It was just another day at the office. Then the phone started ringing and the caseload kept growing...on today's show, your favorite Planet Money gumshoes investigate your listener questions. | Fill out our listener survey here.
This was still in circulation at a public library as of this writing. Yikes! You will notice that most of the examples are no longer relevant. (Oh Hello AltaVista! It’s been a while since you and I chatted. A librarian never forgets her first search engine.)
This book would have been a decent purchase back in 1996. It is a real deep dive, with emphasis on the research. This book was written for the business folks rather than the tech people. I also think this was written to help make the business case for the brick and mortar crowd that just didn’t get the technology.
Why it is still in a public library collection gathering dust is a mystery…
Hovertext: My 8 year old found this on my drawing board and thought it was comedy gold. However, I think she was just laughing at the idea of vandalism, which has me worried.
Today's News:
Oh my goodness, friends. Something very cool happened today with a book project I have kept secret for a long time, but which will be revealed soon.
The U.S. House voted to authorize the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to begin planning for the massive coastal barrier project in Galveston Bay, but funding is not yet secured. The largest civil engineering project in U.S. history would permanently alter the Texas coast.
As a teenager, Chewey Clinton unexpectedly tells a friend a secret he has been holding on to for years, and the friend reacts in the best way possible.
Good morning. Houston’s heat wave will continue for the foreseeable future, at least through the early part of next week and possibly longer. Temperatures will peak this weekend, likely reaching 100 degrees for much of the area and setting numerous records. With high pressure dominating, rain chances will continue to remain low to non-existent.
This morning I’d also like to address what might perhaps be best characterized as “tropics silly season.” This is when “scary” maps showing a large hurricane striking Texas or other parts of the Gulf coast are shared on social media, as has been happening this week. These forecast maps are typically not falsified. They’re real products, but they are not representative of reality. What I mean is that the computer model has indeed generated such an output, but this output often comes at 12-, or 14-, or even 16-days after initialization, and therefore simply no longer bears any reality toward what will happen. Weather models simply cannot provide this specific of a forecast, that far out.
They key to spotting such tropical scare fodder is to look at the forecast hour of the output. If it is greater than 240 hours (10 days) it can safely be discounted. Take the forecast below from the US Global Forecast System model, which came out on Wednesday morning. Now the GFS model has plenty of uses, but it has a known bias for generating phantom storms at this time of year. Anyone sharing this is doing so out of ignorance, at best, and malevolence, at worst.
On the face of it this model output looks intimidating. But note the forecast hour, 360. That means it’s a forecast for 15 days from now. (Tropical Tidbits)
The bottom line is that the model may indeed be picking up on increasing tropical moisture in the Caribbean Sea or Gulf of Mexico in about 10 days time. And something may come of it. But the most likely scenario, by far, is that anything tropical that forms would stay away from the upper Texas coast.
Thursday
Today will be hot and sunny, with high temperatures in the upper 90s. The heat index will near dangerous levels this afternoon so please take care outside. Overnight lows will fall into the upper 70s, except for the coast which will remain in the low-80s. Winds will be light, out of the south.
High temperatures on Saturday will be downright uncomfortable. (Weather Bell)
Friday, Saturday, and Sunday
More of the same. I’d expect the heat to peak on Saturday and Sunday, with high temperatures reaching 100 degrees for much of the area.
Next week
As winds turn more southerly, we probably will see high temperatures drop back into the upper-90s, and possibly mid-90s. I don’t see much of a chance for a pattern change until at least the second half of next week, and even then it seems that our weather is unlikely to change a whole lot. We shall see.
I haven’t been to a Chuck E. Cheese since my kids ditched the franchise for the mall and Chipotle. I drive past one almost every day and still get a little misty-eyed. I miss the instant-print images of my kids as cheerleaders or hockey players. I miss the excitement of a cup of grimy tokens and watching my children debate between a Transformers cinch sack or pastel cotton candy that cost the equivalent of sixty bucks. I do not miss the overhead tubes that smelled inexplicably of diapers AND cigarettes or the almost-fear of being punched over a ticket dispute or the time my mother slot-machined two cups of tokens in five minutes.
I also confess I miss the pizza. I miss eating it while being sung to by a set of animatronic figures in a rural Oklahoma barn. Recently, the parenting nostalgia gods smiled on me at Kroger when someone discarded a wilting frozen pizza at the self-checkout. It wasn’t just any pizza. I was surprised to find a familiar creepy mouse, bright colors, a free token certificate, and the magic words: Chuck E. Cheese Cheese Frozen Pizza. The “Cheese Cheese” felt instantly fun fun.
I’ve resisted ordering Chuck E. Cheese pizza through their faux pizza store (Pasquale’s Pizza) designed to make adults feel better about ordering Chuck E. Cheese pizza at home. I’ve also been tricked before with restaurant-offerings-gone-grocery-store; Cheesecake Factory bread is only good in a Cheesecake Factory. But this was Chuck E. Cheese frozen pizza; I had to take the chance at reliving the glory days of an elementary school Saturday. I pushed my wonky cart back to the freezer case and found a box of cheese cheese pizza. My Kroger only carried cheese but there is a pepperoni version somewhere out there, perhaps stored in that barn.
When I got home with my frozen bounty, neither kid was interested. Beyond their “we’ve outgrown Chuck E.Cheese” status, I’ve also never quite mastered the magic of making a frozen pizza taste good. The Chuck E. Cheese Cheese frozen pizza would be no different. As it cooked, I asked Alexa to play theme park music to set the mood, and she played the "Alexa Song,” which somehow felt right. The crust was simultaneously burnt and raw, but the cheese and sauce were triumphs, turning into that memorable gooey fireball of a mess on the roof of my mouth. The sauce, however, was a little bit sweet and a little bit metallic-can-of-Raviolios. Our house was filled with that familiar smell of sweaty socks and sweaty tweens mixed with sweaty cheese: childhood on a foil-lined cookie sheet. I dropped some pennies in a red Solo cup and shook them for old times’ sake. Only the dogs came running.
I wondered if the frozen version of Chuck E. Cheese pizza is just leftover restaurant pizza repackaged for the parenting public. But it just feels like when American Girl started selling their dolls at Toys R Us. The ambiance and experience were gone. By the same proverbial token, a frozen pizza at home is not the same thing as a pizza served with music, tickets, trinkets to ponder, the thrill of a Deal or No Deal screen, birthday parties, and a musical mouse.
After I tossed the evidence in the trash, there was only one thing left to do. I cut the free token coupon out of the cardboard box and snuck over to Chuck E. Cheese when my kids went to school for a little pizza and play therapy.
