I've realized I've done at least two things in my life for the simple reason that it would annoy/piss off someone that I didn't like.
First, though maybe this doesn't count since I really did have issues with the faith - I quietly left off being a Christian because I was mad at my family. That doesn't take into account, as I say, the issues I actually had with it but it was a deciding factor in leaving and being an atheist. Then deciding I was going to be a witch - partially because I thought it was better to focus on the Female, yes. But also because I knew it would 'concern' people.
Second, going to a Catholic church.
My mother had just married my Dad and his parents were living with us. His mother hated me and she hated Catholicism. She's an angry ex-Catholic. So, when informed that I *had* to go to a church on Sunday's because no one in the house was *not* going to be Christian, I picked the one I knew would piss her off the most. And proceeded to learn everything I could so I could argue with her about it and be right.
Which, upon reflection would be why neither of these things lasted.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Look, It's Halloween, people...
I get that some Christian groups think that Halloween is evil. I think they're nutters, but whatever. No skin off my nose. I don't go to 'faith based' Halloween activities.
Halloween is my favorite holiday, and that's ignoring the religious aspects of the day.
I think the...what do they even call them. Hell houses? The Christian version of a haunted house that shows you all the people in hell. Whatever. They're designed to basically scare people into believing in Christianity. Which is the wrong way of doing it but what the hell. As long as the kids aren't out there wearing scary costumes and worshiping ze Debil. *rolls eyes* For the record, the kids aren't out there worshiping anything except sugar. Which has it's own problems, no question.
Now they're coming out with this thing where they're going to wear white 'to show righteousness' (let's not talk about how irritating and wrong *that* is. *cough*self-righteous much?*cough*) and hand out Bibles (or 'other Christian gifts', though what those might be I have no idea) to kids who come trick or treating.
Apart from making your house about as popular as the people who hand out those little toothbrush kits instead of candy (way to get egged and tp'd by the way!), this is stupid.
First, who's paying for all those Bibles? Even assuming that a household could find a small Bible for, what? Five bucks let's say? How many Bibles do they need to buy to make sure they have enough? 10? 20? More? Who's going to do that?
Second, if I were a parent and someone handed out religious material to my kid I'd be pissed. *I* get to choose the religious information that comes to my kid. Not you, random person I may or may not know to say hello to. How would they feel if their kid stopped by a Muslim household (not for trick or treating, since that's Evil *makes airquotes in sarcastic manner*, but for some other reason) and they were handed a Qur'an? I believe the words shit and fit would apply to most of their reactions.
Third, do you really need to stake out another holiday? You've got plenty. Go away. *makes shooing motions* If you don't like it, don't participate. Don't let your kids participate. Don't try and ruin it for everyone else though, okay?
The *majority* of people you encounter on the street on Halloween are not viewing it as a religious holy day. And for the ones that are? That's their religion and it's their right. Back the hell off.
Here endeth my complaining.
For now.
*makes DUM DUM DUMMMMMMMMMM sounds*
Halloween is my favorite holiday, and that's ignoring the religious aspects of the day.
I think the...what do they even call them. Hell houses? The Christian version of a haunted house that shows you all the people in hell. Whatever. They're designed to basically scare people into believing in Christianity. Which is the wrong way of doing it but what the hell. As long as the kids aren't out there wearing scary costumes and worshiping ze Debil. *rolls eyes* For the record, the kids aren't out there worshiping anything except sugar. Which has it's own problems, no question.
Now they're coming out with this thing where they're going to wear white 'to show righteousness' (let's not talk about how irritating and wrong *that* is. *cough*self-righteous much?*cough*) and hand out Bibles (or 'other Christian gifts', though what those might be I have no idea) to kids who come trick or treating.
Apart from making your house about as popular as the people who hand out those little toothbrush kits instead of candy (way to get egged and tp'd by the way!), this is stupid.
First, who's paying for all those Bibles? Even assuming that a household could find a small Bible for, what? Five bucks let's say? How many Bibles do they need to buy to make sure they have enough? 10? 20? More? Who's going to do that?
Second, if I were a parent and someone handed out religious material to my kid I'd be pissed. *I* get to choose the religious information that comes to my kid. Not you, random person I may or may not know to say hello to. How would they feel if their kid stopped by a Muslim household (not for trick or treating, since that's Evil *makes airquotes in sarcastic manner*, but for some other reason) and they were handed a Qur'an? I believe the words shit and fit would apply to most of their reactions.
Third, do you really need to stake out another holiday? You've got plenty. Go away. *makes shooing motions* If you don't like it, don't participate. Don't let your kids participate. Don't try and ruin it for everyone else though, okay?
The *majority* of people you encounter on the street on Halloween are not viewing it as a religious holy day. And for the ones that are? That's their religion and it's their right. Back the hell off.
Here endeth my complaining.
For now.
*makes DUM DUM DUMMMMMMMMMM sounds*
American Horror Story
Things:
1) I enjoy this show more with each episode.
2) They pronounced Samhain correctly! All the love for that.
3) The music they keep playing when the original owner, the Doctor, is doing nasty things in his basement is from the soundtrack to Bram Stoker's Dracula. You know, the one with Gary Oldman. *shudder* You have Gary Oldman and that's what you do with him? Shame on you Coppola. Moving on...
