Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Everlasting Love – It Doesn’t Exist In Food Or Radio, Why Would It Exist In Relationships?

Over the past few weeks, age and change have helped me see how marriages fall apart. And even without letting it, as most people claim happens with marriage. I have two non-relationship relationship examples. And it’s further killed my faith in everlasting love. (This is in no way a dig on those who are happily married. This is simply my perspective on why I don’t think I’ll ever get married.)

First example – a radio show I love. I won’t mention it so as not to say bad things about it. You know why? Because despite no longer being madly in love with the show, I still care about the people who are on the show. (And I don’t even know them, but it feels like it.) For the past five or so years, I listened to them religiously. I loved the show, related to the hosts, or could relate to the hosts as some of my friends. I would listen from the time I got out of bed, and once the show went into repeat on iHeart Radio, I listened at night to the portions of the show I missed. Or I’d download podcasts. I was infatuated. This is the first part of love, right?

As the years went on, I loved them more and more, and a time came where they were off the air for a week. I genuinely felt sad and in withdraw. No, really.

When the show came back on the air, it was mostly the same, but a little different. Could this be similar to a spouse graduating from college, changing careers, losing weight or taking on other new habits after you’re married? That’s what it felt like. And slowly, over the past six or eight months, or however long it’s been, I’ve drifted. I’ve lost that loving feeling. I’ve tried to recapture it a lot of different ways. I’m not totally ready to check out, but it’s definitely not the “soul mate” I once thought it was. I can go weeks without listening to the show, and if I turn on the replay stream in the evenings, I often find myself bored and turning it off to instead watch crap TV on Netflix (which is another love of mine, so not meant as an insult, just a change in priorities). I used to want to travel to meet the hosts of the show. Now I feel like if I were in their city, I’d be like, “Meh. Not sure I care.” Continue reading


Paula Deen Controversy – Who Cares?

Not that anyone cares, but here’s my simple take on Paula Deen. The Food Network thought she was played out. Partially, probably, because the diabetes scandal had exposed her and drawn ridicule. And partially because, well, that’s what happens in Hollywood and, I guess, America. Stars have a run, but eventually it gets old. Food Network took the opportunity when it arose, and used it as an excuse to dump Paula. I don’t necessarily disagree with this. It’s business. Paula should have said, “I respect that my time at Food Network has lapsed. I apologize for my misconstrued and disrespectful views in the past, and assure you those are not my views now.” And moved on. She has a bajillion dollars. Why does she care what the American public thinks?

But, alas, her reaction and the public’s over-reaction, making it political, as usual, has turned bad into worse. Corporations with Paula Deen lines of products are dumping her publicly. Whereas if she’d kept her composure, sure those endorsements would have dropped, eventually, assuming the demand for her products naturally dropped. But this is a mess.

I grew up in the Midwest with inarguably racist people. But as a child, I have had my share of racial slurs (for many races). Much like it used to be cool to say, “That’s so gay.” You don’t realize it’s hurtful, or if you do, it’s “cool.” As sad as that is. I realized the error of my ways for racism stuff in middle school (decidedly too late), but honestly didn’t stop saying some of the homophobic stuff until later in high school. In that case, I was saying, “That’s so gay” and probably not realizing what I was saying.

Deen is in her 60s or 70s, though. So to imagine her using these racial slurs in her 30s or 40s is a little out of character. Especially since 30 years ago was the 80s. It’s not like it was the 40s or 50s. I realize the south is a different world, but I think that’s why it’s shocking. Deen was well into adulthood, and past the equal rights movements and into the 80s. She should have been doing coke like everyone else.

So, long story short, I think Food Network used this old story to do what they already planned to do. It was convenient. Deen handled it badly (30 years ago and now). And, honestly, what’s the big deal? Deen should take her deep pockets and slink off into the thick air that is the south in the summertime. It’s not like we don’t know what butter is without her. Or don’t know how to google the types of foods she cooks. We can go on without her show, without her pots and pans, and without her drawl. No one was persecuted. And it’s a lot bigger deal than it ever should have been.

Am I right, y’all? 

Texas Wing: The Davis Filibuster

Without taking a side on the issue, I wanted to react to the Texas filibuster last night. First, let me give credit to West Wing for even having a hint of interest in a filibuster. I’d heard the word before, but never knew what it was until I watched the “The Stackhouse Filibuster” episode on season two of West Wing. The show explained what a filibuster was, and played out the story leading to the senator’s decision. In the case on West Wing, the senator didn’t have to stay on topic. And his goal was to delay voting on a bill so he could get an appropriation added (or however you say that). So his goal was to delay long enough that they’d miss the news cycle. Josh said they wanted to hurry up and pass the bill without delay or making it more complex. So, his goal was to delay so they’d consider adding funds to research autism. His goal wasn’t to get the whole thing ignored.