I will from time to time have a question for another team that I have not previously interacted with, or a team that I interact with occasionally and do not wish to overstay my welcome. My general approach is to open the email message with a greeting along the lines of
Hello, intelligent and (if I may say so) frightfully attractive members of the XYZ team.
After buttering them up, I ask my question.
I don’t know if it helps, but I figure it doesn’t hurt.
A colleague of mine shared a story of an incident that occurred over 15 years ago. He was part of a team that hosted a group of college students who were visiting the Microsoft Redmond campus. At the end of the day’s activities of visiting various buildings and introducing them to Microsoft employees across many different engineering teams, the tour organizer asked if any students had any questions.
One student sheepishly raised his hand and hesitantly said, “I expected people here to be better looking.”
The student immediately recognized that this comment was inappropriate, awkwardly lowered his hand, and hung his head in shame for the rest of the session.
So um, yeah, don’t do that. Even if you think it, don’t say it out loud.
A customer had a program that opened a very large spreadsheet in Excel. Very large, like over 300,000 rows. They then selected all of the rows in the very large spreadsheet, copied those rows to the clipboard, and then ran a program that tried to extract the data. The program used the GetClipboardData function to retrieve the data in Rich Text Format. What they found was that the call to GetClipboardData was returning NULL. Is there a maximum size for clipboard data?
No, there is no pre-set maximum size for clipboard data. You are limited only by available memory and address space.
However, that’s not the reason why the call to GetClipboardData is failing.
There are two ways to make clipboard data available. One is to put the data directly on the clipboard at the time you take ownership of it. Another option is to declare that you have data of a particular type, but instead of putting the data on the clipboard, you say, “If anybody asks, let me know, and I’ll produce the data.” This is known as clipboard delay-rendering, and it is a common optimization for data formats that are rarely used or expensive to produce. If somebody asks for the format, the clipboard owner gets a WM_RENDERFORMAT message to say, “Somebody wants that data, can you produce it now?”
Excel does not operate natively in Rich Text Format. The Rich Text Format data that it places on the clipboard is delay-rendered. And then when another program asks for the Rich Text Format data, Excel says, “Oh yeah, just hang on a second, let me go get that for you.” Mind you, Rich Text Format is not the best format for a data table. As its name suggests, Rich Text Format is designed for text. It can represent basic tables, but that’s not its bread and butter.
When the system asks a clipboard owner to render clipboard data, it sends the WM_RENDERFORMAT message and waits up to 30 seconds for it to return. If the clipboard owner fails to produce the data within 30 seconds, then system abandons the request, and GetClipboardData returns NULL.
What’s happening is that this table is so large that it’s taking Excel longer than 30 seconds to produce the Rich Text Format table. The GetClipboardData function times out and returns NULL.
Next time, we’ll see what we can do to extend this timeout.
The judge in the 11-year federal lawsuit against Texas said the state has not properly punished or shut down unsafe child care placement facilities or curbed the rate of children who are sexually victimized while in the state’s care.
A man carrying a gun, a knife and zip ties was arrested Wednesday near the Maryland home of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh after threatening to kill him, authorities say.
I work for a marketing organization where all the top leaders are white..
My supervisor and I recently hired three well-qualified employees, who all happened to be Black. Shortly after the first two started, I received an impromptu phone call from my supervisor’s supervisor, Tammy. Tammy said she did not believe these two new employees were well-qualified or would work out long term. This was directly after one of the employees said in a meeting that he noticed that he didn’t see any other Black men in leadership in the organization. (Note: This comment was relevant and delivered professionally at an organization that says it’s all about everyone being heard.)
Then I hired Rachel, who would report directly to me. I was overjoyed to hire her because she hit every assignment out of the park. Rachel was also exceptionally well qualified on paper, with perfect references. Rachel was also the first Black employee in this role since the program started in 2012. She has gotten good feedback already from all of the external organizations and people we work with.
During Rachel’s first internal meeting with other staff, she talked about her background and said she was studying to become a X (specific job title). Tammy called me immediately after and said: “I just wanted to talk to you about Rachel. There’s no way she has the qualifications she says she has. She said she’s a X already? There’s no way … I’m just trying to protect you here.” I was shaking at this point; I did not see this coming (maybe that was naive). I told Tammy I was shocked to hear that she felt that way and told her there must have been some miscommunication. Then Tammy sent out an email to all managers saying she now wants final approval on all new hires.
I told my supervisor, and together we reported this to HR. HR set up a conflict resolution type meeting with Tammy and me where Tammy said, “I’ve taken all the DEI training I can take, I’ve read White Fragility, but it seems like you’ve made up your mind that I’m a racist. I’m also concerned about the performance of white employees like [random white coworker], so I don’t see how this could be racism … You accusing me of this is changing my whole self-image.” I was confused about why this was being treated as a personality clash. I have nothing against Tammy; I am just concerned about the pattern of saying our Black employees aren’t qualified.
After the unproductive meeting with HR, my supervisor and I brought this to our executive director, who asked us to make written statements about what happened. Once I sent that in, the organization hired an outside law firm to investigate. I have an interview with them on Wednesday. I think Rachel also filed with the EO office. I also reported this to a membership agency that our organization belongs to.
I don’t want to hurt Tammy (my supervisor’s supervisor), who has been a mentor to me (maybe because I’m another white woman). (And she hasn’t spoken to me since she found out I reported her when she used to call me all the time and even ask my advice about the organizational culture.) But I also know that this felt like racism or, at the very least inappropriate scrutinizing of new employees in my gut. I don’t want anyone to have their qualifications questioned inappropriately; how awful for that to be your welcome to a new organization. And it completely goes against our values and “commitment to equity.”
But I’m wrestling with this question: Was it appropriate to report this to HR as possible bullying or racial discrimination? Or was it overkill?
It was 100% appropriate. When you notice a pattern of Black employees being scrutinized in a way white employees aren’t, or their qualifications questioned in a way other people’s aren’t, that’s absolutely something you should flag to someone who’s in a position to examine it and act on it. Your organization can’t claim to have a commitment to equity if it doesn’t embrace taking a closer look at patterns like that.
As for Tammy … it doesn’t sound like her DEI training or reading has gotten through to her. “You accusing me of this is changing my whole self-image (and therefore you are wrong)” — and her stronger concern for her own image than the actual experience of Black people in your organization — is the epitome of the white fragility she claims to have educated herself about. And her refusal to consider that she might have some unconscious bias playing out is exactly the defensive response that prevents organizations from making meaningful progress in combatting racism on their teams. Unconscious bias shows up in well-meaning people all the time, and you can’t counter if it you don’t first accept that we can all have biases no matter how well-intentioned we are. That reality doesn’t make someone a bad person; it’s what you do or don’t do with that understanding that matters. Tammy seems to have missed that super basic, foundational plank in her DEI training.
