Useless Newspaper

Tuesday a very sad event began taking place here in my city.  It was the demolition of my elementary and high school building, the building that from 1974-2004 housed Dayton Christian Schools.  I attended kindergarten through 4th grade here, then shuffled over to a different building for middle school (where I met Bobby), and then back to this glorious building for high school.

I won’t use their pictures, but if you have just a minute I hope you’ll click here to see this gallery from the Dayton Daily News of some beautiful pictures of the building as I remember it.

The building was first opened in 1927 as the Julienne Catholic Girls High School.  From 1927-1973 high school girls got a Catholic education there.  The Sisters who ran the school lived in the convent that was attached to the high school building.  In 1974, Julienne merged with the boys’ Catholic high school, Chaminade, and Dayton Christian found a home in the “Julienne building”.  The Catholic church de-consecrated it for us Protestants but it was still sacred to most of us who walked it’s halls thereafter.

The convent where the nuns lived was converted into the elementary school.  So, our bathrooms had tubs in them which was a little weird but for the most part it was like any elementary – just much more beautiful.  The chapel (there is a picture on that gallery I linked to, I hope you’ll look at it) in the elementary was the nuns’ chapel, and it was gorgeous. Absolutely breathtaking, and I have SUCH special memories of that room.  We had chapel in there once a week, and it was where I learned to worship as a child.  I learned it at church, too, of course, but also at school.  We had such fun chapel services conducted by people who wanted to help kids learn about God in a fun way.  So, that room is very special to me, and it’s beauty still speaks to me, even though it’s gone.

The top row of windows overlooking this courtyard were right outside my 4th grade classroom

A hallway with beautiful arched windows in my high school

I can’t count the number of times I walked up and down this hallway…isn’t it beautiful?  The building won all kinds of awards when it was designed, and was recently listed on the National Register of Historic Places, although that did not save it from demolition.  It was just a beautiful, beautiful place.  It not only had the arched windows you see here but plenty of stained glass, a lovely courtyard, and pretty marble-ish floors.

It was a gorgeous place to go to school.

But it outlived it’s usefulness, and now it’s gone.

In 2004, after Dayton Christian moved out of the building, which was basically too expensive to maintain because of it’s age, Dayton Public Schools bought it.  They used it for a couple of years to house Stivers School for the Arts, a 7-12 grade school whose own old beautiful building WAS being saved from demolition and was going through huge renovations. After Stivers was done, it sat empty, and Dayton Public decided to demo it.  The neighborhood association and Julienne alumni fought hard to save it, but to no avail.  It’s very sad.

But it’s not why I’m upset.  Because I’ll always have my memories.

What upsets me is that as I was looking through the pictures of my old school on the Dayton Daily News website, I also read every single article pertaining to the demolition that they had on their front page, like this one and the captions of the gallery linked to above, and all these articles called the building “the Julienne building” and mentioned that it was “most recently home to Stivers School for the Arts”.

Not one mention was made of the fact that from 1974-2004, Dayton Christian Schools owned and used that building.  THIRTY YEARS, as if they never happened.  Thousands of graduates, forgotten.  It’s despicable. Despicable, despicable, despicable.

It seems to me that Dayton Daily only prints news about Dayton Christian if it is negative.  And since for the thirty years DC was in that building, it was a positive thing for the building and the neighborhood, there was of course, no mention of it even though it was clearly relevant to the background of this story.

Let me tell you something, Dayton Daily News.  That building was important to ME.  And not because it was beautiful and historic, but because I went to school there – Dayton Christian School.  For THIRTY YEARS that was the Dayton Christian building.  And you act like it NEVER HAPPENED.  That’s some crack journalism there.  Really.  Way. To. Go.

When you fail to mention DC, you make a glaring omission in the history of the building in question.  Stivers only occupied the building for two years and yet they always make the cut.  Why gloss over thirty years of top-notch education that was done there?  It doesn’t make any sense, and actually it’s completely and totally FREAKING RIDICULOUS.

Tuesday when I griped on my Facebook status about the Dayton Daily News’ gross error in their coverage, one of my friends commented, “useless newspaper.”

I couldn’t have said it better myself.  And I mean that in the most Christian way possible.

I was weepy after looking at your photo galleries the other night, Dayton Daily, but now I’m just pissed. (Yes, Christians get pissed.  Sometimes even righteously.) You took thirty years of good and made it into nothing. You really pulled one over on us Christ-ers, great job. Did you think we wouldn’t notice?

I am thoroughly disgusted.

You can gloss over our memories but you can’t make them go away.

What do you think, DC Alumni?  I hope you’ll share a special memory of OUR building in the comments.  And maybe tell DDN where to stick it. In the most Christian way possible.

____________

I ganked those photos from Flickr. Click on the images for the credit. Please don’t sue me random guy from Flickr, I’m totes broke.

Post to Twitter

Find something real to worry about.

As I perused MSNBC this morning, it was clear to me that Jenny is not the only one getting worked up about things with little or no consequence.

Evidently things are going along SO SWIMMINGLY in our country that real actual news sources – not just Perez – have nothing better to do than report on utterly meaningless controversies.

For example.

Here’s what’s making headline news in our country today.

Crawling helmets: Have over-protective parents finally gone too far?

I have no words for this. Actually, I have a lot of (four letter) words for this based on the fact that my husband and I deal with kids ages 14-22 on a daily basis, but for the sake of our livelihoods I will refrain.