4) Zachary Quinto! I <3 you. For the record. Even when you're creepy and dead and murderous.
5) I really wish Quinto's hubby on the show had given McDermott a blowjob. I...would pay money for that. No lie.
6) The guy playing the Doctor was in Rose Red. He played the annoying post-cognitive psychic who lost fingers. Can't remember the characters name and I never knew the actors name.
7) Mutant baby? Y/Y?
8) I really want to know where Violet's boyfriend came from. I mean, clearly, he's one of the ghosts in the house but when did he get killed? I want that story.
9) I fear that they're going to kill the dog next week. There was a shot in the preview of the microwave with something red splattered on the inside and that's an urban legend, you know? The dog in the microwave? While this will make me cringe badly...I'll keep watching the show.
10) Abby! That surprised me so, so badly. I really like her and, you know, yes, she's going to be coming back as a ghost (most likely), I'm still going to miss her because the ghosts aren't the same as the people they used to be.
Oh! And at some point I shall talk about Paranormal Activity. All three movies. Maybe tonight when I can add visual aides....
1) I enjoy this show more with each episode.
2) They pronounced Samhain correctly! All the love for that.
3) The music they keep playing when the original owner, the Doctor, is doing nasty things in his basement is from the soundtrack to Bram Stoker's Dracula. You know, the one with Gary Oldman. *shudder* You have Gary Oldman and that's what you do with him? Shame on you Coppola. Moving on...
4) Zachary Quinto! I <3 you. For the record. Even when you're creepy and dead and murderous.
5) I really wish Quinto's hubby on the show had given McDermott a blowjob. I...would pay money for that. No lie.
6) The guy playing the Doctor was in Rose Red. He played the annoying post-cognitive psychic who lost fingers. Can't remember the characters name and I never knew the actors name.
7) Mutant baby? Y/Y?
8) I really want to know where Violet's boyfriend came from. I mean, clearly, he's one of the ghosts in the house but when did he get killed? I want that story.
9) I fear that they're going to kill the dog next week. There was a shot in the preview of the microwave with something red splattered on the inside and that's an urban legend, you know? The dog in the microwave? While this will make me cringe badly...I'll keep watching the show.
10) Abby! That surprised me so, so badly. I really like her and, you know, yes, she's going to be coming back as a ghost (most likely), I'm still going to miss her because the ghosts aren't the same as the people they used to be.
Oh! And at some point I shall talk about Paranormal Activity. All three movies. Maybe tonight when I can add visual aides....
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Health Update
Possible TMI because I basically just talk about breasts, but not in a sexy way. Move along if any of this is too much information for you.
Still going to the gym, still following the diet.
We stopped weighing me in a while back because, while I was still shrinking it wasn't being reflected on the scale in any helpful sort of way. Meaning, I'd lose a pound here or there, but nothing like the five pounds a week or three a week that it had been before. The issue, if you want to call it that, is that I'm building muscle while losing fat. So I'm getting smaller but not losing as much actual weight. Still a very good thing.
So we've been measuring me every two or three months. Last time we measured I'd lost, overall, more than five inches. That's taking all the measurements and just adding up how much I've lost. Very good, I think. :D
I notice the weight loss in that my clothes are getting larger, but it's a slow process. The biggest hint I get is in my bra. I've already gone down from a DD to a C cup and down two sizes around my chest as well. Right now I'm in the middle hooks of the chest strap where when I bought it it had to be at the last set of hooks. And I keep having to cinch up the shoulder straps. So that's fun!
The thing with bra's that I have is this: There are two ways the bra can be wrong. It can be too small, or too large. If it's too small then you get muffin tops a/k/a double boob. That's where you look like you've got little boobs on top of your boobs because the excess flesh is being squeezed out the top. It's not attractive. Not at all. When the bra fits properly, this is not an issue. The bra and your breast should be in one smooth line. However, when the bra is too big (either too large a cup size or too large in general) you can get a similar issue to the muffin top. Meaning: it fits okay when you put it on, but when you bend over you fall out of it. Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. Producing....the muffin top.
So I always delay and worry about shrinking my bras. It's a lot of fiddling for me to find just the right position of all the straps so that there is no muffin top. Because I hate that like a burning, burning thing.
Another fascinating thing: Your body changes in the weirdest ways when you're losing as much fat as I am. It's kind of like deflating. Not a particularly attractive image, I grant you. But that's what it looks like. You wake up some mornings and find new *dents* in your flesh.
The other thing is, I've been wearing skirts almost exclusively. This isn't for any modesty or 'skirts are women's wear' kind of thing. It's practicality. 1) Skirts are more forgiving to weight loss. I can wear a skirt and have it look good a lot longer than I can pants. They get baggier and look less professional more quickly. 2) Changing clothes at the gym. Slip the exercise pants up under the skirt, whip off the skirt, voila! This is as opposed to the one woman who strips off completely and wanders around the locker room. It's disconcerting to walk in and be greeted by a naked 70 year old woman, alright? 3) I have more skirts that fit than I do pants. And I'm trying not to buy clothes until I absolutely have to. 4) I like skirts. :p
And I really need to go through my closet. Maybe this weekend. Probably not, since I'm lazy. But maybe.
