This one is sure to generate hate mail. Think of me what you will. Call me on my privilege if it makes you feel better or more superior. For the record I'm a white woman whose mostly straight and I work hard for what I have and I blame no one for the things I don't have. And there's not a day that goes by that I'm not aware of and grateful for every damn thing I do have.
Compassion or empathy fatigue is a real thing and it's not just reserved for those who work in first-responder fields like paramedics, fire-fighters, doctors and shrinks. Everyone and anyone can get it. There's an adequate definition of it here thanks to wikipedia. In short, for those too lazy to click the link, means that eventually, after being bombarded with enough horror, trauma (man-made or otherwise), natural disasters, appeals for donations and petitions you will eventually stop giving a shit.
After enough changes to language to accommodate every kind individual out there, after enough political scandals and economic catastrophes and typhoons and earthquakes and social movements a person just stops caring. It becomes too much to deal with, they reach a saturation point.
And it's not to say that the movements and petitions aren't worth a person's time. Quite often a lot of good is accomplished through petitions and donations (when people look at where their money goes before forking it over). When something comes along (and something always comes along, every single day in my email inbox) that someone is truly outraged by a petition is started. It comes with a preamble aimed to get the potential petitioner's blood boiling so that they'll sign it and if they're blood boils long enough, they'll donate money to the cause.
Just about every petition I've bothered to sign online has eventually followed up, asking me to lend them money to accompany my slacktivist click of a button. And I'm not joking. I get at least one email per day from a place like Avaaz or Change.org or something similar, sometimes I get up to four separate requests from different groups asking me to sign four different petitions in one day! Every. Single. Day.
Is it any wonder that I've reached the maximum number of shits to give?
A thought occurs. Just because I didn't sign the petition or even bother to let the preamble get my blood boiling, doesn't mean that I don't care about the rights of gays, or the rights of women in foreign countries, or the environment. I care about all these things. I don't need to be enlightened or have my mind changed. I forward those movements by being honest and living my life as if the very things we seek to change are completely normal things that should and in places already exist. For example, I live my daily life accepting that all humans are worthy of respect and that littering is too easily prevented to be a problem.
These two examples are just the most recent things to get dragged up onto my pinnacle of empathy fatigue.
Firstly that all human beings are worth of basic respect and dignity. I don't care how you identify yourself. I don't care for the labels that are constantly being invented and applied for every conceivable gender identity and sexual orientation that exists. I don't care to affix them on others, and I don't care to have them affixed on me. A person is a person is a person and we're all worthy of respect and dignity and a fair chance. Period. End of discussion. I've reached my apex here in that just about every form of discrimination that can be identified has a name and a social agenda. I disagree with the idea of demonizing people who are trying to make a difference in the gay community because they're not "doing it right enough" or because they're a human being and sometimes a dick to other people with their opinions. Part of the problem may be that this constant berating of all the ways that people are being discriminated against, or abused in a variety of ways, is something I already know and in most cases there's nothing I can do about it aside from what I'm already doing. I'm not the target audience for this kind of campaign and yet I find it being thrust at me time and time again. There are people who could benefit from knowing that there's a huge spectrum of orientation, and these people are the least likely to be the ones to seek out this information.
I see the problem this way: I'm already an atheist and I'm confident and happy about it. I don't need another confident atheist trying to keep convincing me to some how be more of an atheist and talking smack about other athiests who maybe aren't trying hard enough because they still have friends who are Christian or Muslim or Jewish. Perhaps I just dream about a utopia where people are just fucking nice to each other and no one needs to make anyone else feel guilty for the things they say, the beliefs they hold or the opinions they have the nerve to state. And we can still tell jokes and laugh at ourselves once in a while. Because life is hilarious if you look at it closely enough.
Secondly, the environment. Global warning in particular. Holy shit am I tired of hearing about it and being made to feel guilty about my existence's impact on the world. Okay, I'm a vegetarian, I drive a small car, I recycle, I don't litter, I don't let my bathroom faucet run while I brush my teeth, I don't drive my car from one end of a big box parking lot to the other to avoid walking across the damn enormous things and I do this to save gas and/or money. Not the environment. Yes. You read that right.
This is not to say that it's not worth while. I don't want to rain on the parade of those who say that every little bit counts. I don't want to claim that it makes no difference. I don't want to say that Global Warming is a sham. I don't want to tell you that recycling is a waste of time. Penn & Teller have already covered that. I'm not saying that Global Warming isn't a real thing, I just question whether or not it's entirely humanity's fault. This of course doesn't dismiss all the other ways that humans are fucking up the planet, but I'm not convinced that CO2 generated by humans and our gadgets is the major cause.
There's just as much evidence out there to show that the planet is warming because of the sun as there is evidence to say it comes from cars or cow farts. Though knowing that the sun is in one of it's most active periods does lend a lot to the sun-warming-the-earth theory. The planet is getting warmer, that's a fact I won't deny, but I am willing to think that it's not entirely our fault, I don't have the built in human sense of guilt about my existence that a lot of people (some of them religious) are raised with. I prefer sound, level headed research to fear-mongering and guilt tripping. Again, I think I'm just not the target audience, I already know better, Dear Media, stop badgering me.
I drive a small efficient car because I know that gasoline is a finite resource and I don't like spending any more of my hard earned dollars on it than I have to, because there are much more interesting things to spend it on. I turn the water off when I brush, and lights out when I'm not using them because I have to pay for that. I'm a responsible adult who lives on her own. Know what else is a finite resource? My income.
Tuesday 19 November 2013
Friday 20 September 2013
We have no choice but to make choices
Hello dear reader, if you're still actually reading. I know it's been a long time between rants. Turns out I've been too content lately to rant about things. Or I haven't. I haven't decided yet what excuse to provide to you. Or if I even need to give you one.
As you may have guessed, this one's about choice. It's a major influence in human existence. Decision making is how we all managed to get here, one way or another. It is something we will do from the day we're born to the day we die, voluntarily or not.
Evolution, and our daily experiences have wired our brains to make certain instinctual decisions. Some of us are able to look at them differently. Have a listen to this little gem of a podcast when you find the time (about an hour) or if you have lots of time read the book it relates to "Why People Believe Weird Things" by Michael Shermer (who has introduced me to my new favourite colloquialism for brains: electric meat). To sum up, over time some of our individual and collective electric meat have managed to find patterns and correlations where none exist, but seem to be a throw back to a time when we really need to know if that rustling in the grass was just the wind or something that could kill us. This is just one kind of involuntary choice that we make.
In this post I want to talk about the choices we voluntarily make, both consciously and subconsciously. Wait, how can a subconscious choice be voluntary? I have a point here, I promise. I'm not just referring to choosing not to breathe or make your heart beat, though you can choose to hold your breath or make your heart beat faster though exercise, but that's beside the point. Or rather it is the point. By holding your breath you choose to acknowledge the process you become aware of it and suddenly your power over it. You do have power over it, albeit only for a short period of time. If you hold it until you pass out, your subconscious will take the reins back.
I think we can do this same trick with subconscious decisions we make as a result of conditioning. So many people make choices based on what they know, what they've done, tasted, heard or were taught. Experiences easily become ingrained in our soft impressionable electric meat. Studies have shown that people have a very hard time changing their mind about a thing even after trying it a second time. I won't get into the biochemical reasons about why we cannot or have a very hard time changing our minds, I lack those credentials.
I firmly believe that we can make our unconscious decisions conscious, voluntary ones. It takes work and it takes awareness. Sometimes it takes external assistance, at the start.
To make a choice we need to be presented with options. Sometimes there's only two choices, sometimes there are too many and we become overwhelmed, I know I've been "crippled by choice" because there were too many appealing options when faced with only being able to choose just one. This type of situation often leads people to regret their choice, because of all the other options they wish they'd explored. Everyone has their own filters for making choices depending on the situation. Some of those filters can be difficult to apply to a simplified choice. Friend or Foe? Yes or No? One or Zero?
We weigh the options and if there's enough time we work out the best out come for the moment and hopefully for later on. Some of us are really good at this, some of us are very bad at it. And by that I don't mean that people are incapable of making choices, they're wired to. Some people just can't see the third, fourth or fifth (etc) options that exist.
Addicts and professional victims are prime examples.
Addicts continue to get their fix (regardless of what it is) for reasons they justified to themselves long ago and see no need to change. It could be habitual it could be a coping mechanism, it could be both. The most common story is that they drink and/or do drugs to help forget about some horrible thing that happened to them in their life either a long time ago or something on going. Over time, they chose to give up choice. Yes that makes sense, they chose to give it up by choosing not to be sober.
The lucky ones are those who managed to gain awareness, one way or another, and suddenly choice is restored, when it never really left them in the first place. They always had the choice, they just couldn't see it in front of them. They get clean they cut back and/or stop what they're doing. They choose to stop, they choose to seek help, they choose to remain sober. Every day it's a choice. The burden of choice.