Last night, the democrats (in general) were trying to delay until the end of the session at midnight. The filibuster started around 11AM. I believe one senator, Wendy Davis, talked for the majority of the time (11 hours). Unlike the filibuster on West Wing, where he talked about nothing (for example, he read recipes and parts of books), it appeared Davis had to stay on topic. I tried to read some and it sounds like national versus state filibuster rules are different. It’s also possible filibuster rules have changed since the West Wing episode. Or the West Wing episode wasn’t accurate. My guess it’s the state versus national thing. Anyway, Davis was stopped after eleven hours for not staying on topic.

This is where I learned the word germaneness. Yes, that’s a word. And apparently it’s written in the rules somewhere. I missed the original dropping of this word, so I’m not sure if it was defined to the senators, but I’ve never heard such harsh abuse of a word outside of the word “literally.” I’m not even sure some of the senators were using the word in context. Because, you see, the thing about a filibuster is, it’s just a stall tactic. And it’s boring and annoying. You can feel your life ticking away. You see people in the background holding their heads in annoyance and frustration. You see the “president” fake banging his gavel. You see all kinds of nonsense adults probably shouldn’t be involved in. And you have to wonder, is this what the government intended with a filibuster? Because, it’s dumb.

Listening to grown adults talk very slowly, in circles. I suppose end-of-semester presentations prepared these senators well because that’s the last time I’ve seen such obvious stall tactics for time. Sentences that ramble on, and as the person goes off topic saying, “Stay with me.” It’s hard to stay with anyone who’s speaking in one slow, run-on sentence.

On the other hand, as the clock ticked to midnight and it was apparent the president wanted to push the vote through (but the woman in white who knew all of the rules seemed to be on the other side), it really was exciting. What was going to happen? Could the democrats come up with more crap to talk about?

In the end, a woman senator, whose name I don’t know, said something to the effect of what does a woman senator have to do to get the attention of a male president. On my clock, this was around 11:48PM. This elicited a small amount of clapping that ruptured into applause. I am a little unclear on who was in the room, if it was just senators or if it was citizens. I saw pictures of people standing in line to get in the room, so I have to suspect there were more than senators in the room, based on the applause. The “president” first seemed to bang the gavel in a fake way. Then he actually banged it. Then he got annoyed and at times could be heard saying something to the effect of he was trying to bring the room to order. The secretary was asked to take roll, but that was impossible over the cheers. This went on for a few minutes before it was apparent the democrats weren’t going to yield until after midnight. At one point, the “president” throws his arms up in exasperation and leaves the stage. As midnight draws near (and according to my clock passes), the secretary starts to call roll again. I’m unsure how she could even hear votes. Ultimately, time had elapsed, and the vote was too late.

So, here’s what I don’t get: what’s to stop senators from merely screaming when they don’t want to vote on a bill that won’t go their way? I can understand that you can’t limit the time a person talks about stuff relevant to a bill, because that could, long-term, cause a bill to not be discussed as it should be. But, the screaming? I saw a tweet saying those who scream or otherwise cause the session to be out of order can be jailed for up to forty-eight hours. It was clear there was no way to arrest all of those causing this ruckus in time to meet the midnight deadline. So, ultimately, the filibuster, which had been broken, was carried out by a mob of non-rule-abiding citizens.

I don’t necessarily have a stake in anything that happens in Texas, so I’m not speaking to this bill specifically, but I’m speaking to filibusters in general. Is what happened OK? It seems like something that would happen on Mean Girls (in a high school) and not with elected officials. I cannot believe it’s this hard to make laws. And in a state controlled by republicans, you have to expect the republicans are going to make the rules. Just like states controlled by democrats will be, well, controlled by democrats. If the citizens of Texas don’t like it, don’t elect republican officials. But, the state of Texas elected these officials, so shouldn’t they be allowed to vote on the bill? It’s so weird to me.

Look, I used to flip game boards over when it was clear I was going to lose. But I was like 10 years old. As I’ve grown up, I realize you can’t win everything. For democrats, does it suck to take a step back in time? Sure. For other bills that are going to pass, do those suck for those senators? Yes. But the thing is, this is how a democracy works, right? If you’re going to filibuster a bill, then do it the right way. If this becomes the way things are done, I feel like the government is only going to get more chaotic and even less able to come to amicable agreements. You can’t get everything you want all the time. And in a government where you buy or bribe votes, everything’s already screwed up, anyway. But if the elected officials are going to vote for or against a bill that the minority is pissed about, find a way to talk sense. Or find a way to elect the right officials into office.