The right response from Tammy would have been, “Thanks for pointing this out and let’s take a closer look at what’s happening.”
So yes, you were right to report it. You needed to, in fact. Don’t let Tammy’s defensive response shake your confidence in that.
With These Words…
I Thee Wed
Contemporary Wedding Vows for Today’s Couples
Eklof
1989
This is one of those books that helps you customize your vows. I have actually had a couple of reference questions over the years about writing vows. Most of the time, I didn’t think of a book that would actually give you vows. Most of the folks I waited on were looking for specific poetry. I suppose this has an audience but I doubt this kind of book would be one that comes to mind.
I am not ready to call this one an obvious weeder, but I would probably be looking for a more modern version. No mention of vows for gay people but they did have a set for older couples. This is one of those examples that isn’t wrong per se, but it does leave out the gay/lesbian crowd. My feeling is that if you are a non traditional couple, you will probably be more likely to have non traditional vows and this would probably be a disappointment.
Horror has never fared well at the Oscars. Despite the Academy Award's 93-year-run, horror films have only won 18 Oscars out of over 3,000 possible ones. Frequently, horror films don't even make it into the Oscar nomination phase — as was the infamous case for Toni Collette's performance in Ari Aster's "Hereditary." Now and again, a film like 1991's "The Silence of the Lambs" breaks through this boundary. Jonathan Demme's procedural thriller became the first and only horror film to earn an Oscar for best picture. But since Hannibal's on-screen debut, only a handful of horror films have received award season attention — namely 2017's "Get Out," which won an Oscar for best screenplay. Sadly, horror stars haven't received the recognition they deserve for the grueling emotional and physical work the genre requires.
Below is a list of some of the best and most promising horror actors of all time. These stars slay in bloodbaths, emotionally-driven moments, and subverting what horror films can and can't do.
Linnea Quigley
No matter what film Linnea Quigley stars in, her joy is contagious. Since her role as Dolores in 1981's "Graduation Day," Quigley has become an iconic scream queen that slays in bonkers B-horror films. Known for her work in 1985's "Return of the Living Dead" and 1988's "Night of the Demons," Quigley brings gleeful gore to the screen like no one else. 2009's "Night of the Demons" tried to redo Quigley's iconic lipstick scene to no avail. Only Quigley lands that unique mixture of sexy, sarcastic, and campy violence. After five decades of tongue-in-cheek and blood-soaked films, it's become her revered signature style.
Even though she's an established horror icon, Linnea Quigley consistently makes time for the horror community. Despite her incredibly busy film production schedule, Quigley still has time for horror fans. She regularly attends midnight movie Q&As and horror film conventions, charming all who meet her.
Shelley Duvall
Most horror fans know about the psychological abuse that "The Shining" star Shelley Duvall endured on set for director Stanley Kubrick's vision. Unexpectedly cutting Duvall's lines, isolating her from the cast and crew, and verbally abusing her until she cried were all par for the course for Kubrick. In 2021, Duvall discussed Kubrick's method-like approach to The Hollywood Reporter, admitting that Kubrick's "exacting" takes for "The Shining" were exhausting, especially the film's iconic staircase scene which took no less than 127 takes and dehydrated the star.
While horror fans often discuss these troubling production elements, more attention should go to Duvall's raw and visceral performance as Wendy Torrance. Duvall crafts a much-needed vulnerability with Wendy in the Stephen King adaptation, which grounds the character alongside Jack Nicholson's unhinged performance. Without her, "The Shining" would have become something more akin to camp, as Nicholson's Jack Torrance often skirts the line into foreshadowing the menace of the Joker from 1989's "Batman." Although Wendy's agency pales in comparison to her literary counterpart, Duvall soared with the material she had.
We must call out abuse on film sets, but the "Three Women" star deserves more critical acclaim for her creative depth. Fans craving more horror featuring Duvall should check out "The Twilight Zone" segment titled "A Saucer of Loneliness."
Florence Pugh
While Florence Pugh is a relative newcomer to the horror genre, she won over the bloody hearts of fans with her leading role as Dani in Ari Aster's "Midsommar." Aster's film follows Dani's overwhelming grief, terror at leaving an unhealthy relationship, and unfulfilled desire. Thanks in part to Pugh's mastery of subtle facial expressions that convey just the right feeling at the right time, Ari Aster's heartwrenching movie became a commercial and critical hit, earning over $40 million globally on a $9 million budget.
Yet, many horror fans missed out on seeing Pugh's first foray into terror. In 2016's "Lady Macbeth," Pugh portrays Katherine, a 19th-century woman sold into an unhappy marriage. What follows is a chilling film that shows off Pugh's sinister capabilities alongside her sympathetic demeanor. By the end of the film, viewers will wrestle with disgust and fear of Pugh's cutthroat character, who will not second guess murdering to get what she wants.
Pugh will next stretch her horror muscles in Olivia Wilde's upcoming feature film, "Don't Worry, Darling." Based on the trailer, Pugh's Alice discovers some unsettling truths about her domestic life. Blending the machismo elements of "Mad Men" with the feminist sci-fi lens of 1975's "The Stepford Wives," Wilde crafts a dystopia perfect for showcasing Pugh's talents.
Dee Wallace
Dee Wallace entered the world of horror with 1975's "The Stepford Wives," portraying Nettie the maid. Decades later, she still reigns as a scream queen. Wallace has portrayed some of horror's most memorable roles in such films as "Cujo," "The Howling," "Lords of Salem," "The Hills Have Eyes," and 2007's "Halloween." She frequently collaborates with Rob Zombie and has worked with iconic genre directors like Steven Spielberg, Wes Craven, and Peter Jackson — achievements that few horror stars can claim.
While it's an impossible task to pick which horror film best showcases Wallace's talent, many look to her role as Donna in "Cujo" as a prime example. Although the Stephen King adaptation takes place during a scorching summer, filming for "Cujo" happened in the winter of 1982. Despite Wallace "freezing to death" on set, her acting never falters. It's easy to believe she's fighting against a rabid dog to save the life of her son and herself. Once "Cujo" wrapped, Wallace spent three weeks in the hospital due to exhaustion.
Octavia Spencer
2019's "Ma" showcased Oscar-winner Octavia Spencer's knack for portraying a horror villain. Created on a budget of $5 million, "Ma" brought in more than $60 million globally at the box office. Despite this impressive feat, critics gave it a cool reception gave it a cool reception. However, it's worth noting that the flaws of "Ma" were tied more to Scotty Landes' uneven script than Spencer's madcap performance. Based on its stellar box office numbers and critics' love of seeing a "bananas" Spencer on-screen, Blumhouse Productions should see the film's franchise potential if an unhinged Sue Ann "Ma" Ellington rises again. If Michael Myers can cheat death over and over again, why shouldn't Ma have a chance to show off her truly terrifying potential?
