Art Imitates Life

"When you're single, and your friends start to get married, every wedding invitation brings a strange moment of self evaluation. Will you be bringing a guest or attending alone? What it's really asking is 'where do you see yourself in 3 months? Sitting next to your girlfriend or hitting on a brides-made?" I always checked I was bringing a guest. I was an optimist."

Ok this post isn't about relationships, or weddings, etc so worry not. It's about TV. Yes TV. What? I think TV shows are a great medium for doing more than just entertainment. They can bring solace and connection to these characters that help you feel less alone or abnormal.

My point of this post is the weird connection I have realized between my real life, and my "comfort" TV shows.

We all know what comfort food is. But today I'm talking about "comfort TV". That show you throw on when things are so bad you just need something to...well...obviously...comfort you. I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Partially cause my normal, go to comfort show Gilmore Girls, has sparked a confusing taste in my mouth via the reboot. But we're not going to get into that.

More importantly, and a little selfishly, I'm going to turn to my left and look to my mantle. There I see a photo of me and my BFF, and a photo of me and my college roommate.
When I moved into the dorm with this stranger, I didn't didn't know what to expect. But we soon became fast friends, and both realized we had an affinity for the show "Scrubs".  This was before the easy "DVR" or "Streaming" age, so we found ways to watch the entire series online together. FYI there is no better way to bond than with a great TV show. OK maybe there is, but you catch my drift. It became our thing. To this day, if I hear Boston's "More Than a Feeling" I think of her. Oh and of course "Poison" (cause Turk air banding is epic).

So to continue this concept...

A couple years later, my best friend stopped by to see me on his way to..well who knows where. He was always going somewhere. So I took him out for a day in NYC with no idea what or where we were going. Looking back, I'm pretty sure I failed at giving him any decent experience, but what he gave me was so much more. We were on the subway and he told me about this episode of this show he loved: "How I Met Your Mother". The story was about the word moist, but that's not relevant to this story.  A few years latter, after sadly having to leave the City That Never Sleeps, I started watching said show. Wow. Just Wow. I was hooked. I finished the entire series (no spoilers but the ending is...rough). I re-watched the series a couple years later, and then again with my BFF. When I finish writing this, I will be back to re-watching. Let that sink in

I said something the other day that I say a lot. "Every story has been done, it's the characters that make you watch." But I'm realizing there's an element I'm leaving out of this comfort TV concept. It's great to find a show with characters you love and identify with. But when you find a show with not only that, but a real life, amazingly important person in your life that you shared the experience of living through those TV moments...well that is priceless. And that, my friends, is what TV comfort is truly about.

This is  Robin Sher...I mean Heart Rose, signing off from metro news home. I hope this post had been legand... wait for it...

A for Effort, F for Creativity

Most of us start off our morning reading the news. Sadly, it is more often the Facebook News feed rather than Wall Street Journal. I'm not knocking Facebook. It has a valid social purpose and it's ability to allow me to stay connected to people is great. But it's the abuse of info that has us all bogged down. I know for each of you it's different, but we all have that topic (or topics) that we are so sick of seeing on status updates:
"Become my friend in Farmville"
"Jane Smith changed her relationship status to 'it's complicated'"
"Let me post a million youtube videos"
"I'm going to tell you how amazing you are, husband/boyfriend (etc) even though you're sitting right next to me"

Yes the list goes on and on. What I want to touch on is a lesser known offender: The Grade Grubber. Sorry if that's a harsh term but it has to be said. If you take the time to click to my profile and pull out your glasses, you can read the little lettering that tells you that not only did I pass my classes, I graduated with a Bachelor's Degree. I have worked a multitude of jobs and I'm currently working in my field of study. That's it, that's all it says.  It doesn't tell you what lists I made, awards I won, honor societies I was in, etc. Maybe someday it will allow for that (maybe it already does) but I really could care less. It's a Facebook Profile, not my resume. This is not Linked In. Yes, there are plenty of businesses that search your Facebook when receiving your resume but that doesn't mean you should confuse the two. What I'm trying to say, bluntly, is the constant barraging of your grades (be it quiz, test, EOC, or final grade) all over my news feed has got to stop. It is all out madness.

I highly value education and of course I'm happy to hear my friends are doing well, but what they fail to realize is it's just a number/letter and it's a blip in the real world. I don't mean to sound jaded, but it's one of those things that everyone focuses on while forgetting the content they actually memorized to achieve that grade. First of all, constantly posting your grades makes people appear more arrogant than smart; maybe even a little egotistical. I do not use my FB status to let the world know every time I achieve a project at work. "Created a new CRM today and my boss gave me an A+ for it." First of all, you don't get grades at work and often you get little recognition at all. That doesn't mean what you do isn't important or valued. The focus should be on the work and not one person's evaluation on it. What I would love is if everyone would stop telling me they got a 98 or a B+ and instead taught something they learned in that corresponding class. We would all be a lot better off if we spent our time learning, not just reading a report card with our morning coffee....

Or better yet, just pick up the New York Times.