The ultimate power of choice. For those who feel completely powerless in many or all aspects of their lives it may be easy to believe that they never had choices. That it's up to a god or an authority figure or the universe or higher power. There's that word again, power. Making choices makes us feel powerful. We regain some modicum of control over our lives, even if it's something as simple as what to wear. The bigger the decision the more power you typically have over your own life or everyone else's if you're in politics.
The bigger and more elaborate decisions you make the more in control you'll feel. I can only speak from personal experience here, but I've made some decisions in my life that were neither A nor B but G or N or Z. Even if those other letters were very unpopular and no one else in their right mind would choose. I've made choices that go against my instinct, that go against my experience, choices that poke sticks at old wounds, choices that some people don't understand. And the more often I do this, the more I feel like I'm in control of my own life. Because ultimately, unless someone incapacitates me I am the only one in control of my own life because I'm the only one responsible for it.
A professional victim may see the events of their life as beyond their control, as a result of outside influences only and require blame to rest solely on the shoulders of others. Sure, sometimes it is. Instinctively, no person consciously choses to be sexually, physically or psychologically assaulted. Not the first time. Sadly some folks get conditioned by repeat offences and start to choose the bad over the good either because it's all they've ever known, that they have no choice, and this infiltrates every non-choice they make from that point onward. Or they don't believe or know they can do any better. The reasons for believing they have no choices is as wide and varied as the choices they don't realise they have. It's an option they've never considered. It's not just choosing some other letter of the alphabet besides A or B. It's recognizing that there's a choice at all.
Not everyone gets to this point. Either to that point at which they cannot not see their choices or they don't reach that point at which they become aware that there are other options. Sometimes awareness does cut the proverbial mustard.
Many nights I chose not to write. I chose not to think. I chose to watch something or play solitaire or read comics. I chose the path of least resistance. It wasn't until recently that I was made aware of my choice to let my brain sit in idle for a long period of time. Tonight I chose to eat left over steamed broccoli and potato chips for dinner and I chose to write instead of do nothing or get some much needed sleep.
Which just proves that we can't always make the right choice or the best choice, but it's still a choice. Never do anything you aren't prepared to regret, something you cannot do without making a choice.
More on this to come I hope, when I next choose to shift my brain from idle into a useful gear.
As you may have guessed, this one's about choice. It's a major influence in human existence. Decision making is how we all managed to get here, one way or another. It is something we will do from the day we're born to the day we die, voluntarily or not.
Evolution, and our daily experiences have wired our brains to make certain instinctual decisions. Some of us are able to look at them differently. Have a listen to this little gem of a podcast when you find the time (about an hour) or if you have lots of time read the book it relates to "Why People Believe Weird Things" by Michael Shermer (who has introduced me to my new favourite colloquialism for brains: electric meat). To sum up, over time some of our individual and collective electric meat have managed to find patterns and correlations where none exist, but seem to be a throw back to a time when we really need to know if that rustling in the grass was just the wind or something that could kill us. This is just one kind of involuntary choice that we make.
In this post I want to talk about the choices we voluntarily make, both consciously and subconsciously. Wait, how can a subconscious choice be voluntary? I have a point here, I promise. I'm not just referring to choosing not to breathe or make your heart beat, though you can choose to hold your breath or make your heart beat faster though exercise, but that's beside the point. Or rather it is the point. By holding your breath you choose to acknowledge the process you become aware of it and suddenly your power over it. You do have power over it, albeit only for a short period of time. If you hold it until you pass out, your subconscious will take the reins back.
I think we can do this same trick with subconscious decisions we make as a result of conditioning. So many people make choices based on what they know, what they've done, tasted, heard or were taught. Experiences easily become ingrained in our soft impressionable electric meat. Studies have shown that people have a very hard time changing their mind about a thing even after trying it a second time. I won't get into the biochemical reasons about why we cannot or have a very hard time changing our minds, I lack those credentials.
I firmly believe that we can make our unconscious decisions conscious, voluntary ones. It takes work and it takes awareness. Sometimes it takes external assistance, at the start.
To make a choice we need to be presented with options. Sometimes there's only two choices, sometimes there are too many and we become overwhelmed, I know I've been "crippled by choice" because there were too many appealing options when faced with only being able to choose just one. This type of situation often leads people to regret their choice, because of all the other options they wish they'd explored. Everyone has their own filters for making choices depending on the situation. Some of those filters can be difficult to apply to a simplified choice. Friend or Foe? Yes or No? One or Zero?
We weigh the options and if there's enough time we work out the best out come for the moment and hopefully for later on. Some of us are really good at this, some of us are very bad at it. And by that I don't mean that people are incapable of making choices, they're wired to. Some people just can't see the third, fourth or fifth (etc) options that exist.
Addicts and professional victims are prime examples.
Addicts continue to get their fix (regardless of what it is) for reasons they justified to themselves long ago and see no need to change. It could be habitual it could be a coping mechanism, it could be both. The most common story is that they drink and/or do drugs to help forget about some horrible thing that happened to them in their life either a long time ago or something on going. Over time, they chose to give up choice. Yes that makes sense, they chose to give it up by choosing not to be sober.
The lucky ones are those who managed to gain awareness, one way or another, and suddenly choice is restored, when it never really left them in the first place. They always had the choice, they just couldn't see it in front of them. They get clean they cut back and/or stop what they're doing. They choose to stop, they choose to seek help, they choose to remain sober. Every day it's a choice. The burden of choice.
The ultimate power of choice. For those who feel completely powerless in many or all aspects of their lives it may be easy to believe that they never had choices. That it's up to a god or an authority figure or the universe or higher power. There's that word again, power. Making choices makes us feel powerful. We regain some modicum of control over our lives, even if it's something as simple as what to wear. The bigger the decision the more power you typically have over your own life or everyone else's if you're in politics.
The bigger and more elaborate decisions you make the more in control you'll feel. I can only speak from personal experience here, but I've made some decisions in my life that were neither A nor B but G or N or Z. Even if those other letters were very unpopular and no one else in their right mind would choose. I've made choices that go against my instinct, that go against my experience, choices that poke sticks at old wounds, choices that some people don't understand. And the more often I do this, the more I feel like I'm in control of my own life. Because ultimately, unless someone incapacitates me I am the only one in control of my own life because I'm the only one responsible for it.
A professional victim may see the events of their life as beyond their control, as a result of outside influences only and require blame to rest solely on the shoulders of others. Sure, sometimes it is. Instinctively, no person consciously choses to be sexually, physically or psychologically assaulted. Not the first time. Sadly some folks get conditioned by repeat offences and start to choose the bad over the good either because it's all they've ever known, that they have no choice, and this infiltrates every non-choice they make from that point onward. Or they don't believe or know they can do any better. The reasons for believing they have no choices is as wide and varied as the choices they don't realise they have. It's an option they've never considered. It's not just choosing some other letter of the alphabet besides A or B. It's recognizing that there's a choice at all.
Not everyone gets to this point. Either to that point at which they cannot not see their choices or they don't reach that point at which they become aware that there are other options. Sometimes awareness does cut the proverbial mustard.
Many nights I chose not to write. I chose not to think. I chose to watch something or play solitaire or read comics. I chose the path of least resistance. It wasn't until recently that I was made aware of my choice to let my brain sit in idle for a long period of time. Tonight I chose to eat left over steamed broccoli and potato chips for dinner and I chose to write instead of do nothing or get some much needed sleep.
Which just proves that we can't always make the right choice or the best choice, but it's still a choice. Never do anything you aren't prepared to regret, something you cannot do without making a choice.
More on this to come I hope, when I next choose to shift my brain from idle into a useful gear.
Friday 10 May 2013
Abercrabbie and Bitch
A lot of fuss is being made, and rightly so that the maker of Abercrombie & Fitch line of clothing is a horrible person and that I would say is absolutely true. Most are saying he's a horrible hypocrite because he doesn't fit the model of beauty and perfection that he so exclusively wants to cater to. People all over are making macros and memes that essentially say "Dear Pot, You are also black. Signed, Kettle".
And we need to stop doing it.
He said we're fat, so we call him ugly. What are we, fucking five year olds? When was the last time that defence worked?
Yes it's a horrible exclusionary marketing strategy to openly say that fat and "uncool" kids have no right to wear the clothing you design (which is really just a t-shirt with screen printed or fabric labels on them that any one with enough gumption could manufacture). Yes, it's a cruel thing to say openly and a foolish move to think that the world will not react, but it has. And it has made the name popular in demographics that are not their target market. It's made his line of clothing a target for ire in every other demographic, except his target market. At least I hope his target market has heard the stupidity that has come out of his mouth. Because clearly, Mike Jefferies can't.