Still going to the gym, still following the diet.
We stopped weighing me in a while back because, while I was still shrinking it wasn't being reflected on the scale in any helpful sort of way. Meaning, I'd lose a pound here or there, but nothing like the five pounds a week or three a week that it had been before. The issue, if you want to call it that, is that I'm building muscle while losing fat. So I'm getting smaller but not losing as much actual weight. Still a very good thing.
So we've been measuring me every two or three months. Last time we measured I'd lost, overall, more than five inches. That's taking all the measurements and just adding up how much I've lost. Very good, I think. :D
I notice the weight loss in that my clothes are getting larger, but it's a slow process. The biggest hint I get is in my bra. I've already gone down from a DD to a C cup and down two sizes around my chest as well. Right now I'm in the middle hooks of the chest strap where when I bought it it had to be at the last set of hooks. And I keep having to cinch up the shoulder straps. So that's fun!
The thing with bra's that I have is this: There are two ways the bra can be wrong. It can be too small, or too large. If it's too small then you get muffin tops a/k/a double boob. That's where you look like you've got little boobs on top of your boobs because the excess flesh is being squeezed out the top. It's not attractive. Not at all. When the bra fits properly, this is not an issue. The bra and your breast should be in one smooth line. However, when the bra is too big (either too large a cup size or too large in general) you can get a similar issue to the muffin top. Meaning: it fits okay when you put it on, but when you bend over you fall out of it. Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. Producing....the muffin top.
So I always delay and worry about shrinking my bras. It's a lot of fiddling for me to find just the right position of all the straps so that there is no muffin top. Because I hate that like a burning, burning thing.
Another fascinating thing: Your body changes in the weirdest ways when you're losing as much fat as I am. It's kind of like deflating. Not a particularly attractive image, I grant you. But that's what it looks like. You wake up some mornings and find new *dents* in your flesh.
The other thing is, I've been wearing skirts almost exclusively. This isn't for any modesty or 'skirts are women's wear' kind of thing. It's practicality. 1) Skirts are more forgiving to weight loss. I can wear a skirt and have it look good a lot longer than I can pants. They get baggier and look less professional more quickly. 2) Changing clothes at the gym. Slip the exercise pants up under the skirt, whip off the skirt, voila! This is as opposed to the one woman who strips off completely and wanders around the locker room. It's disconcerting to walk in and be greeted by a naked 70 year old woman, alright? 3) I have more skirts that fit than I do pants. And I'm trying not to buy clothes until I absolutely have to. 4) I like skirts. :p
And I really need to go through my closet. Maybe this weekend. Probably not, since I'm lazy. But maybe.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Boss
I am still convinced that the character Tom Kane is analogous to John Marcone. If Marcone became mayor of Chicago and then got a progressive, degenerative illness. I don't picture Kelsey Grammer *as* Marcone, physically. For that, see Gabriel Macht.
Go google him. I'll wait. Oh, no, I won't. Here:
You're welcome.
I think it's all the attitude. Here:
"If in the course of doing what I feel is best for this city there is collateral damage...So be it."
You tell me who said that. John Marcone or Tom Kane.
Both of them certainly could have and that's the awesome part.
And then there's the part where, having been handed a pair of severed ears in a really nice box by the guy whose ears they are he waits until he gets home to open it. Sees that it's the ears, goes 'eh' and puts them down the garbage disposal. Then tries to have an emotional moment with his wife.
His balls clank when he walks.
In other news, I clearly have a thing for the anti-hero type. Thankfully that's just my taste in fictional men!
Go google him. I'll wait. Oh, no, I won't. Here:
You're welcome.
I think it's all the attitude. Here:
"If in the course of doing what I feel is best for this city there is collateral damage...So be it."
You tell me who said that. John Marcone or Tom Kane.
Both of them certainly could have and that's the awesome part.
And then there's the part where, having been handed a pair of severed ears in a really nice box by the guy whose ears they are he waits until he gets home to open it. Sees that it's the ears, goes 'eh' and puts them down the garbage disposal. Then tries to have an emotional moment with his wife.
His balls clank when he walks.
In other news, I clearly have a thing for the anti-hero type. Thankfully that's just my taste in fictional men!
I find myself wondering
About the religion of my ancestor's. Not the more recent ones. I know that. They were Lutherans and quite proud of it. German Lutherans, in my experience, tend to be proud of that. The combined ethnicity and religion. Because, after all, Luther himself was German.
I'm thinking of further back. Earlier than Luther. Earlier than Christianity. The pre-Christian tribal religions. It's an aspect of my ancestry that I've never thought of before. I'm proud of my German heritage but I've never considered the religion that my forefathers (and mothers) lived. Clearly I'm thinking about it now - something I blame on you, sanil. :)
Funny thing. In just the basic, googling beginnings of research it turns out that the tribal religions of Germany were closely related to the Nordic tribal religions. Which makes perfect sense once you know it and probably before that even if you bother to think about it, which I never did. :)
And I've been mildly obsessed with the Vikings for ages, which is what makes it funny for me. It's something I should have known but didn't!