A Couple of Fairy Tales

Sorry, I know I talk about love and movies a lot so if you're sick of that go ahead and stop reading now.

no....seriously....lol

Romeo & Juliet were 16 year old lovers who barely knew each other and yet their story is considered one of the most famous (and tragic) love stories.
The same concept can be seen all through (Disney) fairy tales:

In The Little Mermaid, Ariel has fins while her Prince has legs. They aren't even technically the same species, right? If this was non-fiction, can you imagine all of the racial tension their would be? Prince Eric's friends would be making fun of Ariel with prejudice jokes and slurs.

Belle (Beauty and the Beast) is a sweet but spunky french girl while her Prince is spoiled, selfish, and unkind. Oh, and did I mention, he's a Beast (literally) and has serious anger management issues. In the real world, Belle's friends would be telling her that she was in an abusive relationship, not to mention Stockholm Syndrome, and she had to leave his hairy ass.

Then there's Aladdin, the tried and true story of two lovers from different sides of the tracks. You have the poor, thieving, "Street Rat" who falls for a wealthy, privileged, sheltered Princess. Is it romantic when I guy steals an apple for a girl? I bet her friends are all seeing the bad boy attraction but warning her that he's a free loader who will probably get her pregnant and bail or end up in jail.

But still, we root and pray that with time, effort, and a little bit of magic, these couples will be able to overcome their differences. Why do we care so much? Because we are taught to believe that these two people are meant to be together. Love doesn't care how you look, what you're interested in, or where you came from. Love is a magical force that is deeper than all those things. Love conquers all.

So should we ignore these lessons because they come from "childhood" fairy tales? Or stop and take a moment to look and see how many times those fictional stories were happening around us. So What do we do? Believe in the fantasy of a happy ending or become cynics and run away from something cause it's not going perfect. All I know is that nothing in my life has ever gone perfect and my love life life could probably fit into a million Brother's Grimm Tales. Well I chose to believe that maybe these writers didn't haven't so far off. That true love can conquer all. I don't think this based on fact or experience, but because I'd rather live in a world of hope than one of hopelessness. There's always a darkness before the storm, just, unlike the books, you have to figure out on your own when the storm is really over. You can't cheat and count how many pages until the end. Sleep well, Readers!

"Flattery Will Get You Everywhere"

I don't care if you're 18 or 80, we all like to be flirted with. Flirting boosts our self-esteem. It makes us feel desirable and sexy. Self-esteem leads to a more confident and happy individual.*  Remember how you felt at the beginning of your last/current relationship? The way your heart would beat a little faster? That ear to ear grin that was plastered on your face? The random giggles that no one else understood? The simple feeling of being wanted? We all know that's a great time but we can't always be at that stage. Although, when done correctly, flirting can give you most of those benefits without the games or possible heartbreak.

Another benefit to flirting is that it is often a substitution for joking. Jokes tend to illicit negative remarks. Although not meant to be taken seriously, it can still leave the subject feeling a little down. On the other hand, flirtation leaves the subject feeling sexy, smart, and or well liked. There is nothing negative there.

Studies show that men with higher levels of testosterone (sex drive) are 20% better with "verbal fluency." I could give you some similar study about women but I will be honest I couldn't find one. Then again, do you know how difficult it is to find a serious research case when using the search string: "women, sexual arousal, better, happier."I'm sure there are plenty of legitimate studies illustrating the health benefits created when women are aroused.

My assertion is that by flirting, you are actually doing something positive and helpful for not only you but someone else.

This is not to say there aren't scenarios where innocent flirtation is not acceptable but if you follow these rules, flirtation can be a harmless, self strengthening tool.

The Rules

1. Make sure there are no other parties involved, e.g., spouses, boyfriends or girlfriends. If flirtation initiates reasonable jealousy from a 3rd party, you will only end up with more drama and even feelings of guilt or immorality.
   
2. Don't flirt with anyone who is clingy, co-dependant, or might have pre-established feelings for you. In this scenario, you are just adding lighter fluid to the fire. Unless you are a bitch, a control freak, or a sadist, you will find yourself with more than you bargained for. On the flip side, do not attempt flirting if you yourself are clingy, co-dependant, or have or may in the future have feelings for the subject. That road no longer falls under the blanket of harmless, innocent flirting. If you do not divert yourself from this path, you will most likely end up arriving at the Heartbreak Hotel.
   
3. Don't flirt with authority figures, e.g., teacher, boss, or police officer. This can get you into real trouble that can have serious and lasting consequences. Some people get a rush from such a risky situation. but most often the benefits do not out way the costs.
   
4. Probably the most obvious rule is to watch for signs that your flirting is unwanted, especially in the work place. Sexual harassment is a serious thing and you should never cross over the boundary that makes someone feel uncomfortable. 

By following those few simple rules, you will find flirting to be a wonderful way to brighten both your day and the day of others. By following the rules, flirtation creates no victims, only winners. Let's be honest, who doesn't love to be complimented? A touch, a look, or a word can be enough to make someone smile inside and out. Personally, I love to flirt. It makes me feel young and vibrant and if the subject flirts back, it's a bonus. Does that mean I follow every rule to a T? Of course not, but that doesn't mean they aren't great guidelines to follow.