I would have a lot of bones to pick with Mr. Jefferies were we to meet and have an intelligent conversation. What he's said is disgusting and hurtful to a vast cross section of the western population. However, retaliating by calling him ugly and/or fat is not going to help this problem go away. I don't care what he looks like, someone that ignorant and/or cruel doesn't deserve to be preserved in our collective memory via the wit and humour of memes and shared FB photos (whatever that means). I don't suggest we turn the other cheek. I suggest we simply call him out for the hurtful words he has made very public and request an apology from him.
If we continue to do this — and by we I mean anyone who wouldn't fit in his boring clothing or are pissed that he's a jerk — we are only going to get the same message: "Dear Kettle, Ditto. Pot."
And we need to stop doing it.
He said we're fat, so we call him ugly. What are we, fucking five year olds? When was the last time that defence worked?
Yes it's a horrible exclusionary marketing strategy to openly say that fat and "uncool" kids have no right to wear the clothing you design (which is really just a t-shirt with screen printed or fabric labels on them that any one with enough gumption could manufacture). Yes, it's a cruel thing to say openly and a foolish move to think that the world will not react, but it has. And it has made the name popular in demographics that are not their target market. It's made his line of clothing a target for ire in every other demographic, except his target market. At least I hope his target market has heard the stupidity that has come out of his mouth. Because clearly, Mike Jefferies can't.
I would have a lot of bones to pick with Mr. Jefferies were we to meet and have an intelligent conversation. What he's said is disgusting and hurtful to a vast cross section of the western population. However, retaliating by calling him ugly and/or fat is not going to help this problem go away. I don't care what he looks like, someone that ignorant and/or cruel doesn't deserve to be preserved in our collective memory via the wit and humour of memes and shared FB photos (whatever that means). I don't suggest we turn the other cheek. I suggest we simply call him out for the hurtful words he has made very public and request an apology from him.
If we continue to do this — and by we I mean anyone who wouldn't fit in his boring clothing or are pissed that he's a jerk — we are only going to get the same message: "Dear Kettle, Ditto. Pot."
Tuesday 7 May 2013
"Men, you're less beautiful than you think"
If you're connected to the outside world in anyway, by either a television or the internet you've probably seen the Dove advertisement that proves to women that they are prettier than they think and they should stop being so damn hard on themselves. And yes, I'd love it if every woman could see themselves with the same eyes as those who love them. I'm a big fan of having self-esteem.
Shortly after this advert went viral all over Facebook, a parody was made for men. You can see it here, if you haven't already (and really I've only included the link to prove my point not to boost the view count on this thing). It's essentially the same video, but with the opposite message. In the original video women are shown a drawing described to a forensic artist by someone less critical than themselves. Through out the original video the women are describing themselves using the unflattering language we are all taught. For what reason I can't say, some sad attempt at modesty perhaps. They are shown how they describe themselves in comparison.
The parody shows men describing themselves as how they are. They are unabashedly kind to themselves. They are confident and honest about their appearance and are all easy on the eyes. They are also shown what they described themselves, they are also shown the drawings described by women who, in the video, describe them as "creepy" or having "rapey" eyes (I don't even ... I don't want to even touch that one right now). The drawings they describe end up being 'handsome celebrities' instead of themselves and the drawings they describe are also not their faces but gross exaggerations of "ugly" people.
The tag line at the end of the parody video? "Men, you're less beautiful than you think."
Since when is it wrong for both genders to feel good about themselves? Since when is it wrong for both genders to be confident and happy about their looks? Since when is it wrong for men and women to think they're nice looking? I understand how parody works, I understand that it's an exaggeration to make a humorous point. Well I don't find it particularly amusing.
The mere existence of beauty standards makes it hard enough for anyone, regardless of gender identification, to feel happy in their own skin. Some of us don't need Dove's misguided attempts at making us feel better and some of us certainly don't need parody videos telling men that they're over-confident and unattractive. Mainstream media is already doing this to the entire gender spectrum.
There is already a razor fine line between being modest and over confident. Step over that line and suddenly you're a horrible, self-absorbed, and shallow. Too modest? People encourage you to feel better about yourself (maybe by buying whatever they're selling), but don't feel too confident or you could find yourself on the wrong side of that fine line and be criticized for thinking you're beautiful. Try not to cut yourself in the process. And for some people that is what happens.
I don't agree with boosting one gender and simultaneously bringing the other down a few pegs (even if it is all in jest). People (not men and/or women) need the same support. I don't buy into this idea that just because there's such a thing as the patriarchy that no man alive ever needs to be told that they're nice looking. I suspect that guys sometimes have just as many self-esteem and body issues as women do. Pretending they don't is only going to make it worse.
Tuesday 2 April 2013
It's not my fault
I should really just change the title of this blog from "unpopular opinions" to "how to piss off, hurt and alienate your friends in 1,000 words or less." I do wonder about who I might be angering or hurting etc. I really do. Many of my friends see these posts and read them and may or may not think I'm a horrible person for writing the things I do (or the opposite). That's not why I keep this blog. In that vein, please read on. I will caution, this time I'm talking about weight and body image issues and how we treat people of different sizes.
You can't say I didn't warn you.
My employer decided that it would be a terrific idea that since spring is coming and people of all ages and genders are guilty of enjoying eating a lot in the winter and put on a few pounds that they might want to or feel the need to loose. Perhaps so they can atone for the sin of eating. So this challenge is office-wide and it extends all the way to the end of June if not a little further. I'm hazy on the details, I didn't read the email thoroughly because it really rubs my rhubarb and I have no plans to participate. I actually can't for a few reasons.
I think it's a horrible and insensitive idea. It doesn't take into account how many people in our office there are that can safely participate. It doesn't account for anyone of any size with an eating disorder. It puts a lot of attention on the people in our office that are, for lack of a better word: curvy and puts just a little more societal shame on them for having larger fat cells than the rest of us.
Let me be clear. If anyone wants to lose weight and feel better about themselves and does it safely I am behind that 100%. I'm more concerned with someone being healthy and happy than what their dress or pants size is. I don't care if you can't squeeze into a size 6 or even a size 16. I care about you. I have friends and co-workers of all shapes and sizes and I love them all equally.
While I'm being honest and clear, I will also state for the record I'm 5 foot 4 and 140 pounds. I'm not embarrassed about it. I've been working really fucking hard at maintaining that for my own well being and self esteem and physical health as well. I don't think I look like a person who weighs that much (I've been working incredibly hard on building muscle), but it doesn't change the number on the scale that I've been seeing without fail for three months. It's not going to change. I'm at peace with that number and all the work — physically and mentally — that I've put in to get there.
There's a misconception that if a person is thin they shouldn't ever complain about their weight. Ever. Why would they. Thin = happy. Right? This has become even clearer to me now that the work-place challenge has begun. And I don't like it, but women are worse for this kind of behaviour. What I refer to of course is the (almost) "othering" of skinny people. As if they couldn't possibly have any body issues at all. Easter treats came into the office today and they got put on my desk, because I'm skinny and therefore exempt from the challenge and "allowed" (if not encouraged) to eat milk chocolate. The word skinny lately seems like a substitute for something much meaner lately, it sounds loaded. I've heard it this way in a couple of different contexts lately. And all I want to say is this: it's not my fault.
It's not my fault that society has put so much pressure on everyone to be ridiculously thin. It's not my fault that sweets and deep fried things are so tasty (I have a weakness for them too). It's not my fault that I am thin and others are not. It's not my fault that people have eating disorders (on both sides of the spectrum). It's not my fault.
And I can't stress this enough: It's not your fault either.
We, as individuals, alone control what we eat how much and the level of exercise we partake in as well as the frequency. We all choose because that's our right as human beings, it's not a fault. If there's someone out there who needs the motivation or a little push to lose a few pounds they've wanted to be free of then I guess the work-place weight loss challenge is the perfect opportunity. I just wish it wasn't so "public". If there's someone who may be larger, but doesn't feel the need to lose any weight because they're (perhaps after years of self-work finally) content with their size, I worry that they'll feel pressured and shamed into participating for that reason. I worry about those who might not succeed. Will they feel better or worse about the whole thing and themselves at the end if they don't lose even one pound.
I confess I've never been a large person, but I have my body-issue demons. These days there's a truce between us but it's an uneasy one. I can't and won't pretend I understand what it's like to have lived a long period of time in a large person's body and everything that entails. The assumption that because I appear to be a healthy body 'size' I should never ever complain, that I don't have the right to do so? That's what gets me.
People of all sizes have their issues and it's no one's right to judge how harshly someone else feels about their own weight or, for that matter, how much (and what) they should eat based on the size of their waste line. Seriously, people. We need to stop that. Myself included.
You can't say I didn't warn you.
My employer decided that it would be a terrific idea that since spring is coming and people of all ages and genders are guilty of enjoying eating a lot in the winter and put on a few pounds that they might want to or feel the need to loose. Perhaps so they can atone for the sin of eating. So this challenge is office-wide and it extends all the way to the end of June if not a little further. I'm hazy on the details, I didn't read the email thoroughly because it really rubs my rhubarb and I have no plans to participate. I actually can't for a few reasons.
