The question today is do you play the game and win or stick to your morals and loose? Sometimes, is it better just to win even if that win seems hollow and empty? Are you really winning? And even if it doesn’t really feel like a win to you, maybe playing along for that battle will allow you to ultimately win your own war. Of course, can you feel okay about how you won the war knowing you sold yourself to win a few battles? For example, does a successful and ethical CEO ever feel truly happy knowing he cheated a bit in college to get where he is now? I mean, we all play the game a bit, it’s a given. The question is how far are you willing to bend over backwards to get where you want to be. And when you get there, can you ever really enjoy it while your ass is still hurting from all the times you were screwed?
I don’t believe in regrets but I’ve been looking at my life and I’m upset with how I handled a lot of conflict situations. Often, I didn’t stand up for the people or ideas that I believed in. These were the minority and I always figured not ruffling feathers or getting involved was the best approach. Looking back I am appalled that I took the easy way out and have been focusing on not making that mistake in the future. I don’t want to appear argumentative, but I also don’t think staying quiet is really helping anyone. Of course, it is always about comparing the size of the win with the casualties of the battle. Some battles really aren’t worth fighting. But sometimes, I just feel like we all get too complacent, too tolerant of others negative behavior. By not causing a commotion, we are condoning their harmful and narcissistic actions and allowing them to continue. Do we passively go along with the notion that the son revolves around us so we don‘t look like the bad guy? Or do we chose to appear like raving idiots, standing up and exclaiming that we are not the center of the universe. For me, I think standing by my convictions is the most important thing because at the end of the day I have to live with myself. Well the battle is about to begin so I should go get my weapons ready for attack. You know what they say is the best defense.bb..
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Age Discrimination
So lately I've been looking into the dating websites. I sincerely believe they are incapable of doing what they advertise and their only use is to find weird people to talk to. But this blog is not about the inefficiency of those dating sites but about age. Where should I start?
After scavenging a handful of dating websites I noted a pretty common feature. When searching for people/matches/dates you are asked to put it a short list of criteria: male/female, how far away they live, must have a photo (yes or no), when they were last online, and an age range. Obviously, I'm going to talk about the latter.
I'm not sure how many of you reading this have used sites like this before, but it has really made me think a lot about where you draw the age line. Ok, let's back up. When you are in high school it is a big deal if a senior dates a freshman. But when you look at your parents, it is not at all unacceptable for them to be 10 years apart. So where does that leave those of us (like me) in the middle? I sit there, staring at my screen, wondering what is too young or too old to date.
Well, I know anyone under 18 is a no but what about the odd 18-20 range. They can't drink yet so that can be messy but still not a deal breaker. But what about maturity? I met a really sweet 18 year old but it was more than apparent of his innocence. So if not 18, what about 19, or 20? I once heard a rule about dating younger. It says take half you age and add 7. Hmm..(24/2) + 7 = 19. Well, I guess that solves that??
So what about the question "how old is too old?" Is 30 too old? Well surely 30 isn't too old because I met a 31 year old the other day and he didn't seem much older than me. So if 31 is okay, then what about 32? 33? 34? 35?....I mean where do you cut it off? How can anyone be expected to go to a dating site and say "no one older than 33; that's my cutoff."
I understand that age is just a number and it has much more to do with what stage your are at in life and maybe your overall maturity. I also think it has to do with your personality. For example, my friend Stephen has a thing for older women. I believe it is because he is VERY intelligent for his age and he is used to his "peers" being people who were older than him. As for me, I've always had a thing for younger guys. Whether it be an old high school boyfriend who's 2 years younger, or rocker who's 21. Granted, that's not a huge age difference, but I think it's important to note my motherly personality is naturally attracted to boys younger than myself.
Overall, my point of of all of this is to make YOU think about your own age range. How easily could you come up with definitive caps to your age requirements? Can you really just sit down and say: "39 is ok, but 40 is too old." I know you can't so don't even lie to yourself. Seriously, spend a few minutes thinking about it. I think you will realize that it's an interesting quandary.
After scavenging a handful of dating websites I noted a pretty common feature. When searching for people/matches/dates you are asked to put it a short list of criteria: male/female, how far away they live, must have a photo (yes or no), when they were last online, and an age range. Obviously, I'm going to talk about the latter.
I'm not sure how many of you reading this have used sites like this before, but it has really made me think a lot about where you draw the age line. Ok, let's back up. When you are in high school it is a big deal if a senior dates a freshman. But when you look at your parents, it is not at all unacceptable for them to be 10 years apart. So where does that leave those of us (like me) in the middle? I sit there, staring at my screen, wondering what is too young or too old to date.
Well, I know anyone under 18 is a no but what about the odd 18-20 range. They can't drink yet so that can be messy but still not a deal breaker. But what about maturity? I met a really sweet 18 year old but it was more than apparent of his innocence. So if not 18, what about 19, or 20? I once heard a rule about dating younger. It says take half you age and add 7. Hmm..(24/2) + 7 = 19. Well, I guess that solves that??
So what about the question "how old is too old?" Is 30 too old? Well surely 30 isn't too old because I met a 31 year old the other day and he didn't seem much older than me. So if 31 is okay, then what about 32? 33? 34? 35?....I mean where do you cut it off? How can anyone be expected to go to a dating site and say "no one older than 33; that's my cutoff."
I understand that age is just a number and it has much more to do with what stage your are at in life and maybe your overall maturity. I also think it has to do with your personality. For example, my friend Stephen has a thing for older women. I believe it is because he is VERY intelligent for his age and he is used to his "peers" being people who were older than him. As for me, I've always had a thing for younger guys. Whether it be an old high school boyfriend who's 2 years younger, or rocker who's 21. Granted, that's not a huge age difference, but I think it's important to note my motherly personality is naturally attracted to boys younger than myself.
Overall, my point of of all of this is to make YOU think about your own age range. How easily could you come up with definitive caps to your age requirements? Can you really just sit down and say: "39 is ok, but 40 is too old." I know you can't so don't even lie to yourself. Seriously, spend a few minutes thinking about it. I think you will realize that it's an interesting quandary.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Blog from last night...
Perhaps I am out of the loop like always. Maybe I just think differently than most people my age. But once again I do not get the newest [facebook status] craze: Texts From Last Night. In case you're not aware, they are the sentences with an area code in front of them. The website is http://www.textsfromlastnight.com and after realizing this, I went to the site to see what it was all about. I perused the "about" section and still didn't understand.. Let me quote what it says on Wikipedia:
This concept is not only clear but actually sounds humorous. I know we have all found drunken text messages that make no sense and, along with massive misspellings, are quite hilarious. The issue I have comes from when I read the texts posted on the website. Here are some random examples:
Although the texts may be clever, they resemble a tweet more than a drunken text message. Nothing about these texts fits the category of "regrettable" as stated in the description of the site. Instead, they sound like sober antidotes thought up the next day. Is this nothing more than a less depressing regurgitation of FML? And, like FML I don't understand why people "repost" these TFLN as their statuses instead of writing their own.