Like Edgar, King of Figaro once said, "flattery will get you everywhere." Try it, you might be surprised at the results.

*on a side note, it is important to note that self-esteem cannot come entirely from others. most of it must come from within. If your self worth is riding on the praise from others, you will never be happy. That being sad, there is nothing wrong with people's compliments giving you a boost in the right direction.

Three Little Words

Three little words...no, not "I love you." Friends with Benefits. Can such a concept really exist? I may not be the most versed in sexual experiences, but I have been around the block a time or two. Show of hands, how many of you have accomplished a Friends With Benefits situation successfully? Not as many people as you think just waved their hands in the air...like they just don't care.

There is one main reason people always blame for the lack of viability in Friends with Benefits: Attachment

Attachment

Humans are emotional creatures. Females more so than males, but either way sex is an emotional experience. There's the body issues of the self conscious. There's the worry of not pleasing your partner or worse, being flat out bad at it. The fear that what you find kinky, they find scary. The list goes on. Point being, despite what anyone says, sex is always awkward and confusing to some degree. When you take off your clothes (or at least some of them) to have sex, you are metaphorically shedding a piece of your wall.  You are putting your guard down and exposing a small weak spot. It's inevitable. It's impossible not to. And no mater how small that crack in the wall is, there's always that chance you get shot. That is, shot with the arrow of attachment. Once again, it's more common with women than with men, but it does swing both ways. Trust me, I've seen plenty of guys fall hard after sleeping with a Man Eater. Guy or girl, it's easy to tell ourselves not to care. What's difficult is actually making our emotions do what we tell them. Once you're shot, there is NO going back. You're poisoned with the need to be with that person on some level more than just primal. Sorry, no doctor can cure that ailment.

But Attachment is not the only reason Friends with Benefits fail. There's always the need to be territorial.

Territory

While attachment falls under "Love/Belonging Needs" in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, Territory falls under "Safety Needs." We may be a civilized race, but that doesn't mean we're not still animals. Homo sapiens to be exact. Many animals, such as dogs, feel the need to mark their territory. A mutt doesn't pee on a hydrant because of an emotional attachment. It is merely staking it's claim to make sure others know it's been there. While many people IN relationships suffer from this issue, it manifests itself in a slightly different way for Friends with Benefits. While not present in all Friends with Benefit scenarios, the worry of other people getting involved with your "friend" is a common concern. It could be the number of others they are sleeping with that worries you for your own health and safety. It could be the awkwardness of them sleeping with a friend or coworker you have to see everyday. While the ground rules may allow for an open arrangement, it doesn't mean one party will not get livid if the other sleeps with their enemy. The basic instinct is to protect your surroundings. When the "friend" strays from the guild lines, it may make the other fearful because they are no longer in control of the situation. Humans enjoy the safety of their car, their home, their bed, etc. While many think Friends with Benefits is a safer alternative to dating, it is in fact more unstable due to its amorphous nature.

The bottom rung of Maslow's triangle is "Psychological Needs." These are what I like to call primal needs. Maslow describes this as anything that is a literal requirement for human survival. While eating, breathing, or sleeping are what most people think of as "Psychological Needs" I assert that sex, ere go procreation, is a requirement for the survival of the human race. Sex is a primal instinct. You remember what Cole Porter taught us: birds do it, bees do it, even educated fleas do it. So when two individuals engage in a Friends with Benefits situation, it is often to simply fill their subconscious need to mate. So how will this contaminate the success of this no strings attached setup? Well its in the title: Friends

Friends?


There is one major component to Friends with Benefits that is not present in agreements like "F@$% Buddies" or "Booty Calls." The people are friends. It sounds simple and obvious, but it's actually a very important part that is often overlooked. There's always the worry of breaking up a friendship that can ruin any Friends with Benefits. But more subtle, there's the self analysis that makes one discover: "are we really friends??" At first I thought this was the perfect solution to the aforementioned problems. If you're not really friends, then there's no worry of getting attached. I mean, who would get attached to someone they don't even like. This way, it's only about the primal need to get laid. It seemed like the perfect loophole. Until you realize the fatal flaw. You can't be Friends with Benefits without being friends. Then all you're left with are the benefits. This ironically become messy because without the friendship element, communication is difficult. Setting ground rules and having mutual understandings tend to get thrown to the wayside. While some "go with the flow" personalty type may be able to thrive in that situation, the average person will find it difficult. As if the actual sex isn't awkward and confusing enough, having the arrangement be awkward is simply unsustainable for most people. Think how difficult it would be to solicit someone you don't even like for sex. Try talking to them about STD tests. Try talking to them about anything. It's as painful as pulling teeth. Trust me, even if it's good in the bedroom, it's the getting from the living room to the bedroom that's the deal breaker.

So what's my conclusion to all of this. I honestly don't know. As I've gotten older I've realized the more casual the sex, the more maturity is needed. I'd like to think by my age we all all mature enough to handle such a complex arrangement but I'm quickly realizing that's not true. Friends with Benefits are not for the weak. So maybe it's a game where there are no winners. Then again, you know what they say: if at first you don't succeed...