I think it's a horrible and insensitive idea. It doesn't take into account how many people in our office there are that can safely participate. It doesn't account for anyone of any size with an eating disorder. It puts a lot of attention on the people in our office that are, for lack of a better word: curvy and puts just a little more societal shame on them for having larger fat cells than the rest of us.
Let me be clear. If anyone wants to lose weight and feel better about themselves and does it safely I am behind that 100%. I'm more concerned with someone being healthy and happy than what their dress or pants size is. I don't care if you can't squeeze into a size 6 or even a size 16. I care about you. I have friends and co-workers of all shapes and sizes and I love them all equally.
While I'm being honest and clear, I will also state for the record I'm 5 foot 4 and 140 pounds. I'm not embarrassed about it. I've been working really fucking hard at maintaining that for my own well being and self esteem and physical health as well. I don't think I look like a person who weighs that much (I've been working incredibly hard on building muscle), but it doesn't change the number on the scale that I've been seeing without fail for three months. It's not going to change. I'm at peace with that number and all the work — physically and mentally — that I've put in to get there.
There's a misconception that if a person is thin they shouldn't ever complain about their weight. Ever. Why would they. Thin = happy. Right? This has become even clearer to me now that the work-place challenge has begun. And I don't like it, but women are worse for this kind of behaviour. What I refer to of course is the (almost) "othering" of skinny people. As if they couldn't possibly have any body issues at all. Easter treats came into the office today and they got put on my desk, because I'm skinny and therefore exempt from the challenge and "allowed" (if not encouraged) to eat milk chocolate. The word skinny lately seems like a substitute for something much meaner lately, it sounds loaded. I've heard it this way in a couple of different contexts lately. And all I want to say is this: it's not my fault.
It's not my fault that society has put so much pressure on everyone to be ridiculously thin. It's not my fault that sweets and deep fried things are so tasty (I have a weakness for them too). It's not my fault that I am thin and others are not. It's not my fault that people have eating disorders (on both sides of the spectrum). It's not my fault.
And I can't stress this enough: It's not your fault either.
We, as individuals, alone control what we eat how much and the level of exercise we partake in as well as the frequency. We all choose because that's our right as human beings, it's not a fault. If there's someone out there who needs the motivation or a little push to lose a few pounds they've wanted to be free of then I guess the work-place weight loss challenge is the perfect opportunity. I just wish it wasn't so "public". If there's someone who may be larger, but doesn't feel the need to lose any weight because they're (perhaps after years of self-work finally) content with their size, I worry that they'll feel pressured and shamed into participating for that reason. I worry about those who might not succeed. Will they feel better or worse about the whole thing and themselves at the end if they don't lose even one pound.
I confess I've never been a large person, but I have my body-issue demons. These days there's a truce between us but it's an uneasy one. I can't and won't pretend I understand what it's like to have lived a long period of time in a large person's body and everything that entails. The assumption that because I appear to be a healthy body 'size' I should never ever complain, that I don't have the right to do so? That's what gets me.
People of all sizes have their issues and it's no one's right to judge how harshly someone else feels about their own weight or, for that matter, how much (and what) they should eat based on the size of their waste line. Seriously, people. We need to stop that. Myself included.
Monday 18 March 2013
Let This Be A Lesson
Steubenville.
By now you all know what that's about, the media can't stop talking about it. For those of you who've been living under a rock or don't follow any mainstream media (which would surprise me if you're reading this) two teenagers were found guilty of rape recently. They raped a woman who was intoxicated... A point which is entirely irrelevant to the story.
There's a whole movement of media shaming going on. Feminists of the internet have their knickers and jock straps in a twist about how the only thing the media can focus on is how bad they feel for these two young boys and how their futures are now ruined, they will never be successful or have the football careers they can reminisce about when they're too old to play anymore.
It is sad. And there's good reason for the media to keep talking about it, but I feel like the media almost tried to make a point here and completely missed the mark. It's sad that these two boys were never taught that if a woman isn't expressly, verbally asking for and then consenting to have sex that you don't have sex. It's sad that people are trying to make it the girl's fault for having any alcohol in her bloodstream, because if she'd been sober it would have been less sad for those boys' future? Doesn't sound right does it? Why are we slut shaming this poor woman? How is she suddenly not a 'good girl' and therefore deserved it? Does anyone in the mainstream media actually hear the words coming out of their mouths?
Sure those boys are going to have a rough time, especially if they're pretty and in jail. Rape goes both ways. And maybe they'll learn a lesson. I'm not one to tout the old eye for an eye adage, but it does happen. Being on the other side of that coin would absolutely teach them something. Though I hope they don't have to learn this way.
Maybe they will serve their time, emerge reformed one way or another, the world will have forgotten what they've done and they will have lives and continue to live them. They will find work and support themselves and by that definition they will be successful adults. They do not have to become football super stars to consider their lives "not ruined". How do we know for sure that if they had been able to keep their dicks in their pants that they would have been superbowl MVPs?
Maybe they had hopes and dreams about playing college ball. They probably won't be doing that now. And I am not sad about this. I am not sad that they have to go to jail. I am not sad that they will have to learn about life, a woman's rights and feminism the hard way.
I am sad for the victim, but I keep that kind of sadness tightly locked down for... reasons. I hope that she was intoxicated enough that she won't remember every detail for the rest of her life. I hope that it fades. I hope that she seeks any help that's available to her and I hope that she is able to move on with her life now that justice has been served. I have hope that her unfortunate case sets a precedent.
A precedent that would make young guys think twice about whether or not they are allowed to have sex with a woman (and vice versa in various combinations, men are raped too by other men and women too). A precedent in the media who consistently leave out one important word in their lament for these boys — it's NOT sad that these boys have no football or glamours career ahead of them. Let this be a lesson to those of you who want to have a bright future, live the American Dream or whatever nonsense you like to call it. There are a number of ways to ruin that kind of future. Raping an intoxicated woman is only one of them.
By now you all know what that's about, the media can't stop talking about it. For those of you who've been living under a rock or don't follow any mainstream media (which would surprise me if you're reading this) two teenagers were found guilty of rape recently. They raped a woman who was intoxicated... A point which is entirely irrelevant to the story.
There's a whole movement of media shaming going on. Feminists of the internet have their knickers and jock straps in a twist about how the only thing the media can focus on is how bad they feel for these two young boys and how their futures are now ruined, they will never be successful or have the football careers they can reminisce about when they're too old to play anymore.
It is sad. And there's good reason for the media to keep talking about it, but I feel like the media almost tried to make a point here and completely missed the mark. It's sad that these two boys were never taught that if a woman isn't expressly, verbally asking for and then consenting to have sex that you don't have sex. It's sad that people are trying to make it the girl's fault for having any alcohol in her bloodstream, because if she'd been sober it would have been less sad for those boys' future? Doesn't sound right does it? Why are we slut shaming this poor woman? How is she suddenly not a 'good girl' and therefore deserved it? Does anyone in the mainstream media actually hear the words coming out of their mouths?
Sure those boys are going to have a rough time, especially if they're pretty and in jail. Rape goes both ways. And maybe they'll learn a lesson. I'm not one to tout the old eye for an eye adage, but it does happen. Being on the other side of that coin would absolutely teach them something. Though I hope they don't have to learn this way.
Maybe they will serve their time, emerge reformed one way or another, the world will have forgotten what they've done and they will have lives and continue to live them. They will find work and support themselves and by that definition they will be successful adults. They do not have to become football super stars to consider their lives "not ruined". How do we know for sure that if they had been able to keep their dicks in their pants that they would have been superbowl MVPs?
Maybe they had hopes and dreams about playing college ball. They probably won't be doing that now. And I am not sad about this. I am not sad that they have to go to jail. I am not sad that they will have to learn about life, a woman's rights and feminism the hard way.
I am sad for the victim, but I keep that kind of sadness tightly locked down for... reasons. I hope that she was intoxicated enough that she won't remember every detail for the rest of her life. I hope that it fades. I hope that she seeks any help that's available to her and I hope that she is able to move on with her life now that justice has been served. I have hope that her unfortunate case sets a precedent.
A precedent that would make young guys think twice about whether or not they are allowed to have sex with a woman (and vice versa in various combinations, men are raped too by other men and women too). A precedent in the media who consistently leave out one important word in their lament for these boys — it's NOT sad that these boys have no football or glamours career ahead of them. Let this be a lesson to those of you who want to have a bright future, live the American Dream or whatever nonsense you like to call it. There are a number of ways to ruin that kind of future. Raping an intoxicated woman is only one of them.
Friday 1 March 2013
This will probably read like a very bad after school special
Extra points for you if you remember those.
My last post actually had an alternate title: how to piss off and alienate people in 1000 words or less. I'm totally joking, I have no idea how many words were in the last post. This one might be a close second.
