![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
May. 16th, 2009
[PHOTO] The Squirrels of Toronto
May. 16th, 2009 02:20 pmThe below three pictures are of a cute squirrel I found on the University of Toronto campus, in the St. Michael's College area, last Sunday before I ran into the Tamil protest downtown.
While the squirrel, in its various subspecies, is a notable pest in Toronto as Torontoist's Rhonda Riche noted in 2007 they're also essential for our ecology and identity.
While the squirrel, in its various subspecies, is a notable pest in Toronto as Torontoist's Rhonda Riche noted in 2007 they're also essential for our ecology and identity.
Toronto is a squirrelly place. Even the mascot for our 150th anniversary was Seskwee the Sesquicentennial Squirrel. The frolicsome animal is a rodent of the family Sciuridae. There are more than 250 types of squirrel, but in Toronto two kinds dominate: the American Red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), and the Eastern Grey Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis). But what about our famous Black and White Squirrels, you ask?
Several species of squirrels, including the Eastern Grey, have melanistic phases, which means that they can appear either black or brownish grey in colour. Eastern Greys are the most common type found in Toronto. The famous white squirrels of Trinity Bellwoods Park are merely albinos.
Other than their cuteness, what's good about these critters? Squirrels play a big role in tree propagation. When they bury their nuts under the ground, about 10 to 20 percent of said seeds are lost, allowing trees to take root. Still, many consider them pests because they eat bulbs out of our gardens and take up residence in our walls. Squirrels also cause electricity outages as they often end up in transformers searching for food. When Seskwee ends up electrocuted, it causes a power surge that shorts equipment. And, because they often chew on tree branches to sharpen their teeth, they sometimes end up chomping on live power lines instead.
Still the squirrel, in its ubiquity, has become a symbol of our city. On any given day, you can find tourists snapping shots of the black ones because they are unknown overseas. Squirrels are so cool that Brampton has replaced its former mascot, "Millie the Millennium Techno Bug," with Sassy the Sesqui Squirrel. When Brampton is biting you, you know you're onto something good.
Grand news from the Toronto Star today: the Sinhalese-Tamil conflict may be coming to Toronto.
Tensions between Sinhalese- and Tamil-Canadian communities has been a long-standing theme in Canada, although Sinhalese-Canadians are a less organized and more dispersed community than their nominal co-nationals. It isn't a surprise that a Sinhalese Buddhist temple might have been targeted owing to the importance of religion in the Sri Lankan conflict, as Sinhalese nationalists' conception of the island as a Buddhist nation has serious ramifications; Buddhist monks, in fact, are famed supporters of Sinhalese ultranationalism.
A Buddhist monk believes a suspected arson at a temple in Scarborough is related to the ongoing conflict in Sri Lanka.
The fire sent three monks running for safety from the building on Kingston Rd. just south of Military Trail Rd., at about 4:30 a.m. after its east emergency entrance was found burning. Police and the Ontario Fire Marshal's Office are investigating.
Nalaka, a resident monk, said he believes the incident is connected to the war in Sri Lanka. He also said the monks have been threatened in the last week.
The incident has caused upset across Toronto's Sinhalese community.
"Every single Sinhalese person is Toronto is calling each other right now," said a man who attends the temple but did not want to be named. "It's very alarming."
Fire investigator James Gillespie estimates damage at $20-30,000. Police are looking at two bottles found near the door which may have been filled with accelerant, he said
Tensions between Sinhalese- and Tamil-Canadian communities has been a long-standing theme in Canada, although Sinhalese-Canadians are a less organized and more dispersed community than their nominal co-nationals. It isn't a surprise that a Sinhalese Buddhist temple might have been targeted owing to the importance of religion in the Sri Lankan conflict, as Sinhalese nationalists' conception of the island as a Buddhist nation has serious ramifications; Buddhist monks, in fact, are famed supporters of Sinhalese ultranationalism.
