Facebook

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Do the Words "Geek" and "Tattoo" Go Together?

If someone says the word “tattoo,” what do you picture?

A.    A big Harley-Davidson motorcyclist with a skull and crossbones hidden under his black leather jacket?

B.     A twenty-six-year-old girl with a small butterfly on her ankle?

C.     A gang member proudly displaying his number of kills with tattooed teardrops on his face?

D.    A working-girl showing off a tramp stamp to prospective customers on her street corner?

E.     An Indian geek with an ORACLE brand tattoo splayed across his unimpressive abs?

If you chose answer “E,” you’re obviously up with the latest in tattoo trends. Dean Nelson of the UK Telegraph recently reported that Indian employees of high-tech companies are getting company logos tattooed on their bodies in order to celebrate being hired by these prestigious firms. Even when they take other jobs, they keep the tattoo as a permanent reminder of their success. 

I suspect that this may be a cultural trend that will not transfer to U.S. employees. Americans, on the whole, tend to frown on the “branding” of anything but cattle, and I’m sure PETA doesn’t like that practice much, either. Looking back at our history, it is difficult to view the branding of humans as anything less than a symbol of slavery. American workers may like their jobs at Microsoft or Google, but I just don’t see an employee willingly having “IBM” tattooed on an arm or leg. Of course, employees who don’t like their jobs may choose to have their employer’s logo tattooed on the place where they sit; there would be a certain satisfaction in that, don’t you think?
 
Telegraph Article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10062046/Bangalores-IT-workers-start-tech-tattoo-craze.html

Tattoo Photo: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/media/photo/2012-04/69563152.jpg

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

North American Wood Apes

Sign on Pikes Peak Highway  
Photograph by Ashish S. Hareet/Wikimedia Commons
An important announcement follows. Now pay attention!

The organization formerly known as the “Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy” will from here-on-out be known as the “North American Wood Ape Conservancy.” That is all.

Just kidding. Comments must be made, no?

First, it is a fact that the designation “Bigfoot” has become a derogatory term. Furthermore, people who hunt “Bigfoot” are often victimized by uneducated persons who make rude comments.

“Bigfoot” is normally pictured as an ape-like creature that walks on two legs and leaves enormous footprints in mud and snow. Since there is no scientific proof that these creatures exist, many people consider “Bigfoot” to be as real as ghosts, the Loch Ness Monster, and Donald Trump’s hair. But – and this is a BIG but – what if there is enough circumstantial evidence surrounding the mythology of “Bigfoot” to make a case that “Bigfoot” is indeed real?

Consider, if you will: What if “Bigfoot” is actually a “North American Wood Ape?” And what if the “North American Wood Ape” is actually a human genetic “cousin” or even an evolutionary ancestor of Homo sapiens? What are the anthropological and sociological ramifications of finding such a living creature? Further, are people who seek the “North American Wood Ape” as barmy as the people who seek “Bigfoot?”

This is a serious issue that deserves some serious consideration. Until proof is found of the existence of either “Bigfoot” or a “North American Wood Ape,” I believe that it is only fair to err on the side of politeness. I, for one, will now refer to all such animals and/or imaginary beings as “the creatures formerly known as Bigfoot.”