I'm thinking of further back. Earlier than Luther. Earlier than Christianity. The pre-Christian tribal religions. It's an aspect of my ancestry that I've never thought of before. I'm proud of my German heritage but I've never considered the religion that my forefathers (and mothers) lived. Clearly I'm thinking about it now - something I blame on you, sanil. :)
Funny thing. In just the basic, googling beginnings of research it turns out that the tribal religions of Germany were closely related to the Nordic tribal religions. Which makes perfect sense once you know it and probably before that even if you bother to think about it, which I never did. :)
And I've been mildly obsessed with the Vikings for ages, which is what makes it funny for me. It's something I should have known but didn't!
Saturday, October 22, 2011
Thought for the day:
You know your team is pretty badass when this:
is your team woobie.
*hums Avengers theme as she wanders around the house*
is your team woobie.
*hums Avengers theme as she wanders around the house*
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
The 'Cardinal Virtues'
There are, according to Lewis, seven virtues. "Four of them are called 'Cardinal' virtues, and the remaining three are called 'Theological' virtues. The 'Cardinal' ones are those which all civilized people recognise: the 'Theological' are those which, as a rule, only Christians know about."
This chapter, as you can see, deals only with the Cardinal virtues. Lewis says he'll get back to the Theological ones later, and I must believe him. :)
The term 'cardinal' has nothing to do with Cardinals, either the birds or the Roman Catholic ranking of priests. According to Lewis it comes from a Latin word meaning 'the hinge of a door'. I made use of the wonder that is Google and found that the term for the hinge of a door is 'cardin'. So, there you are.
The first Cardinal virtue is prudence. Prudence is, essentially, practical common sense - taking the time to think about what you're doing and what the likely outcome is going to be. Many people think that Christians are supposed to be 'foolish'. They take the instruction to 'be like children' in order to enter Heaven incorrectly. Christ told us "to be not only as 'harmless as doves', but also 'as wise as serpents'. He wants a child's heart, but a grown-up's head. He wants us to be simple, single-minded, affectionate, and teachable, as good children are; but He also wants every bit of intelligence we have to be alert at its job, and in first-class fighting trim."
Lewis believes that being a Christian will keep a person sharp. "Anyone who is honestly trying to be a Christian will soon find his intelligence being sharpened: one of the reasons why it needs no special education to be a Christian is that Christianity is an education itself."
Then why do we have so many classes about Christianity? I don't think this is what he was going for, but Christianity is not instinctive. It's not something where you go, 'Oh, I'll be a Christian' and suddenly you know how. You have to be taught and so, um...yeah. I think being a Christian *does* require a special education. It is also an education unto itself, since you learn the tenets and then have to live them which teaches them to you even better.
The next cardinal virtue is temperance. Most people, as Lewis points out, view temperance as cautioning against excessive drinking. But that's not what it means, really. It refers to *all* pleasures, and it's not about abstinance. It's about *restraint*. You go so far, to a reasonable point, and no further.
"An individual Christian may see fit to five up all sorts of things for special reasons...but the moment he starts saying the things are bad in themselves, or looking down his nose at other people who do use them, he has taken the wrong turning."
Temperance = moderation. It is reasonableness in your actions. Are you unable to drink a little without drinking a lot? Then don't drink. Are you making a hobby the center of your life and neglecting you family or your other responsibilities? Then you need to reduce the level of involvement with that hobby.
The third cardinal virtue is justice. "It is the old name for everything we should now call 'fairness'; it includes honesty, give and take, truthfulness, keeping promises, and all that side of life."
The fourth cardinal virtue is fortitude: "both kinds of courage - the kind that faces danger as well as the kind that 'sticks it' under pain."
So the four cardinal virtues are, in Amber terms: Common Sense, Self Control, Fairplay and Strength of Character. I don't think that very many people would say that any of these are bad things and since these are the virtues that Lewis says everyone is aware of I don't know that there's really anything more to say. We'll see about the theological virtues once we get to those.
This chapter, as you can see, deals only with the Cardinal virtues. Lewis says he'll get back to the Theological ones later, and I must believe him. :)
The term 'cardinal' has nothing to do with Cardinals, either the birds or the Roman Catholic ranking of priests. According to Lewis it comes from a Latin word meaning 'the hinge of a door'. I made use of the wonder that is Google and found that the term for the hinge of a door is 'cardin'. So, there you are.
The first Cardinal virtue is prudence. Prudence is, essentially, practical common sense - taking the time to think about what you're doing and what the likely outcome is going to be. Many people think that Christians are supposed to be 'foolish'. They take the instruction to 'be like children' in order to enter Heaven incorrectly. Christ told us "to be not only as 'harmless as doves', but also 'as wise as serpents'. He wants a child's heart, but a grown-up's head. He wants us to be simple, single-minded, affectionate, and teachable, as good children are; but He also wants every bit of intelligence we have to be alert at its job, and in first-class fighting trim."
Lewis believes that being a Christian will keep a person sharp. "Anyone who is honestly trying to be a Christian will soon find his intelligence being sharpened: one of the reasons why it needs no special education to be a Christian is that Christianity is an education itself."