Maybe I'm just pissed because I was really looking forward to what they advertise: reading drunken text messages from people who are too sloshed to even pick up their phone, let alone type out words. Even better, let's create a site where we include drunken voice mails. We all know that would be hilarious. All I'm saying is that I don't get the gimmick for sites like FML and TFLN and cannot see how they differ at all from sites like Twitter.
Someone wake me up when the next craze is at least original. FML!
***Just thought I would add this on to my blog. If you are looking for a great site that actually posts funny and real internet failures, check out http://facebookfails.com/ you'll love it!***
Texts From Last Night (TFLN) is a regularly updated blog that re-posts short text messages submitted by its users. The texts are sent in by people who wake in the morning "to find regrettable messages sent to or from their mobile phones." The receiver then sends the discovered text into the website.
This concept is not only clear but actually sounds humorous. I know we have all found drunken text messages that make no sense and, along with massive misspellings, are quite hilarious. The issue I have comes from when I read the texts posted on the website. Here are some random examples:
(703): Ryan Howard.... the only guy who struck out more than me this weekend
(201): its raining. im dressed as yoda and im trick or treating alone. and i wonder why im still a virgin..
(626): Waldo just asked us for directions. Even he doesn't know where he is.
Although the texts may be clever, they resemble a tweet more than a drunken text message. Nothing about these texts fits the category of "regrettable" as stated in the description of the site. Instead, they sound like sober antidotes thought up the next day. Is this nothing more than a less depressing regurgitation of FML? And, like FML I don't understand why people "repost" these TFLN as their statuses instead of writing their own.
Maybe I'm just pissed because I was really looking forward to what they advertise: reading drunken text messages from people who are too sloshed to even pick up their phone, let alone type out words. Even better, let's create a site where we include drunken voice mails. We all know that would be hilarious. All I'm saying is that I don't get the gimmick for sites like FML and TFLN and cannot see how they differ at all from sites like Twitter.
Someone wake me up when the next craze is at least original. FML!
***Just thought I would add this on to my blog. If you are looking for a great site that actually posts funny and real internet failures, check out http://facebookfails.com/ you'll love it!***
Saturday, October 3, 2009
A is for Addiction
A is for addiction, B is for bulimia, C is for cutting, D is for drinking, E is for....
Everyday we are bogged down by the idea of millions of diseases; it's a wonder we are not all hypochondriacs. The more I read about them, the more I think I have every disorder under the sun. Maybe it's all in our head, or maybe we have a little bit off all of it stuck in that noggin of ours. Who am I to say...
But since this is a blog, I am forced to take an opinion or less I don't write at all. Today's topics are obsession and addiction. I believe the two go hand in hand so for the purpose of this blog, I am going to refer to them as one mental diseases.
On a personal note I have had my own bouts of hypochondria. I thought I had ADD, Dyslexia, General Stress Disorder, and more. Maybe I do have one or more of those things; maybe I don't. I assume I'll never really know because the definitions of theses mental illnesses are so fuzzy it seems hard to determine a real diagnosis.
But whether or not we have a "real" disease, we can all agree we suffer from addictive tendencies. With some people it is the obvious: cigarettes, alcohol, [illegal] drugs, and so on. Those sorts of things are easy to classify as "addictions." What I want to know is how many of you out there feel you suffer from what most people would call an "unhealthy obsession?" Maybe I should back up and give you Webster's deffinition of the 2 words:
obsession: a persistent, disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling
addiction: persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
Okay, I admit there are many definitions for these words but I needed to start somewhere. So I think it is safe to say that an unreasonable idea/feeling about a preoccupation could be deemed a harmful substance by the user. Simple deduction here shows the similarities of obsession and addiction. But as always, I digress. My point here is not to prove the two words are to same but to express my concern that the term obsession is underestimated as a voluntary response why the term addiction is considered a serious mental affliction.
I hope that at least some of you out there understand where I'm coming from. I look at my current obsession and see it to be no different than any typical substance one might be addicted to. While a smoking addict may want I cigarette to calm him or her down, my obsession makes me refuse to let go of someone long past. The smoker doesn't want to quit because of the memory of the feeling the nicotine brings him or her. How is this any different than what I go through on a daily basis? Although some substances are said to be physically addictive, we all know that "non addictive" substances like marijuana are still addictive mentally, as can be so many of our daily obsessions.
Ultimately, where I'm going with this blog, is to justify that our obsessions are just as real and dangerous as our addictions. That if our obsessions are not treated (along with our addictions) we are likely to live a mentally unhealthy life. My biggest concern is that there is so much outreach for the addicts and not enough for the clinically obsessed. I encourage anyone brave enough to share their obsession(s) here in hopes of reaching out to others with a similar cause. You all know mine; refusal to let go of someone whom I felt truly connected. These obsessions may not be healthy but I have to think that at least admitting them gives us some sort of power to make over them. Or maybe I'm just kidding myself. All I know is I can't sleep again cause I miss the person who illogically means the world to me. If that's not a persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful then I don't know what is.
"I'll never let go. I promise" - LC
Thursday, October 1, 2009
If
Today I've been thinking again about love. What is the difference between loving someone and being in love? How can you tell the difference between being in love and wanting what you can't have? How are we to know? I don't like using my blog as a self promotion outlet for my own work but today is an exception. I really believe in this this "what if" concept and what it can do to one's sanity. Enjoy the poetry:
If..
9-3-06
When we were young we played make believe
We imagined whole worlds we had never seen.
But once we get older, as the rumor states,
This imaginative notion will slowly abate.
But I must disagree with the statement afore
As we get older our imaginations transform
Into what is known as adult fantasy
An exotic, romantic, soliloquy
The infamous If, a deadly sin,
Leaving you wondering what could have been.
If I had stayed, If I had gone..,
If I had jumped.., If I was wrong..
If only he knew, if only she knew,
If only I knew how much I loved you.
Fantasy makes living much more fun
Imagining what your existence might have become.
Taking you away from your mundane life
Rewriting it like a movie with action and strife.
You can choose your best friend, a side kick that's cool
A typical jokester, a jester, a fool.
You can pick your leading lady, sweet or sexy,
But someone you'd never be with in reality.
The infamous If, a deadly sin,
Leaving you wondering what could have been.
If I had stayed, If I had gone..,
If I had jumped.., If I was wrong..
If only he knew, if only she knew,
If only I knew whether I loved you
But life isn't like the movie we've dreamed
With car chases, gun fights, and sex scenes.
So as you are brought back into real time
You wonder if all your fantasies were genuine
The infamous If, a deadly sin,
Leaving you wondering what could have been.