I recently completed another solar orbit, I turned 35. Yeah. Whoopdie doo. I've decided I'm only 35 in pixels and on paper, because I certainly don't feel that old and I don't look it either. Anyway, I had a point here.
I had an absolutely wonderful birthday weekend as the actual day was a Sunday and the party was on Saturday night so I started my birthday on the right foot. Surrounded by all the adopted family of choice that I love dearly. Seriously, I cannot stress how incredible it is and how much it means to me that people came to see me and share time and food and imbibe with me.
I've spent far too much time in my adolescent years and my 20s, sadly, believing that no one would really want to hang around with me. I wasn't interesting/fun/pretty/clever enough to hang around with. I didn't have close friends that I'd like to keep for the rest of my days until 7 years ago when I met the friends I still have today. So yes, this is how much seeing my friends on my birthday means to me.
I drove to my own birthday party. I have rules about mixing alcohol and driving. In bold terms they don't mix. Ever. I never understood the rule granting me legal permission to have one drink and then go for a drive. I have a zero tolerance rule for myself, not just because it makes sense, but because I'm not so much a cheap drunk as I am an efficient one. It doesn't take much, and from one night of libations to the next I never know how quickly it's going to hit me or how long it's going to stick around.
I got some puzzling looks from people at the party who didn't understand why I drove to the party and why I wasn't going to drink. It was my birthday after all. A dear friend actually tried to make me take a cab so that I could have a drink, I very politely reminded this friend that they didn't get to make that decision for me (it's hard to be assertive about boundaries without worrying about offending people, but that's a post for another day). And I know that my friends mean well. I know they wanted me to have a good time at the party in my honour and believe me, I did. My face was actually sore from all the smiling.
What I found puzzling was the unconscious notion from others that I couldn't possibly have fun at my own birthday party without alcohol. Brace yourselves this is where the bad after school special part comes in. I don't actually need booze to have a good time. No, really. Depending on the circumstances I will have much more fun without it. See alcohol doesn't loosen me up in the sense that it lowers my inhibitions. I'm perfectly comfortable doing that while sober and I'll lower them as far as I please and is socially acceptable. I also like being in control of my limbs, fine motor skills and speech. Alcohol takes that away from me and I can think of nothing scarier or useless to me than that.
I do enjoy a glass of wine on occasion. Just one. It's a shame, really I have bottles of wine that claim to be absolutely wonderful and I'd like to try them, but I can only drink one glass. And I'm unlikely to finish it all before it's only good for cooking. Which seems like a bit of a waste to me. Clearly, I need to have people over and share it with them. And make sure they have a safe way home. If they want to.
My last post actually had an alternate title: how to piss off and alienate people in 1000 words or less. I'm totally joking, I have no idea how many words were in the last post. This one might be a close second.
I recently completed another solar orbit, I turned 35. Yeah. Whoopdie doo. I've decided I'm only 35 in pixels and on paper, because I certainly don't feel that old and I don't look it either. Anyway, I had a point here.
I had an absolutely wonderful birthday weekend as the actual day was a Sunday and the party was on Saturday night so I started my birthday on the right foot. Surrounded by all the adopted family of choice that I love dearly. Seriously, I cannot stress how incredible it is and how much it means to me that people came to see me and share time and food and imbibe with me.
I've spent far too much time in my adolescent years and my 20s, sadly, believing that no one would really want to hang around with me. I wasn't interesting/fun/pretty/clever enough to hang around with. I didn't have close friends that I'd like to keep for the rest of my days until 7 years ago when I met the friends I still have today. So yes, this is how much seeing my friends on my birthday means to me.
I drove to my own birthday party. I have rules about mixing alcohol and driving. In bold terms they don't mix. Ever. I never understood the rule granting me legal permission to have one drink and then go for a drive. I have a zero tolerance rule for myself, not just because it makes sense, but because I'm not so much a cheap drunk as I am an efficient one. It doesn't take much, and from one night of libations to the next I never know how quickly it's going to hit me or how long it's going to stick around.
I got some puzzling looks from people at the party who didn't understand why I drove to the party and why I wasn't going to drink. It was my birthday after all. A dear friend actually tried to make me take a cab so that I could have a drink, I very politely reminded this friend that they didn't get to make that decision for me (it's hard to be assertive about boundaries without worrying about offending people, but that's a post for another day). And I know that my friends mean well. I know they wanted me to have a good time at the party in my honour and believe me, I did. My face was actually sore from all the smiling.
What I found puzzling was the unconscious notion from others that I couldn't possibly have fun at my own birthday party without alcohol. Brace yourselves this is where the bad after school special part comes in. I don't actually need booze to have a good time. No, really. Depending on the circumstances I will have much more fun without it. See alcohol doesn't loosen me up in the sense that it lowers my inhibitions. I'm perfectly comfortable doing that while sober and I'll lower them as far as I please and is socially acceptable. I also like being in control of my limbs, fine motor skills and speech. Alcohol takes that away from me and I can think of nothing scarier or useless to me than that.
I do enjoy a glass of wine on occasion. Just one. It's a shame, really I have bottles of wine that claim to be absolutely wonderful and I'd like to try them, but I can only drink one glass. And I'm unlikely to finish it all before it's only good for cooking. Which seems like a bit of a waste to me. Clearly, I need to have people over and share it with them. And make sure they have a safe way home. If they want to.
Wednesday 30 January 2013
Compare and Contrast
I read this article and being a vegetarian myself, I found it so very sad that this behaviour is okay. Why is it okay to question a vegetarian on their reasons and morals with respect to food, but it's not okay to question a person's religious beliefs? Why is it okay to react to vegetarianism with "Good for you I could never give up meat" and it's not okay to do the same thing to (non)religious people.
This might seem like a very strange comparison and contrast, but I like a challenge and lately I've noticed some similarities.
Disclaimer: I'm also an atheist (for those of you who are new here).
Some of the stories contained in the above, linked article describe outright discrimination and sneaky subterfuge, example the old grandmother sneaking finely minced chicken into a vegetarian dish because "everyone needs to eat meat."Hold the bloody phone. Not everyone needs to eat meat. Eating meat is a choice as is not eating it. We all have our reasons for not eating meat and they vary widely but usually have some sort of moral or personal ethos at their core. To tell someone they're wrong, foolish or malnourished suggests that vegetarians can't take care of themselves, that we haven't thought this through or that we're going against instinct because people have always eaten meat. Always.
I've been vegetarian (not vegan) for almost 13 years now. That's a long time and when I first started this dietary adventure it never occurred to me that I would change my mind and go back to eating meat. I knew that there was a risk that I may not be able to eat meat any more after a certain amount of time, I'm certain my belly would revolt for a while if I were faced with having to eat dead animals again. And this was a choice I made quite easily and have never regretted it.
I have been an Atheist for even longer, 20 years now. It was a choice I made quite easily as well. Also I've never regretted this decision. These two choices I've made, I've never ever felt a need to ever re-evaluate them. And I still don't. These are the two best decisions I've ever made in my life or possibly ever will make.
I get the comments and questions about one, but not the other. Both are just as unconventional and against the supposed grain and yet no one either wants to know about my lack of religion or just doesn't want to have that conversation because it's one of those things you don't discuss in polite company. Oh but my dietary choices? That's fair game. Think about it for a second. I'll wait.
Here are some of the the comments I get most often. At the lunch table in cafeteria's when meat-eating co-workers are having meaty things. "Does my food offend you, I'm so sorry to eat this in front of you?" My answer is usually something along the lines of "I don't have to eat it/I don't care what you eat." Apply that question to Atheism "Does my religion offend you? I'm sorry for practicing it right in front of you." Who would say that? No one. Because people have the freedom to practice their religion without fear of discrimination.
Another gem. "I could never give up steak, it's so delicious. Don't you miss it?" My answer is always a polite no I don't miss it, instead of the thought of eating dead flesh turns my stomach. Flip that around "I could never give up God, he's so awesome. Don't you miss him?" Who would say that? No one. Because the initial reactions I got to being an atheist was "you're going to hell". Quite the empty threat for an Atheist, but I digress.
The only comment parallel I can almost make is this one, "can't you just pick the meat off?" This one usually comes up when there's something served with meat like pizza with pepperoni or salads that have chicken on them. My answer is always: No. I can't. I say this instead of asking them if they would like to pick raw, maggoty road kill of their food before they eat it. Because I'm nice like that and usually people are eating when this question gets asked. Now let's flip that one around. "Can't you just ignore the religious parts?"Yes. Yes I can. I do this every day. All day. Regardless of how I feel about religion.
I'm expected to do this. We are all expected to do this and it's called respect for other people's beliefs. So why is it okay for people to make these sorts of comments about a person's dietary choices. I'm not the only vegetarian in the world who gets asked these questions. If you want to be religious and/or eat meat that's fine, you go right ahead and do that on your own because as a human being you do have the right to make these choices. I do not have an agenda that I wish to impose on anyone. I do not ask meat eaters why they eat meat during meal times. I do not ask Christians, Jews or Muslims why they believe what they do while they worship.
