So Katy Perry has a song out called "Unconditionally."
Come just as you are to me
Don't need apologies
Know that you are worthy
I'll take your bad days with your good
Walk through the storm I would
I do it all because I love you
I love you
Unconditionally
We need to have a chat about the concept of unconditional love. It can be familial, it can be romantic, it can be friendly. But it's a messed up concept.
The idea behind unconditional love is that it can overcome any obstacle and weather any mistakes.
But the thing about love is that it's not supposed to be unconditional. Love is meant to be conditional -- it's based on how you treat one another, whether you trust each other, and the foundations of a strong bond. No one deserves your love in spite of how they treat you.
The idea that someone has a right to your love in virtue of anything other than the fact that they have earned it and you have freely given it contributes to child abuse and spousal abuse in a way that's really unhealthy. Most people think that the concept of unconditional love is cute.
But think about a dog who loves his master unconditionally, who comes when he's called regardless of how many times he's been kicked. It's not cute; it's sad. But we expect people in families or relationships to "work through" the rough times and love each other anyway.
Unconditional love shouldn't be praised as this amazing feat: you have a right to withdraw your love whenever you feel you need to, whenever the bad begins to outweigh the good. Loving someone regardless of how they treat you isn't endearing or romantic. It just hurts.
This is a blog about things, about thinking about things, about talking about things, and about being as snarky and poignant as I can manage. I hope you enjoy it.
Showing posts with label life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label life. Show all posts
Friday, December 6, 2013
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
On Knowing Vs. Doing
There's nothing quite like being forced to watch Super Size Me for the fourth time to bring out the "we got the memo" mood in me.
I think one of the interesting things about the PSAs about the dangers of smoking, eating fast food, safe driving, etc., is the fact that no one I know doesn't already know about them.
We've been raised in a culture that knows that certain behaviors are dangerous. I think a lot about the rise in "molly" or MDMA use in the EDM culture -- and how, if you let people in on the little secret that MDMA is pure ecstasy, no one didn't know that it could be dangerous. I remember talking about ecstasy in DARE (drug awareness education program) in elementary school. We all knew what it was and why it could be so dangerous.
I also think about fast food or junk food consumption -- we pretty much all know it's bad for us. Shaming someone who's eating it doesn't suddenly make them suddenly decide that it's not good for them and stop.
The choices people make: to smoke, or eat unhealthy food, or do things they know can be unsafe, are made, at this point, in spite of the fact that everyone knows they're bad. Why people might choose to do something they know isn't good for them comes down to temporarily weighing pros and cons or the cognitive dissonance between what they know and what they want or believe. It's not a matter of PSAs...it's about changing attitudes, day in and day out, to change the instinctive reactions that override the rational knowledge.
I think one of the interesting things about the PSAs about the dangers of smoking, eating fast food, safe driving, etc., is the fact that no one I know doesn't already know about them.
We've been raised in a culture that knows that certain behaviors are dangerous. I think a lot about the rise in "molly" or MDMA use in the EDM culture -- and how, if you let people in on the little secret that MDMA is pure ecstasy, no one didn't know that it could be dangerous. I remember talking about ecstasy in DARE (drug awareness education program) in elementary school. We all knew what it was and why it could be so dangerous.
I also think about fast food or junk food consumption -- we pretty much all know it's bad for us. Shaming someone who's eating it doesn't suddenly make them suddenly decide that it's not good for them and stop.
The choices people make: to smoke, or eat unhealthy food, or do things they know can be unsafe, are made, at this point, in spite of the fact that everyone knows they're bad. Why people might choose to do something they know isn't good for them comes down to temporarily weighing pros and cons or the cognitive dissonance between what they know and what they want or believe. It's not a matter of PSAs...it's about changing attitudes, day in and day out, to change the instinctive reactions that override the rational knowledge.
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
On Why "Awkward" Has It Wrong
I have a dirty little secret. I watch MTV. Specifically, I watch Girl Code and Awkward. That's right: my media consumption is not limited to BBC News, CNN, the NY Times and Wall Street Journal, HBO, and the internet. Shocking, I know. MTV's Awkward endeavors to present the life of a socially-awkward American blogger in high school.
But MTV has it wrong. Not that this really surprises me, since MTV also gets Skins, the people who go "down the shore," and a lot of other things wrong. But as much as I love Awkward, it is in no way because it accurately portrays the life of a blogger.
The show treats blogging like a tell-all confessional diary on the internet. And for some bloggers, this is probably the case -- especially if those bloggers are, say, 13, which I assume is the market MTV is shooting for with this show. But for most bloggers late into high school and into college, the posts are typically less about which boy is fighting for your attention and more about how you see the world.
Do I post life updates on my blog? Absolutely. Because they help contextualize the things I have to say, and also because they make for useful excuses when I've been bad about regularly updating, not because I fool myself into thinking my readers actually care about my exam schedule.
People still keep diaries, and some people are silly enough to make their deepest, darkest secrets open to the internet viewing public. But that's not what most awkward teenage/twenty-something bloggers are doing with their blogs. They're trying to change minds, spread awareness of issues, comment on social change and new media, not complain about the fact that their ex and their current boyfriend are fighting over them.
Also, that's not even awkward. But it does make for interesting television.
The fact remains, though, that when this is how bloggers are represented in traditional media (kind of like how the movie Hackers presents hackers, which is not at all like what hacking actually is or what hacktivists do), it delegitimizes the medium. Most bloggers see themselves as the voices of new media, their work taking the place of traditional Op-Eds in a world where print media is dying out. Positing the work of bloggers through the lens of a girl who uses the internet to work out her petty relationship problems takes away from the legitimacy of bloggers, teenage girls, and the internet generation.
Don't get me wrong, though -- I would pay good money for Tamara's wardrobe and vocabulary, and Jenna Hamilton's life is ceaselessly amusing. Just don't confuse what she does with what most bloggers are trying to do.
Unapologetically yours,
Rachel Leigh
But MTV has it wrong. Not that this really surprises me, since MTV also gets Skins, the people who go "down the shore," and a lot of other things wrong. But as much as I love Awkward, it is in no way because it accurately portrays the life of a blogger.
The show treats blogging like a tell-all confessional diary on the internet. And for some bloggers, this is probably the case -- especially if those bloggers are, say, 13, which I assume is the market MTV is shooting for with this show. But for most bloggers late into high school and into college, the posts are typically less about which boy is fighting for your attention and more about how you see the world.
Do I post life updates on my blog? Absolutely. Because they help contextualize the things I have to say, and also because they make for useful excuses when I've been bad about regularly updating, not because I fool myself into thinking my readers actually care about my exam schedule.