Then why do we have so many classes about Christianity? I don't think this is what he was going for, but Christianity is not instinctive. It's not something where you go, 'Oh, I'll be a Christian' and suddenly you know how. You have to be taught and so, um...yeah. I think being a Christian *does* require a special education. It is also an education unto itself, since you learn the tenets and then have to live them which teaches them to you even better.
The next cardinal virtue is temperance. Most people, as Lewis points out, view temperance as cautioning against excessive drinking. But that's not what it means, really. It refers to *all* pleasures, and it's not about abstinance. It's about *restraint*. You go so far, to a reasonable point, and no further.
"An individual Christian may see fit to five up all sorts of things for special reasons...but the moment he starts saying the things are bad in themselves, or looking down his nose at other people who do use them, he has taken the wrong turning."
Temperance = moderation. It is reasonableness in your actions. Are you unable to drink a little without drinking a lot? Then don't drink. Are you making a hobby the center of your life and neglecting you family or your other responsibilities? Then you need to reduce the level of involvement with that hobby.
The third cardinal virtue is justice. "It is the old name for everything we should now call 'fairness'; it includes honesty, give and take, truthfulness, keeping promises, and all that side of life."
The fourth cardinal virtue is fortitude: "both kinds of courage - the kind that faces danger as well as the kind that 'sticks it' under pain."
So the four cardinal virtues are, in Amber terms: Common Sense, Self Control, Fairplay and Strength of Character. I don't think that very many people would say that any of these are bad things and since these are the virtues that Lewis says everyone is aware of I don't know that there's really anything more to say. We'll see about the theological virtues once we get to those.
Fandom
can make me love things.
For instance, I've never previously cared much about Hawkeye (let's leave aside the fact that my entire love of the Avengers is a new and shiny thing - I did previously collect Avengers comics. For Iron Man and Captain America and the slash. Because they are married.), but thanks to fandom and all the awesome fics getting written about him in movie verse, I'm kind of loving Clint.
Also, Coulson. The little short films Marvel's put out starring him? Adorable and genius and I want to put him in my pocket, but he'd probably go ninja badass on me.
For instance, I've never previously cared much about Hawkeye (let's leave aside the fact that my entire love of the Avengers is a new and shiny thing - I did previously collect Avengers comics. For Iron Man and Captain America and the slash. Because they are married.), but thanks to fandom and all the awesome fics getting written about him in movie verse, I'm kind of loving Clint.
Also, Coulson. The little short films Marvel's put out starring him? Adorable and genius and I want to put him in my pocket, but he'd probably go ninja badass on me.
Ninja post
Not dead!
Just...rather tired, truth be told. I must not be sleeping well, though I don't remember waking up during the night. But I've been going to bed 'on time', or as close as possible and I'm still oversleeping and waking up tired. That's delaying the whole...Mere Christianity thing because I'm not reading it in the morning and then when I sit down to type up a post on what I have read I'm just *tired* and don't feel like it.
So. But I'm determined to do better! I *will* get the post I've been working on out tonight. It's about the 'cardinal' virtues.
Just...rather tired, truth be told. I must not be sleeping well, though I don't remember waking up during the night. But I've been going to bed 'on time', or as close as possible and I'm still oversleeping and waking up tired. That's delaying the whole...Mere Christianity thing because I'm not reading it in the morning and then when I sit down to type up a post on what I have read I'm just *tired* and don't feel like it.
So. But I'm determined to do better! I *will* get the post I've been working on out tonight. It's about the 'cardinal' virtues.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Bag of Bones
So A&E is making a mini-series of the novel Bag of Bones. On the one hand, yay! Because I love that book. On the other, Stephen King adaptations do not tend to go well for the most part.
With two exceptions. The Stand and The Shining. The original one with Jack Nicholson. Not 100% true to the book, of course, but I think it's closer to the spirit than the remake (which I kind of like anyway, but I eat junkfood too so that doesn't mean anything).
Also, I have an AO3 account. So. You know. I've been distracted by cleaning things up and posting them. Priorities, I has them.
ps: It was nice seeing Jo again. And then I'm looking forward to next week with the power of a thousand burning suns. James Marsters *and* Charisma Carpenter? I may not survive.
With two exceptions. The Stand and The Shining. The original one with Jack Nicholson. Not 100% true to the book, of course, but I think it's closer to the spirit than the remake (which I kind of like anyway, but I eat junkfood too so that doesn't mean anything).
Also, I have an AO3 account. So. You know. I've been distracted by cleaning things up and posting them. Priorities, I has them.
ps: It was nice seeing Jo again. And then I'm looking forward to next week with the power of a thousand burning suns. James Marsters *and* Charisma Carpenter? I may not survive.
Friday, October 14, 2011
You Can Tell Where My Mind Is Focused
A friend and I discussing movies and what's coming out soon:
Her: So what's on for this weekend?
Me: Well, we're either going to go see Moneyball, that's the one with Brad Pitt and baseball? Or the remake of The Thing.
Her: Oh, count me out. The fact that they even made a remake is deeply offensive to me.
Me: I know. Well, next week is Paranormal Activity 3.