A week ago, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
springheel_jack had an interesting post speculating about the nature of fandom.
I may be affiliated with this group.springheel_jack began his post by referring to the new Star Trek movie, by all accounts a big hit--maybe even a crossover film--and something that pleased long-time Star Trek fans. I can be counted among that number; I might well see the movie again, I'm so pleased with it.
I may be affiliated with this group, but I don't belong to it. As I understand the concept of fannish culture, it relates to people who only belong to fannish circles, who don't participate in any social networks beyond those of fandom. I don't attend sci-fi conventions or anything of the like, for instance, and I do take part in multiple networks of friends: soc.history.what-if people, University of Toronto people, blog people, second- and third-generation people, et cetera. But is this necessarily enough? certainly most of the people I know have extensive Internet presences, and have interests which are often fairly similar to my own.
The phenomenon of fannish culture might be part of a wider phenomenon, another manifestation of the oft-observed phenomena of social networks being self-reinforcing, often detached from other networks. If the people I know and the social networks I belong to have shared interests, how can I easily find new friends and new interests that I might also like? That's one reason why I ask readers to suggest new blogs I might be interested in; new outlooks, new interests, are things I'm always on the lookout for. I'm not sure that I'm doing such a good job, though. (Then again, on Facebook I'm quite reluctant to friend or be friended at random; I like to at least know the people I'm connected to there. LJ and blogging is different for me, perhaps since they're more impersonal media.) Maybe I should start attending events listed in eye and NOW at random and see what happens.
So, what do you think about all this? Am I onto something? Am I wrong? Do you have any suggestions as to how to deal with constrained social networks? Are there points that I've raised or that you'd like to bring up?
springheel_jack had an interesting post speculating about the nature of fandom.What's been bugging me is that this is a Big Geek Culture -slash- Fandom Event, and it brings back all my puzzlement and difficulties and frustrations with Geek Culture and Fandom.
There's two alternatives, I guess. LJ was not always one hundred percent fannish, but it is now, the non-fan types having gone to other services as LJ's cachet has disappeared. I have mixed feelings about the whole idea of 'fandom', insofar as I understand it at all. And I'm not really a fan - I don't feel that I imbibe culture in that way, exactly. So while I'm interested in fandom as a cultural phenomenon, as a way of being related to culture, I'm not terribly interested in fandom's day-to-day activity on its own account. In fact I'm bored by it.
I may be affiliated with this group.
springheel_jack began his post by referring to the new Star Trek movie, by all accounts a big hit--maybe even a crossover film--and something that pleased long-time Star Trek fans. I can be counted among that number; I might well see the movie again, I'm so pleased with it. I may be affiliated with this group, but I don't belong to it. As I understand the concept of fannish culture, it relates to people who only belong to fannish circles, who don't participate in any social networks beyond those of fandom. I don't attend sci-fi conventions or anything of the like, for instance, and I do take part in multiple networks of friends: soc.history.what-if people, University of Toronto people, blog people, second- and third-generation people, et cetera. But is this necessarily enough? certainly most of the people I know have extensive Internet presences, and have interests which are often fairly similar to my own.
The phenomenon of fannish culture might be part of a wider phenomenon, another manifestation of the oft-observed phenomena of social networks being self-reinforcing, often detached from other networks. If the people I know and the social networks I belong to have shared interests, how can I easily find new friends and new interests that I might also like? That's one reason why I ask readers to suggest new blogs I might be interested in; new outlooks, new interests, are things I'm always on the lookout for. I'm not sure that I'm doing such a good job, though. (Then again, on Facebook I'm quite reluctant to friend or be friended at random; I like to at least know the people I'm connected to there. LJ and blogging is different for me, perhaps since they're more impersonal media.) Maybe I should start attending events listed in eye and NOW at random and see what happens.
So, what do you think about all this? Am I onto something? Am I wrong? Do you have any suggestions as to how to deal with constrained social networks? Are there points that I've raised or that you'd like to bring up?