People still keep diaries, and some people are silly enough to make their deepest, darkest secrets open to the internet viewing public. But that's not what most awkward teenage/twenty-something bloggers are doing with their blogs. They're trying to change minds, spread awareness of issues, comment on social change and new media, not complain about the fact that their ex and their current boyfriend are fighting over them.
Also, that's not even awkward. But it does make for interesting television.
The fact remains, though, that when this is how bloggers are represented in traditional media (kind of like how the movie Hackers presents hackers, which is not at all like what hacking actually is or what hacktivists do), it delegitimizes the medium. Most bloggers see themselves as the voices of new media, their work taking the place of traditional Op-Eds in a world where print media is dying out. Positing the work of bloggers through the lens of a girl who uses the internet to work out her petty relationship problems takes away from the legitimacy of bloggers, teenage girls, and the internet generation.
Don't get me wrong, though -- I would pay good money for Tamara's wardrobe and vocabulary, and Jenna Hamilton's life is ceaselessly amusing. Just don't confuse what she does with what most bloggers are trying to do.
Unapologetically yours,
Rachel Leigh
Thursday, July 11, 2013
On Writers, Women, and the Sexy Lamp Test
Back when Joss Whedon was writing Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly and Dollhouse, he was repeatedly asked questions about why he wrote such strong female characters. His answer, finally, was given in a speech he presented on equality, when he simply stated "Because you're still asking me this question."*
George R.R. Martin, author of the Game of Thrones books, was asked where his inspiration for complex, well-written female characters came from, and he responded that he "always considered women to be people."**
Most feminists and female readers know about the concept of the Bechdel test, developed by Allison Bechdel to determine whether a work gives a fair or even remotely non-sexist depiction of women. The test has three parts: (1) Does this work include at least two female characters?; (2) Do these characters talk to one another?; (3) Is the conversation about something other than men? If you can successfully answer "yes" to all three of those questions, congratulations, there is a chance you have written a remotely non-sexist piece.
However, Kelly Sue Deconnick, a writer and artist for Marvel comics, stated that the Bechdel Test may be expecting too much from us, and has proposed a test wherein "if you can take out a female character and replace her with a sexy lamp, you're a hack."*** My question, then, is when a large number of female characters fail both Bechdel's test and are replacable by a sexy lamp, why are we asking those few writers who write women who actually resemble people why they write them that way?
What does it say about the status quo for female characters when the noteworthy and novel thing is that they're written in three dimensions instead of just as a plot device?
I've often advocated for the need for strong female role models, and those are often hard to find in the real world. But it's worrisome that they are nearly as scarce in the world of fantasy and fiction, and that those writers who create them are often questioned or criticized.
Isn't it time that, instead, we start asking, "I've noticed you've written a hollow shell of a human being and slapped a pair of breasts on her. Why did you do that?" instead?
Curiously Yours,
Rachel Leigh
*http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/josswhedonequalitynow.htm
**http://hbowatch.com/20-minute-interview-with-george-r-r-martin/
***http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/20/kelly-sue-deconnick-talks-captain-marvel-pretty-deadly-and-the-sexy-lamp-test
George R.R. Martin, author of the Game of Thrones books, was asked where his inspiration for complex, well-written female characters came from, and he responded that he "always considered women to be people."**
Most feminists and female readers know about the concept of the Bechdel test, developed by Allison Bechdel to determine whether a work gives a fair or even remotely non-sexist depiction of women. The test has three parts: (1) Does this work include at least two female characters?; (2) Do these characters talk to one another?; (3) Is the conversation about something other than men? If you can successfully answer "yes" to all three of those questions, congratulations, there is a chance you have written a remotely non-sexist piece.
However, Kelly Sue Deconnick, a writer and artist for Marvel comics, stated that the Bechdel Test may be expecting too much from us, and has proposed a test wherein "if you can take out a female character and replace her with a sexy lamp, you're a hack."*** My question, then, is when a large number of female characters fail both Bechdel's test and are replacable by a sexy lamp, why are we asking those few writers who write women who actually resemble people why they write them that way?
What does it say about the status quo for female characters when the noteworthy and novel thing is that they're written in three dimensions instead of just as a plot device?
I've often advocated for the need for strong female role models, and those are often hard to find in the real world. But it's worrisome that they are nearly as scarce in the world of fantasy and fiction, and that those writers who create them are often questioned or criticized.
Isn't it time that, instead, we start asking, "I've noticed you've written a hollow shell of a human being and slapped a pair of breasts on her. Why did you do that?" instead?
Curiously Yours,
Rachel Leigh
*http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/josswhedonequalitynow.htm
**http://hbowatch.com/20-minute-interview-with-george-r-r-martin/
***http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/20/kelly-sue-deconnick-talks-captain-marvel-pretty-deadly-and-the-sexy-lamp-test
Sunday, July 7, 2013
On Skins and Adolescence
Last Monday was the premiere of the first episode of the last series of Skins.
For those of you who don't know, Skins has been one of my favorite shows since it first washed up stateside my junior year of high school. I loved it for a lot of reasons, including, in large part, the fact that Nicholas Hoult played Tony Stonem in the first two series.
But really, what drew me in when it comes to Skins was the way they portrayed people my age. Yes, the show was racy and definitely a lot more wild than my life (or anyone that I knew, really) was at the time. But after years of seeing the 16-19 year-old years treated like nothing more than bad grades, shopping trips, and shenanigans learning to drive, it was amazing, to me, to see a show that portrayed its teenage characters as complex, autonomous characters.
The characters in Skins had the complicated backstories that are often associated with much more adult stories -- neglect, abuse, loss, joy, family. They also had real, complex problems -- depression, suicide attempts, eating disorders, bipolar disorder, anxiety. Skins was the first show I ever watched that treated my generation more like adults than children. And it made me feel less alone.
The characters in Skins made real, complex decisions and those decisions had consequences. Even now, with the final series and the reboot of some of the original characters in the specials Fire, Rise, and Pure, the characters, who have aged since the last time we saw them (Effy Stonem, for example, is now working for a high-powered investment bank instead of wreaking havoc on her high school/college), are facing adult issues with real consequences. And I'm excited to see where it all heads. In the meantime, I'm glad there is at least one show that presents adolescence as something more complicated than just that awkward time between when you're a little kid and when you become a full-fledged grownup.
I am speaking, of course, to the UK version of Skins. The American adaptation that MTV tried to pull off was a laughable shadow of its British counterpart.