Regardless of Ma's fate, Spencer shows fans that all her years of starring in critically acclaimed dramas have only perfected her ability to gleefully shock audiences. Hopefully, more horror directors will see this, too, and give us more films featuring Spencer's talents.
Lupita Nyong'o
Written and directed by Jordan Peele, "Us" became a critical and commercial hit. While the horror-mystery film has a stellar cast that includes Elisabeth Moss and Winston Duke, Lupita Nyong'o's dual performance as Addy and Red in "Us" deserves special praise. In Peele's film, she's not just the final girl. She's also its central villain. Although Nyong'o is a relative newcomer to the horror genre, "Us" demonstrates that she can play both the sympathetic lead and avenging foe with ease. Her versatile and chilling work in "Us" proves she's a winning bet for any future horror film's casting.
Nyong'o next stars in Marvel Studios' "Black Panther" sequel, "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever," which is slated to hit theaters on November 11. While there are no future horror film announcements at this time for Nyong'o, fans should keep their fingers crossed that this blockbuster action star will return soon to the world of terror.
Brad Dourif
While he's best known for voicing a killer doll, Brad Dourif has acted as unhinged characters in genre films for over four decades. To his credit, the Emmy-nominated actor has starred in some massively popular horror film universes such as "Alien," "Halloween," "The Exorcist," and of course, the expanding mythos of Don Mancini's "Chucky." Dourif has made a career out of playing characters who are either on the edge of madness or have long since gone over the edge — as is the case with his role as the "Gemini Killer" in William Peter Blatty's"The Exorcist III."
Although Dourif told Rue Morgue in 2018 that he was done playing sociopathic and sadistic characters, he reprised his role as Chucky for Mancini's 2021 Syfy series of the same name. Dourif will voice the killer doll in Season 2 of "Chucky," continuing the legacy that the serial killer turned child's toy.
Tony Todd
In 1992's "Candyman," genre icon Tony Todd brings the urban legend of Chicago's Cabrini Green housing project to life with sinister charm. His portrayal of Candyman ranks as one of horror's most memorable performances, paving the way for Black horror filmmakers like Jordan Peele and Nia DaCosta to tell their own horror stories. Inspired by Todd's legacy, DaCosta and Peele crafted their take on the Cabrini Green monster with 2021's "Candyman." Peele spoke about Todd's influence on his horror career in 2020, sharing, "A Black monster was pretty revolutionary. If there was no 'Candyman,' I don't know that there would be a 'Get Out '... Tony Todd built a character that was a force and had a charisma. He gave me a sense of power as opposed to a feeling of otherness."
Todd has portrayed Candyman throughout the horror franchise's four films. The horror star has accumulated more than 247 roles in his career, taking turns at playing heroes and monsters — including the fan-favorite character of Death in the "Final Destination" franchise.
Barbara Crampton
Beginning with 1985's "Re-Animator," Barbara Crampton has made a name for herself in the world of horror. From her deliciously campy work in beloved horror classics like "Puppet Master" to her gory role as Susan in Stuart Gordon's "Castle Freak," Crampton consistently delivers killer performances. To her credit, Crampton knows precisely when to dial-up tension or lean into comedy, making her a joy to watch. There's a sarcastic edge to Crampton's humor, which shines brightly in 2021's "Jakob's Wife," a film that the star also produced.
While Crampton often stars in horror films, "Jakob's Wife" marked the first time that the genre legend played an old-school monster. Critics loved seeing Crampton transform into a sexy and scathing vampire, giving the film a Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The 2021 horror film looks at vampire lore through a feminist lens, using its familiar concept to uniquely explore a woman's buried passion for life. Crampton's sharp timing soars above the buckets of B-movie blood, cementing her status as one of horror's greatest actors.
Bruce Campbell
1981's "The Evil Dead" introduced the world to Bruce Campbell's dim-witted but charming Ash Williams, and horror hasn't been the same since. At the time, no one knew that Sam Raimi's low-budget horror film would become one of horror's most beloved properties. During the film's 40th anniversary, Campbell noted how the film's legacy now has surpassed its initial reception. "The irony is we're in more theaters 40 years later than we were when it originally got released," Campbell told The Columbus Dispatch in 2021.
Campbell reprised his iconic role for the film's two sequels and Starz's "Ash vs. the Evil Dead" television series. "Ash vs. the Evil Dead" truly showcases Campbell's acting talent, adding layers of depth to a tired and world-weary Ash. While his knack for physical comedy (and perfectly timed flips) has always shined through in his roles, the Starz series best showcases how much Campbell's Ash has evolved. Campbell refined a role that was born out of slapstick, B-movie terror into one filled with pathos. Ash Williams becomes someone searching for redemption, and it's a joy to root for him on his journey.
Keith David
While many horror fans praise Kurt Russell's R.J. MacReady in John Carpenter's "The Thing," Keith David's Childs deserves equal acclaim. By the end of "The Thing," Childs and MacReady are seemingly the only ones left alive as they both wonder if the other is an alien. Thanks to David's tense Childs, the film lands its ambiguous ending. In another actor's hands, the ending could have felt lackluster, but David sells the film's terror. The Emmy-winning actor has starred in horror classics like "They Live" and "Pitch Black" and in beloved scary television series like "Tales From the Crypt" and "Creepshow."
Despite David's talents, horror hasn't given him too many more leading roles. As Ashlee Blackwell, the author of "Horror Noire: A History of Black Horror," said best, "We've always loved horror. It's just that unfortunately, horror hasn't always loved us." Thankfully, fans craving David's horror talents won't need to wait too long. He next stars as Otis Haywood Sr. in Jordan Peele's highly anticipated third feature film, "Nope."
Angela Bassett
If there was a real-life Supreme, it'd be Angela Bassett. The timbre of Bassett's voice is a master class in witchcraft in itself. While she got her horror start in Wes Craven's "Vampire in Brooklyn," she has gone on to be an integral returning cast member in Ryan Murphy's horror anthology series, "American Horror Story." In each season of "AHS," Bassett outshines her co-stars through her committed powerhouse performances. She's earned Emmy nominations for her roles in "AHS: Coven" and "AHS: Freak Show." The longtime Murphy collaborator also directed "Chapter 6" of "AHS: Roanoke" and "Drink the Kool-Aid" in "AHS: Cult."