Romantic (lead) Roles

I have a huge passion for movies and I love to review everything I see. And yet I realized that I haven't ever written a blog talking about movies. Mainly, that's because my blog is for wide range issues, not specific movie critiques. But I was re-watching the movie Loser the other day when it hit me: Romantic Comedies; also known as Rom-Coms, more importantly, also referred to as Chick Flicks. Love them or hate them, they are love stories that many girls fall in love with. Let me preface this by saying I know there are men who enjoy these movies, and there is nothing wrong with that, but for the purpose of my discussion, I am only going to discuss the (fairer) sex with the higher demographic. Woman love romance, duh. Nothing new there. But as I watched Loser a pattern stuck out so strongly I can't believe I've never noticed it before. In so many of these movies, the lead male spends the entire film being noble and trying to win the love of the lead female. The lead female, on the other hand, gets to spend the movie wavering, being flighty, and sometimes even seeing other men.

Classic Examples:

The Notebook
A film often named when asked for the title of a chick flick. Not a film I much enjoyed, but I watched it none the less. From what I remember, Ryan Gosling spends the entire movie not giving up on the love of his life, Rachel McAdams. And yet, somehow she gets to be engaged and spend her life trying to decide what future she really wants. What a luxury for her.

Notting Hill / Runaway Bride
So I know these are two separate movies, but since they are both Rom-Coms with Julia Roberts from 1999, I'm going to lump them together. In Notting Hill, Roberts gets to be the rich, famous, glamorous movie star and yet she still pushes Hugh Grant away. In Runaway Bride she gets to be engaged four times and then still runs from the only guy that's been supporting her, Richard Geer. I wish I had that many men calling on me with proposals.

While You Were Sleeping
I'm not going to lie, this is one of my favorites in the genre. But, alas, I must pick it apart like all the others. Sandra Bullock falls in love with a man, Peter Gallagher, shes never really met, but sees everyday at the train station (can we say flighty?) She then spends most of the movie lying that she is the finance of Gallagher, who is now in a coma. While his family accepts her, his brother, Bill Pullman, falls for her but is noble in trying to keep his distance. He truly cares for her while she is lusting for a man she doesn't even know. Any woman who gets in good with a family that has two hansom sons should be thanking her lucky stars.

But there are exceptions to this rule, and thank heavens for that. Look at Meg Ryan's classics for a minute: When Harry Met Sally, You've Got Mail, Sleepless In Seattle. All these movies place the male and female leads as equals. They are both good and bad, each flawed in their own way.

I think maybe the most interesting movie to look at is one of the most classic romantic films in Hollywood: Casablanca. So maybe Casablanca is unfair to analyze because it is not a comedy like the other films were, but I think it's still worth a quick note. Throughout the movie, viewers are forced to wonder the true intentions and feelings of both Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. This can make it appear that they are both equal in their games and roles in the relationship. But it cannot be excluded that, in the end, Bogart does the honorable thing by letting Bergman go. The fact that he sacrifices to do what's best for her, doesn't truely make this movie an exception to my thesis.

So is this what makes women happy? To watch movies where they get to do whatever they want while the men stay devoted and chaste? I guess you could say that is feminism, but I think it's a load of bollocks (as Hugh Grant would say). If we want to watch films about powerful young women, that's fine, but if we want to see a love story, the roles should be equal. It is sexist for us to think we deserve to get away with more in a relationship, even if it's just in our fantasies. Plus, lets be honest: nice guys finsish last and if most women met a guy like the ones in Chick Flicks they'd probably leave him for a guy you'd see in an Action Flick. You know the one's I'm talking about.
Hollywood films don't have to be real, but they should at least make us look inward at ourselves. Art imitates life and life imitates art and that scares me. So think twice before you get all worked up over that Romantic Comedy movie with the sweet, wonderful guy. Or not, and go find you a action star boyfriend. It's up to you.

V-Day is for Virgins, Kindness is for Kooks

As a single girl (not by choice), I should be annoyed by the approaching holiday celebrating some martyred saints no one knows much about. Honestly, I could really care less about it anymore. When I was younger and more innocent, I spent Valentine's Day after Valentine's Day with high hopes. I was always in serious relationships and I expected some sort of romantic gesture from my suitor. In the end, I was lucky if I got flowers and maybe a less than desirable meal. Now, I'm just happy that the pressure is off and that I can  expect nothing from February 14th except a busy day at work. But this blog isn't really about Valentine's Day. It should be titled:

Random Acts of Kindness 
Being a nice person will get you walked all over...


.....Oh, I'm sorry you wanted more? I thought the title + subtitle was self explanatory, but I will elaborate. My Best Friend Stephen says you have to accept the consequences of your actions. If you want to do something nice, you have to be ok with the possible result that no one will say thank you. If you've read my last blog, you know that I'm pretty accustom to hearing only the negative complaint instead of the positive phrase. But what if it's more than that?