Culturally yours,
Rachel Leigh
Photo credits:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTYBodWpgle0hIMbsYTKZBIef1lk_al7HdSIl0M9y3YbcrKztrbOcs6rS6h_ljjHLyNVLRd4iLTTgeWdtjDvERAPRbmnP9ZaJmXw828mlGSCHE33zQT4n42ELHwRHwuXRjuQ_h43CcT9hr/s400/skins-cast-nagy.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOULGUtYct73gRdOX-Vqi0l4R-2m0WmNU-oxEkc1fmGUQ_PoZMromuPK7GvPTRjtj-ntC0VXmpVc7JF6hN-zfRfCS35S1EyeAIdVrEmTwJIwr2n5Q1Ni39Krh0I1AFyKy4qk60OpDARib6/s1600/article-0-0CA776D4000005DC-732_634x429.jpg
But really, what drew me in when it comes to Skins was the way they portrayed people my age. Yes, the show was racy and definitely a lot more wild than my life (or anyone that I knew, really) was at the time. But after years of seeing the 16-19 year-old years treated like nothing more than bad grades, shopping trips, and shenanigans learning to drive, it was amazing, to me, to see a show that portrayed its teenage characters as complex, autonomous characters.
The characters in Skins had the complicated backstories that are often associated with much more adult stories -- neglect, abuse, loss, joy, family. They also had real, complex problems -- depression, suicide attempts, eating disorders, bipolar disorder, anxiety. Skins was the first show I ever watched that treated my generation more like adults than children. And it made me feel less alone.
The characters in Skins made real, complex decisions and those decisions had consequences. Even now, with the final series and the reboot of some of the original characters in the specials Fire, Rise, and Pure, the characters, who have aged since the last time we saw them (Effy Stonem, for example, is now working for a high-powered investment bank instead of wreaking havoc on her high school/college), are facing adult issues with real consequences. And I'm excited to see where it all heads. In the meantime, I'm glad there is at least one show that presents adolescence as something more complicated than just that awkward time between when you're a little kid and when you become a full-fledged grownup.
I am speaking, of course, to the UK version of Skins. The American adaptation that MTV tried to pull off was a laughable shadow of its British counterpart.
Culturally yours,
Rachel Leigh
Photo credits:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTYBodWpgle0hIMbsYTKZBIef1lk_al7HdSIl0M9y3YbcrKztrbOcs6rS6h_ljjHLyNVLRd4iLTTgeWdtjDvERAPRbmnP9ZaJmXw828mlGSCHE33zQT4n42ELHwRHwuXRjuQ_h43CcT9hr/s400/skins-cast-nagy.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOULGUtYct73gRdOX-Vqi0l4R-2m0WmNU-oxEkc1fmGUQ_PoZMromuPK7GvPTRjtj-ntC0VXmpVc7JF6hN-zfRfCS35S1EyeAIdVrEmTwJIwr2n5Q1Ni39Krh0I1AFyKy4qk60OpDARib6/s1600/article-0-0CA776D4000005DC-732_634x429.jpg
Friday, July 5, 2013
On R-E-S-P-E-C-T
I've been thinking a lot about respect recently. It started with a video about the influence of teachers and made me think about why I respect those who have taught me and why others fail to respect them. I've thought about respect for feelings and respect for boundaries. I've thought very deeply about respect for king and country (or, well, I mean, I don't live in a country with a king, but I think you know where I'm going with that).
I've thought about what it takes to earn my respect. If you do not treat me like a child, I will respect you as an equal who deserves the adult they have deigned to acknowledge. If you accept that I have clear boundaries -- physically, emotionally, psychologically -- then I will respect that their are lines that you may also not want me to cross.
But those are the things it takes to earn my respect. And I've also started to wonder if that, too, is a flawed concept. Because in expecting you to respect those needs, the only reason I can cite is that I am a full, complex human being, deserving of respect. But then so is everyone else: full, complex human beings who, while I may not understand their positions, have reasons and origins as complex as mine and just as deserving of being respectfully heard out.
And, I suppose, what I've come to is something of a middle. On the one hand, I feel like there are positions and opinions undeserving of respect. On the other, however, people are not simply their views and opinions.
What I guess I'm trying to say is that, while I have always seen respect as something earned, I'm beginning to question if that's the right way of seeing things. Does respect for a person have to entail respect for their beliefs or choices? If not, are there people undeserving of respect?
I'd be lying if I said I knew.
Thoughtfully yours,
Rachel Leigh
I've thought about what it takes to earn my respect. If you do not treat me like a child, I will respect you as an equal who deserves the adult they have deigned to acknowledge. If you accept that I have clear boundaries -- physically, emotionally, psychologically -- then I will respect that their are lines that you may also not want me to cross.
But those are the things it takes to earn my respect. And I've also started to wonder if that, too, is a flawed concept. Because in expecting you to respect those needs, the only reason I can cite is that I am a full, complex human being, deserving of respect. But then so is everyone else: full, complex human beings who, while I may not understand their positions, have reasons and origins as complex as mine and just as deserving of being respectfully heard out.
And, I suppose, what I've come to is something of a middle. On the one hand, I feel like there are positions and opinions undeserving of respect. On the other, however, people are not simply their views and opinions.
What I guess I'm trying to say is that, while I have always seen respect as something earned, I'm beginning to question if that's the right way of seeing things. Does respect for a person have to entail respect for their beliefs or choices? If not, are there people undeserving of respect?
I'd be lying if I said I knew.
Thoughtfully yours,
Rachel Leigh
Friday, June 21, 2013
On Admitting Mistakes
I'm sure you've heard about the Kickstarter crap that blew up in the last couple of days. Namely, that Kickstarter was funding a "seduction guide" which, at heart, boiled down to a guide to dating which advocated sexual harrassment and sexual assault. My only note on this part of the issue is this: under no circumstances should you ever assume that touching someone or resorting to "physical escalation" is okay without first actually obtaining consent. Some people don't even like being touched, let alone being pulled onto a stranger's lap, having their hair pulled, or any number of the displays of "dominance" this guide suggests. Do not act first and ask questions later -- "physical escalation" without freely-given consent isn't "awesome" or sexy; it's sexual assault.
What I'm posting about is something that Microsoft did earlier in the week and Kickstarter did today: admitting they're wrong. In the aftermath of a horrible backlash to the announcement of the DRM requirements on the new Xbox One console, Microsoft very publicly admitted their mistake and, after advice from gamers and users, removed the DRM from the console release. And today, Kickstarter posted a public apology on their blog and made a $25,000 donation to RAINN in an attempt to reconcile their bad decision to fund the project mentioned above.
Is there a skeptical part of me that thinks these actions were only driven by the need to keep potential investors and users from refusing to spend money? Absolutely. But do I think there's something very brave and admirable about a company publicly admitting that they "done goofed"? Absolutely.