Of the four "AHS" characters she's portrayed so far, none hold a candle to her fierce performance as community leader and Voodoo Queen Marie Laveau. "AHS" fans loved her character so much that they even asked her to star in a spinoff show featuring her take on the real-life Marie Laveau. Horror has often struggled with its portrayal of Black witches. Often, horror harmfully stereotypes Black women into using their powers to sacrifice their story in favor of saving a white lead, as happened with Bonnie Bennett in "The Vampire Diaries." Or horror pushes Black witches to the sidelines as in the case of Rachel True's Rochelle in "The Craft." However, Bassett's Marie Laveau fought to keep her community safe, never sacrificed her values, and showed off some impressive magic to boot. More Marie magic times, please!
Toni Collette
Will horror fans ever get over Toni Collette's Oscar snub(s)? Not likely. In 1999, the "Knives Out" star was overlooked for an Oscar nomination for her chilling role as Lynn Sear in "The Sixth Sense." Again, in 2018, Collette's intense psychological portrayal as Annie in Ari Aster's terrifying hit film, "Hereditary," was disregarded. Her work as the disgruntled, grieving, and unhinged mother in the film was a gut-punch to horror fans — who are still reminding the Academy that they made a huge mistake. Throughout the film's tumultuous runtime, Collette's Annie succumbs to insidious forces outside of her control, and the star contorts her face and body to seething extremes. Critics have called her performance as Annie "soul-shattering" and "flawless."
While there are several fampus scream queens on this list, none of them can wail quite like Toni Collette. Her unwavering and unmatched intensity on-screen is pure nightmare fuel.
Jamie Lee Curtis
In 1996's "Scream," the dream team of Kevin Williamson and Wes Craven took every opportunity they got to school audiences on Jamie Lee Curtis' horror legacy — and for a good reason. Jamie Lee Curtis is a staple of the horror genre and has fundamentally shaped what we now know as the final girl trope. From her breakout role as the young Laurie Strode in John Carpenter's "Halloween" to starring in slasher classics like "Prom Night" and "Terror Train," she puts beauty and brawn into her portrayal of slasher survivors. Jamie Lee Curtis shows that women in horror can be running around screaming but also have enough agency to know when it's time to attack too. Thanks in part to her return as the weary and formidable Laurie Strode in the rebooted "Halloween" franchise, David Gordon Green's Michael Myers films have found global success.
The horror legend will finish her reprisal of Laurie Strode in Green's upcoming "Halloween Ends." Meanwhile, the legendary scream queen is channeling her horror experience into filmmaking. In 2020, Jamie Lee Curtis announced that she's directing and co-writing a climate change-themed horror film for Blumhouse Productions titled "Mother Nature."
Vincent Price
Starring in horror films from the '40s through the '90s, Vincent Price contributed a wealth of meaty roles to the genre with his signature wit, distinctive voice, and debonair charm. After his starring role in 1953's "The House of Wax," Price became known for his creepy talents. He thrived in the era of classic horror cinema with roles in "Witchfinder General," 1958's "The Fly," and "House on Haunted Hill." He worked with the legendary Roger Corman and William Castle. His last genre-adjacent role was in Tim Burton's "Edward Scissorhands." As one of the only actors around for the birth of horror on the big screen, it's hard to quantify just how much of a positive impact he had on future generations of horror fans and filmmakers.
However, genre icon John Waters shared some insight into the "Master of Menace." "He gave upscale a good name, and he was always handsome, dignified, charming, and a little bit sinister," he said. Reflecting on his career as a campy horror movie villain, the late Price once shared, "I don't play monsters, I play men besieged by fate and out for revenge." Even decades later, it's impossible to deny Price's charisma as an artist.
"Each day on twitter there is one main character. The goal is to never be it."
In 2019, Twitter user @MapleCocaine tweeted out an innocuous statement that would become one of Twitter's core axioms: "Each day on twitter there is one main character. The goal is to never be it." Usually the wearer of the main character crown has either said something so out of pocket that anyone with more than two brain cells can see that "the best time to delete the tweet was immediately after sending it, the second best time is now," or someone who makes a statement so bafflingly offensive with an unfounded sense of confidence, we're shocked to discover the tweeter wasn't just two junior high boys in a trenchcoat pretending to be an adult behind a keyboard.
Yesterday's Twitter main character was Hanna Rosin, a novelist and editorial director for audio for New York Magazine. After watching the delightful gay rom-com "Fire Island" on Hulu, Rosin criticized the film about gay men for its *checks notes* inability to pass the Bechdel Test.
For those unaware, The Bechdel-Wallace (commonly just Bechdel) Test is a cinematic measuring tool of the depiction of women in fiction. The test has only three rules: (1) that at least two women are featured, (2) that these women talk to each other, and (3) that they discuss something other than a man. "The Test" first appeared in Alison Bechdel's 1985 comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For," based on conversations Bechdel had with her friend Liz Wallace, as well as the works of Virginia Woolf. It is also a tool that has been willfully misunderstood and weaponized over its nearly 40-year existence, and yesterday was no different.
The Perfect Imperfection Of The Bechdel-Wallace Test
The Bechdel-Wallace Test is not meant to be treated as the be-all, end-all of feminist theory, but a bare minimum measurement of media produced for mass audience appeal. The Bechdel-Wallace Test is imperfect by design, because it allows something like the objectifying male fantasy "Weird Science" a passing score, while a film with inarguable feminist characters like "Jackie Brown," "Gravity," or "Before Sunrise," fail.
The Bechdel-Wallace Test was not designed to be a definitive metric, it was a punchline in a comic strip that points out how frequently Hollywood blockbusters fail their female characters. Unfortunately, plenty of people have somehow convinced themselves that The Bechdel-Wallace Test is the only qualifier as to whether or not a movie is "good," completely ignoring any of the nuance, context, or intention of the stories being told.
In a now deleted (but screenshotted to hell and back) tweet, Rosin applied the test to "Fire Island," stating that the film receives "an F-," failing the test "in a whole new way." While Rosin could have stopped there and gotten plenty of eye rolls, she went a step further by saying, "Do we just ignore the drab lesbian stereotypes bc cute gay Asian boys? Is this revenge for all those years of the gay boy best friend?" Disregarding the fact the Bechdel-Wallace Test is pass/fail and the utter disrespect to refer to the ICONIC Margaret Cho as performing "drab lesbian stereotypes," the tweet was a perfect showcase of how beyond misunderstood the Bechdel-Wallace Test has become.
Not Every Story Needs To Prioritize Women
"Fire Island" was written by Joel Kim Booster and directed by Andrew Ahn, and is a modern, gay, retelling of Jane Austen's "Pride & Prejudice" starring gay Asian American men. It is true, yes, that Hollywood has a problem with showcasing women in complex, interesting roles, but do you know who else Hollywood has a problem with showcasing in complex, interesting roles? Literally anyone that isn't a cisgender, straight, white man.