If I had stayed, If I had gone..,
If I had jumped.., If I was wrong..
If only he knew, if only she knew,
If only I knew how I felt about you
If..
9-3-06
When we were young we played make believe
We imagined whole worlds we had never seen.
But once we get older, as the rumor states,
This imaginative notion will slowly abate.
But I must disagree with the statement afore
As we get older our imaginations transform
Into what is known as adult fantasy
An exotic, romantic, soliloquy
The infamous If, a deadly sin,
Leaving you wondering what could have been.
If I had stayed, If I had gone..,
If I had jumped.., If I was wrong..
If only he knew, if only she knew,
If only I knew how much I loved you.
Fantasy makes living much more fun
Imagining what your existence might have become.
Taking you away from your mundane life
Rewriting it like a movie with action and strife.
You can choose your best friend, a side kick that's cool
A typical jokester, a jester, a fool.
You can pick your leading lady, sweet or sexy,
But someone you'd never be with in reality.
The infamous If, a deadly sin,
Leaving you wondering what could have been.
If I had stayed, If I had gone..,
If I had jumped.., If I was wrong..
If only he knew, if only she knew,
If only I knew whether I loved you
But life isn't like the movie we've dreamed
With car chases, gun fights, and sex scenes.
So as you are brought back into real time
You wonder if all your fantasies were genuine
The infamous If, a deadly sin,
Leaving you wondering what could have been.
If I had stayed, If I had gone..,
If I had jumped.., If I was wrong..
If only he knew, if only she knew,
If only I knew how I felt about you
Monday, July 13, 2009
Denial is not just a river in Africa
PREFACE: This blog is an investigation on applying factors of coping with death to factors of coping with loss. It is a little lengthy and very anecdotal, but I felt it was necessary to make a proper comparison. Please realize this before choosing to read. Thanks!
Death is a widely studied subject. Even my (stupid) college had a class on the subject ("Death as a Fact of Life"). Whether you learned it in psychology or religion class, the Stages of Grief are pretty standard: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance. When dealing with a loss, I believe we go through these stages, although not necessarily in a simple, linear order. Also, I am NOT using the word loss as a synonym for death. Please make note of that fact.
I lost someone who knows how many days, months, years ago. My (ex) best friend and I always had a rocky, fair weather friendship. It got worse about 4 years ago when his girlfriend convinced him "being friends with a girl is wrong." We didn't speak for 6 months. This is where Stage 3: Bargaining comes into play. I called him right before I left for NYC. I told him I was willing to put aside everything because I wanted us to make up before I moved. Then again, bargains only work when both parties make good on their share.
Things went from awkward to good to quiet and so on for a while, but I guess there's always a calm before the storm. A year ago, he started displaying erratic behavior: excessive drinking, drugs, and partying. Rather than accept this new lifestyle of his, I chose to participate in Stage 1: Denial. I refused to believe it was really him and told myself it was just a stage his current (new) girlfriend was imposing on him. After another missed birthday (mine) and a "he said, she said" accusation on his part, I went into Stage 2: Anger. I screamed at him for the first time and told him where he could shove it. Obviously, we didn't speak again for 4 months.
I went to some therapy which made me really miss him so I tried to reconnect, this time there was no bargaining. Instead we just sort of denied the whole fight happened and went on like normal. That worked for less than a week before I realized denial really doesn't work. Soon he was back to his old ways of never calling me back and putting everyone (and their dog) over me. A quick bout of anger led into Stage 4: a long string of depression over the matter. But since I obviously don't learn, 7 months later I was back to Stage 3. I was so deep into Stage 4 I was willing to bargain my pride, morals, and soul just to have him back in my life. Unfortunately, a trade was impossibly because I had nothing of value to him [that is, nothing except seeing me in pain or dead, but that's another story].
It's been a couple months now and I'm trying to take steps toward Stage 5: Acceptance. But every time I think I am succeeding, I run across something that so strongly reminds me of him. Oddly enough, the feeling I got the other day from reliving the memory of the Met could not be found in any of these "Stages of Grief." A sadness, for sure, but not depression. If only you could imagine how it feels to miss someone like they're dead when they haven't really gone. Sometimes I tell myself he is dead, and that makes it somewhat easier. Maybe he really did die that Thanksgiving weekend. Maybe the only way to reach acceptance is to fully realize the boy I knew is gone and he is never coming back. That's not as easy to do when he's not really dead.
A quandary for thought.
Death is a widely studied subject. Even my (stupid) college had a class on the subject ("Death as a Fact of Life"). Whether you learned it in psychology or religion class, the Stages of Grief are pretty standard: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance. When dealing with a loss, I believe we go through these stages, although not necessarily in a simple, linear order. Also, I am NOT using the word loss as a synonym for death. Please make note of that fact.
I lost someone who knows how many days, months, years ago. My (ex) best friend and I always had a rocky, fair weather friendship. It got worse about 4 years ago when his girlfriend convinced him "being friends with a girl is wrong." We didn't speak for 6 months. This is where Stage 3: Bargaining comes into play. I called him right before I left for NYC. I told him I was willing to put aside everything because I wanted us to make up before I moved. Then again, bargains only work when both parties make good on their share.
Things went from awkward to good to quiet and so on for a while, but I guess there's always a calm before the storm. A year ago, he started displaying erratic behavior: excessive drinking, drugs, and partying. Rather than accept this new lifestyle of his, I chose to participate in Stage 1: Denial. I refused to believe it was really him and told myself it was just a stage his current (new) girlfriend was imposing on him. After another missed birthday (mine) and a "he said, she said" accusation on his part, I went into Stage 2: Anger. I screamed at him for the first time and told him where he could shove it. Obviously, we didn't speak again for 4 months.
I went to some therapy which made me really miss him so I tried to reconnect, this time there was no bargaining. Instead we just sort of denied the whole fight happened and went on like normal. That worked for less than a week before I realized denial really doesn't work. Soon he was back to his old ways of never calling me back and putting everyone (and their dog) over me. A quick bout of anger led into Stage 4: a long string of depression over the matter. But since I obviously don't learn, 7 months later I was back to Stage 3. I was so deep into Stage 4 I was willing to bargain my pride, morals, and soul just to have him back in my life. Unfortunately, a trade was impossibly because I had nothing of value to him [that is, nothing except seeing me in pain or dead, but that's another story].
It's been a couple months now and I'm trying to take steps toward Stage 5: Acceptance. But every time I think I am succeeding, I run across something that so strongly reminds me of him. Oddly enough, the feeling I got the other day from reliving the memory of the Met could not be found in any of these "Stages of Grief." A sadness, for sure, but not depression. If only you could imagine how it feels to miss someone like they're dead when they haven't really gone. Sometimes I tell myself he is dead, and that makes it somewhat easier. Maybe he really did die that Thanksgiving weekend. Maybe the only way to reach acceptance is to fully realize the boy I knew is gone and he is never coming back. That's not as easy to do when he's not really dead.
