As my beloved Chargers opted not to make it to the Superbowl this year, I wasn't insanely interested, except for the commercials, which, sadly, I missed most of due to my SIL's recent acquisition of Sims 3. It's fun, if less than user-friendly. However, to review:
Previews: The previews for Alice in Wonderland and the Wonderful World of Harry Potter have me salivating for both. The one for AIW in particular was simply lovely. The preview for Robin Hood was decent, but after having read Stephen Lawhead's Hood, I don't know that I'll be satisfied with a film rendition of anything else.
Commercials: Doritos was the victor this year, with the little kid and his order to "Keep yo' hands off my mama, Keep yo' hands of my Doritos". Snickers came in a close second, if only for the use of Betty White, who I can't believe is still as alive as she is.
Tebow: The whole world just needs to knock it off with the whole Tebow thing. I didn't see the halftime show, but the controversy leading up to it was preposterous. To all the Anti-Tebow Ad people - Shut up. CBS can show whatever they want when they are the ones airing the Superbowl. They are a television station. They aren't required to be non-partisan, and Tebow's mother is certainly entitled to her freedom of speech, and the church which funded the commercial is free to spend their money however they want. To all the Pro-Tebow Ad people - Shut up. Gloating over this woman's freedom of speech is not classy. If a Pro-choice woman had done what she did, you wouldn't be talking about her freedom of speech, you'd be yelling about how inappropriate it is for someone to push a political agenda during the Superbowl.
The Saints - Well played, Gentlemen. Well played.
Showing posts with label Judgey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judgey. Show all posts
Monday, February 8, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
Judgey Jeudi - Haiti and one day late
Today I read a facebook status that read thusly:
"Shame on you America: A country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed without eating, elderly going without needed meds, and veterans without medical treatment yet we have a benefit for the people of Haiti on 12 TV stations. 99% of people won't have the guts to copy and repost this, but I do!!!!!"
I stared at it for a moment, thinking "There's no way someone can have posted this. No way." But they did. Apparently, many people share this opinion, and I can't help but wonder: What the F***? (I do not curse, but I will certainly imply it in this situation).
The status has the laughable audacity to compare the situation of the poor in our own country to that of the poor (read: everyone) in Haiti. That comparison is ridiculous at best. There is a system in America for the poor, for the elderly, for the veterans. Is it a perfect system? Of course not, but at least we have a government in place to try and correct the failings in those systems. On any given day, in any cty in America, the homeless of our country can find a place that will give them food, shelter, clothing, free medical care and , in many places, the opportunity to gain an education. Will all the poor in our country avail themselves of these things? No, but the point remains that the resources exist, and are free to those who would come. The elderly have resources from the government as well, and while Veterans do find themselves tied up in beuracratic red tape, their medical care is FREE.
In Haiti, especially after the earthquake, there is nothing. Nothing. In place of a soup kitchen, they are recieving food drops that sometimes have to sit on the tarmac because there is not enough manpower to transport them to hungry mouths. In place of medical care, the sick and injured are in tents, on the ground, with scant medication and fewer supplies. The infastructure that could have provided for the destitute and displaced is gone, crumbled to the ground by the earthquake and aftershocks. This is not New Orleans after Katrina, which had an entire country of fellow Americans to help them rebuild. Haiti is not just one city, but an entire country that now has to start from square one. They have no fellow Haitians that were unaffected by the disaster to help them rebuild, and if we, America, with some of the wealtiest citizens in the world, do not help, who will? Should we stand by in our comfy homes, watch them suffer and say "We've got problems of our own!" right before we flip on the XBOX?
The American method for caring for our poor and elderly is far from perfect, and sadly, there are some who slip through the cracks in the infastructure. But the point here is that there IS a system. There IS help available, wheras in Haiti, there is nothing, and to refuse help, based on the argument of our own poverty, is nothing short of ignorant, ethnocentric and hypocritical. Without assistance, the entire country of Haiti will slip through the cracks, leaving America standing sheepishly by, saying "But we had our own poor!".
"Shame on you America: A country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed without eating, elderly going without needed meds, and veterans without medical treatment yet we have a benefit for the people of Haiti on 12 TV stations. 99% of people won't have the guts to copy and repost this, but I do!!!!!"
I stared at it for a moment, thinking "There's no way someone can have posted this. No way." But they did. Apparently, many people share this opinion, and I can't help but wonder: What the F***? (I do not curse, but I will certainly imply it in this situation).
The status has the laughable audacity to compare the situation of the poor in our own country to that of the poor (read: everyone) in Haiti. That comparison is ridiculous at best. There is a system in America for the poor, for the elderly, for the veterans. Is it a perfect system? Of course not, but at least we have a government in place to try and correct the failings in those systems. On any given day, in any cty in America, the homeless of our country can find a place that will give them food, shelter, clothing, free medical care and , in many places, the opportunity to gain an education. Will all the poor in our country avail themselves of these things? No, but the point remains that the resources exist, and are free to those who would come. The elderly have resources from the government as well, and while Veterans do find themselves tied up in beuracratic red tape, their medical care is FREE.
In Haiti, especially after the earthquake, there is nothing. Nothing. In place of a soup kitchen, they are recieving food drops that sometimes have to sit on the tarmac because there is not enough manpower to transport them to hungry mouths. In place of medical care, the sick and injured are in tents, on the ground, with scant medication and fewer supplies. The infastructure that could have provided for the destitute and displaced is gone, crumbled to the ground by the earthquake and aftershocks. This is not New Orleans after Katrina, which had an entire country of fellow Americans to help them rebuild. Haiti is not just one city, but an entire country that now has to start from square one. They have no fellow Haitians that were unaffected by the disaster to help them rebuild, and if we, America, with some of the wealtiest citizens in the world, do not help, who will? Should we stand by in our comfy homes, watch them suffer and say "We've got problems of our own!" right before we flip on the XBOX?