My family and many of my friends will be the first to tell you that I am horrible about admitting when I'm wrong. The thing is that many people (I have even heard this about the two previously-mentioned incidents) consider apologizing or admitting mistakes as a sign of weakness. Which I don't understand. The mistake may have been a weakness, but admitting that it happened and trying to make up for it is not. If anything, trying to hide from those mistakes is a sign of cowardice, which is probably an even larger weakness. And the ability to listen to criticism, change your course of action, and come forward and say "our first idea wasn't great and we're trying to do better" is not only admirable -- it's something I want to get better at. Everybody has faults and makes mistakes, and it's about time we start respecting people for admitting they were wrong.
Faultily yours,
Rachel Leigh
What I'm posting about is something that Microsoft did earlier in the week and Kickstarter did today: admitting they're wrong. In the aftermath of a horrible backlash to the announcement of the DRM requirements on the new Xbox One console, Microsoft very publicly admitted their mistake and, after advice from gamers and users, removed the DRM from the console release. And today, Kickstarter posted a public apology on their blog and made a $25,000 donation to RAINN in an attempt to reconcile their bad decision to fund the project mentioned above.
Is there a skeptical part of me that thinks these actions were only driven by the need to keep potential investors and users from refusing to spend money? Absolutely. But do I think there's something very brave and admirable about a company publicly admitting that they "done goofed"? Absolutely.
My family and many of my friends will be the first to tell you that I am horrible about admitting when I'm wrong. The thing is that many people (I have even heard this about the two previously-mentioned incidents) consider apologizing or admitting mistakes as a sign of weakness. Which I don't understand. The mistake may have been a weakness, but admitting that it happened and trying to make up for it is not. If anything, trying to hide from those mistakes is a sign of cowardice, which is probably an even larger weakness. And the ability to listen to criticism, change your course of action, and come forward and say "our first idea wasn't great and we're trying to do better" is not only admirable -- it's something I want to get better at. Everybody has faults and makes mistakes, and it's about time we start respecting people for admitting they were wrong.
Faultily yours,
Rachel Leigh
Monday, June 10, 2013
On Aunt Flo and Things We're Not Supposed to Talk About
We're going to talk about something that's going to alienate my male readers for a bit.
And that is precisely why we're going to talk about them. Because we don't talk about them. Because half the world's population has them or has had them. And they're perfectly natural and normal and, y'know, actually a good thing for your body, and women are expected to treat them like a dirty little secret.
I watched a video the other day about stupid things women have to deal with, and one of the things it mentioned was having to sneak a tampon to the bathroom. I'll be the first to admit, I'm embarrassed to have to buy "feminine hygiene products"...especially from a male clerk. But my question becomes why? Why is there a taboo against a natural, healthy, normal thing? Just because it's a little gross? Yeah, well, so are farts, but it's something you can't control and, I've noticed, most guys don't feel bad about doing in public anyway.
Now, I am by no means saying you have to love your period. Is it a great sign that everything's hunky-dory in your endocrine system? Absolutely. In fact, it's a great indicator that you're eating right, your ladybits are all in order, and that you're not too stressed, as any of those can affect the frequency or heaviness of your period. But, let's be serious, periods can really suck.
Aside from having to spend several days crafting schemes to somehow get everything you need into the bathroom without anyone noticing, there's all the crazy stuff that happens to your body. I had a (male, obviously) friend once tell me that there has been no medical link found between PMS hormones and mood swings (and that therefore the mood swings are all in your head).
My response was to look him in the eyes and tell him that, even if that were true, there are plenty of not-in-our-head reasons for mood swings on your period. PMS hormones cause bloating, fatigue, bizarre food cravings, headaches, breast sensitivity, cramps, nausea, and a whole host of unfortunate physical happenings. So, no, maybe my emotions are not directly impacted by the change in hormones. But tell me how you feel when you're sore and tired, feeling fat because your clothes don't fit right, and still can't stop yourself from craving potato chips. Like I said, periods suck.
But just because they suck and are maybe a little bit gross doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about them. It's just another one of those things we're taught not to talk about because it's not polite -- but then how do you know what a warning sign is for when something isn't right? Period problems can get really out of hand, and it's important that we be okay enough as a society that when a girl's health is at risk, she isn't ashamed to talk about the fact that it's her time of the month. Also, it would be nice to not have to bring my purse to the bathroom every day for a week. Thanks.
Your Friend (the PMS Tiger (great meme, look it up)),
Rachel Leigh
Periods.
And that is precisely why we're going to talk about them. Because we don't talk about them. Because half the world's population has them or has had them. And they're perfectly natural and normal and, y'know, actually a good thing for your body, and women are expected to treat them like a dirty little secret.
I watched a video the other day about stupid things women have to deal with, and one of the things it mentioned was having to sneak a tampon to the bathroom. I'll be the first to admit, I'm embarrassed to have to buy "feminine hygiene products"...especially from a male clerk. But my question becomes why? Why is there a taboo against a natural, healthy, normal thing? Just because it's a little gross? Yeah, well, so are farts, but it's something you can't control and, I've noticed, most guys don't feel bad about doing in public anyway.
Now, I am by no means saying you have to love your period. Is it a great sign that everything's hunky-dory in your endocrine system? Absolutely. In fact, it's a great indicator that you're eating right, your ladybits are all in order, and that you're not too stressed, as any of those can affect the frequency or heaviness of your period. But, let's be serious, periods can really suck.
Aside from having to spend several days crafting schemes to somehow get everything you need into the bathroom without anyone noticing, there's all the crazy stuff that happens to your body. I had a (male, obviously) friend once tell me that there has been no medical link found between PMS hormones and mood swings (and that therefore the mood swings are all in your head).
My response was to look him in the eyes and tell him that, even if that were true, there are plenty of not-in-our-head reasons for mood swings on your period. PMS hormones cause bloating, fatigue, bizarre food cravings, headaches, breast sensitivity, cramps, nausea, and a whole host of unfortunate physical happenings. So, no, maybe my emotions are not directly impacted by the change in hormones. But tell me how you feel when you're sore and tired, feeling fat because your clothes don't fit right, and still can't stop yourself from craving potato chips. Like I said, periods suck.
But just because they suck and are maybe a little bit gross doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about them. It's just another one of those things we're taught not to talk about because it's not polite -- but then how do you know what a warning sign is for when something isn't right? Period problems can get really out of hand, and it's important that we be okay enough as a society that when a girl's health is at risk, she isn't ashamed to talk about the fact that it's her time of the month. Also, it would be nice to not have to bring my purse to the bathroom every day for a week. Thanks.