Her: I didn't even want to see 2.
Me: I know, but they've sucked me in!
Her: I understand. Well, no I don't, but.
Me: And Avengers comes out in May! *huge grin of hugeness*
Her: Wow. Checking off the days, are we?
Me: I'm just very aware that it's like...seven months until the movie comes out. Less than a year. *still grinning with maniac gleam in her eyes*
Her: *backs slowly away from the crazy*
Me: I will totally go see it at the midnight showing! And then again, and again, and again.... *grins the whole time*
Her: So what's on for this weekend?
Me: Well, we're either going to go see Moneyball, that's the one with Brad Pitt and baseball? Or the remake of The Thing.
Her: Oh, count me out. The fact that they even made a remake is deeply offensive to me.
Me: I know. Well, next week is Paranormal Activity 3.
Her: I didn't even want to see 2.
Me: I know, but they've sucked me in!
Her: I understand. Well, no I don't, but.
Me: And Avengers comes out in May! *huge grin of hugeness*
Her: Wow. Checking off the days, are we?
Me: I'm just very aware that it's like...seven months until the movie comes out. Less than a year. *still grinning with maniac gleam in her eyes*
Her: *backs slowly away from the crazy*
Me: I will totally go see it at the midnight showing! And then again, and again, and again.... *grins the whole time*
Temporary Marriages
What do you guys think of the idea?
I know, modern, secular times who would even bother, right? If you want to live with someone and have sex, you just do. It's a non-issue unless you come from a highly religious background or live in a very religious area.
But I'm thinking about it in the context of religion.
I know that in Islam there's the concept/practice of mut'ah nikah. I've hardly studied it in depth or anything because I don't have a horse in that race, but the basic idea as I understand it is that it is something that is permitted in Shi'a but not Sunni practices. The idea is that a man may take a wife for a limited, specific amount of time so that he does not commit the sin of zina. So a man goes off to war or on a long trip or what have you and his wife does not come with him. He finds himself *unbearably* in need of the ability to have regular sex. Rather than just find a woman and have sex with her (implying seduction, rape or simple prostitution) he finds a woman and marries her. But before they're married there is the understanding and (I believe) a contract that the marriage is only to be for, let's say four months. And he will pay her mahr and then they're married for the four months, with almost all the same rights and obligations as a permanent marriage. At the end of the four months they separate, no divorce necessary and life moves on.
There's some controversy about this because some claim that the practice was made haram, etc. etc. And there is some criticism of it because it doesn't seem to be very different from prostitution. *holds up hands* I know it's not viewed as the same thing at all by Muslims who believe that it's permitted. I'm just saying, from the other angle that it *resembles* it in many ways. There are also many ways that it differs - a large one being that provision is made for the possibility of children from the mut'ah nikah which is clearly not the case in prostitution.
In a similar vein there was a little furor a week or two back about Mexico (I believe) allowing temporary marriages. These would be marriage licenses with an expiration date of a year (or possibly whatever the couple wanted). There is also the historic practice of marriage only lasting a year and a day. This was practiced by the Norse tribes, as I recall and probably many others. The marriage could be renewed every year.
Okay. I can hear you wondering why in the hell I'm thinking about these things.
Well. I don't have any problems with these concepts. Different cultures, times, etc. I might not enter into such an arrangement, but I don't judge the people who do. However, I just recently found out that one of the men who works at our office told someone else that he 'gets married whenever he wants to have sex'. And this bothers me and makes me think less of him. So why should that be? If I have not issues with other kinds of temporary marriages, why do his actions bother me?
Two reasons: the hypocrisy and the deceit.
Hypocrisy - This is a man who claims to be a sincere and practicing Christian. He has made statements that express his heavy disapproval of those who engage in premarital sex. He's polite about it, but he's *judgy*.
Now there are, as there are in so many, many things differing opinions on the permissibility of divorce in Christian circles. They range from those who believe that divorce is never, ever on option to those who allow divorce without any penalties. But it is (I believe) universally understood within Christianity that it is not the normal state of things. That it is not what God desires for people. That it is *frowned upon* if nothing else.
But here is a man who judges others by his version/understanding of Christianity who marries and divorces with seeming disregard for the deeper meaning of what marriage is supposed to be. He is abusing what the marriage, from a Christian religious view point, means.
Deceit - I don't think that any of the five women he has been married to knew that he viewed the marriage as just a legal/moral way for him to have sex. I think that they were deceived as to what the marriage would entail.
So that's my problem. If both of the people were entering into the marriage with the same idea of the purpose and what it would entail, no problem. And if he were less of a 'better than you' kind of person, if wouldn't bother me as much most likely.
I know, modern, secular times who would even bother, right? If you want to live with someone and have sex, you just do. It's a non-issue unless you come from a highly religious background or live in a very religious area.
But I'm thinking about it in the context of religion.