The American method for caring for our poor and elderly is far from perfect, and sadly, there are some who slip through the cracks in the infastructure. But the point here is that there IS a system. There IS help available, wheras in Haiti, there is nothing, and to refuse help, based on the argument of our own poverty, is nothing short of ignorant, ethnocentric and hypocritical. Without assistance, the entire country of Haiti will slip through the cracks, leaving America standing sheepishly by, saying "But we had our own poor!".
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Judgey Jeudi - The Santa Scheme
Christmastime is over, but I have given it some thought, and I've decided there is just to much darn hypocrisy around Christmas. Not the commercialism. I mean, that's a little ridiculous too, but talking about that is just beating the proverbial deceased horse.
No, I'm talking about the man in the red suit. St. Nick, Chris Cringle, Papai Noel. In other words, Santa Clause. He's a beloved figure, bursting with good cheer and last Christmas's cookies. He's even based on a real person, sort of. You can get the story of St. Nicholas and his Modern adaptation here and here. I would tell you all about it, but frankly, it's late and I'm lazy.
Santa is a beloved holiday figure, and with good reason. Kids love him because he brings them toys. Parents love him because he's an awesome bribe.
As I get closer to having my own children, however, it occurs to me that by perpetuating the Santa Claus thing, we are doing something that we scold and berate our children for: We're lying. Now, now, don't argue. There's no way around it. Santa Claus is fictional. He isn't real. He's fake, and yet every year we call him real and tell our children that Santa brings them presents. Every single year, we participate in the largest conspiracy ever concocted, and for what? For a lie on this scale and of this magnitude, one would think we were hiding something so damaging, so disturbing, that tiny minds would be driven to insanity if they knew the truth. But we aren't. We are hiding that Mommy and Daddy buy the presents, which strikes me as pretty far from a damaging reality.
Laying the lying thing aside, the Santa thing provides difficulties to tiny minds. Firstly, all kids stop believing at some point, and all kids know that they will stop believing at some point. It's just this tiny, niggling knowledge that sits in the back of their minds. Even 4 year olds know they won't always believe. They've seen Polar Express. They know how this stuff works. Interestingly enough, The Year, the year any given child stops believing is met with sadness and bittersweet memories by most adults. Any other person finally figuring out that they had been lied to for 8 to 10 years would be applauded for finally seeing through the ruse. That critical year, though, is like initiation. It's the year older kids are let in on the lie and we ensure that our grandchildren will have the tinsel-covered wool pulled over their eyes as well. We seal that sweet little deal with the whispered words "Just don't tell your sister!" The threat of "Or I'll maim you" is implied. Secondly, children, especially in public school, will notice that Santa doesn't bring as much to the poor kids, or, that if you are a poor kid, Santa brings more to the rich kids, and he doesn't visit some kids at all. Thirdly, most kids are at least vaguely aware of the fact that the mechanics don't make any sense. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for, and they notice all the holes in the Santa scheme, but don't say anything, because there is always that silent threat that, once you stop believing, Santa stops bringing. I noticed all the difficulties at four, and struggled with them, as much as a child struggles with anything, for the next six years, because even though I got Mom to admit to me that Santa was fake, we still perpetuated the Santa thing for years, and I couldn't wrap my head around the discrepancy.
What I don't understand is why? What are we hoping to accomplish by telling our children about Santa Claus? And really, where is the problem with children knowing that presents are given because we love one another, and not as a reward for good behavior from some Benevolent Peeping Tom? Imagine Christmas without Santa, or with him as a fun movie character, but out of the spotlight. Maybe instead of Christmas presents as a bribe and as a reward for good behavior, they can be an example of kindness when maybe we haven't been as nice as we should that year. It's a tiny analogy for grace, really. We could teach our children about gratitude (because who is really thankful to a mysterious omniscient stranger who lives with penguins?) and about giving of ourselves.
PS: Parents - Your kids notice that Santa doesn't bring you anything. Biggest hole in the lie, exhibit A.
No, I'm talking about the man in the red suit. St. Nick, Chris Cringle, Papai Noel. In other words, Santa Clause. He's a beloved figure, bursting with good cheer and last Christmas's cookies. He's even based on a real person, sort of. You can get the story of St. Nicholas and his Modern adaptation here and here. I would tell you all about it, but frankly, it's late and I'm lazy.
Santa is a beloved holiday figure, and with good reason. Kids love him because he brings them toys. Parents love him because he's an awesome bribe.
As I get closer to having my own children, however, it occurs to me that by perpetuating the Santa Claus thing, we are doing something that we scold and berate our children for: We're lying. Now, now, don't argue. There's no way around it. Santa Claus is fictional. He isn't real. He's fake, and yet every year we call him real and tell our children that Santa brings them presents. Every single year, we participate in the largest conspiracy ever concocted, and for what? For a lie on this scale and of this magnitude, one would think we were hiding something so damaging, so disturbing, that tiny minds would be driven to insanity if they knew the truth. But we aren't. We are hiding that Mommy and Daddy buy the presents, which strikes me as pretty far from a damaging reality.