Your Friend (the PMS Tiger (great meme, look it up)),
Rachel Leigh
Sunday, June 2, 2013
On Street Fairs, Weather, and Bad Parenting
There are certain days when I wish I wrote a food blog. Like today, when my stomach is full of delicious Richmond Greek Festival moussaka and duck fat french fries from a place called Rox, who had a booth at a street festival called Broad Appetit.
But the fact is that I don't run a food blog, and even if I did, that's still probably not what I would be talking about today.
Because, well, I need to rant.
This was not a place for your infants or pets. It was 90 degrees today in Richmond (which is, admittedly, not all that unusual) and is, honestly, perfectly fine weather for a street food festival. It is not, however, fine for babies and dogs. The National Weather Service points to any temperature above 82 degrees with high humidity as a reason to use extreme caution for risks of heat stroke, dehydration, or hyperthermia.* These risks are significantly greater for children and the elderly. Also, I'm sure your poodle in full winter coat isn't appreciating it either (although, shoutout to the SPCA for having an air-conditioned RV and water for all the dogs who were out there in this heat anyway).
I also don't know where people get the idea that large crowds, particularly large crowds where people will be drinking, are a good atmosphere for a small child or pet. They could get tripped on, spilled on, or in any way hurt extraordinarily easily in those kinds of situations, and aside from that, it's incredibly overstimulating. Your child is not appreciating the street food and craft beers that you are currently purchasing beer tickets for. As a matter of fact, he's red in the face and on the verge of unconsciousness and I'm pretty sure you should go find a doctor.
Hire a babysitter. Leave the dog at home with water and air conditioning. You're not doing anyone a favor by bringing them to events like these.
Yours in frustration,
Rachel Leigh
*http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/heat/index.shtml#wwa
But the fact is that I don't run a food blog, and even if I did, that's still probably not what I would be talking about today.
Because, well, I need to rant.
This was not a place for your infants or pets. It was 90 degrees today in Richmond (which is, admittedly, not all that unusual) and is, honestly, perfectly fine weather for a street food festival. It is not, however, fine for babies and dogs. The National Weather Service points to any temperature above 82 degrees with high humidity as a reason to use extreme caution for risks of heat stroke, dehydration, or hyperthermia.* These risks are significantly greater for children and the elderly. Also, I'm sure your poodle in full winter coat isn't appreciating it either (although, shoutout to the SPCA for having an air-conditioned RV and water for all the dogs who were out there in this heat anyway).
I also don't know where people get the idea that large crowds, particularly large crowds where people will be drinking, are a good atmosphere for a small child or pet. They could get tripped on, spilled on, or in any way hurt extraordinarily easily in those kinds of situations, and aside from that, it's incredibly overstimulating. Your child is not appreciating the street food and craft beers that you are currently purchasing beer tickets for. As a matter of fact, he's red in the face and on the verge of unconsciousness and I'm pretty sure you should go find a doctor.
Hire a babysitter. Leave the dog at home with water and air conditioning. You're not doing anyone a favor by bringing them to events like these.
Yours in frustration,
Rachel Leigh
*http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/heat/index.shtml#wwa
Thursday, May 23, 2013
On Digital Humanities and My Job
I don't often talk about my work, but seeing as I'll be doing it 40 hours a week for the next seven weeks, maybe it's not such a bad idea to give everyone a little 'splaining.
If you followed the other blog linked to this account, you probably know I'm a writing consultant, as I used that blog to discuss the training process and the challenges I expected to face as a writing consultant. But what you may or may not know is that for the last three years, I have worked at the UR Digital Scholarship Lab.
The DSL is a Digital Humanities research lab. To a lot of people, digital humanities sounds like something of an oxymoron, because the humanities (history, philosophy, etc) tend to be pursuits we naturally link with neo-Luddism. Okay, no, most people don't think it's an oxymoron -- mostly, they just kind of look at me like "huh?"
Our work in the lab is some bizarre hybrid of historical research and computer science skills that come together to create interesting historical resources which match the modern age -- interactive maps, updated digital archives, things which make often inaccessible research or concepts modern and graspable.
My pet project since I've worked there has to be Visualizing Emancipation -- an interactive map of the emancipation process during the Civil War. A lot of people think (and we're certainly taught) that Emancipation happened when Lincoln made the Emancipation Proclamation and, like a magic spell, all the slaves were free. Maybe, if your education was a little more in-depth, you were taught that what gave the emancipation of slaves legal teeth was the passing of the 13th Amendment. Yay no more slaves!
What VE shows is the fact that the process was much more complex than that, and also precisely that -- it WAS a process. Every emancipation event in the database corresponds to a primary or secondary source which can point to the exact date at which a slave ran away, was liberated, was re-enslaved, or any number of other major events which focus on the fact we're not just talking about a historical or political moment in time. We're looking at the lives of people with real agency and whose freedom was not simply given to them.
This is not even to touch on the continuing plight of slaves and human trafficking victims which persists in a country that points to a point in history as the time when Americans stopped owning other Americans. But that's a topic for another day.
For the time being, if you want to check out what I've been up to or the Visualizing project, you can go to http://dsl.richmond.edu, http://dsl.richmond.edu/emancipation, or follow the project on twitter at @vizemancipation.
Historically (and digitally) yours,
Rachel Leigh
If you followed the other blog linked to this account, you probably know I'm a writing consultant, as I used that blog to discuss the training process and the challenges I expected to face as a writing consultant. But what you may or may not know is that for the last three years, I have worked at the UR Digital Scholarship Lab.
The DSL is a Digital Humanities research lab. To a lot of people, digital humanities sounds like something of an oxymoron, because the humanities (history, philosophy, etc) tend to be pursuits we naturally link with neo-Luddism. Okay, no, most people don't think it's an oxymoron -- mostly, they just kind of look at me like "huh?"
Our work in the lab is some bizarre hybrid of historical research and computer science skills that come together to create interesting historical resources which match the modern age -- interactive maps, updated digital archives, things which make often inaccessible research or concepts modern and graspable.
My pet project since I've worked there has to be Visualizing Emancipation -- an interactive map of the emancipation process during the Civil War. A lot of people think (and we're certainly taught) that Emancipation happened when Lincoln made the Emancipation Proclamation and, like a magic spell, all the slaves were free. Maybe, if your education was a little more in-depth, you were taught that what gave the emancipation of slaves legal teeth was the passing of the 13th Amendment. Yay no more slaves!