Because that would be rude.
Just about everyone who knows me has asked the above questions or made these comments. And many of them are going to read this entry. I want you all to know I'm not annoyed with you specifically. I'm not terribly offended (maybe a little tired after 13 years of being asked the same questions and giving the same answers and I grant that sometimes it's just plain old curiosity on the other person's part). It just occurred to me that there was a parallel here and a sudden realization that one of these lines of questioning was 'okay' and one of them is not.
Food for thought.
This might seem like a very strange comparison and contrast, but I like a challenge and lately I've noticed some similarities.
Disclaimer: I'm also an atheist (for those of you who are new here).
Some of the stories contained in the above, linked article describe outright discrimination and sneaky subterfuge, example the old grandmother sneaking finely minced chicken into a vegetarian dish because "everyone needs to eat meat."Hold the bloody phone. Not everyone needs to eat meat. Eating meat is a choice as is not eating it. We all have our reasons for not eating meat and they vary widely but usually have some sort of moral or personal ethos at their core. To tell someone they're wrong, foolish or malnourished suggests that vegetarians can't take care of themselves, that we haven't thought this through or that we're going against instinct because people have always eaten meat. Always.
I've been vegetarian (not vegan) for almost 13 years now. That's a long time and when I first started this dietary adventure it never occurred to me that I would change my mind and go back to eating meat. I knew that there was a risk that I may not be able to eat meat any more after a certain amount of time, I'm certain my belly would revolt for a while if I were faced with having to eat dead animals again. And this was a choice I made quite easily and have never regretted it.
I have been an Atheist for even longer, 20 years now. It was a choice I made quite easily as well. Also I've never regretted this decision. These two choices I've made, I've never ever felt a need to ever re-evaluate them. And I still don't. These are the two best decisions I've ever made in my life or possibly ever will make.
I get the comments and questions about one, but not the other. Both are just as unconventional and against the supposed grain and yet no one either wants to know about my lack of religion or just doesn't want to have that conversation because it's one of those things you don't discuss in polite company. Oh but my dietary choices? That's fair game. Think about it for a second. I'll wait.
Here are some of the the comments I get most often. At the lunch table in cafeteria's when meat-eating co-workers are having meaty things. "Does my food offend you, I'm so sorry to eat this in front of you?" My answer is usually something along the lines of "I don't have to eat it/I don't care what you eat." Apply that question to Atheism "Does my religion offend you? I'm sorry for practicing it right in front of you." Who would say that? No one. Because people have the freedom to practice their religion without fear of discrimination.
Another gem. "I could never give up steak, it's so delicious. Don't you miss it?" My answer is always a polite no I don't miss it, instead of the thought of eating dead flesh turns my stomach. Flip that around "I could never give up God, he's so awesome. Don't you miss him?" Who would say that? No one. Because the initial reactions I got to being an atheist was "you're going to hell". Quite the empty threat for an Atheist, but I digress.
The only comment parallel I can almost make is this one, "can't you just pick the meat off?" This one usually comes up when there's something served with meat like pizza with pepperoni or salads that have chicken on them. My answer is always: No. I can't. I say this instead of asking them if they would like to pick raw, maggoty road kill of their food before they eat it. Because I'm nice like that and usually people are eating when this question gets asked. Now let's flip that one around. "Can't you just ignore the religious parts?"Yes. Yes I can. I do this every day. All day. Regardless of how I feel about religion.
I'm expected to do this. We are all expected to do this and it's called respect for other people's beliefs. So why is it okay for people to make these sorts of comments about a person's dietary choices. I'm not the only vegetarian in the world who gets asked these questions. If you want to be religious and/or eat meat that's fine, you go right ahead and do that on your own because as a human being you do have the right to make these choices. I do not have an agenda that I wish to impose on anyone. I do not ask meat eaters why they eat meat during meal times. I do not ask Christians, Jews or Muslims why they believe what they do while they worship.
Because that would be rude.
Just about everyone who knows me has asked the above questions or made these comments. And many of them are going to read this entry. I want you all to know I'm not annoyed with you specifically. I'm not terribly offended (maybe a little tired after 13 years of being asked the same questions and giving the same answers and I grant that sometimes it's just plain old curiosity on the other person's part). It just occurred to me that there was a parallel here and a sudden realization that one of these lines of questioning was 'okay' and one of them is not.
Food for thought.
Saturday 19 January 2013
Four Eyes
Disclaimer: I wear glasses. I have worn them for more than half of my life. I can get away with taking them off. I'm not wearing them right now, but I wouldn't dare drive without them and movies just look better with them on. I've also had my share of battles with acne.
Today rant is about the notion that glasses make you look smarter and who looks like a real nerd with glasses on. This is partially triggered by this combination of images. And I apologize in advance if anyone here is triggered too.
I am growing weary of the notion that 'nerds' are sexy and that it's become a fashion statement. In someways Big Bang Theory and the rise of geek culture has only fanned these flames. I have nothing against either of these things. I love the show, I'm a proud geek about many things, and I think intellect is a serious turn on. However, social awkwardness and visual impairment are not fashion statements. They are not a persona you can just slip into because it's trendy. You can't just put on a pair of glasses and call it "geek chique" nor should you post pictures of yourself wearing said specs on the internet and caption it "I'm a nerd now, lol!"
It's one of the most distasteful things you can do, topping that off is contrasting that level of stupidity by posting it with an image of a supposedly "real nerd". That dude with the acne, braces and glasses might not have even been a nerd. I can promise you he was probably socially awkward only because I was once a teenager and we were all like that to some degree, but people grow out of these things. And this guy may or may not feel good about this photo from their childhood being used to point out how silly it is to think Geek is a fashion choice.
I have news for you. Neither person in that photo set is a nerd. The woman in the top image is someone with macular degeneration (or pretending to for the trendiness of it), the boy in the bottom image is just that, a boy. He may have had interesting intellectual pursuits or solitary hobbies, maybe he played with model air planes or video games. Maybe not.
Maybe he was dumb as a post. Maybe the woman has a PhD. I don't know that for sure. And neither do you.
And that's the point.
Some people choose to wear glasses (instead of contacts). Some people have acne (most of us grow out of it eventually). Some people get braces. This is not the nerd trifecta. Having glasses does not make you smarter. Having acne does not make you a socially awkward out cast who will forever be alone. Having braces will only be painful and put cob corn and apples on the no-no list, it will not enhance your IQ or make you less interesting.
I grow weary of "geek chique". It's based on the assumption that anyone who wears glasses must obviously feel inferior about it, so let's give them some time in the sun for once. As if all the bullies in school that went into marketing suddenly felt bad about picking on the kids with glasses and braces and decided that they would do geek culture a favour by making them fashionable and desirable for once.
There's an uglier side of this as well. Not just those whose glasses were just a part of their daily life, but the sudden surge of love for geeky guys, or at least the appearance of them. The notion has been proposed that these girls don't love geeky guys, if they were put in a room with a bunch of guys who had raging cystic acne and coke-bottle glasses, they'd be exposed for the frauds they are. Which just reinforces the stereotype that all true nerds, geeks, dorks and dweebs will only ever truly be those that are cursed with poor skin/crazy hormones or who've inherited their parents' macular degeneration.
No.
I don't care what you look like, how thick your glasses are or the condition of your skin or whether or not you were born with perfect straight teeth. These things are irrelevant. What makes you a geek or a nerd is how passionate you are about something. Anything. It's intellect and passion for something that defines which of the aforementioned adjectives you want to use to describe yourself. And if you don't want to use any of them, good for you. You don't have to and no one has the right to affix one of them to you. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the hardware on your face.
Today rant is about the notion that glasses make you look smarter and who looks like a real nerd with glasses on. This is partially triggered by this combination of images. And I apologize in advance if anyone here is triggered too.
I am growing weary of the notion that 'nerds' are sexy and that it's become a fashion statement. In someways Big Bang Theory and the rise of geek culture has only fanned these flames. I have nothing against either of these things. I love the show, I'm a proud geek about many things, and I think intellect is a serious turn on. However, social awkwardness and visual impairment are not fashion statements. They are not a persona you can just slip into because it's trendy. You can't just put on a pair of glasses and call it "geek chique" nor should you post pictures of yourself wearing said specs on the internet and caption it "I'm a nerd now, lol!"
It's one of the most distasteful things you can do, topping that off is contrasting that level of stupidity by posting it with an image of a supposedly "real nerd". That dude with the acne, braces and glasses might not have even been a nerd. I can promise you he was probably socially awkward only because I was once a teenager and we were all like that to some degree, but people grow out of these things. And this guy may or may not feel good about this photo from their childhood being used to point out how silly it is to think Geek is a fashion choice.