Laying the lying thing aside, the Santa thing provides difficulties to tiny minds. Firstly, all kids stop believing at some point, and all kids know that they will stop believing at some point. It's just this tiny, niggling knowledge that sits in the back of their minds. Even 4 year olds know they won't always believe. They've seen Polar Express. They know how this stuff works. Interestingly enough, The Year, the year any given child stops believing is met with sadness and bittersweet memories by most adults. Any other person finally figuring out that they had been lied to for 8 to 10 years would be applauded for finally seeing through the ruse. That critical year, though, is like initiation. It's the year older kids are let in on the lie and we ensure that our grandchildren will have the tinsel-covered wool pulled over their eyes as well. We seal that sweet little deal with the whispered words "Just don't tell your sister!" The threat of "Or I'll maim you" is implied. Secondly, children, especially in public school, will notice that Santa doesn't bring as much to the poor kids, or, that if you are a poor kid, Santa brings more to the rich kids, and he doesn't visit some kids at all. Thirdly, most kids are at least vaguely aware of the fact that the mechanics don't make any sense. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for, and they notice all the holes in the Santa scheme, but don't say anything, because there is always that silent threat that, once you stop believing, Santa stops bringing. I noticed all the difficulties at four, and struggled with them, as much as a child struggles with anything, for the next six years, because even though I got Mom to admit to me that Santa was fake, we still perpetuated the Santa thing for years, and I couldn't wrap my head around the discrepancy.
What I don't understand is why? What are we hoping to accomplish by telling our children about Santa Claus? And really, where is the problem with children knowing that presents are given because we love one another, and not as a reward for good behavior from some Benevolent Peeping Tom? Imagine Christmas without Santa, or with him as a fun movie character, but out of the spotlight. Maybe instead of Christmas presents as a bribe and as a reward for good behavior, they can be an example of kindness when maybe we haven't been as nice as we should that year. It's a tiny analogy for grace, really. We could teach our children about gratitude (because who is really thankful to a mysterious omniscient stranger who lives with penguins?) and about giving of ourselves.
PS: Parents - Your kids notice that Santa doesn't bring you anything. Biggest hole in the lie, exhibit A.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
I'm running out of things to be judgey about.
I know, it shocked even me. Take a moment to collect yourself.
Whenever you're ready.
Anyway, I've decided to not just let the judgemental juices flow whenever I feel like. I have to limit myself. So, from now on, We will have Judgemental Jeudi (which means Thursday in French, in case you were smarter than me and took Spanish, aka a useful language, in high school). Point being, I'll still post a lot, but more about boring stuff like my life, and the Thoughtful stuff will happen on Thursdays. Stay tuned. We're talking about Santa tomorrow.
Whenever you're ready.
Anyway, I've decided to not just let the judgemental juices flow whenever I feel like. I have to limit myself. So, from now on, We will have Judgemental Jeudi (which means Thursday in French, in case you were smarter than me and took Spanish, aka a useful language, in high school). Point being, I'll still post a lot, but more about boring stuff like my life, and the Thoughtful stuff will happen on Thursdays. Stay tuned. We're talking about Santa tomorrow.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
The Cosmic FacePalm
If you aren’t a Christian, you can still read this, but it will make very little sense to you. I mean, the words will, obviously, but the concepts presented won’t. Fair warning.
Ah, Marijuana. Mary Jane. Reefer. Pot. No matter what you call it, it is the fantastic substance that has inexplicably managed to find it’s way onto the DEA’s S**t list.
For the record, I think we need to legalize marijuana, if for no other reason than to get the potheads to shut the eff up. That aside, it’s an amazing rotation crop, a phenomenal building material, and an incredibly strong fiber. It is a potential miracle crop; it’s sustainable, fast-growing, and has myriad purposes other than recreational. As far as its recreational use goes, it is by far one of the least dangerous drugs on the market, including tobacco and alcohol. No one ever went into a marijuana-induced rage and tried to kill someone. It hasn’t been conclusively linked to lung cancer, though not for lack of trying on the part of the DEA. Furthermore, as much as the D.A.R.E. programs of the world try to label it as an addictive hallucinogenic, it isn’t. Pot isn’t addictive, for one thing. You may really enjoy smoking it, but nobody ever sat in a room with the shakes because they were withdrawing from pot. It’s also not a hallucinogen, and don’t let anybody tell you it is. Enough of it might alter your perceptions a bit, and if it’s got something weird in it that isn’t pot, you might hallucinate, but strait cannabis? I think not. Doctors in California are prescribing this stuff for headaches. If our medical professionals think it safe enough to give for such frivolous reasons, I think we may be go for legalization. 
So now you know where I stand on legalization. You’ll notice, however, that I don’t smoke pot. Ever. For any reason. I have no problem with the drug itself, but, though I enjoy it, I don’t choose to partake. Why, you may ask? For the simple fact that it is illegal.
My belief system, or Christianity, as some would refer to it, includes the mandate from Christ to obey the laws of the land, insomuch as they do not cause you to go against God’s laws. In other words, don’t steal, but if your leader makes it a law to kill Jews, don’t do that either. I don't smoke marijuana, not because I think it's wrong, but because my government has decided to make it illegal.
I had a discussion with a Christian pot-smoker though, in which they justified to me why they still allow themselves to smoke, even though they know the whole “law-of-the-land” rule. The first excuse they hit me with was “Jesus also said not to get tattoos” I sighed and answered, “Jesus didn’t say that. That’s in the Old Testament and it’s a Judaic law. It doesn’t apply to you and me because we aren’t Jewish. Like Kosher.”* He paused for a moment, then said “But our government thinks it’s alright to bomb civilians” For the record, they don’t, but I let it pass and said “If you feel that joining the military would cause you to sin, then by all means, don’t. The mandate was to follow all the laws that do not cause you to sin. God’s law comes first.” After that, he just said “I’m just stating my opinion, and I’ve never been convicted* by the Holy Spirit to stop smoking pot” Our conversation ended there, but I couldn’t help but think that the Holy Spirit shouldn’t need to convict us when something is spelled out for us in God’s word.
