peace, or disorderly conduct, and when it came time for the trial, I believe the charge was disorderly conduct.
MR. KUNSTLER: Were you informed by a police officer that the pig had squealed on you?
THE WITNESS: Yes.

[amazon asin=B004VN7RN0&template=iframe image] [amazon asin=B001AXU1FA&template=iframe image] [amazon asin=067120601X&template=iframe image]

[The genesis of this post being a link
from Sara Lachman greatfully acnowledged.]