"Fire Island" is a film that celebrates queer, Asian American joy, and showcases a community of men that are often regulated to secondary characters or offensive stereotypes. This is a film about specific experiences, not the whole of the LGBTQIA+ community. This means it is not the responsibility of "Fire Island," Joel Kim Booster, Andrew Ahn, or anyone else who worked on the film to pass the Bechdel-Wallace Test, because this movie isn't telling a story that would elicit the need to pass the test.
A film like "Fire Island" shouldn't be held to the same standard as something like the Bechdel-Wallace failing "The Avengers," because the film wasn't made with the intention of appealing to universal audiences or trying to tell a story that could speak to society as a whole. Getting pissy about "Fire Island" failing the Bechdel-Wallace test is the cinematic equivalent of judging a fish by its ability to ride a bicycle. It's also impossible to ignore that Rosin's ire was directed at a film providing seldom-seen representation of a marginalized community, and not calling something out something like "Top Gun: Maverick," which also doesn't pass the test.
The World Has Changed Since The Bechdel-Wallace Test Was Created
When The Bechdel-Wallace Test first appeared in 1985, the world was an entirely different place. American supervillain Ronald Reagan was president, for crying out loud, and we're still trying to undo the fallout of his destruction of American progress. The simplistic test was a reflection on the very narrow perspective of women's representation in cinema, not taking into account a multitude of factors that influence whether or not a film would, could, or should pass the test. The test is a reflection of the outdated social norms of the 1980s, and has not evolved to encompass the broader scope, mainly because it was a joke in a comic strip and not some groundbreaking philosophical theory based on heavily researched data.
Okay, I just added a corollary to the Bechdel test: Two men talking to each other about the female protagonist of an Alice Munro story in a screenplay structured on a Jane Austen novel = pass. #FireIsland#BechdelTest
Understandably, Rosin was ratioed beyond her wildest dreams and Alison Bechdel even took to Twitter to praise "Fire Island," poking fun at the ridiculousness of holding the film to The Test's standards. For what it's worth, Rosin did post an apology on Twitter, but it's no one other than the impacted party's place to determine whether or not the apology is accepted and if the harm has been rightfully repaired.
Regardless, the fact the Bechdel-Wallace has become the "gold standard" of film criticism in many "progressive" circles is a complete misuse of the test's existence, and a fundamental misunderstanding of what determines a film's quality. The next time someone dismisses a film because "it doesn't pass the Bechdel Test," that should be a sign to interrogate why the film doesn't pass, because if it's anything like "Fire Island," it's an intentional decision worthy of praise.
I was hoping to write to you with good news about an exciting new job, but, it’s only been a week and I’m already wondering if I should quit.
My last job of two years at a large company was fine but not great: the management was lackluster and I wasn’t really excited about the work, but I was paid reasonably and had a lot of schedule flexibility, including the option to work from home once a week (I’m in a lab-based environment, so more than that would be tough). I recently accepted another position at a small company because it’s in a field I hope to get into, plus the work seems more aligned with my background. They also made an offer on the spot, and while I took a day to think about it, I’ll admit I was flattered. They initially offered $15k/year less than I was making, but when I mentioned that, they agreed to match my (then) current salary, so I’d thought that was a good sign. However, I’ve been here a week, and already I’ve learned that:
– There’s a massive amount of turnover. In a 20-person company, five (including the president/owner) have been here more than 15 years; everyone else started within the last year, and most have only been here a few months.
– We are exempt employees but our time is micromanaged, and I don’t have nearly the same schedule flexibility as I was led to believe. I was also specifically told that working from home would be a regular option, but it turns out that it’s only allowed in very limited circumstances (being out mildly sick, for instance), only with pre-approval (hard to do if you’re sick!), and — since we only have desktops — we’d need to check out one of the barely functional laptops ahead of time.
– One of the longer-term employees is blatantly sexist, to the point that he actively disparages and usually refuses to even acknowledge women, including the two more senior female employees. The HR person is aware — he treats her the same way — but apparently she’s powerless to address it because he’s close friends with our boss.
– Our boss (the president/owner of the company) is apparently a bit of a tyrant. He’s the kind of person who’s always generating new ideas, and he’ll frequently ask employees to drop everything and focus on his pet projects (and prioritize them over actual, funded work with strict deadlines). Even more concerning, he’s apparently prone to yelling when he’s displeased; I haven’t witnessed that yet, but other employees have said that it’s very ugly and borderline abusive.
I left my last job on good terms, I know they’re still hiring for my old position, and the HR person told me in my exit interview to keep in touch and to let him know if things didn’t work out here, so … I’m really tempted to ask for my old job back. From some of your previous posts, I know I’d need to be committed to staying for a while, but honestly? My gut feeling says I’d rather go back and stay for at least another year rather than staying here even a few more weeks. I’m willing to give it another week or two to see if things improve, but am I being over-sensitive?
You are not being overly sensitive.
You were misled about the schedule flexibility and working from home. Those two things right there are reason enough to decline to stay. You signed up one thing and found it was another. You’re not obligated to stay when someone does a bait and switch on you (just like they wouldn’t be obligated to keep you if you told them during the hiring process that you were available 9-5 and then announced after you started that you’d only be working 11-4).
It’s also entirely reasonable to decline to work in an environment where blatant sexism is tolerated (and refusing to acknowledge women is really extreme on the sexism scale), where the boss yells or is abusive, or where the management just sucks.
People don’t always have the option to turn down work in those circumstances, but when you do have options, you’re entitled to use them!
There is sort of a hierarchy of needs at work, in that most people aren’t likely to find somewhere perfect and so sometimes it makes sense to decide you can live with something that’s less than ideal (like bad management or an annoying culture). And if you’d only encountered some of the more minor problems on this list — like if the only real issue was that the owner changed focus frequently — it might be more reasonable to stick it out and see how things go. (That’s not to say that frequent priority shifts aren’t problematic; they are. But they can be manageable for some people in a way that other things on your list are not.) But that’s not your situation.
There’s also an advantage to getting out now, in that you can just leave this job off your resume entirely and not have to answer interviewers’ questions about it in the future, whereas if you stay six months and then leave, you’ll have much more of a gap. Gaps aren’t inherently resume-killers, but it’s nice to not have to bother speaking to them at all.
That said, since you wanted to leave your previous job, I’m hesitant to tell you to jump right back to it just as a way to get out of this one. An alternative would be looking for something different and leaving as soon as you find it, rather than going back to a job that you were pleased to move on from.
For what it’s worth: you were flattered when this employer made you an offer on the spot, but often that’s a sign of trouble to come. Not always, but sometimes it means they’re desperate to hire because they can’t keep people (possibly reflected in their high turnover) or that they aren’t particularly thoughtful or rigorous about hiring (which can have ramifications for who you’re working with — and potentially for who’s managing you too), or that they don’t want you to have too much time to think it over, or just that they’re kind of a chaotic mess. Sometimes it’s none of those things, but it’s definitely a flag to slow down and make sure you’ve done your due diligence on what working there will be like.