This post isn’t really about Marijuana. That’s just the conversation that got me thinking. It made me realize how often I have heard the excuse, “God hasn’t convicted me”. Yea, but, if it’s in the Bible, should he have to? If Christ specifically said, and he did, “Don’t allow yourself to become angry to the point of hatred”*, it’s a sin whether you are specifically convicted of it or not. I’ve heard this logic applied to lying, broken promises, disobedience to parents, ect ect ect, and it doesn’t hold water then, either. You don’t get to sin and then wait, as a naughty child, for daddy to come slap your hand, and then assume, if he doesn’t, that you must be special and the rule doesn’t apply to you. Christ’s teachings apply to everyone who chooses to follow them, and to pick and choose which commands are convenient to you is the very definition of a lukewarm* faith. Don’t get me wrong, I sin too, and often. Much more often than I would care to admit, but here it is. I admit it. Every day, multiple times. I am a bonafide, tried and true sinner. I’m prideful, spiteful, manipulative, and a terrible gossip. The point here is that it would still be wrong of me to beat my husband with a 2X4, even if I didn’t feel convicted afterward. I have a feeling that sometimes God just says “Convict you? But I already convicted you! I gave you the rules, right here in the book! They aren’t even hard rules!*” And then he does a cosmic facepalm and has to sit down for a moment because we humans are just so dumb sometimes.
*For those of you who don’t know, There are three kinds of laws in the Old Testament. There’s the Judaic laws, which deal with cleanliness and Kosher. If you aren’t a Jew, those don’t apply. Then there are Civic laws, which deal with crime and punishment. Unless you’re a Hebrew, those don’t apply either. Then there are moral laws, like the Ten Commandments, the laws against Bestiality, that kind of thing. Those were typically repeated in the New Testament and apply to everyone. We don’t pick and choose these. The wording in the Hebrew and Aramaic is different and helps us differentiate.
* For those non-christians who are reading this and are confused about the use of the term “conviction”, it’s sort of, but not really, the same as a court conviction. Basically it means to feel guilty for what you’ve done, but we believe that the guilt comes from God rather than ourselves.
* This is what I call Rai-phrasing. The passage is in Matthew 5:21-26
* Revelation 3:15-16
Monday, December 28, 2009
Jesus Hates Trees (and Penguins.)
The movie Avatar came out last weekend, and, like they do with everything that doesn't have a Judeo-Christian theme, the militant Christians are calling foul.
Quick facts about Avatar, in case you live in a cave:
- There is a very strong Environmental theme. The main race is very in-tune and respectful of nature, and their (female) deity manifests herself through a tree. She is not actually a tree, but uses is to communicate to her people (like a burning bush, some would say).
- I would use this bullet to give another quick fact, but basically, that first one is where people are taking issue. It's the same thing that happened with Happy Feet. Apparently Jesus doesn't love Penguins either.
The point here is not (thankfully) the Christian relationship with the media. That's a topic for a whole other blog. My point this time is the stance so many Christians seem to take against Environmentalism. I have, over the last week, seen several facebook posts decrying Environmentalism as a dangerous, terrible idea, full of hypocrisy and dangerous philosophies.
The way I see it though, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Granted, Nature WORSHIP is certainly not what God had in mind, but switching to canvas bags?
According to the Genesis account, God created the Heavens and the Earth, and truly, did a stunning job. The natural world is a testament and a witness to the Great Artist. Go to to the Mountains sometime. Or the Desert. Or anywhere. Just go and marvel at what his hands have made. Phenomenal, truly. After creating all that beauty, we come to find out that it's a gift! It's possibly the second greatest present ever given to anyone, ever, and it is given to the next creation: Man. God made the man, breathed air into him, gave him a name, and put him in the Garden of Eden. Why did he put him there? According to Genesis 2:15, to work it and take care of it. The Amplified Bible says "to tend and guard". The point is that God's purpose was clear. The Earth was a gift, but it was up to Adam, and, consequently, Adam's children, to care for it.
Shouldn't we, then, as Christians, be the most environmentally concious? Not in spite of our greater goal, which is the expansion of the Word, but if we truly believe that this earth was a gift, should we not be the first in line for environmentally friendly options, or are we so confident that God does not see how we squander his gifts? That's what it is, in case you have forgotten. It was the first gift, even before the gift of a mate. It has fallen into disrepair at our hands, and yet militant christianity sees no need to repair the damage mankind has done, and even seeks to destroy a movement that has the possibility to restore a fraction of this world's beauty. When God gives, he gives with the understanding that we will be good stewards of what he has provided.
Granted, if the focus of a life is entirely environmental, it could indeed pave the way for nature worship (I guess). But instead of seeing the environmental movement as a threat to the Message and warning against it, could we not use it? Could it not serve as a reminder to God's greatness and a tool for ministry? Are we that unimaginative that we can think of no way to both honor the great commision and be good stewards of what God has given? Come on now.
God gave us this earth, and he gave only one. I believe he will call us home before it falls to shreds, but that isn't the point. We care for it because we appreciate what we have been given and the care we put into the earth is how we show our gratitude to its creator.
I leave you today with this cartoon:
Quick facts about Avatar, in case you live in a cave:
- There is a very strong Environmental theme. The main race is very in-tune and respectful of nature, and their (female) deity manifests herself through a tree. She is not actually a tree, but uses is to communicate to her people (like a burning bush, some would say).
- I would use this bullet to give another quick fact, but basically, that first one is where people are taking issue. It's the same thing that happened with Happy Feet. Apparently Jesus doesn't love Penguins either.
The point here is not (thankfully) the Christian relationship with the media. That's a topic for a whole other blog. My point this time is the stance so many Christians seem to take against Environmentalism. I have, over the last week, seen several facebook posts decrying Environmentalism as a dangerous, terrible idea, full of hypocrisy and dangerous philosophies.