I have news for you. Neither person in that photo set is a nerd. The woman in the top image is someone with macular degeneration (or pretending to for the trendiness of it), the boy in the bottom image is just that, a boy. He may have had interesting intellectual pursuits or solitary hobbies, maybe he played with model air planes or video games. Maybe not.
Maybe he was dumb as a post. Maybe the woman has a PhD. I don't know that for sure. And neither do you.
And that's the point.
Some people choose to wear glasses (instead of contacts). Some people have acne (most of us grow out of it eventually). Some people get braces. This is not the nerd trifecta. Having glasses does not make you smarter. Having acne does not make you a socially awkward out cast who will forever be alone. Having braces will only be painful and put cob corn and apples on the no-no list, it will not enhance your IQ or make you less interesting.
I grow weary of "geek chique". It's based on the assumption that anyone who wears glasses must obviously feel inferior about it, so let's give them some time in the sun for once. As if all the bullies in school that went into marketing suddenly felt bad about picking on the kids with glasses and braces and decided that they would do geek culture a favour by making them fashionable and desirable for once.
There's an uglier side of this as well. Not just those whose glasses were just a part of their daily life, but the sudden surge of love for geeky guys, or at least the appearance of them. The notion has been proposed that these girls don't love geeky guys, if they were put in a room with a bunch of guys who had raging cystic acne and coke-bottle glasses, they'd be exposed for the frauds they are. Which just reinforces the stereotype that all true nerds, geeks, dorks and dweebs will only ever truly be those that are cursed with poor skin/crazy hormones or who've inherited their parents' macular degeneration.
No.
I don't care what you look like, how thick your glasses are or the condition of your skin or whether or not you were born with perfect straight teeth. These things are irrelevant. What makes you a geek or a nerd is how passionate you are about something. Anything. It's intellect and passion for something that defines which of the aforementioned adjectives you want to use to describe yourself. And if you don't want to use any of them, good for you. You don't have to and no one has the right to affix one of them to you. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the hardware on your face.
Tuesday 15 January 2013
VD... It's coming.
No, not venereal disease. Anyone who's smart, safe, lucky and responsible can avoid that. Valentine's Day is a little harder to dodge with out a deprivation chamber or living in a cave or spending a month with your eyes shut tight, your fingers in your ears and going "lalalala I can't hear you". Valentine's Day is the ultimate marketing success, anyone can exploit this day for a sale or a deal, it's guaranteed income for a day for those in the restaurant and flower and possibly even horse-drawn carriage businesses.
It's a day that preys on those who still cling to the Hollywood ideals of romance and their pocket books. All over North America husbands and boyfriends are going to find themselves in big trouble for either forgetting it (not sure how that's possible with how prevalent it is everywhere you go) or for not doing enough to mark the day.
It's a day that once had some meaning loosely tied to St. Valentine. This may be why so few people call it St. Valentine's Day, equal parts laziness, typography, and having little do to with St. Valentine himself. Now it's just an excuse to buy your sweetie flowers and chocolate and expensive dinner. Some might even use it as an excuse to propose marriage, thereby getting in the black of their significant other's good books in the romance department for a good amount of time.
I think it will surprise no one to find that I hate Valentine's Day. Okay, fine. Hate is a strong word. I have hated it in the past, vehemently hated it. In school I never got many paper valentines, I never had a boyfriend in school (all of it up to after college) so Valentine's Day always seemed to me to be a way for the world to collectively point out how lonely I am. Thanks world, everyone else is happily paired in varying degrees of love from "puppy" to "deeply in" and I am woefully not.
I've been in relationships when Valentine's Day comes around and I've told my partners they were off the hook when it came to Valentine's Day I don't care for the "holiday" and expect nothing. I made it clear that this wasn't some strange reverse psychology trick either. I really don't care about the day and will happily treat it like any other day. If they wanted to do something special and/or romantic my birthday is just 10 days later and I'll be much more appreciative of romantic gestures then. I haven't met many partners that cared about Valentine's Day either so I've never been too concerned that I was ruining it for them. If I was they didn't tell me so.
This year, I am not in a Capital R Relationship for Valentine's Day. This will be the first time in almost four years. Now simply because I don't like celebrating it financially and with chocolate and flowers, this does not mean I am not keenly aware of the imposing sentiment or blind to the romantic things my friends and their significant others or other couples are engaged in. And it will always bother and annoy me, but never as much as it does when I am single.
A thought occurred to me earlier today when I realized that this dreadful day is looming. I have an online dating profile and it's been intentionally dormant for a few months, for reasons I don't think I have to explain here. I thought maybe I should resuscitate it, but doing so this close to Valentine's Day... I feel like it would leave me vulnerable to too many people desperately seeking someone for Valentine's Day. And I wish them the best of luck in their endeavours, but I'd be wary that it was only a move of desperation (ie. a hook-up) and not really what I want. Why put myself in that line of fire? There's also the very real danger that I become what I wish to avoid in a late-night, sleep-deprived saving throw at my loneliness.
No. I do not want to stoop to that level. I almost feel bad for saying that, assuming that people who just want to get a little action for Valentine's Day (or even VD if they're not careful) are lonely, desperate people. People who've probably had profiles for a long time and not just in a mad dash to find someone to share the Hallmark Holiday with. No, I don't want to have to say no (if I need to) to people who are so hopeful already at a time of year that makes people feel extra emotionally vulnerable, myself included.
If I could spend that day with my head under a blanket, I probably would. It would be nice to have someone else under there with me and even better still if they wanted to make a for reals blanket fort, but that's not where I am right now and that's okay too. I will spend that day at work, doing my job. I will come home and probably avoid any unnecessary 'internetting' and go to bed. I will take a day to love and be nice to myself because I am awesome and totally worth it.
If you're alone that day, for whatever reason, it's a day for love so they say, don't forget to love yourself. On February 14 and every other day too.
It's a day that preys on those who still cling to the Hollywood ideals of romance and their pocket books. All over North America husbands and boyfriends are going to find themselves in big trouble for either forgetting it (not sure how that's possible with how prevalent it is everywhere you go) or for not doing enough to mark the day.
It's a day that once had some meaning loosely tied to St. Valentine. This may be why so few people call it St. Valentine's Day, equal parts laziness, typography, and having little do to with St. Valentine himself. Now it's just an excuse to buy your sweetie flowers and chocolate and expensive dinner. Some might even use it as an excuse to propose marriage, thereby getting in the black of their significant other's good books in the romance department for a good amount of time.
I think it will surprise no one to find that I hate Valentine's Day. Okay, fine. Hate is a strong word. I have hated it in the past, vehemently hated it. In school I never got many paper valentines, I never had a boyfriend in school (all of it up to after college) so Valentine's Day always seemed to me to be a way for the world to collectively point out how lonely I am. Thanks world, everyone else is happily paired in varying degrees of love from "puppy" to "deeply in" and I am woefully not.
I've been in relationships when Valentine's Day comes around and I've told my partners they were off the hook when it came to Valentine's Day I don't care for the "holiday" and expect nothing. I made it clear that this wasn't some strange reverse psychology trick either. I really don't care about the day and will happily treat it like any other day. If they wanted to do something special and/or romantic my birthday is just 10 days later and I'll be much more appreciative of romantic gestures then. I haven't met many partners that cared about Valentine's Day either so I've never been too concerned that I was ruining it for them. If I was they didn't tell me so.
This year, I am not in a Capital R Relationship for Valentine's Day. This will be the first time in almost four years. Now simply because I don't like celebrating it financially and with chocolate and flowers, this does not mean I am not keenly aware of the imposing sentiment or blind to the romantic things my friends and their significant others or other couples are engaged in. And it will always bother and annoy me, but never as much as it does when I am single.
A thought occurred to me earlier today when I realized that this dreadful day is looming. I have an online dating profile and it's been intentionally dormant for a few months, for reasons I don't think I have to explain here. I thought maybe I should resuscitate it, but doing so this close to Valentine's Day... I feel like it would leave me vulnerable to too many people desperately seeking someone for Valentine's Day. And I wish them the best of luck in their endeavours, but I'd be wary that it was only a move of desperation (ie. a hook-up) and not really what I want. Why put myself in that line of fire? There's also the very real danger that I become what I wish to avoid in a late-night, sleep-deprived saving throw at my loneliness.
No. I do not want to stoop to that level. I almost feel bad for saying that, assuming that people who just want to get a little action for Valentine's Day (or even VD if they're not careful) are lonely, desperate people. People who've probably had profiles for a long time and not just in a mad dash to find someone to share the Hallmark Holiday with. No, I don't want to have to say no (if I need to) to people who are so hopeful already at a time of year that makes people feel extra emotionally vulnerable, myself included.
If I could spend that day with my head under a blanket, I probably would. It would be nice to have someone else under there with me and even better still if they wanted to make a for reals blanket fort, but that's not where I am right now and that's okay too. I will spend that day at work, doing my job. I will come home and probably avoid any unnecessary 'internetting' and go to bed. I will take a day to love and be nice to myself because I am awesome and totally worth it.