So you spend your time and money making food for your co workers to boost moral and no one verbally appreciates it; not a big deal. Honestly, I know better than to expect a thank you; it's so much more than that. Everyday I experience that not only is my kindness not recognized, but used as an Achilles' Heel to take me down to others' unhappy level. People see caring as an emotion, and society tells us emotional people are weak. Just like a predator will pray on the frail, these sad people use the caring as their punching bags. They see our heart's exposed and shoot it with a black arrow, piercing us just like Bard kills Smaug. **ya I just pulled out The Hobbit reference** 
It's hard enough to not be rewarded for being nice, but to be punished is just incomprehensible. What kind of world do will we live in if the good are hunted by the cold-hearted? Maybe I'm overreacting. Maybe you will read this and leave me comments of the glorious appreciations you have received for being a charitable person. I really hope you do. All I know is I see the people who never look up to give someone the time of day and they rarely get attacked. Survival of the fittest. Sometimes the best way to survive is keeping your head down and talking to no one. But let's be honest, a leopard can't change it's spots and I can't stop being nice to people. So at least I can admit I have a target on my back and a huge arrow pointing me out to all those that need an easy mark. Go ahead, take your shot. Honestly, you can't say anything mean about me that I haven't already thought of myself. Maybe the best kindness I can give is allowing others a person to displace their anger on. I'll see you tomorrow, I'll be the one with the exposed left breast. Don't get the reference? Look it up!

Positive Thought

This may be a little pessimistic but I'm starting to seriously wonder about the concept of  the power of positive thought. When I was younger (only a short time ago, actually) I honestly believed in the idea that if you sent out positive energy you would receive it in return. Okay, so I now see how silly it sounds when I write it down, but I challenge you to think if you've ever felt that thinking positive would acquire a better result. It's not such a hard idea to subscribe to. I mean, many people (including myself) believe in Karma; the idea that our actions will cause a ripple effect and come back to us ten fold. So the idea that we could do that with brain waves isn't that crazy of a concept. Or is it?

Tonight I was angry because I felt like karma was on vacation. I had done multiple good deeds, gone above and beyond my job, and yet when I needed someone to help me, no one was there. I was angry; oh you can only imagine how angry. So someone insisted that I think positive. That by not worrying about the problem so much, and "visualizing what I wanted" things would solve themselves. Well tonight, I called shenanigans on that in a heartbeat. I was upset and fed up with the false promises of thinking positive. I mean, even the person who recommended this therapy was guilty of blowing up when things weren't going well. What happen to positive thought, Missy? And then, it really dawned on me. It's as simple as the classic phrase: the squeaky wheel gets the oil.

No one likes a complainer, a whiner, or a Debbie Downer. What's important is to look at how people deal with them. I don't know about you, but in my 25+ years of my experience I have most often seen people take the same approach: shit them up. It's like a child causing a tantrum in public. the parents find it easier to give in than to hold out. So if the people who are doing nothing and still complain get special treatment then what happens to those who stay quite and do their job. Obviously you guessed it, they get screwed. You asked for a real world example? Okay here's one: a girl complains that she can't stay at work till close because the weather is bad and she is afraid of getting home safely.  Her request is indulged because she is vocal about it. Then in turn, her loyal coworkers are forced to pick up the slack. After she is off work, she decides, last minute, to go out to drink with her co-workers, disproving her claim of worry about getting home safely.

Okay, so you may think I'm getting off topic with this, so let me bring it all together. The people who quietly think positively about their future get forgotten about, while the people that negatively vocalize their opinions get taken care of. After experiencing this time and time again, I seriously ask supporters of the "positive thought" to come show me how that can really work.

And trust me, I'm positive about this....er.....i mean negative about this. Wow, this is tricky.

"User generated Television. Create your life"

If you're my age, then your grandparents witnessed the birth of television. It was, in most ways, an upgrade to the old version of entertainment: the radio. Capitalizing on the usage of TWO of the five senses was enough to make it a marvel. It not only changed the face of entertainment, but of media and politics (see Kennedy V. Nixon debates 1960). If you're parents are as old as mine, they probably witnessed the next big improvement: the remote. No, no, I'm just kidding. I'm actually speaking about the first color televisions. Ultimately, this only enhanced the quality for one sense, rather than adding a new one. Yes, someday we'll have TV commercials where you can actually smell the greasy hamburger and corporate america will have one more way of brainwashing us. I mean, because they say smell is linked to memories and..........oops, there I go getting off topic. What I was trying to point out is that color TV was an improvement for the eyes, but it didn't really change HOW you experienced TV.

Anyone around today knows that we continue that train of advancement with televisions. We have LCD screens so we can see details. We have surround sound so we can hear a pin drop. We even put it in a lighter weight packaging, called the flat screen, so people would buy bigger TVs without fear of not being able to lift or move them. What I'm trying to illustrate is that the change from radio to television is much more monumental than HD or a plasma screen.