The way I see it though, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Granted, Nature WORSHIP is certainly not what God had in mind, but switching to canvas bags?
According to the Genesis account, God created the Heavens and the Earth, and truly, did a stunning job. The natural world is a testament and a witness to the Great Artist. Go to to the Mountains sometime. Or the Desert. Or anywhere. Just go and marvel at what his hands have made. Phenomenal, truly. After creating all that beauty, we come to find out that it's a gift! It's possibly the second greatest present ever given to anyone, ever, and it is given to the next creation: Man. God made the man, breathed air into him, gave him a name, and put him in the Garden of Eden. Why did he put him there? According to Genesis 2:15, to work it and take care of it. The Amplified Bible says "to tend and guard". The point is that God's purpose was clear. The Earth was a gift, but it was up to Adam, and, consequently, Adam's children, to care for it.
Shouldn't we, then, as Christians, be the most environmentally concious? Not in spite of our greater goal, which is the expansion of the Word, but if we truly believe that this earth was a gift, should we not be the first in line for environmentally friendly options, or are we so confident that God does not see how we squander his gifts? That's what it is, in case you have forgotten. It was the first gift, even before the gift of a mate. It has fallen into disrepair at our hands, and yet militant christianity sees no need to repair the damage mankind has done, and even seeks to destroy a movement that has the possibility to restore a fraction of this world's beauty. When God gives, he gives with the understanding that we will be good stewards of what he has provided.
Granted, if the focus of a life is entirely environmental, it could indeed pave the way for nature worship (I guess). But instead of seeing the environmental movement as a threat to the Message and warning against it, could we not use it? Could it not serve as a reminder to God's greatness and a tool for ministry? Are we that unimaginative that we can think of no way to both honor the great commision and be good stewards of what God has given? Come on now.
God gave us this earth, and he gave only one. I believe he will call us home before it falls to shreds, but that isn't the point. We care for it because we appreciate what we have been given and the care we put into the earth is how we show our gratitude to its creator.
I leave you today with this cartoon:
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Love Isn't
I write about love a lot. Clearly, it’s because I have love all figured out. Just ask my husband. Actually, don’t ask my husband. He would only laugh at you, and possibly give an eye roll and a sarcastic “I’m sure she does. It’s probably a part of her plan for your life.” Thank you, dear. Don’t you have errands to run?
Love is a lot of things. Patient and kind, for starters. One of the strongest bonds between individuals, for seconders. There is actually a very good description of love that can be found here. Love is a lot of very good things, and if you take the time to really think about all the implications, it isn’t easy, but it is so worth it, if it’s the real thing.
With all the things love is, there are a lot of things that love most certainly isn’t, but that we have somehow been conditioned to believe it is. I’m not sure where we got our many ridiculous delusions about love, but I have a feeling the liberal media and Ann Coulter have something to with it. Possibly Al Qaeda was involved. I’m not really sure.
I digress. Love is a lot of very good things, but love is most certainly not the following:
A Feeling or about Listening to Your Heart – Or a noun, for that matter. The common usage of the word “love” means, basically, a feeling. Infatuation. Attachment. Warm Fuzzies. Now, all of that IS necessary to form the base of a love relationship, but if it is what a relationship is based on, that relationship is set up to fail, simply because feelings are fleeting and fickle. Love, the real kind, the kind that lasts until death, is a verb. It’s something you think about and consciously do. Take a look at the biblical description of love again (if you’re an ath-nostic, Buddhist, Pastafarian or someone else who thinks the Bible is utter nonsense, read it and pretend it wasn’t written by a Christian. Pretend Marx wrote it. He was smart, right?) None of the things mentioned are passive. Kindness, Patience, Selflessness, Honesty, Perseverance. Regardless of your belief system, 90%* of people would agree that these things make up a successful love relationship and they are all active, living choices. There will be days when you wake up and don’t feel all that snuggly toward your significant other. On those days, you still choose to love, and to commit to the person you are with.
Also, I’ve discussed the listening to your heart thing. Don’t do it. Listening exclusively to your emotions in love is a surefire way of ending up with someone you’re crazy about but that isn’t good for you. You have to use your head! That’s why you have a head! Don’t just use your head, though. Marrying someone who is good for you but that you have no emotional attachment to isn’t fair on anyone.
A Battlefield – I’m sure Ms. Benatar would beg to differ, as would anyone who has ever uttered the phrase “You have to fight for love!” Let’s review the idea of a battlefield, shall we? Bloodshed, Massive Casualties, Screaming and Gnashing of teeth. That doesn’t sound like love to me. It sounds like life. And it certainly sounds like the traditional approach to dating. Love is the partnership that gets you through the hard times and battles of life. Not to say you and the person you love won’t have your share of fights and disagreements. Paul and I have our weekly fight every Saturday when my sweet husband sleeps until noon and I wake up at 8AM. All I want is some quality time and all he wants is some quality snoozing. What was I talking about? Oh yes. If your relationship, your love, is a battlefield, why on earth would you want to be involved? Battles are not good. They are not fun. They are damaging, and if you are constantly involved in one, you will find yourself damaged. Now, love is certainly not easy, and yes, you have to fight for it. But you don’t fight against the person you are in love with. The fight is the two of you, together, against layoffs, temptation, your own selfishness and broken water heaters. Life is going to throw you enough curveballs to struggle through together without turning your relationship into a constant battle.
A Pit – You don’t fall in love. “Fall in” implies something you can’t help. Now, it’s true you can’t help who you are attracted to. That’s mostly hormones and endorphins and what not anyway. So, technically, you fall in “like”. What you decide to do with said “like” is up to you. You can walk away immediately and never act on your feelings or you can start a relationship and choose to love them. Now, admittedly, love is complex, and while you can help the “love” aspect, you can’t help the emotional attachments that grow over time when you are with someone. Love is a lot easier to give than to take away. That’s why heartbreak hurts so darn much.