Having your own personal shopper hand-select pieces to fit your life and your unique aesthetic makes it easy to look your best, even with your busy playdate schedule. To get you started, please take a few minutes to complete our style questionnaire.
1. How do you feel about clothes shopping?
I will tolerate it if bribed.
I’m just in it for the shopping cart rides.
I will lose my shit if you make me stay in this store one minute longer.
2. Where do most of your clothes come from?
They magically appear in the drawers.
Target, and accidentally bringing other kids’ sweatshirts home from birthday parties.
Emergency change of clothes purchases at zoo gift shops.
3. How much time and effort do you put into assembling the right look?
Any look is the right look if it involves the top or bottom half of an old Halloween costume.
If by that you mean finding a shirt, taking an extended break to play with Hot Wheels, and then choosing a pair of pants that might actually be just a second shirt where I put my legs through the sleeves, then approximately twenty-five to forty minutes. Effort: Herculean.
4. How would you describe your typical style?
Eclectic.
Whatever is clean and covers most of my tummy.
Finger-paint casual.
Batman-inspired.
Not that one, I want that other one.
5. How often do you wear shirts with buttons?
Once a week.
Once a month.
Only when serving as the ring bearer in my aunt’s wedding, and then only under threat of no cake.
6. Are there are any styles you would NOT wear?
Emphatically yes, and they change hourly.
Temperature-appropriate.
Itchy-looking.
Slacks and chinos.
7. Any fabrics, details, or features we should avoid?
The crinkly kind.
The pokey kind.
The swishy kind.
The fuzzy kind.
Zippers.
Tags.
Seams.
Congratulations! We are now ready to pull together accent pieces and classic staples. Based on your responses, our stylists will curate a wardrobe for you that is made up of:
Two Trader Joe’s bags full of hand-me-down sweatpants
Five of the same exact faded blue Paw Patrol T-shirt with stains in different places
Yep. There's a video out there that this one is a follow-up to. It's also like a week late. Anyway, here's the original video: https://youtu.be/_yMMTVVJI4c
Hovertext: Here, let me take you under my shitty wing.
Today's News:
I like to think that when humanity are all ultra-intelligent cyborgs, they will look back and see the differences between me and Albert Einstein as a rounding error.
I currently work in payroll — a part of HR that is far from glamorous but that everyone has need of. Because of this, I’ve been getting lots of solicitations on LinkedIn about amazing opportunities at other companies, promising competitive pay, excellent benefits, etc. etc.. But all lacking really any specific information about what the pay exactly is, what the benefits are, even basic information on what the job entails. These messages all then invite me to schedule a time on their calendar, or to provide a time for a call.
I’m open to new opportunities, but I’m also perfectly happy where I’m at and don’t really understand why the approach puts all the onus on me to get more information. My initial thought (which I know isn’t appropriate) is to respond back saying essentially, “You reached out to me — you gotta give me more information if you want me to set aside time in my day.”
Is this just how recruiting works now? Is it worth it to push back at this at all?
It’s been how (a lot of) recruiting has worked for a while … although it’s particularly out-of-touch with this job market.
The lack of info on salary and benefits has been common for a really long time. If anything, more recruiters are including it now than they used to, because there’s been a push for salary transparency in job ads. But declining to share info on salary has been a thing forever. Employers like it because they can lowball candidates if candidates don’t know the salary range. (They don’t say that’s why they like it — they say it’s because salary can vary depending on someone’s qualifications and a candidate won’t possibly understand why they fall at the spot in the range where they fall — but that is BS and the real reason they like it is because it gives them an advantage in salary negotiations.)
Not including any real info about what the job entails is somewhat less common, although not terribly so. It’s bizarre, obviously, but it’s very much a thing. Recruiters seem to disproportionately be phone people more than “I will put lots of info in email” people — they like to get you on the phone and talk through the details rather than writing everything out. It makes no sense though, since a written job description almost definitely exists and they could just attach it — and they’d presumably better attract the right candidates and more efficiently screen out the wrong ones if they shared that info up-front.
It actually is quite reasonable to reply back, “My schedule is pretty packed right now, so before we carve out time for a call, could you forward me the job description and info on salary and benefits?” (You could leave out the “my schedule is pretty packed” line if you want, but I find if you don’t say something like that to pushy people, they try to convince you that they’ll share everything you want to know on the call … whereas if you signal that you’re very busy, they often get more forthcoming. It won’t work every time — for many recruiters, contacting candidates is a numbers game and they’re just trying to rack up as many hits as they can as quickly as possible — but it’ll work for the better ones, who are the ones you want to work with anyway.)
My company has worked with a consultant for the last few years that provides leadership training and professional coaching to “improve corporate culture.” Some interesting things have come out of that, but there is one thing I find bizarre: a values exercise. Essentially, you select your “top five value words” and how you define them. Reading the materials around this exercise, it is all about uncovering your personal values for your own, personal development. There’s a wide range of options you can select. Some are things like “Adventure,” “Friendship,” “Family,” or “Health.” Others are things like “Money,” “Religion,” or “Power,” or “Wealth.”
My company has made this an organization-wide exercise. Last year at an all-company meeting, we all had to go through this exercise to select and define our five value words. At the meeting, we were split into random, interdepartmental groups to discuss our values. I selected five values and defined them for myself at a surface level and in a work context (obviously). However, some people in the group dug in really deep — there was oversharing and crying! There were also quite a few people selecting values that matched our corporate values. At the end of the meeting, it was implied that “some people” didn’t understand this exercise was “not just about work” (*eye-roll*).
At every all-company meeting, we’re asked to share a value and why it is important to us. When we do 1:1s, especially with new employees, we’re also supposed to share our values.
But that’s not even the odd thing — when they hire new people at our company, candidates are required as part of the interview process to select their five values and discuss them with the interviewer. I have not been involved in an interview/hire where this happened, but was helping out on an opening in my department and saw this and was kind of aghast.
If I were looking for a job, I do not even know how I would approach this question. It seems like something that one could fake pretty easily, say to match the company’s values after a quick search of the website. And I’m not sure how the answers to this question are even used in the hiring decision-making process.
I find this a strange practice and wanted your take!
Yeah, it’s problematic.
There’s a place for talking about values in a work context — but it should be talking about the company’s values and how they want those values playing out at work. For example, if the company puts a lot of weight on values like X or Y, it makes sense to talk about what operating in alignment with those values looks like and doesn’t look like, and even talk about them in hiring and performance evaluations.