I know that in Islam there's the concept/practice of mut'ah nikah. I've hardly studied it in depth or anything because I don't have a horse in that race, but the basic idea as I understand it is that it is something that is permitted in Shi'a but not Sunni practices. The idea is that a man may take a wife for a limited, specific amount of time so that he does not commit the sin of zina. So a man goes off to war or on a long trip or what have you and his wife does not come with him. He finds himself *unbearably* in need of the ability to have regular sex. Rather than just find a woman and have sex with her (implying seduction, rape or simple prostitution) he finds a woman and marries her. But before they're married there is the understanding and (I believe) a contract that the marriage is only to be for, let's say four months. And he will pay her mahr and then they're married for the four months, with almost all the same rights and obligations as a permanent marriage. At the end of the four months they separate, no divorce necessary and life moves on.
There's some controversy about this because some claim that the practice was made haram, etc. etc. And there is some criticism of it because it doesn't seem to be very different from prostitution. *holds up hands* I know it's not viewed as the same thing at all by Muslims who believe that it's permitted. I'm just saying, from the other angle that it *resembles* it in many ways. There are also many ways that it differs - a large one being that provision is made for the possibility of children from the mut'ah nikah which is clearly not the case in prostitution.
In a similar vein there was a little furor a week or two back about Mexico (I believe) allowing temporary marriages. These would be marriage licenses with an expiration date of a year (or possibly whatever the couple wanted). There is also the historic practice of marriage only lasting a year and a day. This was practiced by the Norse tribes, as I recall and probably many others. The marriage could be renewed every year.
Okay. I can hear you wondering why in the hell I'm thinking about these things.
Well. I don't have any problems with these concepts. Different cultures, times, etc. I might not enter into such an arrangement, but I don't judge the people who do. However, I just recently found out that one of the men who works at our office told someone else that he 'gets married whenever he wants to have sex'. And this bothers me and makes me think less of him. So why should that be? If I have not issues with other kinds of temporary marriages, why do his actions bother me?
Two reasons: the hypocrisy and the deceit.
Hypocrisy - This is a man who claims to be a sincere and practicing Christian. He has made statements that express his heavy disapproval of those who engage in premarital sex. He's polite about it, but he's *judgy*.
Now there are, as there are in so many, many things differing opinions on the permissibility of divorce in Christian circles. They range from those who believe that divorce is never, ever on option to those who allow divorce without any penalties. But it is (I believe) universally understood within Christianity that it is not the normal state of things. That it is not what God desires for people. That it is *frowned upon* if nothing else.
But here is a man who judges others by his version/understanding of Christianity who marries and divorces with seeming disregard for the deeper meaning of what marriage is supposed to be. He is abusing what the marriage, from a Christian religious view point, means.
Deceit - I don't think that any of the five women he has been married to knew that he viewed the marriage as just a legal/moral way for him to have sex. I think that they were deceived as to what the marriage would entail.
So that's my problem. If both of the people were entering into the marriage with the same idea of the purpose and what it would entail, no problem. And if he were less of a 'better than you' kind of person, if wouldn't bother me as much most likely.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
*dead from fangirl glee*
Avengers trailer.
*explodes and has to reanimate self to watch again*
All the- and the-
No. Words. Must. Watch. Again. While grinning like a lunatic!
Work? What the fuck is that?
*explodes and has to reanimate self to watch again*
All the- and the-
No. Words. Must. Watch. Again. While grinning like a lunatic!
Work? What the fuck is that?
Monday, October 10, 2011
AHHHHHHHH
Okay, okay, remember the post about animals and how I can't stand them being hurt?
I have somehow managed to never read the novella Apt Pupil before. It's about a little psycho kid who figures out that one of his neighbors is a Nazi in hiding. So he (like you do) goes and blackmails the guy into telling him all the juicy details of the concentration camps. And it goes as well as you expect something like that to go.
I'm reading along, quietly freaked out because holy crap this kid is *wrong in the head*.
And then the Nazi guy catches a stray cat and shoves it in his oven so he'll stop having nightmares. And he's talking about adopting a puppy because bigger is better, you know?
*shudder* I'm skimming this fucking story. I see any mention of any kind of animal and I skip ahead.
The fucking kid ran over a wounded bird on his bike.
I don't even-
I hate this story so much.
I want both of these people dead.
I have somehow managed to never read the novella Apt Pupil before. It's about a little psycho kid who figures out that one of his neighbors is a Nazi in hiding. So he (like you do) goes and blackmails the guy into telling him all the juicy details of the concentration camps. And it goes as well as you expect something like that to go.
I'm reading along, quietly freaked out because holy crap this kid is *wrong in the head*.
And then the Nazi guy catches a stray cat and shoves it in his oven so he'll stop having nightmares. And he's talking about adopting a puppy because bigger is better, you know?
*shudder* I'm skimming this fucking story. I see any mention of any kind of animal and I skip ahead.
The fucking kid ran over a wounded bird on his bike.
I don't even-
I hate this story so much.
I want both of these people dead.
Guidance or Matrixing?
I think I've talked about the idea of matrixing before. It's a term that I've mainly heard used when talking about photographs, videos or audio recordings where people see or hear something that wasn't there in 'life'. Faces in windows, mirrors or the trees. Like, say you're looking at a door. There's a stain pattern in the wood and it looks like a face. Or a person. One of the doors at the salon I go to has a pattern on it that looks like an evil monkey face.