A Math Test – This analogy is iffy at best, but stay with me. If someone is wrong for you, you can’t try harder and make them the right person for you. Actually, maybe love is a math test. You can give the wrong answer over and over, but no matter how big and bold you write it, it will still be the wrong answer. Take this analogy how you will.
A Test of Moral Fortitude – Last one. Five is quite enough. This one baffles me. If your significant other has done you very wrong, I.e. cheated on you, lied to you, belittles you, ect ect ect, sticking around doesn’t prove what a better person you are, it proves you are stupid and possibly have some sick attachment to pain. Staying with someone who hurts you doesn’t make your love stronger or prove that you are the better person. It’s mostly just dumb.
The point is, once you realize that love is none of these things, it may lead you to think about what love really is. (Don’t worry, I have this kind of life-changing effect on people). Love is never easy (Oh, look! Another thing love is not that we think it should be!), but the good kind is worth it, and I dare you to believe that you are worth the good kind of love.
*This statistic is completly made up
Love is a lot of things. Patient and kind, for starters. One of the strongest bonds between individuals, for seconders. There is actually a very good description of love that can be found here. Love is a lot of very good things, and if you take the time to really think about all the implications, it isn’t easy, but it is so worth it, if it’s the real thing.
With all the things love is, there are a lot of things that love most certainly isn’t, but that we have somehow been conditioned to believe it is. I’m not sure where we got our many ridiculous delusions about love, but I have a feeling the liberal media and Ann Coulter have something to with it. Possibly Al Qaeda was involved. I’m not really sure.
I digress. Love is a lot of very good things, but love is most certainly not the following:
A Feeling or about Listening to Your Heart – Or a noun, for that matter. The common usage of the word “love” means, basically, a feeling. Infatuation. Attachment. Warm Fuzzies. Now, all of that IS necessary to form the base of a love relationship, but if it is what a relationship is based on, that relationship is set up to fail, simply because feelings are fleeting and fickle. Love, the real kind, the kind that lasts until death, is a verb. It’s something you think about and consciously do. Take a look at the biblical description of love again (if you’re an ath-nostic, Buddhist, Pastafarian or someone else who thinks the Bible is utter nonsense, read it and pretend it wasn’t written by a Christian. Pretend Marx wrote it. He was smart, right?) None of the things mentioned are passive. Kindness, Patience, Selflessness, Honesty, Perseverance. Regardless of your belief system, 90%* of people would agree that these things make up a successful love relationship and they are all active, living choices. There will be days when you wake up and don’t feel all that snuggly toward your significant other. On those days, you still choose to love, and to commit to the person you are with.
Also, I’ve discussed the listening to your heart thing. Don’t do it. Listening exclusively to your emotions in love is a surefire way of ending up with someone you’re crazy about but that isn’t good for you. You have to use your head! That’s why you have a head! Don’t just use your head, though. Marrying someone who is good for you but that you have no emotional attachment to isn’t fair on anyone.
A Battlefield – I’m sure Ms. Benatar would beg to differ, as would anyone who has ever uttered the phrase “You have to fight for love!” Let’s review the idea of a battlefield, shall we? Bloodshed, Massive Casualties, Screaming and Gnashing of teeth. That doesn’t sound like love to me. It sounds like life. And it certainly sounds like the traditional approach to dating. Love is the partnership that gets you through the hard times and battles of life. Not to say you and the person you love won’t have your share of fights and disagreements. Paul and I have our weekly fight every Saturday when my sweet husband sleeps until noon and I wake up at 8AM. All I want is some quality time and all he wants is some quality snoozing. What was I talking about? Oh yes. If your relationship, your love, is a battlefield, why on earth would you want to be involved? Battles are not good. They are not fun. They are damaging, and if you are constantly involved in one, you will find yourself damaged. Now, love is certainly not easy, and yes, you have to fight for it. But you don’t fight against the person you are in love with. The fight is the two of you, together, against layoffs, temptation, your own selfishness and broken water heaters. Life is going to throw you enough curveballs to struggle through together without turning your relationship into a constant battle.
A Pit – You don’t fall in love. “Fall in” implies something you can’t help. Now, it’s true you can’t help who you are attracted to. That’s mostly hormones and endorphins and what not anyway. So, technically, you fall in “like”. What you decide to do with said “like” is up to you. You can walk away immediately and never act on your feelings or you can start a relationship and choose to love them. Now, admittedly, love is complex, and while you can help the “love” aspect, you can’t help the emotional attachments that grow over time when you are with someone. Love is a lot easier to give than to take away. That’s why heartbreak hurts so darn much.
A Math Test – This analogy is iffy at best, but stay with me. If someone is wrong for you, you can’t try harder and make them the right person for you. Actually, maybe love is a math test. You can give the wrong answer over and over, but no matter how big and bold you write it, it will still be the wrong answer. Take this analogy how you will.
A Test of Moral Fortitude – Last one. Five is quite enough. This one baffles me. If your significant other has done you very wrong, I.e. cheated on you, lied to you, belittles you, ect ect ect, sticking around doesn’t prove what a better person you are, it proves you are stupid and possibly have some sick attachment to pain. Staying with someone who hurts you doesn’t make your love stronger or prove that you are the better person. It’s mostly just dumb.
The point is, once you realize that love is none of these things, it may lead you to think about what love really is. (Don’t worry, I have this kind of life-changing effect on people). Love is never easy (Oh, look! Another thing love is not that we think it should be!), but the good kind is worth it, and I dare you to believe that you are worth the good kind of love.