Bat on a plane! Rabies scare prompts health warning
Here’s how this vitally important article starts out: On an August morning last year, 53 people aboard a commercial airplane from Wisconsin were potentially exposed to the rabies virus when a bat flew through the cabin soon after takeoff, according to a government report of the incident released today.
Ok let’s review. The bat flew out of the plane before it could bite anyone AND this happened last August. Correct me if I’m wrong but if any of the 53 passengers who were in mortal danger had actually contracted rabies from the bat who didn’t bite anyone and probably wasn’t rabid in the first place, they would be long dead by now. Let me give you another quote from the article. Simply seeing a bat doesn’t put a person at risk of rabies. OH MY GOD are we seriously this stupid? UGH.

Also, in case you were worried about it, let me clear something up for you. Freeman isn’t marrying his step-granddaughter. It’s time to put the rumors to rest: Morgan Freeman isn’t planning to tie the knot with his step-granddaughter E’Dena Hines, who is 47 years his junior. I am so relieved to hear this, I had totally lost sleep over it. Actually now that I think of it, I DON’T CARE. I wouldn’t even care if Morgan Freeman was planning to marry his step-grandson, but that is a conversation for another time.

BLT potato chip and more crazy flavors. Someone clue me in on how to get a job in which I get paid to come up with life-changing concepts like Australian BBQ Kangaroo-flavored potato chips. I don’t know what a kangaroo tastes like, nor do I care to find out. The article then goes on to describe this:

Doritos Late Night All-Nighter Cheeseburger-Flavored Tortilla Chips pack all the flavors of cheese, ketchup, onions, pickles, beef, and buns into individual tortilla chips. OMG I am going to throw up. Don’t even get me started on the seaweed-flavored Pringles. I think I’d rather eat pink slime.

Let’s keep our eyes on the prize here, America. We have more important things to deal with. Like the fact that 17 million children in our country don’t know where their next meal will come from. The fact that the U.S. infant mortality rate is one of the highest among all developed countries. Or maybe that the Army diagnosed 76,176 soldiers with PTSD between 2000 and 2011. No worries, though. I’m sure they’ll be all fixed up as soon as they get a bag of Spanish Chicken Paella-flavored Lays.

I need a drink.

Post to Twitter

I’m not a woman anymore, I’m a MOM!

Excuse me if I’m a bit ranty, but, well…I’m a bit ranty.

I keep seeing something around the blogosphere, links on Facebook and twitter, etc. that is really disturbing to me.  And no, it’s not politics, or child soldiers, or anything of any actual consequence that has me riled up.

It is the over-targeting, from a marketing standpoint, of women who have children.  It’s the heavy, ridiculous, almost comical marketing to “MOMS”.  Sure, there are many products and services (such as diapers!) that only a mom would have a need for.  But there are also many things that should be marketed to women in general that are now pointedly being marketed with ” a twist” FOR MOMS.

Because apparently, once you give birth to or adopt a child, you are no longer just a woman.  And you need to be told SPECIFICALLY what to wear, and how to wear it.  You need to be told what meals to make your family, and how to make them.  And you need to only read blog posts and articles that have the word “mom” in the title.

Let me urge you to no longer read blog posts with the word “mom” in the title unless it is a post or article about parenting.

I am tired of reading about fashion FOR MOMS, cooking FOR MOMS, products FOR MOMS.

I’m a woman.  If I read an article about how to wear the latest fashion trend, I am going to be reading about WOMEN’S FASHION, not MOM FASHION.

I recently saw a post titled something to the effect of “How to wear skinny jeans if you’re a mom”  - that is not the exact title because I don’t want to be a total jerkwad, after all this rant is completely impersonal – there are dozens if not more bloggers and writers using the word “mom” to get search engine traffic (plenty of whom I think are super-great people).  I was immediately incensed when I read the title. Because really, if you’re a mom, why would you wear skinny jeans any differently from any other woman?  If that’s the case, shouldn’t women who delivered vaginally wear their jeans differently from c-section moms? OH MY GOSH WHAT IF YOU’VE HAD BOTH TYPES OF DELIVERIES??? Then HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU KNOW HOW TO WEAR YOUR SKINNY JEANS?  Oh! Or what if you’re a mom by ADOPTION!!??  Or a STEPMOM?  Ohmagah I am hyperventilating just thinking about the crisis I would have over skinny jeans if I were a MOM OF MULTIPLES!  Or a mom with biological, adopted, AND stepkids.  That type of mom probably shouldn’t even wear clothes at all.  Too difficult!

{Are you picking up my sarcasm?  I hope so because I am laying it on pretttttty thickly.}

It’s not mom fashion, it’s fashion.  And females who have children should not have separate rules for wearing clothing.  There should be fashion difference for women of different ages, perhaps, but not rules, articles, tips, or tricks based on being a mom. The reason these articles and post exists is because the word “mom” brings in good search engine traffic.  That is the bottom line.

To give you another example of this ridiculousness, I saw another post the other day, the title of which began with “Mom Fashion:” – then the rest of the title was about the appropriateness of teen clothing for prom or something like that.  You see, the article was not about mom fashion at all.  It was about whether you should let your daughters wear slutty clothes to the school dance.  Sure, moms were the article’s intended audience, but the title was written just for search engine optimization (SEO), not to, you know, MAKE ACTUAL SENSE.

So if you see those posts, don’t click on them.  Go to a fashion website instead.

Because you are a woman.  Even if you have a child.  You are a woman.

Don’t you guys love it when I get pissed off??

Let me say in closing, that I realize this is what some feel they have to do to be successful in business, if their business is a blog or website. Perhaps this is just a game you have to play these days.  But I am 100% uninterested in participating in it as blogger or a reader of blogs. (Or a WOMAN).

As much as it pains me to say this, however, I know my opinion is not the only valid one on the subject? Anyone care to add theirs?  Just please be nice and respectful in your comments.

Post to Twitter