What VE shows is the fact that the process was much more complex than that, and also precisely that -- it WAS a process. Every emancipation event in the database corresponds to a primary or secondary source which can point to the exact date at which a slave ran away, was liberated, was re-enslaved, or any number of other major events which focus on the fact we're not just talking about a historical or political moment in time. We're looking at the lives of people with real agency and whose freedom was not simply given to them.
This is not even to touch on the continuing plight of slaves and human trafficking victims which persists in a country that points to a point in history as the time when Americans stopped owning other Americans. But that's a topic for another day.
For the time being, if you want to check out what I've been up to or the Visualizing project, you can go to http://dsl.richmond.edu, http://dsl.richmond.edu/emancipation, or follow the project on twitter at @vizemancipation.
Historically (and digitally) yours,
Rachel Leigh
Sunday, April 28, 2013
On Finals Week (Page 6 of 8)
It's the last Sunday of the semester, and I'm holed up in the library writing a blog post. You know what that means -- it's Finals week, and I'm once again using this blog as an excuse to procrastinate on whatever it is I am actually supposed to be doing. Finals Week posts tend to be, in some ways, reflective, as I get a chance to look back on a semester of life lessons and stories and stupid generalizations (like my post about judging you based on where you study).
This one's a little different, because most of the time, Finals Week comes with a sense of finality. Instead, I find myself already thinking ahead to three weeks from now when I'll be moving all of my stuff back into the dorms at U of R for my summer job. It feels like nothing's really ending, which I think is compounded by my fundamental inability to grasp the fact that I'm going to be a senior in about two weeks. None of it seems real -- nothing's ending, nothing's starting, it's just kind of fading into itself. Is this what the real world is like? Who knows?
For those of you who have finished your finals already -- well, I hate you. For those of you still struggling through, best of luck!
'Twas the night before finals
And all through UR...
I'll come up with a way to finish that rhyme someday.
Good luck,
Rachel Leigh
This one's a little different, because most of the time, Finals Week comes with a sense of finality. Instead, I find myself already thinking ahead to three weeks from now when I'll be moving all of my stuff back into the dorms at U of R for my summer job. It feels like nothing's really ending, which I think is compounded by my fundamental inability to grasp the fact that I'm going to be a senior in about two weeks. None of it seems real -- nothing's ending, nothing's starting, it's just kind of fading into itself. Is this what the real world is like? Who knows?
For those of you who have finished your finals already -- well, I hate you. For those of you still struggling through, best of luck!
'Twas the night before finals
And all through UR...
I'll come up with a way to finish that rhyme someday.
Good luck,
Rachel Leigh
Monday, March 11, 2013
On Major Life Decisions
"Everyone I know is getting married or pregnant. I'm just getting more awesome."
~Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother
Okay, hold the phone. Who told everyone around me that it was okay to start getting engaged and married or popping out babies? When did I miss the memo on this whole life-changing-decisions thing?
I feel like I've got my life in order when both my socks match and I wake up before noon. How is it possible that people my age are making these huge decisions about spending the rest of their lives with someone? Or multiple someones, apparently.
I guess I'm torn, because I've read a number of things about how this generation is wasting our 20s, because we think we have our whole lives ahead of us to make these huge decisions, so it doesn't matter if we don't settle down or figure our lives out. And I rationally know that that really just isn't the case. But I don't feel like I'm emotionally or personally ready to start making those kinds of choices.
And I think a lot of this comes down to another big difference between Denmark and the States -- because in Denmark, most people don't get married until their 30s, at least, and most people older than I am are still in college and figuring out their lives. And I feel like that shouldn't be a crime. But unfortunately, in our system, it seems like not having everything figured out already puts you behind the 8-ball.
So now I'm suddenly having these visions of browsing the Help Wanted ads and spending my nights searching cheap dating sites (since my broke, unemployed, imaginary butt clearly couldn't afford the good ones), taking care of cats that somehow came into my possession, hoping to figure out my life. And it seems like it's way too soon for those kinds of thoughts.
I guess I'm just not sure if everyone else is moving too fast or if I'm just going too slow to keep up, but either way, my head is spinning and something seems off. I really just want to watch some cartoons and play with Legos.
Peter Pan-ing with the best of 'em,
Rachel Leigh
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
On My Plans for Valentine's Day
This week is the Vagina Monologues, which in addition to being a great time with an amazing group of women, is one of my favorite times of the year because it allows me the opportunity to make people extraordinarily uncomfortable by yelling at them about vaginas.
Now, the reason I enjoy making people uncomfortable by yelling at them about vaginas is not simply because I like making people uncomfortable. The fact is that I like pointing out the ways in which your discomfort doesn't make sense. The word "vagina," and the legions of college girls yelling about them in the Student Commons, are considered weird or offensive because we are taught from a very young age that vaginas and the things they do and the things they're used for ought to be shameful and secretive. All you need to know to know that is to look at the ways a girl will go out of her way to hide the fact that she's on her period -- which is, y'know, entirely out of our control and completely natural.
So girls are taught that our bits are supposed to be secrets that ought to be kept quiet, out of sight, and out of mind. But while it's weird and disconcerting for women to be tabling about their vaginas (and, more honestly, about the violence which is perpetrated against those people who possess them), it's totally fine for men to be yelling about testicular cancer or to draw penises in public. But people see our weird emoticon-vaginas on our posters and think they're creepy and wrong.
So, yes, I will continue to yell at you, professor who is refusing to make eye contact, about the wonders of vaginas and the things we say about them and the things we don't say about them (the things that lead to illness and violence because we're AFRAID or ashamed to talk about them), because I want to force you to think about why exactly the most quintessential piece of female human anatomy should be seen as creepy or wrong. I mean, yeah, I get that they're all flaps and doo-dads, but I'll keep yelling about them Until the Violence Stops.
Yours in Vagina-Love,
Rachel Leigh
For the record, any one in the area of the University of Richmond, the show is the 13th, 14th, and 15th in the Pier (Tyler Haynes Commons) at 9 pm. You can get tickets, t-shirts, or chocolate vagina lollipops in the Commons every day.
Now, the reason I enjoy making people uncomfortable by yelling at them about vaginas is not simply because I like making people uncomfortable. The fact is that I like pointing out the ways in which your discomfort doesn't make sense. The word "vagina," and the legions of college girls yelling about them in the Student Commons, are considered weird or offensive because we are taught from a very young age that vaginas and the things they do and the things they're used for ought to be shameful and secretive. All you need to know to know that is to look at the ways a girl will go out of her way to hide the fact that she's on her period -- which is, y'know, entirely out of our control and completely natural.