A quandary for thought.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
If you can count, maybe you should have stopped at 10
So I was watching "Jon & Kate Plus 8" today (because I think Kate is so fricken weird and she cracks me up!) and after it's over this show "18 Kids and Counting" comes on. Well my first thought is "in this overpopulated world, where our carbon footprints are getting larger everyday, why the hell would you have 18 kids?" So, I figured I had to watch a bit of the show to see the gimmick. I mean, maybe they were all adopted which would be really sweet. Guess what? They're not. So this family (the Duggars) have 18 children ALL with the same first letter of their first name; Role Call: Joshua, Jana and John-David (twins), Jill, Jessa, Jinger, Joseph, Josiah, Joy-Anna, Jedidiah and Jeremiah (twins), Jason, James, Justin, Jackson, Johannah, Jennifer, and Jordyn-Grace. So, in case the names like Jedidiah or Josiah didn't give it away, The Duggars are very conservative baptists. They believe in the Quiverfull Movement (yes it has a name) which states that you should not use any birth control and "allow God to determine the number of children you will have." These Arkansas parents, Michelle and Jim Bob, teach their 18 kids at home which promotes a horrible stigma about home schoolers. It portrays homeschool families as ignorant, very religious, and hicks. As you can imagine, this is something that quickly gets under my skin.
So if you're not too horrified to keep reading, let me discuss their lifestyle. All the children's Internet usage is heavily monitored, which may be more about control than than about safety. How can the kids learn about freedom when they aren't given any? But wait, it gets better, or worse in this case. As you would assume, the children are not allowed to date in the normal definition of the word. Instead, they go through what they call "courtship." Not only are they not allowed to even kiss before marriage, but they must have a chaperon for every meeting (even if they are adults).
Now don't get me wrong. I believe in the phrase "to each his own" and feel that Michelle and Jim Bob should live however they want. What worries me is the lack of "real world" experiences these children are receiving. I mean, you can lock a puppy up in a cage so he will never pee on the rug or get fleas, but is that really letting him live at all? When children are brought up in such an environment, they are not able to relize the lack of freedom they have. I wont go as far as to say it's brain washing, but I think it is a milder version. If a child is conditioned to be told everything they can do and not do, they don't know they are missing out on the choice. Hearing about courtships and marriages only approved by the dad, I'm reminded of "A Handmaiden's Tail." Have these families gone back in time or have they just never progressed? I completely understand living and raising your family based on religious based morals but does that require them to shelter their kids? What I don't understand is if they teach their children religion, why don't they trust them to use it to make their own decisions, such as marriage? If you trust God to decide how many children you will have, why does the child need permission to date someone from their Dad rather than the Heavenly Father? Seems like a hypocrisy to me.
Well, my head is spinning too much to write anymore so I am going to go lie down. Just talking about 18 children has worn me out.
So if you're not too horrified to keep reading, let me discuss their lifestyle. All the children's Internet usage is heavily monitored, which may be more about control than than about safety. How can the kids learn about freedom when they aren't given any? But wait, it gets better, or worse in this case. As you would assume, the children are not allowed to date in the normal definition of the word. Instead, they go through what they call "courtship." Not only are they not allowed to even kiss before marriage, but they must have a chaperon for every meeting (even if they are adults).
Now don't get me wrong. I believe in the phrase "to each his own" and feel that Michelle and Jim Bob should live however they want. What worries me is the lack of "real world" experiences these children are receiving. I mean, you can lock a puppy up in a cage so he will never pee on the rug or get fleas, but is that really letting him live at all? When children are brought up in such an environment, they are not able to relize the lack of freedom they have. I wont go as far as to say it's brain washing, but I think it is a milder version. If a child is conditioned to be told everything they can do and not do, they don't know they are missing out on the choice. Hearing about courtships and marriages only approved by the dad, I'm reminded of "A Handmaiden's Tail." Have these families gone back in time or have they just never progressed? I completely understand living and raising your family based on religious based morals but does that require them to shelter their kids? What I don't understand is if they teach their children religion, why don't they trust them to use it to make their own decisions, such as marriage? If you trust God to decide how many children you will have, why does the child need permission to date someone from their Dad rather than the Heavenly Father? Seems like a hypocrisy to me.
Well, my head is spinning too much to write anymore so I am going to go lie down. Just talking about 18 children has worn me out.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Hipocrisy-a Real Soon
Hypocrisy: the act of being less critical of oneself than of others.
We all do it, but to what extent? Lately I've been thinking a lot about this topic. I apologize in advance (and give fair warning) this blog is more personal and less pop-culture than normal. Hmm..now where to start...
It was a dark and stormy night...no no
Once upon a time....not even close
Well then, lets start at the beginning. I have a history of being disappointed by people. Maybe it's because I think too much of them, maybe they don't live up to their potential, who knows. That's a whole other blog (been there, done that). My point is, I like to think I see the best possible person in people and, for better or worse, get brutally let down when they don't live up to my expectations.
I grew up with two brothers. I now only have one. Oh no, don't start sending me flowers in sympathy, the other one's not dead. He's just no longer in my life. This is because I have standards. I refuse to put up with people who live in their own head and only think about themselves. Now, don't get me wrong, I've given him time to grow and change; unfortunately, he thinks he's fine the way he is. In fact, my nickname for him is the prodigal son. This comes from the Biblical story illustrating how one son is forgiven no matter how horrible he is and is considered equal to the always loyal son. In case you're not getting it, you can guess who always identified with the "loyal son."
But this blog is not about my feelings toward the "Prodigal Son." What it is about is the continuous forgiveness no matter the trespasses. One of the only things I resent about my wonderful father is that he was always so quick to forgive him no matter how cruel his actions. I understood unconditional love, but not the concept of always "letting things slide." Or, at least I thought I didn't understand it. After much further investigation of myself, I have realized I am just as guilty as my father. Like father, like daughter.
My best friend in high school was my rock. He was the only one who understood me. Over the years..well..I guess life got in the way. I take that back..girls got in the way. "When Harry met Sally" poses the quintessential question: can men and women be friends? I've always said yes, but I have learned why it is so hard. But I digress...
It's been at least 4 years of this rocky "friendship" we have endured and every time it is his own actions that keep us from talking (oh my would he be steamed if he read me saying that..lol). But no matter how much he hurts me, no matter how unfair he is to me, I always reach back out to him. I always forgive his trespasses in a heartbeat (no pun intended) because I care about him with every fiber of my body. I forget how he made me feel for the last 6+ months and I welcome him with open arms. And yet, when my dad does this to my brother, I yell at him. Talk about hypocrisy.