You can’t just scream and flip the game board over. That’s not progress. That’s regression. 

Who Needs The Right Fiance When You Have The Right Ring?

I don’t know why I preface my blogs with caveats, because I can never hit all of the, “but what if…” scenarios. In this case, I’m speaking specifically of one event, with one person, and the situation she’s in, and the irony.

I say this because while I’m speaking of one person, I know this CAN BE a phenomenon. And it’s maddening.

That said, let’s do this!

I have a friend who somewhat recently found out her boyfriend was cheating on her. With multiple girls, across multiple occurrences. His excuse? She was being a bitch during that time and he needed someone who wasn’t. So he stuck his dobber in a bunch of randos.

Can we pause to say how disgusting this is, people? I mean, really. One in three people has some type of STD/STI. And many cheaters (and closeted gay men) don’t use condoms because having/using a condom is often a sign of premeditation. If it’s all “in the moment” then it’s not as guilt-causing. And if it’s all in the moment, then who has a condom? This is spontaneity, people! But, I digress.

Continue reading

You’re The Victim You’ve Set Yourself Up To Be – Take Control Of Your LIfe And Stop Whining!

As much as I wish we could all live in the moment spontaneously and not worry about the future, that’s not really the best way to live life unless you’re a hot hippie in the 60s, willing to have lots of unprotected sex with strangers for drugs. Because in your spontaneous moment, that’s all that matters: free love and getting high.

I’d like to clarify a lot of things because my honest posts sometimes get met with defensiveness. This article doesn’t mean I think you can’t:

  1. Live in the moment for a night, or a weekend, or vacation. You don’t need to be constantly worrying about the future. Just glance that way occasionally.
  2. People who truly aren’t concerned about the future. These people exist. As long as you aren’t simultaneously a victim, go for it, dude. You’ll likely live a lot longer than me (but you’ll probably be working the whole time, and you don’t seem to care – I think you’re crazy).

The people I’m talking to are the self-made victims. The crybabies. Those who want something for nothing. Those who think only of themselves. Those who want everything but don’t want to work hard to get it. Those who don’t understand why they’re never prepared for anything, and think those who are are just lucky or were also given everything they have.

Here’s the thing: Americans want everything, but most don’t want to work for it. Everyone thinks they’re owed something. And those who do the least amount of work want the most. Very few people plan ahead, and most think when they realize something’s there they need, even if they haven’t prepared for it, everyone else that HAS prepared should get out of their way because, “I want it now!”

Continue reading

Want Your Friends To Stop Re-Dating That Horrible Ex? Tell Them To Get Married!

Wanna hear something weird that is probably explained in many a psych lecture across America? But I’ve never been in said lectures, so I find it amusing, if not somewhat frightening.

Back when I was in high school, my sister told me about this girl she worked with who freaked out about her boyfriend and ran up a major highway on-ramp. I’m not sure what she was trying to prove, but to this day, over fifteen years later, our friends still refer to that. And still set that as a marker for crazy in a relationship.

Continue reading

The Greg Brady Effect

OK, before I offend anyone, specifically Barry Williams, I want to preface this by saying I came up with this effect back in high school when the Internet wasn’t really that big of a thing, and I don’t like to insult someone to make my point. That said, I don’t put much stock in looks anyway. It’s strange, but I never have. I mean, I get that people are physically appealing, but I’ve never thought good looks go farther than, well, looks.

However, that doesn’t seem to be true for many people. There are people who only date dark haired girls. Or girls who are under 5’4”. Or guys who are muscular. Or have blue eyes. I suppose it’s probably some weird continuation of the species thing. And I SEE people who are attractive and appreciate it. But I have never dated someone just because they’re good looking. In fact, my biggest pet peeve is when people start dating and the first thing someone asks is “Is he cute?” Why does that matter? Are only popular culture’s definition of good looking people OK to date? I always want to ask if he’s funny. Or is tolerant of different races, religions and sexualities. But that might be weird, too. So I mostly just say, “Tell me about him!”

This weekend I was watching Bridezillas, and a groom-to-be was with this awful, awful girl. His family and friends were telling him to not do it. And instead of giving some weird “she just gets me” thing that most people say he says, “The best thing about her is she’s beautiful.” And then he goes on to say that normally he gets bored with a girl, but even after six months he’s still interested IN HER LOOKS! What?! This guy is getting married because she’s pretty? And she doesn’t even care. She says, “I had a baby, and I still look like THIS!”

What. The. Fuck?

Continue reading