If you're alone that day, for whatever reason, it's a day for love so they say, don't forget to love yourself. On February 14 and every other day too.
Thursday 10 January 2013
Project Girly: Decriminalizing Pink
I've never been 'girly'. As a child I had Barbies and dolls. I wasn't as interested in them as I was in my lego, GI Joes and Transformers. I didn't get excited about wearing a pretty dress on the first day of school. It was just clothing. I preferred exploring the neighbourhood, riding my bike, climbing trees and building forts to playing dress up or thinking about my body image in a negative way. I don't remember caring much about it when I was a kid. It wasn't an issue. Mom and Dad didn't pressure me to girly in anyway if I didn't want to. I have to say — and will repeat often — I won the parents lottery, they got it mostly right.
Whether I was dressed only in pink as a baby is irrelevant. I don't remember and I don't care. At at that time I think my mother was more concerned that I was dressed appropriately for the climate. Colour was irrelevant. Still is. These days I go for dark rich colours because this is my preference. There was a time when I would go out of my way to turn my nose up at things that were pink. I perceived them as excessively girly and that was just not who I was. I didn't really understand why at the time, but I had this obsessive dislike for things that were pink.
A few of the going theories are: It's pink and I am female therefore I should like it and if I don't then there's something wrong with me. Am I not a proper or complete female? This mutated into: It's pink and marketed to my demographic specifically and I hate it, therefore I don't fit in that little demographic box which, as I got more comfortable with the Black Sheep label I'd affixed on myself, I wore that hatred of all things pink (and therefore *ugh* girly) with pride. I didn't need to be girly, I was a woman dammit and I didn't need a colour to prove that I had mammaries and a vagina.
It was more than a colour issue, it was being girly. I started to see this as such a weakness that I was so proud to not be afflicted with and my lack of anything pink at all only proved it. I was a strong woman who didn't need to have pink things and I could still be fantastically feminine without it. I resented the marketing ploy to my gender. I don't care what colour an item is, if it's something I want/need what I couldn't stand was there being a pink version of it just for women. Why is there an option? When the choice is black or pink, dude I will always pick black. I felt a tiny bit of shame on behalf of my gender when I saw women wearing pink, they fell for it. It never occurred to me that they might actually like things that are pink.
I can admit now, that I own one pink shirt. One. I bought it because I liked the red pattern on the front of it and it wasn't frilly or lacy so that made it okay. It wasn't too girly.
And there's the nugget of this post, the little gem. It's not just a colour I was opposed to, it was every thing it represents: being "girly". Wearing frilly clothes with puffy shoulders and lace or sequins and ribbons. I was too comfortable in my jeans and t-shirts and sneakers or boots. I skipped the notion of girly when I was actually still a girl. In high-school I wore baggy clothes, it was extremely rare that people saw that I had a figure. It wasn't an issue with my body image, I was just comfortable and I didn't want any one to look down on me for being girly like I was doing to everyone else that was "girly".
That's awful. I know it.
In the last four years or so I've had very short hair. A hair style widely criticized in the media for not being feminine enough (as if it was our duty or as if short hair was the domain of men only) or immediately equated with being a lesbian by people with fewer than three braincells to rub together. I often wondered if I was being mistaken for a male, I don't have very large breasts, but I don't wear the baggy clothes anymore so at least people can see my curves if there was any doubt. Because of this gender ambiguity, I started a personal quest a couple of years ago: Project Girly. I was going to prove that I could still be me and look like a woman once in a while. See what all the fuss was about.
Project girly meant making a conscious effort to see what I'd missed out on all these years I spent pretending I didn't like girly things. I made a personal rule that I was going to wear a dress or a skirt at least once a week. At first people asked me if there was some special occasion, I got tired of just saying "because I feel like it" and explained Project Girly to those who asked persistently. I slowly built a wardrobe of "not pants". I even acquired a pair of high heels. My only pair. I managed to keep this up for a whole year. It wasn't too bad. When I was younger and I wore a skirt I usually couldn't wait to get home and put on some damn pants, but I wasn't wearing comfortable dresses or skirts. I know better now. I have a good collection now of not pants, and when I see a dress in a store that I like, I want to wear it and try to think of an excuse if it's really fancy.
There are so many ways women put each other down and throw out value judgements like they were disposable. We all have an idea of what women should be like. Regardless of where or how we acquired those value judgements they have no right being affixed to anyone other than ourselves. Women are just as guilty of slut shaming based on appearance as men are. The opposite is also true, I don't want to say how often I've felt pressured to try to look more like a woman, for once. We can either be dammed if we do or dammed if we don't when it comes to "looking like women". Or, and this might be a tough one for some to do, we can just be happy and comfortable in our skins and our clothes and not put anyone else down for being comfortable in their own skin and clothes.
Radical... I know, but not impossible.
Whether I was dressed only in pink as a baby is irrelevant. I don't remember and I don't care. At at that time I think my mother was more concerned that I was dressed appropriately for the climate. Colour was irrelevant. Still is. These days I go for dark rich colours because this is my preference. There was a time when I would go out of my way to turn my nose up at things that were pink. I perceived them as excessively girly and that was just not who I was. I didn't really understand why at the time, but I had this obsessive dislike for things that were pink.
A few of the going theories are: It's pink and I am female therefore I should like it and if I don't then there's something wrong with me. Am I not a proper or complete female? This mutated into: It's pink and marketed to my demographic specifically and I hate it, therefore I don't fit in that little demographic box which, as I got more comfortable with the Black Sheep label I'd affixed on myself, I wore that hatred of all things pink (and therefore *ugh* girly) with pride. I didn't need to be girly, I was a woman dammit and I didn't need a colour to prove that I had mammaries and a vagina.
It was more than a colour issue, it was being girly. I started to see this as such a weakness that I was so proud to not be afflicted with and my lack of anything pink at all only proved it. I was a strong woman who didn't need to have pink things and I could still be fantastically feminine without it. I resented the marketing ploy to my gender. I don't care what colour an item is, if it's something I want/need what I couldn't stand was there being a pink version of it just for women. Why is there an option? When the choice is black or pink, dude I will always pick black. I felt a tiny bit of shame on behalf of my gender when I saw women wearing pink, they fell for it. It never occurred to me that they might actually like things that are pink.
I can admit now, that I own one pink shirt. One. I bought it because I liked the red pattern on the front of it and it wasn't frilly or lacy so that made it okay. It wasn't too girly.
And there's the nugget of this post, the little gem. It's not just a colour I was opposed to, it was every thing it represents: being "girly". Wearing frilly clothes with puffy shoulders and lace or sequins and ribbons. I was too comfortable in my jeans and t-shirts and sneakers or boots. I skipped the notion of girly when I was actually still a girl. In high-school I wore baggy clothes, it was extremely rare that people saw that I had a figure. It wasn't an issue with my body image, I was just comfortable and I didn't want any one to look down on me for being girly like I was doing to everyone else that was "girly".
That's awful. I know it.
In the last four years or so I've had very short hair. A hair style widely criticized in the media for not being feminine enough (as if it was our duty or as if short hair was the domain of men only) or immediately equated with being a lesbian by people with fewer than three braincells to rub together. I often wondered if I was being mistaken for a male, I don't have very large breasts, but I don't wear the baggy clothes anymore so at least people can see my curves if there was any doubt. Because of this gender ambiguity, I started a personal quest a couple of years ago: Project Girly. I was going to prove that I could still be me and look like a woman once in a while. See what all the fuss was about.
Project girly meant making a conscious effort to see what I'd missed out on all these years I spent pretending I didn't like girly things. I made a personal rule that I was going to wear a dress or a skirt at least once a week. At first people asked me if there was some special occasion, I got tired of just saying "because I feel like it" and explained Project Girly to those who asked persistently. I slowly built a wardrobe of "not pants". I even acquired a pair of high heels. My only pair. I managed to keep this up for a whole year. It wasn't too bad. When I was younger and I wore a skirt I usually couldn't wait to get home and put on some damn pants, but I wasn't wearing comfortable dresses or skirts. I know better now. I have a good collection now of not pants, and when I see a dress in a store that I like, I want to wear it and try to think of an excuse if it's really fancy.
There are so many ways women put each other down and throw out value judgements like they were disposable. We all have an idea of what women should be like. Regardless of where or how we acquired those value judgements they have no right being affixed to anyone other than ourselves. Women are just as guilty of slut shaming based on appearance as men are. The opposite is also true, I don't want to say how often I've felt pressured to try to look more like a woman, for once. We can either be dammed if we do or dammed if we don't when it comes to "looking like women". Or, and this might be a tough one for some to do, we can just be happy and comfortable in our skins and our clothes and not put anyone else down for being comfortable in their own skin and clothes.
Radical... I know, but not impossible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)