*This statistic is completly made up
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Sometimes Breaking up IS the Answer
I heard someone say today that “Breaking up is never the answer” Really? It’s not? EVER? Come on, there are many people I think we could all agree should just throw in the towel. Spencer and Heidi, Tom and Kate. You know who they are. I think, though, that each of us knows people in our own lives who we just wish would throw in the towel. Maybe they are being hurt emotionally. Maybe they are a different person when they are with their significant other, and it’s not a nice person. Maybe they are just wrong for each other, and everyone sees it but them. Whatever the reason, it’s often painful to watch, and gets to a point of eye-rolling obviousness.
This particular blog isn’t going to tell you how to deal with those people. There’s really no way to “deal” with them, as they are deluded, and you can’t fix what refuses to admit it’s broken. (You can, but they struggle, and the parts don’t screw in quite right.). It’s an open letter to every person who is in a relationship they shouldn’t be in. Maybe you can print it out and mail it to them. Maybe you shouldn’t though. My advice, while always close to divinely inspired, is not often well received. Apparently, it tends to come off as “judgey”. Anyways, Oswego.
You say you’re in a relationship. That’s nice. You’re happy, you say? You love him/her so very much, you say? I sincerely doubt the first, as you are locked out of the house with no shoes and it is raining. The second I’ll buy. (You have to be careful with deluded people. They’re skittish. Like deer. You could lose their trust at any moment) Lets come in out of the rain, shall we? My self-righteousness is getting wet.
Now that we’re in, let’s talk. I’ll skip the inane chit chat and cut right to the crux of the matter. I think perhaps you are not so happy as you believe. Now, now, stop arguing and listen. I want what’s best for you, darn it. In all seriousness, here’s the deal. There’s a time to fight for a relationship, and there’s a time to cut and run. Now would be the latter. I figure though, that you won’t hear it from me, so I’ll let you tell you. Your subconscious knows, even if you don’t. Find a quiet place, away from all outside influence (the woods are nice, or a bathroom with a lock), and answer the following questions and consider the following points. Before you start though, get the whole “Listen to your heart” nonsense out of your head. Just because your heart is saying “yes” doesn’t necessarily mean the correct answer is “yes”. Ask any battered woman. Or perhaps that woman who married the Eiffel Tower. Actually, don’t ask her. Just look at her and learn. Love is as much about being smart as it is about being sentimental, possibly more so. You can love someone who is a motivational speaker and who lives in a van down by the river, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say that’s not the right person for you. So use your head. So now, we are not listening to our hearts, we are using our heads. Ready, set, go.
1. Relationships should not be a fight. Yes, relationships are sometimes a struggle, and there will always be things the two of you need to struggle through together, and yes, you will always have the occasional argument. But if every day is a constant battle and struggle to keep from falling to pieces, there is an issue. A relationship that is already crumbling from within is like a tooth that is rotting from the inside with decay. That tooth is coming out regardless. You only have to choose to recognize it and pull it early on or to ignore the problem and wait until it finally rots away on its own. The first will hurt, certainly, but it will hurt only for a while, and then heal. The second (ask anyone who has waited through this situation) hurts not only as the tooth continues to decay, pain increasing more and more every day, but also the subsequent root canal is, I’ve heard, one of the most painful things ever. You see? Relationships are like teeth. Brush and floss.
2. What kind of person are you when you are with your significant other? No one is perfect, and you will always have faults, but when you are with the wrong person, those faults become magnified. Do you find yourself becoming jealous? Controlling? Angry? Picking fights where there are none, just to fight about something (been there, done that, by the way)? Most importantly, do you like the person you are when you are with this person? Remember, you have only you to answer to at the end of the day, and if you don’t like that person, you’re pretty much sunk for life.
3. Do you want to be like this forever? The minor things? Those will come and go, and even if they don’t, they can be dealt with, because they are minor. But what about the big things, especially the big problems? Does one of you have trust issues? Is the other overly-controlling? An overactive temper? A tendency to belittle you to make themselves feel better? These big issues are things that may (and probably will) be with you for the rest of your life. Not to say that people cannot change, but deep-seated issues haunt people, even people who have overcome them. If there are huge glaring problems now that you have been unable to work through with this person, or if one of you is unwilling to change, it may be time to be done. You have to decide if its worth it. Keep this is mind. A bad relationship eventually reaches a point where it turns toxic, and at that point, there is nothing worth salvaging other than your sanity and emotional well-being.
4. Why are you here? This is possibly the most important question, and the one that requires the most honesty with yourself. Are you sticking around because, even with all the problems, you are comfortable? Is it the security of knowing that you are with someone? Are you terrified of being single? If your answer sounds flimsy, even to you, it may not be good enough. So many people, once a relationship has lost what made it good, stick around because they are afraid of what waits in the dreaded boat labeled “SINGLE”. I promise, though, that boat isn’t so bad. You find out a lot about yourself, and meet a lot of really cool people on that boat. God uses that boat to work on you and make you into who he would have you be (I know, Mrs. Overbearing talking about God working. I am not perfect either, and I talk a good game, but really, all I want is for you to be happy, because I love you, darn it). Don’t be so afraid of being single that you miss opportunities you could have if you would just jump off. I was so afraid of being single that I held onto a relationship six months after I knew it was over. Turns out, God had better planned for both of us, we just had to let go. God always has better, if you let him give it to you.
Epilogue
Here's the deal, my friend. In the end, you can know you are with the wrong person, but it takes courage to admit it, desire better, and walk away. That part is scary, it's hard, and it's heartbreaking. You will probably cry, you will think life will never get better, and you will be tempted to call "just to talk". Don't. This causes only pain and anger. Allow yourself to heal. Allow THEM to heal. Give your heart time to stop hurting and learn to live life single. Erase them from Myspace and Facebook, delete the number from your phone, get rid of all the pictures, gifts and memorabilia. Healing starts when you stop opening the wound.