So what's the moral of the story? Well it would be easy to say it's not to judge without looking first at yourself. Yet, I don't think it's that simple. We all have our crosses to bare but perhaps we all carry the same cross. What makes sense to one person may seem absurd to someone else. All I ask from my readers now is to find the similarity in others, rather than your differences.
"If only she knew..."
We all do it, but to what extent? Lately I've been thinking a lot about this topic. I apologize in advance (and give fair warning) this blog is more personal and less pop-culture than normal. Hmm..now where to start...
It was a dark and stormy night...no no
Once upon a time....not even close
Well then, lets start at the beginning. I have a history of being disappointed by people. Maybe it's because I think too much of them, maybe they don't live up to their potential, who knows. That's a whole other blog (been there, done that). My point is, I like to think I see the best possible person in people and, for better or worse, get brutally let down when they don't live up to my expectations.
I grew up with two brothers. I now only have one. Oh no, don't start sending me flowers in sympathy, the other one's not dead. He's just no longer in my life. This is because I have standards. I refuse to put up with people who live in their own head and only think about themselves. Now, don't get me wrong, I've given him time to grow and change; unfortunately, he thinks he's fine the way he is. In fact, my nickname for him is the prodigal son. This comes from the Biblical story illustrating how one son is forgiven no matter how horrible he is and is considered equal to the always loyal son. In case you're not getting it, you can guess who always identified with the "loyal son."
But this blog is not about my feelings toward the "Prodigal Son." What it is about is the continuous forgiveness no matter the trespasses. One of the only things I resent about my wonderful father is that he was always so quick to forgive him no matter how cruel his actions. I understood unconditional love, but not the concept of always "letting things slide." Or, at least I thought I didn't understand it. After much further investigation of myself, I have realized I am just as guilty as my father. Like father, like daughter.
My best friend in high school was my rock. He was the only one who understood me. Over the years..well..I guess life got in the way. I take that back..girls got in the way. "When Harry met Sally" poses the quintessential question: can men and women be friends? I've always said yes, but I have learned why it is so hard. But I digress...
It's been at least 4 years of this rocky "friendship" we have endured and every time it is his own actions that keep us from talking (oh my would he be steamed if he read me saying that..lol). But no matter how much he hurts me, no matter how unfair he is to me, I always reach back out to him. I always forgive his trespasses in a heartbeat (no pun intended) because I care about him with every fiber of my body. I forget how he made me feel for the last 6+ months and I welcome him with open arms. And yet, when my dad does this to my brother, I yell at him. Talk about hypocrisy.
So what's the moral of the story? Well it would be easy to say it's not to judge without looking first at yourself. Yet, I don't think it's that simple. We all have our crosses to bare but perhaps we all carry the same cross. What makes sense to one person may seem absurd to someone else. All I ask from my readers now is to find the similarity in others, rather than your differences.
"If only she knew..."
Monday, April 20, 2009
Resume the Position
OMG so my account says I haven't blogged since March 20th. That was just too long ago. Sorry to be out of things but I do have one small (lame) excuse: my computer is broken (hopefully only the charger) and so I have no Internet/MS Word access at my house right now. It's a lame excuse cause I could have just written the blog down with pen and paper ("what's that?") and then typed it up on a friend's computer or something. But hey, Earth Day is coming up so I'm going to stay green and not kill trees just to blog. LOL
Okay, now on to this week's serious point....
Every summer my job highers interns (this year unpaid interns). Last week my boss gave the department a copy of all the résumés and cover letters (electronically of course..no trees killed I promise) and asked us to evaluate the candidates. I have found this to be one of the most frustrating tasks I have had in a long time. Sadly, this is not because everyone is so great it's impossible to choose. It's not just that the applications are less than par. People illustrate the most idiotic things on their résumé and then expect to get hired. Lets go to the examples:
One person wrote this as their first two sentences of their cover letter:
"As a firm believer in the restorative power of the arts, I realize how artistic expression can be a vehicle for social justice. Therefore, I want to spend my life creating and facilitating an environment for theatre to flourish."
Do they realize this is an application for a Customer Service internship not an argumentative essay on the importance of music in school? Did they teach you the concept of over elevated language at your private college? *sigh*
I understand that I work for a performing arts organization but I seriously think these people do not read the description of the job they are applying to. If I have to read one more cover letter about "my love of performing, organizing shows, programming events...etc" I'm going to scream. Obviously, these people have no idea what customer service really means. But perhaps this is because they have no customer service experience. Oh no, wait, it gets better; Many of these people have no work experience AT ALL! One girl succeeded her cover letter with a piece of paper with the heading "Resume" (under her contact info) followed by a 1 & 1/2 page list of her vocal repertoire. That was it. No job history, no skills; just that she sang Puccini's "O mio babbino caro" and played "Maggie" in her high school production of "A Chorus Line." Genius!
Now this is what frustrates me more than anything else in the world. So many children go through high school and college without ever getting one ounce of job experience under their belt. They spend their school semesters and Summers partying or going abroad while ignoring the persevering work force. I know it's an unpaid internship but I refuse to let it slide that you've spent 4 years of high school and at least half of your time in college and never once held a job or even volunteered. A good employer wants people who can multitask and carry a lot on your plate at once. If you can't handle 15 credit hours of school AND a part time job than maybe you're not cut out to handle 5 customers screaming at you at once each about various unforeseen problems.
In this bad economy, the job market is more competitive than ever. Consequently, this means you have to work that much harder to make your résumé/cover letter picture perfect. I can't stand seeing 2 page résumés, cover letters with excessive/unnecessary commas, that useless "objective," and poorly written sentences like "...because I strongly feel to always support the arts." Please don't tell me you have a "career aspiration" of Art Administrations and yet you are a sophomore majoring in Architecture. As robots say "this does not compute."
They say your résumé is your calling card. If this is true, don't expect to get a call from me anytime soon. I think your application made my head explode. I'm going to take a Tylenol, I have a headache.
Okay, now on to this week's serious point....
Every summer my job highers interns (this year unpaid interns). Last week my boss gave the department a copy of all the résumés and cover letters (electronically of course..no trees killed I promise) and asked us to evaluate the candidates. I have found this to be one of the most frustrating tasks I have had in a long time. Sadly, this is not because everyone is so great it's impossible to choose. It's not just that the applications are less than par. People illustrate the most idiotic things on their résumé and then expect to get hired. Lets go to the examples:
One person wrote this as their first two sentences of their cover letter:
"As a firm believer in the restorative power of the arts, I realize how artistic expression can be a vehicle for social justice. Therefore, I want to spend my life creating and facilitating an environment for theatre to flourish."