But probing into individual employees’ and job candidates’ personal values is a whole different thing. In some cases — like with “Adventure,” “Friendship,” or “Wealth” — it’s just overstepping and invasive. With others, like “Religion” or “Health,” they risk getting into really problematic legal territory, since they can’t legally take those things into account when hiring or managing people. And even if they genuinely don’t intend to, the risk that it will unconsciously influence decisions or that people will think think it does is so high that it’s a terrible practice.
There’s been a trend in recent years of employers trying to step into roles traditionally filled by therapists, medical doctors, and personal development in general. They don’t do it well … and even if they did (but they don’t), it’s really, really not their place.
1. My company is creating a paternity leave policy, but has no maternity leave
I need a sanity check to see if i’m justified in feeling so outraged. My (Fortune 500) company recently announced that they are implementing a paternity leave policy this fall. Sounds great and progressive, right? Well, it would be, except that THE COMPANY DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A MATERNITY LEAVE POLICY.
We don’t have details yet about the new policy, but even if it’s unpaid, it’s additional time off that men are entitled to that women are not. The company is big enough that we’re covered by FMLA and short-term disability will pay 100% of salary for 6-8 weeks after birth. The company touts their “maternity” leave policy on sustainability reports, etc. but there is no actual policy other than federally mandated FMLA that men are also eligible for. Why do they need an additional policy? Is this even legal? I’m hoping they actually mean an all-encompassing parental leave, but that’s not how it’s been presented so far. How are they so out of touch? Is there anything I can do?
They cannot legally offer men time off for parenthood that they don’t also offer to women. If that’s really what they’re planning, it’s both outrageous and illegal … in fact it’s so illegal that I’ve got to think that’s not the plan, and whatever they are planning has just been communicated badly so far. My guess is that they’re either formalizing a policy that gives new fathers the same leave that new mothers currently receive, or they’re revamping parental leave for everyone and including paternity leave this time.
You can definitely ask for clarification on what’s being planned, and whether they’re expanding maternity benefits too. And since it’s a big company, you might have a women’s ERG you could reach out to as well — they may have more information or be interested in speaking up as a group.
2. My intern makes nearly as much as me
I’ve been with my current employer for about 12 years, getting satisfactory raises/promotions along the way. We’ve recently made a full-time job offer to an intern who has a similar graduate degree to me, and whose only work experience in our field is the few months they’ve been with us as an intern. The intern reports to me, so I was involved in approving her employment, etc. In this process, I’ve learned that her salary as a full-time employee will be almost as much as my current salary! Although I know it’s a job seekers’ market right now, I’m still frustrated by this. Should I use this information to negotiate with my boss for a higher salary?
Yes yes yes.
There’s a thing going on right now where employers are having to pay more to attract new hires, which is throwing older employees’ salaries out of whack. Employers don’t want to adjust everyone’s salaries because that could be hugely expensive and they think the market could go back down at any time … but that’s creating big inequities where people are getting paid wildly varying amounts for the same work (or in your case, barely more for presumably contributing at a much higher level than a new, more junior hire).
3. My office ignored my birthday
Today’s my birthday. No one at work seems aware, and no one acknowledged it, although I know there’s a list of birthdays somewhere, which used to be used to plan monthly celebrations. Those fell off since the pandemic, and now it seems my department only celebrates the birthdays they happen to think of. Maybe it wouldn’t have stung so much if the office wasn’t still full of balloons from someone’s birthday last week. Maybe it wouldn’t have stung so much if I hadn’t spent my holiday weekend working, and didn’t know that I’d have to spend the night of my birthday working, too. Usually I have no problem working nights or weekends when necessary, and I get a lot of (much appreciated) flexibility in return, and my boss and coworkers are excellent and generous in many ways. But I’m feeling really left out and unappreciated right now.
I’d like to suggest that we return to the monthly celebrations so that things are more structured and inclusive, but I’m struggling to come up with a way to phrase it that doesn’t feel so much like swallowing my pride and being really vulnerable in a way that I’m not really comfortable with at work.
Please do! This is a problem that a good manager would want to know about. If you’re going to do office birthday celebrations (or anniversary celebrations or so forth), you have to have a system for ensuring everyone is celebrated when it’s their turn, or people understandably end up hurt and demoralized. Of course it stings! It feels like you’re not as noticed or appreciated, and that no one cares enough to make the effort for you that they make for others. Often that’s very much not the actual explanation — it’s more likely that the person who tracks birthdays was out or stretched too thin, or it’s an administrative error, etc. — but of course it leaves people feeling that way.
The easiest way to frame it is to make it about everyone, not just you — “Hey, can we get back to monthly birthday celebrations? We missed mine last week and it made me realize that we are probably missing other people’s too since we don’t have an organized system anymore.”
4. Employer is raising health insurance costs by 345%
My company just announced they’re raising the employee contribution for our health care plan by 345%. The changes take affect in 30 days. Is this normal? Do I have any options here (besides going without healthcare or getting a new job)? I feel like everyone at my company is going to ask for raises to cover this increase, which would negate any cost savings they’d get from raising employee contributions.
No, that’s really high! Insurance costs do go up every year, but not by 345%. The average increase in 2022 is projected to be around 5%. Either something very unusual is going on with your plan (any chance your employer is self-insured and pushing the cost of that onto employees?) or your employer is shifting a significant portion of the costs to you that they used to cover.
You can try pushing back with a group of your coworkers — I’m sure you’re not the only one reeling at the increase — but if your employer won’t budge, then yeah, moving to another job would be the only real option.
5. Rejections six months after applying
This is less of an advice question and more wondering if something I’ve encountered is somehow becoming normal. I was job hunting last November-December. In the last week, I’ve gotten two rejection emails for jobs I applied to back in November. I’m all for companies not ghosting applicants, but sending a rejection six months later almost seems worse. Is this becoming a trend of some kind? Are they just doing it because they forgot or did it take that long to fill the position?
It’s not a new trend — it’s a weird thing that has happened occasionally for a while. (But it understandably seems like a trend because it happened to you twice in one week!) Sometimes it’s because it took the employer a while to fill the position and they don’t send rejections until someone accepts their offer (or even until that person starts the job). Sometimes it’s because someone looked at their applicant tracking system, realized they never closed out the rejections for position X, and pushed a button to send them without thinking about how late they’re going to be (or just figures it’s better to send them late than never). Sometimes the hiring was put on hold in the interim and now it’s restarting, so they’re finally processing candidates who normally would have been processed months ago.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/1d8f003ac430e6902cbd856c8b7f4899/Ike%20Seabrook%20DL%20TT%2002.jpg)
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/23e69ecb75c1598d57aed8d63c865b21/Texas%20DFPS%20EG%20TT%2023.jpg)