The End. Hopefully, they will live happily ever after, though, we hope, not with one another.
This particular blog isn’t going to tell you how to deal with those people. There’s really no way to “deal” with them, as they are deluded, and you can’t fix what refuses to admit it’s broken. (You can, but they struggle, and the parts don’t screw in quite right.). It’s an open letter to every person who is in a relationship they shouldn’t be in. Maybe you can print it out and mail it to them. Maybe you shouldn’t though. My advice, while always close to divinely inspired, is not often well received. Apparently, it tends to come off as “judgey”. Anyways, Oswego.
You say you’re in a relationship. That’s nice. You’re happy, you say? You love him/her so very much, you say? I sincerely doubt the first, as you are locked out of the house with no shoes and it is raining. The second I’ll buy. (You have to be careful with deluded people. They’re skittish. Like deer. You could lose their trust at any moment) Lets come in out of the rain, shall we? My self-righteousness is getting wet.
Now that we’re in, let’s talk. I’ll skip the inane chit chat and cut right to the crux of the matter. I think perhaps you are not so happy as you believe. Now, now, stop arguing and listen. I want what’s best for you, darn it. In all seriousness, here’s the deal. There’s a time to fight for a relationship, and there’s a time to cut and run. Now would be the latter. I figure though, that you won’t hear it from me, so I’ll let you tell you. Your subconscious knows, even if you don’t. Find a quiet place, away from all outside influence (the woods are nice, or a bathroom with a lock), and answer the following questions and consider the following points. Before you start though, get the whole “Listen to your heart” nonsense out of your head. Just because your heart is saying “yes” doesn’t necessarily mean the correct answer is “yes”. Ask any battered woman. Or perhaps that woman who married the Eiffel Tower. Actually, don’t ask her. Just look at her and learn. Love is as much about being smart as it is about being sentimental, possibly more so. You can love someone who is a motivational speaker and who lives in a van down by the river, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say that’s not the right person for you. So use your head. So now, we are not listening to our hearts, we are using our heads. Ready, set, go.
1. Relationships should not be a fight. Yes, relationships are sometimes a struggle, and there will always be things the two of you need to struggle through together, and yes, you will always have the occasional argument. But if every day is a constant battle and struggle to keep from falling to pieces, there is an issue. A relationship that is already crumbling from within is like a tooth that is rotting from the inside with decay. That tooth is coming out regardless. You only have to choose to recognize it and pull it early on or to ignore the problem and wait until it finally rots away on its own. The first will hurt, certainly, but it will hurt only for a while, and then heal. The second (ask anyone who has waited through this situation) hurts not only as the tooth continues to decay, pain increasing more and more every day, but also the subsequent root canal is, I’ve heard, one of the most painful things ever. You see? Relationships are like teeth. Brush and floss.
2. What kind of person are you when you are with your significant other? No one is perfect, and you will always have faults, but when you are with the wrong person, those faults become magnified. Do you find yourself becoming jealous? Controlling? Angry? Picking fights where there are none, just to fight about something (been there, done that, by the way)? Most importantly, do you like the person you are when you are with this person? Remember, you have only you to answer to at the end of the day, and if you don’t like that person, you’re pretty much sunk for life.
3. Do you want to be like this forever? The minor things? Those will come and go, and even if they don’t, they can be dealt with, because they are minor. But what about the big things, especially the big problems? Does one of you have trust issues? Is the other overly-controlling? An overactive temper? A tendency to belittle you to make themselves feel better? These big issues are things that may (and probably will) be with you for the rest of your life. Not to say that people cannot change, but deep-seated issues haunt people, even people who have overcome them. If there are huge glaring problems now that you have been unable to work through with this person, or if one of you is unwilling to change, it may be time to be done. You have to decide if its worth it. Keep this is mind. A bad relationship eventually reaches a point where it turns toxic, and at that point, there is nothing worth salvaging other than your sanity and emotional well-being.
4. Why are you here? This is possibly the most important question, and the one that requires the most honesty with yourself. Are you sticking around because, even with all the problems, you are comfortable? Is it the security of knowing that you are with someone? Are you terrified of being single? If your answer sounds flimsy, even to you, it may not be good enough. So many people, once a relationship has lost what made it good, stick around because they are afraid of what waits in the dreaded boat labeled “SINGLE”. I promise, though, that boat isn’t so bad. You find out a lot about yourself, and meet a lot of really cool people on that boat. God uses that boat to work on you and make you into who he would have you be (I know, Mrs. Overbearing talking about God working. I am not perfect either, and I talk a good game, but really, all I want is for you to be happy, because I love you, darn it). Don’t be so afraid of being single that you miss opportunities you could have if you would just jump off. I was so afraid of being single that I held onto a relationship six months after I knew it was over. Turns out, God had better planned for both of us, we just had to let go. God always has better, if you let him give it to you.
Epilogue
Here's the deal, my friend. In the end, you can know you are with the wrong person, but it takes courage to admit it, desire better, and walk away. That part is scary, it's hard, and it's heartbreaking. You will probably cry, you will think life will never get better, and you will be tempted to call "just to talk". Don't. This causes only pain and anger. Allow yourself to heal. Allow THEM to heal. Give your heart time to stop hurting and learn to live life single. Erase them from Myspace and Facebook, delete the number from your phone, get rid of all the pictures, gifts and memorabilia. Healing starts when you stop opening the wound.
The End. Hopefully, they will live happily ever after, though, we hope, not with one another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