Do they realize this is an application for a Customer Service internship not an argumentative essay on the importance of music in school? Did they teach you the concept of over elevated language at your private college? *sigh*
I understand that I work for a performing arts organization but I seriously think these people do not read the description of the job they are applying to. If I have to read one more cover letter about "my love of performing, organizing shows, programming events...etc" I'm going to scream. Obviously, these people have no idea what customer service really means. But perhaps this is because they have no customer service experience. Oh no, wait, it gets better; Many of these people have no work experience AT ALL! One girl succeeded her cover letter with a piece of paper with the heading "Resume" (under her contact info) followed by a 1 & 1/2 page list of her vocal repertoire. That was it. No job history, no skills; just that she sang Puccini's "O mio babbino caro" and played "Maggie" in her high school production of "A Chorus Line." Genius!
Now this is what frustrates me more than anything else in the world. So many children go through high school and college without ever getting one ounce of job experience under their belt. They spend their school semesters and Summers partying or going abroad while ignoring the persevering work force. I know it's an unpaid internship but I refuse to let it slide that you've spent 4 years of high school and at least half of your time in college and never once held a job or even volunteered. A good employer wants people who can multitask and carry a lot on your plate at once. If you can't handle 15 credit hours of school AND a part time job than maybe you're not cut out to handle 5 customers screaming at you at once each about various unforeseen problems.
In this bad economy, the job market is more competitive than ever. Consequently, this means you have to work that much harder to make your résumé/cover letter picture perfect. I can't stand seeing 2 page résumés, cover letters with excessive/unnecessary commas, that useless "objective," and poorly written sentences like "...because I strongly feel to always support the arts." Please don't tell me you have a "career aspiration" of Art Administrations and yet you are a sophomore majoring in Architecture. As robots say "this does not compute."
They say your résumé is your calling card. If this is true, don't expect to get a call from me anytime soon. I think your application made my head explode. I'm going to take a Tylenol, I have a headache.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Are you feeling blue?
Remember last year when everywhere we looked we saw Obama posters/buttons reiterating his policy for change? Well my "hope" for change has taken a fast break down the lane and out of the stadium. That's right, our President of the United States of America has once again put all his backing into the University of North Carolina (at Chapel Hill) to win the NCAA tournament. According to my research he's picked them a lot and obviously must be a fan. Seriously, Barack? The Tarheels? For someone who spent months preaching change he sure is quick to jump on the bandwagon. I mean, the Tarheels are the college basketball equivalent to the MLB New York Yankees. You have these teams who have followings across the country. But these "fans" often only know the star(s) of the team an little else.
To make the whole situation more hysterical, our President is quoted by the Associated Press for saying: "Here's what I like about Carolina: experience and balance." I'm sorry, but wasn't Obama's biggest weakness in the primaries that he had less experience as competitor Hillary Clinton? Did he or did he not convince us that change and new ideas were more important than experience and predictability? So what message does it send us when the man who focused his campaign on revolutionary ideas turns and backs the predictable favorite?
Okay sure, I should be getting mad at our president for his political policies, not his basketball picks. But I bet if you surveyed the country you would find that more Americans know Obama's pick for NCAA winner than his latest foreign policy. Sad, but most likely true. So maybe Obama should realize that even his backing for a sports team can have a profound effect on the way people see him. I know it has changed my view of him. Just food for thought.
Good luck watching your Baracket fall apart, Obama...lol
See his picks for yourself
***NOTE****
This blog's text is purposely dark blue to be pro Duke & UConn!! Who likes light blue anyways??
To make the whole situation more hysterical, our President is quoted by the Associated Press for saying: "Here's what I like about Carolina: experience and balance." I'm sorry, but wasn't Obama's biggest weakness in the primaries that he had less experience as competitor Hillary Clinton? Did he or did he not convince us that change and new ideas were more important than experience and predictability? So what message does it send us when the man who focused his campaign on revolutionary ideas turns and backs the predictable favorite?
Okay sure, I should be getting mad at our president for his political policies, not his basketball picks. But I bet if you surveyed the country you would find that more Americans know Obama's pick for NCAA winner than his latest foreign policy. Sad, but most likely true. So maybe Obama should realize that even his backing for a sports team can have a profound effect on the way people see him. I know it has changed my view of him. Just food for thought.
Good luck watching your Baracket fall apart, Obama...lol
See his picks for yourself
***NOTE****
This blog's text is purposely dark blue to be pro Duke & UConn!! Who likes light blue anyways??
Friday, March 6, 2009
How Are You?
*thanks to Chuck F. for inspiring this blog*
How many times have you had people start off conversations with "How are you doing today?" Maybe you even use this phrase yourself? Now I want you to stop and think about the last time someone said this to you. Was it your boss, your fellow student, or the girl behind the deli counter? How many of these times did you answer "good" or "fine" or something like that? In fact, most often, people are not even using it to start a conversation but merely as a greeting; a replacement for the traditional "Hi." How sadistic is it that we ask people how they are doing when in actuality we honestly do not really care about their answer. Have you ever noticed how people react when you answer "horrible," "atrocious" or "dismal?" They freeze and it takes them a minute to respond. That is because people are so conditioned to reenact the usual routine of "How are you?" "Fine, and you?" "Good" "Later" "Bye." Obviously I am not talking about your good friends who really care about you. I'm talking about those people you encounter daily who, like the rest of us, are too caught up in their daily lives to really care but feel society expects them to ask others how they are feeling.
Seriously? Can we really not come up with a less fake way of communicating. No more of this "how are you" or "what's up." Everyday I see my boss and he says "how are you?" and I want to scream at him: "horrible because I am broke and about to be evicted from my apartment because you cut all my hours you jerk!" Obviously I refrain from saying this because a) I would be fired & b) I know he really cares nothing about my situation. So from now on my new plan is to combat people by answering the infamous question with the most random and crazy answers that it will make them think twice before asking it again, at least to me. I am perfectly happy with a simple hello from you, please keep your fake interest of me to yourself. Tell me how you feel about that..I honestly want to know!
How many times have you had people start off conversations with "How are you doing today?" Maybe you even use this phrase yourself? Now I want you to stop and think about the last time someone said this to you. Was it your boss, your fellow student, or the girl behind the deli counter? How many of these times did you answer "good" or "fine" or something like that? In fact, most often, people are not even using it to start a conversation but merely as a greeting; a replacement for the traditional "Hi." How sadistic is it that we ask people how they are doing when in actuality we honestly do not really care about their answer. Have you ever noticed how people react when you answer "horrible," "atrocious" or "dismal?" They freeze and it takes them a minute to respond. That is because people are so conditioned to reenact the usual routine of "How are you?" "Fine, and you?" "Good" "Later" "Bye." Obviously I am not talking about your good friends who really care about you. I'm talking about those people you encounter daily who, like the rest of us, are too caught up in their daily lives to really care but feel society expects them to ask others how they are feeling.
