A Sad Day Indeed
If you haven't yet heard, not only did they rob us of having 12 planets, not only did they remove the possibility of certainty of what is and is not a planet, but now, they've even taken away 
Xena. (By "they", I mean of course the traditional Rich White Men.) Yes, Xena, once the 10th, I mean 9th, I mean 12th planet of the Solar System, along with her moon Gabrielle. That which would have gotten men everywhere interested in astronomy- now gone. Replaced with the goddess of chaos and strife, Eris, because the astronomers can only fight over definitions to planets and not come up with a reasonable idea. And to add insult to injury, Gabrielle the moon of Xena, also gone, now giving us Eris' daughter, Dysnomia, the spirit of lawlessness.At least this allows for renewed job opportunities for Revisionary Source Criticism of Paul, for when he spoke of the spirit of lawlessness, he didn't actually mean antichrists or those who lead you astray. No, he was actually talking about the moon of the 3rd dwarf planet, speaking prophetically, and, in the tradition of Qur'anic proofs, showing the validity of the Bible. Yes, Paul was warning us to beware the dwarf moon, for it approaches. And by interpretive extension, may the reader understand, beware being born under this moon, for this is an inauspicious beginning. Now there are some who would argue that what Paul was actually pointing to was the coming of the antichrist at the time when Dysnomia would be discovered. For consider that it is 9 billion miles form the sun, and 9 billion miles is merely 3x3 billion miles, and 3 is 1/2 of 6, making for 3 1/2s of 3 6's. But most feel that this is a more conservative theological fringe and not to be taken as seriously as the astronomical predictions by Paul. After all, isn't astrology well affirmed in the Bible?
For those wondering about my repeated return to this theme, yes, I was going to shortly be changing the tagline of this blog to indicate that it covers my travels in America...and slightly further astray. But now- with the departure of Xena, I seem to have absolutely no more interest in astronomy.
Comments
I think it would be funny if they had named it UB40, because then we'd have an orbiting body that made reference to a white "reggae" band from Britain, and we could all cry into our Red Red Wine when they took its planetary hopes away.
Clearly, it is an attack against Lucy Lawless, then, "stripping" the orbiting body of not only its, shall we say, prototypical name, and supplying instead the name for her moon of the Goddess of LawlessNess? Is that what you are saying? Shouldn't Xena being stripped be exhilarating? Are you saying that something apsiring to a planet -should- be named for a star? Wouldn't that be *confusing*? Are you saying that men actually need planets to be named after sexy vixens in order to be interested in planetary bodies, because, franky, I don't see Venus getting that much play, or girls flocking to astronomy despite a majority of the major celestial bodies being named for Greek gods who, if I believe ancient sculpture, had some *heavenly* bodies. And, still, it seems to me that the males I know are the ones going round and round about this whole "Pluto is a planet"/"Pluto is not a planet" stuff. The women I know, really, aren't so troubled. But, perhaps we are used to being yanked around a bit, having things taken from us by men that we deserve. Or stripped. Whatever.
Frankly, I see this naming as completely appropriate and I really don't see how this makes America any more or less evil, nor do I see it as a portent of the end times. But then, though I am liberal, I object to the satirical (farcical?) naming of our current Administrator as "George Bush II" or "Shrub" or "W" anything other than his given name. I mean, did they call John Quincy Adams "John Adams II" or even "Q"? I think not; it offends me as much as any of the names they had for Mr. Clinton. Where is the respect? Revile the current Mr. Bush as I may, I don't feel it helps. I mean, doesn't it tell us in the Ten Commandments that we shouldn't slander others? Martin Luther would say so.
I've found that the best way to deal with an Administration you do not like is to find a way to get involved in changing the system. Like, join the committees wherein you get to spend all the money, or the committees where you get to tell everyone else to do. (yes, I'm warning you, I may someday run for political office...) Slowly, very slowly, by minute progression from A to B, and much like Pluto or Eris making the rounds, perhaps you can win them over or change them to your way of thinking, nudge by teeny nudge. Perhaps not, but at least you tried, in honest earnestness. Do not complain about what you can change: change it. Do not complain about what you cannot change: shake the (cosmic?) dust from your sandals and move on. Choose your battles, wear the right (heavenly?) armor, and someday, may amazed peace fall upon the world.
Let's see: In seriousness, the loss of Xena was no suprise- it was always only a placeholder name, as legally a planet or asteroid or dwarf planet can not be named after a TV character- it must be a number, creation god, or a god of the underworld. Yet still no one has had the guts to name a planet Jesus...
Yes. Men's attention spans *are* that short. And Venus doesn't count- no one's seen her outside marble in 2,000 years. Again, the attention span. Women however can remain interested even though Mars was frankly not much of a catch, and if you follow Jupiter's exploits, ditto, and the only reason we like Uranus is he gets like 2 lines in Greek history.
Again, going back to seriousness, I'd posit that more women are less troubled for the sad fact that there are less women in astronomy, as in the sciences in general- but it does seem that astronomers in general, regardless of gender, see this as a going concern, if just to get it agreed upon.
That would have been cool if they'd named John Quincy Adams Q, but I'm not sure if most saw *that* President as having god-like powers or egomania.
I think your ideas for changing the world are excellent. I'd suggest referring to George Bush as the "II" is rather mild- simply pointing out how he came to be in power was rather royalistic and without regard to constitutional due process. It says nothing against the man itself, as other perjoratives would, such as "Shrub", which I agree, is more of an insult.