So girls are taught that our bits are supposed to be secrets that ought to be kept quiet, out of sight, and out of mind. But while it's weird and disconcerting for women to be tabling about their vaginas (and, more honestly, about the violence which is perpetrated against those people who possess them), it's totally fine for men to be yelling about testicular cancer or to draw penises in public. But people see our weird emoticon-vaginas on our posters and think they're creepy and wrong.
{( )}
For the record, they look like that. Is that weird?
So, yes, I will continue to yell at you, professor who is refusing to make eye contact, about the wonders of vaginas and the things we say about them and the things we don't say about them (the things that lead to illness and violence because we're AFRAID or ashamed to talk about them), because I want to force you to think about why exactly the most quintessential piece of female human anatomy should be seen as creepy or wrong. I mean, yeah, I get that they're all flaps and doo-dads, but I'll keep yelling about them Until the Violence Stops.
Yours in Vagina-Love,
Rachel Leigh
For the record, any one in the area of the University of Richmond, the show is the 13th, 14th, and 15th in the Pier (Tyler Haynes Commons) at 9 pm. You can get tickets, t-shirts, or chocolate vagina lollipops in the Commons every day.
Friday, February 8, 2013
On Identity
Thanks to the internet, we've learned over the years (and had it driven home with the whole Te'o fiasco), we can be anyone. We can be any version of unreal we want -- whether it's simply the best possible version of ourselves or someone entirely different.
We've been trained in the Lady Gaga school of Identity: reveal enough that interests people, and you can control the questions they ask. You can end up an entirely different person, simply by marshaling what you share and what you choose to keep a secret.
This pliability of identity can be liberating, and to some extent, it can be amazing. But, of course, it also has its negative upshots -- complete anonymity and shifting identity lets people believe they can't be held responsible for the things they do...in spite of the fact that, very often, you can.
But the fact of the matter is that I can be the best, wittiest, happiest version of myself on the internet... more so than I ever could be in the offline world. Even the name I use in my blog is a partial construction, pruned to be the person I choose to be.
I'm still tossing this idea around, but I think this idea of constructed identities is really necessary.
Identifiably yours,
Rachel Leigh
We've been trained in the Lady Gaga school of Identity: reveal enough that interests people, and you can control the questions they ask. You can end up an entirely different person, simply by marshaling what you share and what you choose to keep a secret.
This pliability of identity can be liberating, and to some extent, it can be amazing. But, of course, it also has its negative upshots -- complete anonymity and shifting identity lets people believe they can't be held responsible for the things they do...in spite of the fact that, very often, you can.
But the fact of the matter is that I can be the best, wittiest, happiest version of myself on the internet... more so than I ever could be in the offline world. Even the name I use in my blog is a partial construction, pruned to be the person I choose to be.
I'm still tossing this idea around, but I think this idea of constructed identities is really necessary.
Identifiably yours,
Rachel Leigh
Monday, January 28, 2013
On Happiness
It's been a month and a half back stateside, and today in class my professor brought up the fact that the Danes are the happiest people in the world. Now, I've spent years trying to be the best possible version of myself. The problem, I think, is that what I've considered the "best" version of myself has varied greatly at different times in my life.
I think at this point, my goal is just to try to be happy and to do the best I can within those confines. And, for that, I'm trying to pull some lessons from my time in Denmark.
So, without further ado, Rachel's Keys to Happiness (The Danish Way):
Keyed in,
Rachel Leigh
I think at this point, my goal is just to try to be happy and to do the best I can within those confines. And, for that, I'm trying to pull some lessons from my time in Denmark.
So, without further ado, Rachel's Keys to Happiness (The Danish Way):
- Don't Try to Do or Be Everything: This is completely antithetical to the UR way of life, and I know that. I go to a school of over-achievers and the over-involved. But from now on, I'm going to try and stick to only those things that I have the time to do and do well, rather than beating myself up for not having three majors, two minors, and being the president of six clubs.
- Don't Forget to Take Care of Yourself: I've noticed I feel a lot better about myself when I take the time to take care of myself -- to eat foods that make me feel good, drink enough water, work out. They take up time, but I end up feeling like an entirely different person.
- Don't Judge Yourself in Comparison to Others: Thank you Jantelov. This set of the tenets of Danish life come down to "Don't think you're better or smarter or more deserving than anyone else"...but at the same time realizing that it means you're no less of those things either.
- Don't Take Life Too Seriously: If there's one thing I really learned from the Danes, it's that when it comes to joking, nothing is off limits. And not taking life or any one aspect of it too seriously is a struggle that I need to remind myself of on a regular basis -- but one that will ultimately leave me a lot less stressed and a lot happier.
- Don't Be Afraid to Take Some Time: Danes put off going to college longer than we do. Danes put off marriage and kids longer than we do. And that time to make the big decisions, I think, probably gives you some analytical distance and maturity to help make those decisions when the time is right. I'm not as a afraid to not know RIGHT NOW what I want or need to do.
- LOWER YOUR EXPECTATIONS: The secret to happiness is low expectations. Seriously.
Keyed in,
Rachel Leigh
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
On Being Out of Shape
It's no secret -- I am entirely unathletic. Made of tiny little wrists and next-to-no-muscle-mass and lungs that are ready to give out at any given moment, the idea of working out has never exactly appealed to me. I mean, seriously, I get out of breath just THINKING about having to walk across campus. And let's not even talk about how much I felt like dying after walking up the steps to Prague Castle. Take my word for it, I have spent most of my life so out of shape that it was actually pretty laughable.
Which, of course, has sparked this never-ending cycle of not wanting to work out because I was so out of shape, and being out of shape because I didn't want to work out. I've been trying over the last couple of months to be better about that, and I think to some extent it's been working pretty well.
The big question is going to be whether I can keep up this good behavior when I get back to school, or whether the lure of D-Hall fried chicken and being "too busy" (watching Netflix) to go to the gym will win out.
I've always had an odd relationship with working out, a combination of disliking how out of shape I was and feeling so helpless and overwhelmed (and, okay, I admit, lazy) to even know where to start to make it better.
Ohwell, here's hoping I can keep it up in the coming months. If not, you have my permission to hit me.
"Round is a shape, right?"
Rachel Leigh
Which, of course, has sparked this never-ending cycle of not wanting to work out because I was so out of shape, and being out of shape because I didn't want to work out. I've been trying over the last couple of months to be better about that, and I think to some extent it's been working pretty well.
The big question is going to be whether I can keep up this good behavior when I get back to school, or whether the lure of D-Hall fried chicken and being "too busy" (watching Netflix) to go to the gym will win out.
I've always had an odd relationship with working out, a combination of disliking how out of shape I was and feeling so helpless and overwhelmed (and, okay, I admit, lazy) to even know where to start to make it better.