Seriously? Can we really not come up with a less fake way of communicating. No more of this "how are you" or "what's up." Everyday I see my boss and he says "how are you?" and I want to scream at him: "horrible because I am broke and about to be evicted from my apartment because you cut all my hours you jerk!" Obviously I refrain from saying this because a) I would be fired & b) I know he really cares nothing about my situation. So from now on my new plan is to combat people by answering the infamous question with the most random and crazy answers that it will make them think twice before asking it again, at least to me. I am perfectly happy with a simple hello from you, please keep your fake interest of me to yourself. Tell me how you feel about that..I honestly want to know!
Thursday, March 5, 2009
No Matter What A Stripper Tells You....
...you should never believe it because she's just trying to get your money! LOL
This comes from a old FB blog I wrote last year but it's still relevant so I decided it should be posted here. For those of you who do not remember Chris Rock's song No Sex (in The Champagne Room), there is a line that states:
"If you've been dating a man for four months/ and you haven't met any of his friends, you are NOT his girlfriend!"
This, besides being one of my favorite lines, inspired me to think of an more up-to-date version of this concept. The song was written in 1999 so obviously it is a little outdated. Today we have an abundance of new technology and trends that make '99 look like the '50's. We all know that one of the biggest trends is Facebook itself. With the internet, we are so far removed from others and yet we are still able to stay "connected" via the web. Therefore, meeting a guy's friends may not happen as often because many friends don't leave there houses, they just play MMOG games over the internet. So, more important than meeting his/her friends is how you are portrayed on their Facebook page: the place that defines them to the whole entire world. Therefore, in the spirit of Facebook I would like to amend the previous lyrics.
"If you've been dating a man/woman for four months and you are not in his/her profile picture, you are NOT his/her significant other."
[As you can see, I am up with the times and equal opportunity so I used all pronouns to allow for all combinations of relationships (male/female, female/female..ect).]
Cause seriously, kids. If we're "dating" and I have a cute photo of the two of us together looking cheesy and you're profile pic is of you high with a bottle of Jack glued to your hand or some "come get me" half naked photo then I am in NO WAY your girlfriend.
Just clearing that up.
*DISCLAIMER* please be aware that this note is written as a joke and a satire and is NOT meant to offend anyone. I deeply apologize if I did, that was not my intentions. Just thought we could all use a laugh by listening to the crazy shit that runs through my brain. Thank you and goodnight!
This comes from a old FB blog I wrote last year but it's still relevant so I decided it should be posted here. For those of you who do not remember Chris Rock's song No Sex (in The Champagne Room), there is a line that states:
"If you've been dating a man for four months/ and you haven't met any of his friends, you are NOT his girlfriend!"
This, besides being one of my favorite lines, inspired me to think of an more up-to-date version of this concept. The song was written in 1999 so obviously it is a little outdated. Today we have an abundance of new technology and trends that make '99 look like the '50's. We all know that one of the biggest trends is Facebook itself. With the internet, we are so far removed from others and yet we are still able to stay "connected" via the web. Therefore, meeting a guy's friends may not happen as often because many friends don't leave there houses, they just play MMOG games over the internet. So, more important than meeting his/her friends is how you are portrayed on their Facebook page: the place that defines them to the whole entire world. Therefore, in the spirit of Facebook I would like to amend the previous lyrics.
"If you've been dating a man/woman for four months and you are not in his/her profile picture, you are NOT his/her significant other."
[As you can see, I am up with the times and equal opportunity so I used all pronouns to allow for all combinations of relationships (male/female, female/female..ect).]
Cause seriously, kids. If we're "dating" and I have a cute photo of the two of us together looking cheesy and you're profile pic is of you high with a bottle of Jack glued to your hand or some "come get me" half naked photo then I am in NO WAY your girlfriend.
Just clearing that up.
*DISCLAIMER* please be aware that this note is written as a joke and a satire and is NOT meant to offend anyone. I deeply apologize if I did, that was not my intentions. Just thought we could all use a laugh by listening to the crazy shit that runs through my brain. Thank you and goodnight!
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Random Acts of....
Is randomness dead or just reclassified? Lately, people have been (re)posting a note on Facebook entitled “25 Random Things.” **If you do not know about this than you might as well just stop reading this blog because I am NOT going to explain it.** Even more recently, people have been posting (on Facebook, mind you) a link to a Time article ridiculing the “25 Random Things” notes which states: “But it's just so stupid. Most people aren't funny, they aren't insightful, and they share way too much.”
Do people no longer understand the definition of RANDOM? Facebook (and other networking sites) used to thrive on randomness. People would post random pictures, write random blogs/bulletins, and send random wall posts that made us laugh and brightened our dull days. Now, people (even me, I confess) jump into mass postings of 50 question surveys answering nonrandom questions such as “favorite color?” or “who’s the last person to call you?”
According to Claire Suddath, author of the Time article, “Assuming it takes someone 10 minutes to come up with their list, this recent bout of viral narcissism has sent roughly 800,000 hours of worktime productivity down the drain.” Maybe we shouldn’t blame Facebook for making us less productive but should focus on the fact that our jobs today are so mind numbing and unfulfilling that we resort to “narcissistic” surveys we know no one cares to read. Be honest, people. How many of you feel uninspired to work hard at your jobs? Maybe if our bosses motivated us to care about the company we worked for we’d be more invested in our work and less invested in lame surveys.
But once again I digress from my point. The difference between “25 Random Things” and some survey asking you “What are you listening to right now?” is the key word: random. The former requires brain storming, spontaneity, and creativity, all of which wake up your previously numb brain. That’s right, “25 Random Things” causes you to think; think about yourself in more depth than “What color is the shirt you are wearing?” It requires you to open up and put yourself out there without being afraid of judgment. If there is one thing I am sick of it is logging on to Facebook and seeing another photo album made up of 40 photos that all look the same (1/3 of them blurry or out of focus) and usually just show drunk people at a bar. How does that show any creativity, depth, or even randomness? It just reminds me that you are exactly like the millions of other blurry, Facebook clones out there. But when “Jodi” tells me “25) If you prove me wrong, I'll willingly back down; but if I know I'm right, I will argue with you until you probably want to push me in front of a train” or “Lena” writes “8) I graduated first in my class at Manhattan College, Summa cum Laude, phi beta kappa, won the honorary math award, and yet am terrified to apply to grad school bc i dont think i could hack it” then I feel like I am able to understand them that much more.
Surprisingly, I find it very refreshing to read everyone of these “random things” my friends post because even if I already know the facts about them, I get to see what facts they choose to share with the world. I think that tells a lot about a person in its own way. So if you don’t want to know 25 random things about “friends, friends-of-friends, friends-of-friends-of-friends and coworkers,” as Suddath states than, just don’t read their notes. Or maybe Suddath’s problem is that she’s Facebook friends with people that she honestly doesn’t want anything to do with but is simply too chicken to unfriend them. Either way, I enjoy this new form of randomness and encourage people to utilize Facebook as a creative outlet to celebrate their differences rather than illustrate that you go drinking at bars like everyone else. If you’re original people will respond originally and then maybe you’ll have something interesting to read while bored at your job.