What I find to be the most intriguing change since the TV is the WAY we watch media today. Movie theaters have always been a sinkhole for money but with today's technology, many people have the equivalent in their living room. Forget Blue Ray; most cable companies offer viewing of brand new movies in full HD without the hassle of any shiny, metal frisbee. What about DVR? That has got to be considered a bigger change over than the color TV. No longer are people forced to sit down and watch shows when the network tells them to. Competition between "Chuck" and "House" are no longer an issue. Not to mention that ad rates will have to go WAY down because people can now skip past the commercials. 

And it's not just DVR that revolutionized how we watch, but also the internet. Most shows are viewable via Hulu.com and/or the channel website. In fact, this allows me to be watching one show on my TV and another on my computer...AT THE SAME TIME. Ok, I'm not saying I do that, but I am saying that it frees your TV up for other things. Like video games. No seriously, follow me on this one. I can exercise with my Wii Fit on my big screen TV, while watching the new episode of "Castle" streaming from my laptop. Talk about multitasking. So wait, with the increased technology we should all be a lot thinner...hmmm. Anyways, you catch my drift. DVR and the World Wide Web have altered WHEN, WHERE, and HOW we watch TV.

But what about WHAT we watch. We used to live in a two toned world. There were "television shows" and "movies." That was it. Ok, ya there were mini series, but who counts those anyways. Though our TVs are more colorful, the different types of things we watch has become grayer. Those of you younger fans know what I mean. They're called web series, webisodes, and video blogging. Bloggers like Natalie Tran do regular video postings on funny musings. Think sexy female version of Dave Barry. "The Office" (the U.S. version) posts side story webisodes that are only viewable online at NBC.com. Web series such as "The Guild" and "We Need Girlfriends" gain huge followings just like any normal TV shows would. Some web series, like Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog (created during the writer's strike) even harness the power of celebrities such as "How I Met Your Mother" star Neil Patrick Harris, "Castle" namesake Nathan Fillion, and "Big Bang Theory" actor Simon Helberg. But the internet has also created stars from viral videos such as "Tron Guy," "Star Wars Kid," "Chocolate Rain," "Leave Britney Alone," "Numa Numa," and "David After Dentist" (just to name a few off the top of my head). I think you know you're a star when you are not only being parodied on the internet, but on TV shows such as "South Park."

So if the switch from TV to Web wasn't confusing enough, now many internet based media is crossing over into television. These hybrids include web series such as "Qurterlife" (NBC 2008) and "FRED" (Nickelodeon 2010). Do we still call them web series if we see them on TV? Noun aside, I think many people view the information superhighway as a major invention but they forget just how much it has transformed our entertainment industry. 

Ok, so maybe the radio adding a second sense to the mix is a bigger deal than changing the what, where, when, and how we partake in our shows, but it has to be a close second. All I know is I'm going to go watch some more "A Very Potter Musical."*

"User generated Television. Create your life" -Quarterlife

*As well, "A Very Potter Musical" lead Darren Criss has crossed over into television as a recurring role on Fox's "Glee." This was originally my topic for this blog but it somehow got left out so I leave it here in the footnotes. 

Walking the Dog

"After all the shows,
after all the boys of summer had gone,
amid all the confusion
and friends I've been losing
I always thought from the start
I'd be the one moving on.
I guess I'll never know
Where all the boys of summer will go
but I'll miss what we made
and the days were not wasted.
There are some things I may never know."

3 months later. I am finally able to revisit the craziest summer of my life. I have bittersweet feelings about the whole ordeal but felt the best thing to do was focus on what I can take from it. So what I have learned this Summer is listed below:

• If he acts nervous and can't put on a condom, he's probably a virgin
• The best part of a leap of faith is not the safe landing, but the free fall
• The Summer of '10, like Ke$ha, may have seemed good at first, but you soon realize it's nothing but fake sentiment, lowered inhibitions, and void of all intelligence. 
• It doesn't matter if you're 19 or 41. Men of ALL ages act as immature as a 16 year old. 
• I must have good taste because every one's after my sloppy seconds
• If you're too mature to work you problems out via a phone conversation, rather than text messaging, then you should reeducate yourself on the definition of the word "mature."
• Stick with people who have your back, not a knife to your back. 
• Hold strong to your morals. If someone is really your friend they will respect you for that, not turn you away.
• Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me....but after that, don't try to fool your job.
• You don't have to say too much....
• The scars from the rocks will always remind me to live for the moment but also remember that every action has a consequence. 
• Sometimes, paradise is closer than you think. Mine was Lake Fontana. But I've also realized that nirvana comes with a price.
• Blind dates are awkward as hell and some people REALLY shouldn't play match maker.
• I don't know what idiot invented the two-person kayak but they should have known, it's really a solo sport for lonely souls.
• If you know your Achilles' Heel, then why don't you work to fix it?
• A rum cake can feed a small African nation but the money some people spend on a pair of designer sunglasses can feed a large one.
• Irony is when the creator of the NDC is the person who thrives on drama

I learned that this Summer has made me the most jaded I've ever been about people. I am feeling that I really can't trust anybody anymore. This is painful because, although I was always cynical, I did like the part of me that gave people the benefit of the doubt. But now I am learning the hardest lesson of all. That people's actions rarely make sense and even if they have a valid reason, they will never tell you. It's like an episode of unsolved mysteries. "There are some things I may never know..."