Ohwell, here's hoping I can keep it up in the coming months. If not, you have my permission to hit me.
"Round is a shape, right?"
Rachel Leigh
Monday, January 7, 2013
On Richmond
In a few days, we'll be loading up the car to take this show on the road, again. And by "on the road," I mean about 275 miles down south to my second home, the River City, Richmond, Virginia.
Over the last three years, I've heard a lot of people say a lot of things about Richmond. From my friends in high school who promised they'd send Sherman in after me if I wasn't surviving the South to friends from much further south commenting on how far North RVA really is, I've pretty much heard it all.
Which got me thinking -- Is Richmond really Southern or is it Northern?
On the one hand, Richmond was the Capital of the Confederacy during the Civil War.
And trust me, riding down Monument Ave, it's easy to tell that they'll never forget it. And Virginia itself isn't exactly known for being a beacon of northern ideals, though who doesn't love a little Southern hospitality from time to time? (Although if you so much as dare to say "Bless your heart" in front of me, we might have a problem.) Besides, I have never been called a Yankee so many times in my life (you know who you are).
But at the same time, Richmond itself is a relatively Northern city -- more progressive than a lot of its more-Southern counterparts, and I dare you to find someone with a twang. Go ahead, try.
In a lot of ways, it's almost like this little Northern Bubble inside a very Southern state (and don't get me wrong, the University itself is even more a Northern Bubble (two words: Nantucket. Red.)). Never truly Northern and never truly Southern, not really belonging to either.
Confusedly yours,
Rachel Leigh
Over the last three years, I've heard a lot of people say a lot of things about Richmond. From my friends in high school who promised they'd send Sherman in after me if I wasn't surviving the South to friends from much further south commenting on how far North RVA really is, I've pretty much heard it all.
Which got me thinking -- Is Richmond really Southern or is it Northern?
On the one hand, Richmond was the Capital of the Confederacy during the Civil War.
And yes, this is what the ACTUAL Confederate flag looks like. Learn some history, fools.
But at the same time, Richmond itself is a relatively Northern city -- more progressive than a lot of its more-Southern counterparts, and I dare you to find someone with a twang. Go ahead, try.
In a lot of ways, it's almost like this little Northern Bubble inside a very Southern state (and don't get me wrong, the University itself is even more a Northern Bubble (two words: Nantucket. Red.)). Never truly Northern and never truly Southern, not really belonging to either.
Confusedly yours,
Rachel Leigh
Sunday, January 6, 2013
On Back to School
Going back to school has always been something of a toss-up
for me. On the one hand, the stress
levels are definitely not on my list of my favorite things – particularly when
I know that I’m going back to a class that I’ve been dreading for years (yes, I’m
looking at you, Methods).
But on the other, I find a certain comfort in being back at
school – not just in being surrounded by friends and having things to do,
although I absolutely miss those things.
And also not just the River City itself, though I am extremely excited
to get back to that as well. But in some
ways, I feel comfortable in a classroom in a way that I don’t feel comfortable
anywhere else.
It’s one of the few places where I don’t feel like I need to
temper myself or work to impress anyone – I can just be open about the things
that get me passionate or things that I nerd out about, and not have to worry
about being socially awkward. Outside of
the classroom, it takes a very different comfort level for me to act the same way.
On the other hand, back to school means that I have to pack
this week, which everyone knows is my least favorite activity.
Good luck to everybody!
Procrastinatorily yours,
Rachel Leigh
Thursday, November 1, 2012
On Lessons I Learned From TV
TV taught me how to feel, now real life has no appeal.
Marina and the Diamonds has it right. (Side note: Way to be real world for totally not recognizing my Halloween costume.) I have spent way too much of my life watching television and feeling all the feels. But thinking back on it I've realized I've learned some interesting lessons.
Things TV Taught Me:
- It's Never Lupus. Except when it is. Any House fan out there probably knows this. It's like the fundamental rule of House. I think the real takeaways from this, though, were that a) it's never as bad as it could be and b) no trope is safe from subversion. Because it's never lupus. Except for that one episode where it was totally lupus.
- Don't Mess With the Girl Who Can Kill You With Her Brain. River Tam is smarter than you. She's a better fighter than you. Also, she can kill you with her brain. This crazy lady from Firefly is probably the biggest reason to never break the heart of a smart and emotionally unstable girl. She will find you. She will kill you.
- When You're Sad You Should Stop Being Sad and Be Awesome Instead. Okay, so it's not usually that simple. But I have to give Barney Stinson some credit for this one... Sometimes the best way to get past being sad is to just pretend that you're not sad, force yourself to go do something fun, and let the fun make you actually not-sad. Be awesome instead. Also, a more important lesson from HIMYM: more people should suit up. You look really classy, and I love that. Also NPH is a god.
- Even If You're Completely Nuts, Good Friends Will Love You Anyway. Okay, so this isn't based off of a quote, but seriously. Sheldon Cooper. Gregory House. Donna Noble. Real friends love you for who you are, even if that means you are an absolute psycho sometimes.
- Fictional Characters Are Better At Their Jobs Than Real People. Jed Bartlet. That is all.
- And finally, it doesn't matter if it's non-canon, inappropriate, incest, against their sexual orientation, squicky, or if it involves inanimate objects, bending of fictional universes, or time travel. Somebody Out There Ships It.
I enjoyed this post, and while I was writing it, I started thinking of examples from books and movies, so there is a decent chance there will be future lists based around books and movies.
Your Favorite Couch-Potato,
Rachel Leigh
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
On Weirdness
I think it's funny how someone's response when I call them weird is
always to shoot back, "No, you're weird!" I mean, yes, I am. I'm
totally weird. I'm like the weirdest person I know. But why does MY
being weird preclude your ability to be weird? Does my being tall
somehow stop other people from being tall?
I can understand noting the hypocrisy, if I were
somehow saying that you're a bad person because you are weird, but it's
not like that. You may have done or said something that I found odd
because it doesn't make sense to me or it's unconventional. That
doesn't make it bad, but it does make it, at least to me, weird. Why
does the fact that I am also a weird person somehow make you not-weird?
One of my favorite quotes comes from Dr. Seuss: "We're
all a little weird, and life is weird, and when we find someone whose
weirdness is compatible with ours, we join up with them and fall in
mutual weirdness and call it love." The fact that you're weird doesn't
make you somehow less -- it makes you capable of mutual weirdness. But
just because I point it out, doesn't mean you have to go "Nuh uh, you
are!" like I just called you smelly on the playground.
Embrace the weirdness -- but recognize it.
Yours in mutual weirdness,
Rachel Leigh
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)