But that’s just my random thought of the day. Thanks, Jill, for the inspiration.
Do people no longer understand the definition of RANDOM? Facebook (and other networking sites) used to thrive on randomness. People would post random pictures, write random blogs/bulletins, and send random wall posts that made us laugh and brightened our dull days. Now, people (even me, I confess) jump into mass postings of 50 question surveys answering nonrandom questions such as “favorite color?” or “who’s the last person to call you?”
According to Claire Suddath, author of the Time article, “Assuming it takes someone 10 minutes to come up with their list, this recent bout of viral narcissism has sent roughly 800,000 hours of worktime productivity down the drain.” Maybe we shouldn’t blame Facebook for making us less productive but should focus on the fact that our jobs today are so mind numbing and unfulfilling that we resort to “narcissistic” surveys we know no one cares to read. Be honest, people. How many of you feel uninspired to work hard at your jobs? Maybe if our bosses motivated us to care about the company we worked for we’d be more invested in our work and less invested in lame surveys.
But once again I digress from my point. The difference between “25 Random Things” and some survey asking you “What are you listening to right now?” is the key word: random. The former requires brain storming, spontaneity, and creativity, all of which wake up your previously numb brain. That’s right, “25 Random Things” causes you to think; think about yourself in more depth than “What color is the shirt you are wearing?” It requires you to open up and put yourself out there without being afraid of judgment. If there is one thing I am sick of it is logging on to Facebook and seeing another photo album made up of 40 photos that all look the same (1/3 of them blurry or out of focus) and usually just show drunk people at a bar. How does that show any creativity, depth, or even randomness? It just reminds me that you are exactly like the millions of other blurry, Facebook clones out there. But when “Jodi” tells me “25) If you prove me wrong, I'll willingly back down; but if I know I'm right, I will argue with you until you probably want to push me in front of a train” or “Lena” writes “8) I graduated first in my class at Manhattan College, Summa cum Laude, phi beta kappa, won the honorary math award, and yet am terrified to apply to grad school bc i dont think i could hack it” then I feel like I am able to understand them that much more.
Surprisingly, I find it very refreshing to read everyone of these “random things” my friends post because even if I already know the facts about them, I get to see what facts they choose to share with the world. I think that tells a lot about a person in its own way. So if you don’t want to know 25 random things about “friends, friends-of-friends, friends-of-friends-of-friends and coworkers,” as Suddath states than, just don’t read their notes. Or maybe Suddath’s problem is that she’s Facebook friends with people that she honestly doesn’t want anything to do with but is simply too chicken to unfriend them. Either way, I enjoy this new form of randomness and encourage people to utilize Facebook as a creative outlet to celebrate their differences rather than illustrate that you go drinking at bars like everyone else. If you’re original people will respond originally and then maybe you’ll have something interesting to read while bored at your job.
But that’s just my random thought of the day. Thanks, Jill, for the inspiration.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Who needs to be a masochist when your kitty is a sadist?
In Pulp Fiction, Mia (Uma Thurman) says she has a theory that when it comes to important subjects, people can only answer two ways. Which way they answer tells you what kind of person they are. Her example of this is that there are only two kinds of people in the world: Beatles people and Elvis people.
Okay, only a loosely related intro into my talk about the complementary (or lack there of) relationship between masochism and sadism. Let's start with a simple Wikipedia definition:
Sadism refers to the infliction of pain or humiliation upon or by another person. Masochism refers to gratification in the infliction of pain or humiliation upon oneself.
So, logically speaking, you would assume that Masochists would search for Sadist mates and vice versa. I mean, logically, you would assume someone interested in inflicting pain would seek out one who enjoys pain. But according to social psychologist, Erich Fromm, when these two types get together it results in a weak and shallow bond. This is where I become conflicted. Part of me feels that people need to find someone who fills their holes and completes/compliments them. I mean, two hot headed individuals will have lots of trouble working things out. On the other hand, I've read psychological studies that say that couples with the most similarities have relationships that tend to last the longest.
But maybe the problem is that Sadism is not really the opposite of Masochism. Maybe the Masochist only finds pleasure in the pain when they inflict it on themselves and not when Sadists inflict pain on them. Perhaps, Masochists find the real gratification not in the pain but in the control over their own body. This would conclude that Masochists and Sadists are not complementary but are actually a poor match. I would say a relationship between these two would be beneficial to the Sadist but cause the Masochist the opposite of gratification. They would feel helpless instead of that feeling of control they were searching for in self infliction.
Of course, to be fair, I should finish explaining Mia's theory. She says: "Beatles people can like Elvis, and Elvis people can like Beatles but nobody likes them both equally. Somewhere you have to make a choice." I completely agree; nothing is ever as simple as black and white. We may tend to have both masochistic and sadist tendencies but can we ever have them equally? Perhaps that is the real question.
Food for thought
Okay, only a loosely related intro into my talk about the complementary (or lack there of) relationship between masochism and sadism. Let's start with a simple Wikipedia definition:
Sadism refers to the infliction of pain or humiliation upon or by another person. Masochism refers to gratification in the infliction of pain or humiliation upon oneself.
So, logically speaking, you would assume that Masochists would search for Sadist mates and vice versa. I mean, logically, you would assume someone interested in inflicting pain would seek out one who enjoys pain. But according to social psychologist, Erich Fromm, when these two types get together it results in a weak and shallow bond. This is where I become conflicted. Part of me feels that people need to find someone who fills their holes and completes/compliments them. I mean, two hot headed individuals will have lots of trouble working things out. On the other hand, I've read psychological studies that say that couples with the most similarities have relationships that tend to last the longest.
But maybe the problem is that Sadism is not really the opposite of Masochism. Maybe the Masochist only finds pleasure in the pain when they inflict it on themselves and not when Sadists inflict pain on them. Perhaps, Masochists find the real gratification not in the pain but in the control over their own body. This would conclude that Masochists and Sadists are not complementary but are actually a poor match. I would say a relationship between these two would be beneficial to the Sadist but cause the Masochist the opposite of gratification. They would feel helpless instead of that feeling of control they were searching for in self infliction.
Of course, to be fair, I should finish explaining Mia's theory. She says: "Beatles people can like Elvis, and Elvis people can like Beatles but nobody likes them both equally. Somewhere you have to make a choice." I completely agree; nothing is ever as simple as black and white. We may tend to have both masochistic and sadist tendencies but can we ever have them equally? Perhaps that is the real question.
Food for thought
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)