Lose the English Language

Even when I lived in NYC, I always felt like I was behind in social trends such as fashion, music, technology, and slang. So the newest idiocy...er I mean idiom to catch me ear this Summer is "Lose My Number." I did some research and found a very fascinating article from The Independent, talking about how the phrase was the top Twitter trend (#losemynumber) in November 2009. Of course, our current younger generations don't have time to type such a long phrase so it has been abbreviated lmn (according to Urban Dictionary). The issue I have with this new pop acronym is the paradoxical hilarity. 


Let me back up with a few definitions. Urban Dictionary defines lmn as: "If someone you really don't want to talk to, ever again, keeps calling or texting you and blowing up your phone, Tell them LMN." 
***(on a side note, "blowing up your phone" is another phrase I can't stand, but that's a tangent I wont get into here.) *** 
The dictionary defines lose as: "To be unsuccessful in retaining possession of." I don't know about you, but to me that translates to "accidentally." I can "unsuccessfully retain my house key" by accident, but I can't purposely lose them. I can intentionally delete or erase a phone number from my phone or address book, but I can't intentionally lose it. Do you see where I'm going with this? Now if I went to a club, got a guys number on a coaster, and then accidentally left the coaster on the table, that would be "losing his number." But if I get the guys number, go home and throw it out cause I have no interest in calling him, that's not "losing" but getting ride of his number. 


It is another common misuse of a word in the English Language. What worries me most is what it says about the up and coming generations who create and perpetuate these moronic phrases. Maybe its a parapraxis that shows a deeper feeling of loss and lack of control over someone else "deleting your number." Maybe more people need to go to a college English class instead of just going to bars and hooking up. Maybe they lost their brain and I'll find it with their number somewhere. Until then, don't bother losing my number, I know you're not that talented. As Chad always says, "Peace Out, Sucka!"

Shattered Conflict

Both Kurt Vonnegut and Margaret Atwood have written amazing essays about storytelling. I would be kidding myself if I thought I could write anything even close to that caliber. Yet I felt that some sort of comparative between plot structure and real life is inevitable for my blog so here it goes...

In high school English we were taught about plot structure. this is the classic story arc we all remember: It starts with the exposition till a major problem hits (also know as the "conflict"). From there we get the rising action, the climax, the falling action, and then the denouement. We all know this is an over simplified version of any story, and even more so of real life, but it is an easy way to section a narrative. then again, maybe we are kidding ourselves in thinking that life is not that simple.

A couple weeks ago at work I experienced a similar plot structure. It was an average day. The characters and setting were introduced via the normal evening shift change. People checked in, found out where they would be working, and standard activity commenced. that is, until Aidan dropped the glasses. It really was like out of a movie. I'm standing there doing my job and then, as if in slow motion, I see 50 glasses crashing to the floor. The dolly had hit a drain and that rut was the beginning of a negative spiral to to rock bottom. the details about the rest of the night are not really important. Simply put, one by one my fellow co workers crashed either physically or mentally. I found myself spending the night picking up the shattered pieces while trying to salvage what was still whole.

Perhaps I am over using this metaphor, but this instance made me think a lot about that initial conflict often cited in a plot narrative study. As I delved deeper into this idea, it made me wonder if I could place the initial conflict in my own life; that one instance where everything started to spiral out of control. that moment in time when my life went into the rising action that's fit for the silver screen. Did I have my own breaking glass incident that started the drama of my life or is the model truly too basic to apply to one's life? Personally, I think it is impossible to analyze a story until you've finished reading it. That being said, I myself will never be able to realize where my initial conflict occurred until my denouement is complete. Maybe it's better that way.

Your Move...Check Mate

I was never very good at chess. Whenever someone would say "it's your move" I would tense up. So much pressure mixed with a total lack of skill for the strategy. We've all been there. I mean we can't be good at everything. So what do you do when the game you are less than confident about is the dating game? I've always been a timid one when first meeting a prospective mate. I feel awkward, self conscious, and over all clueless. But just recently I finally sat down and tried to analyze an often under discussed issue: who's job is it to make the first move?

No one wants to look like the fool; no one wants to be rejected. Yet ultimately, someone has to step up to the plate and get the ball rolling. The question is Who. So I went on a mission to discover how society felt on the subject. Most people gave me the easy, I mean generic answers: "I donno" and "depends on the situation." To me that proved that most people were just as lost on this issue as I was. So I kept probing and received a couple of interesting answers. One guy admitted his response was old fashioned, but he still put the responsibility on the guy. I had a handful of girls say the same thing but I believe that is do to their lack of nerve more than anything else. It's always easier to pass the buck. I asked people if age or experience played a factor. If someone is older, are they expected to make the first move because they've been in that situation more? When given this prompt, a lot of people agreed but since it was fed to them I consider that framing bias. When I asked my best friend who should make the first move, he gave me most interesting response. He said it is the responsibility of whomever wants it the most. While this is clearly the most logical answer, most people do not not approach the situation that way.

As always, I tried to apply this concept to my own life. I looked at my past and realized 99% of the time I waited for the other person to make the first move. I assume this stems from my lack of self esteem more than anything else. Yet, that justification did not make me feel any better about my prior actions so I looked to change this vicious cycle. Recently, I started playing the game again. A guy and I had hit the stalemate point; nether of us moving for fear of exposing our most prized piece: our king of pride. I ran through all the scenarios of my research trying to determine who's job it was to make a game changing move. Unfortunately, my findings landed me with conflicting conclusions. He was a guy so maybe it was his responsibility, but I was older so maybe it was mine. How could I determine who wanted it more? Perhaps this was the catch-22. 

I wish the moral of this blog could simply be: forget the rules and take matters into your own hands. There's no time like the present. Seize the day...etc etc. But that would make me a hypocrite because I did no such thing. I told myself I would and yet I subconsciously found a a middle man to negotiate the draw. Then again, maybe there's nothing wrong with that approach. If fear of rejection is taken out of the mix, both players can relax and not care who's Queen takes King. 

So lets just check and mate. 

 

You Know What Thomas Wolfe Says...

Don't ask me to repeat the famous quote; I've talked about it a million times on blogs and I don't want to be repetitive. Instead, I want to write something short about my newest revelation from last night.

Home
"Home is where the heart is"
"Home, is this the quite place where you should be alone?"
"Where thou art, that is home"

There are many different quotes and phrases that discuss the notion of home. But for me, I have learned that "Home" is a concept that only resides in the past. You remember what Cinderella said, right? No, not the girl who can't keep her shoes on; the band. They said "Don't know what you got till it's gone." Ignoring the obvious grammatical errors, Tom Keifer has a cliché but valid point. In my experience, I have never felt at home anywhere. It wasn't until I moved to NYC that I found myself missing "my home" (Asheville). But that home was in the past. Yet when I moved back to Asheville, I found myself missing NYC, and feeling "homesick" for it. Now that I'm gone, I think of NYC fondly as a home I once had. 

Maybe this is just me. Maybe you are saying to yourself "I've lived in this house, in this town for 5 years. I'm married, with kids, a good job, and a settled life here. Of course I call this my home, and that's in the present tense." I'm not going to argue with you because I've never felt that way so maybe I can't relate. But, I do think this idea is rooted into our culture somewhat.  Take Facebook (or any networking site) for example. One of the fields you're asked to fill in is "Hometown." Does anyone actually know what this means? Although people may differ in the definition, I think everyone will agree that this field is populated by a city you used to live in. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that there is another field titled "Current City." So here we see society reaffirming my notion that a home can only be in the past; or at least a hometown. 

Maybe it's just me, but I think it is impossible to realize I feel at home somewhere until I've moved on.  "Now I know what I got, It's just this song, And it ain't easy to get back, Takes so long." Cinderella knew you could never go home again. Oops, there I go being repetitive....

Born in the USA

Sorry readers, it has been a while since my last post. Part of it is because I haven't been inspired. The other part is because blogging is a dangerous activity that people try to use against you. But rather than live in fear of what I say, I am back blogging about my newest quandary: "American Idol"

The name alone sparks issues. It is said that more people vote for "American Idol" than president of the United States. Whether or not that's true, the concept of the show brings about one main assumption: the public votes for who they want to see as the new Music Star. Although this sounds simple, the concept itself is very flawed. the idea is that people are voting for the next big thing. As history has proved, it doesn't work out that way. I am not trying to say that Idol winners have not reached a level of fame otherwise unachievable. Yet I do think it is hard to argue that they have become the "Idols" that you would think with the amount of votes/American support they receive. The easy example is Ruben Studdard. He beat out Clay Aiken whom we all know has become way more successful. Even people like Fantasia have had to resort to VH1 reality TV shows to keep her fame and payroll. I am not denying that each and everyone of these Idols are talented. I am trying to make an observation about the voting public

Remember high school elections? Remember how the most popular person won, rather than the best qualified? I think that is sort of the case here. The contestants of Idol are not allowed to compete with their own music. Instead, week after week, they are told to sing a song that fits the day's theme. Therefore, the voting public never gets a real sense of the singer's music, but rather how they sound singing other genres and classic tunes. Once an artist gets out into the recording world, his/her sound differs greatly from the famous music they were forced to sing on Idol. Quickly, the American public realizes they have no interest in this singer's "sound" and record sales decrease. This has nothing to do with the talent of the artist, but rather the design of the system that has propelled them to fame. People aren't voting for the musician they like best, but rather the singing voice and personality that appeals to them. How many people go into a record store (or iTunes for this day and age) and base there purchases solely on those 2 criteria?

Maybe I'm bias cause I don't watch the show but I really don't see the logic in it. I spend 3 days a week riding around in my best friend's car with the radio blasting. Can you guess how many times I've heard a Taylor Hicks song? And in case you think I've been living under a rock, I just youtubed him and more videos from American Idol showed up than his actual singles. What does that tell you? But let me know how you think.

If you can’t beat them, join them?

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..

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.

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:

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!***

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

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