It's not *really* a face. No one purposefully put that pattern there. It's an accident of shapes and then my mind making sense out of random things. Our brains are trained to recognize faces and the shapes of people, so we see them where they aren't.
A similar thing can happen to people in life. Where we see patterns and a meaning where there isn't any.
Say that someone notices a streak of the number 5 coming up in their life. They catch the fifth bus, they find five dollars, they have five china cups with the same pattern, etc. etc. etc. And then the start looking back through their life and they find more and more fives. So they start to think that the number five has a mystical, personal meaning for them. Does it *really* mean something?
Well, in so far as our perception dictates reality, sure. But does it mean that there's some divine force out there putting all these fives in that persons path? Or is it just coincidence and the way our brains work combining to make us see a pattern and meaning where there isn't one?
And what the hell does this have to do with anything, I hear you asking.
Well. I know a lot of people who feel guided by divinity of one sort or another. Most of them have not felt so guided for their entire lives. It's something that came later to them.
So they're noticing something. The end of some thread and looking back and seeing this pattern. It's something that is only clear to them in hindsight. And, of course, now that they've recognized the pattern they look for it in everything and tend to find it because that's how it works. If you want to see the pattern badly enough you will see it.
Of course, people who believe that they're being guided or believe in the pattern will argue that it is there and that their god/gods/divine essence put it there. And it's kind of hard to disprove that.
Sometimes you don't even *want* to disprove it because it's so easy to fall into it yourself. I was thinking about this, about how some people feel *led* which is not something that I've ever really felt. I've felt drawn to do this or that thing, but I've never really noticed a pattern of the kind I'm describing.
Anyway. I was thinking about some of the people I know who feel that there's been this pattern, this presence in their lives that they only recognized at a later date and I realized that I could find a similar pattern/presence in my life. And for a few minutes there was this weightless sort of 'oh shit' moment because it deals with something I had left behind. An aspect of that that, at the time, I had neglected because of personal emotional issues.
But, having given myself time to calm the hell down - is it really a presence? Or is it just that this thing appeals to a part of my personality, so I've been seeking it out both consciously and subconsciously and now that I'm thinking about it it seems to be a pattern imposed from the outside? Combined with the lack of direction I've been feeling lately in regards to spiritual things that would make it an easy solution to latch on to.
Clearly I'm holding back on jumping that bandwagon because, frankly, I suspect that it's more to do with my own brain than with anything external acting on my life. But then, I'm a skeptical person by nature. Not very trusting, even of my own experiences, such as they may be. The vehicle through which we experience reality is limited, our understanding is limited, and it's easy to make something out of nothing.
Also, October and the upcoming Samhain, always make me nostalgic. Make me miss things I've left behind and feel the pulse and pull of them more acutely than I do at any other time of the year.
It's not *really* a face. No one purposefully put that pattern there. It's an accident of shapes and then my mind making sense out of random things. Our brains are trained to recognize faces and the shapes of people, so we see them where they aren't.
A similar thing can happen to people in life. Where we see patterns and a meaning where there isn't any.
Say that someone notices a streak of the number 5 coming up in their life. They catch the fifth bus, they find five dollars, they have five china cups with the same pattern, etc. etc. etc. And then the start looking back through their life and they find more and more fives. So they start to think that the number five has a mystical, personal meaning for them. Does it *really* mean something?
Well, in so far as our perception dictates reality, sure. But does it mean that there's some divine force out there putting all these fives in that persons path? Or is it just coincidence and the way our brains work combining to make us see a pattern and meaning where there isn't one?
And what the hell does this have to do with anything, I hear you asking.
Well. I know a lot of people who feel guided by divinity of one sort or another. Most of them have not felt so guided for their entire lives. It's something that came later to them.
So they're noticing something. The end of some thread and looking back and seeing this pattern. It's something that is only clear to them in hindsight. And, of course, now that they've recognized the pattern they look for it in everything and tend to find it because that's how it works. If you want to see the pattern badly enough you will see it.
Of course, people who believe that they're being guided or believe in the pattern will argue that it is there and that their god/gods/divine essence put it there. And it's kind of hard to disprove that.
Sometimes you don't even *want* to disprove it because it's so easy to fall into it yourself. I was thinking about this, about how some people feel *led* which is not something that I've ever really felt. I've felt drawn to do this or that thing, but I've never really noticed a pattern of the kind I'm describing.
Anyway. I was thinking about some of the people I know who feel that there's been this pattern, this presence in their lives that they only recognized at a later date and I realized that I could find a similar pattern/presence in my life. And for a few minutes there was this weightless sort of 'oh shit' moment because it deals with something I had left behind. An aspect of that that, at the time, I had neglected because of personal emotional issues.
But, having given myself time to calm the hell down - is it really a presence? Or is it just that this thing appeals to a part of my personality, so I've been seeking it out both consciously and subconsciously and now that I'm thinking about it it seems to be a pattern imposed from the outside? Combined with the lack of direction I've been feeling lately in regards to spiritual things that would make it an easy solution to latch on to.
Clearly I'm holding back on jumping that bandwagon because, frankly, I suspect that it's more to do with my own brain than with anything external acting on my life. But then, I'm a skeptical person by nature. Not very trusting, even of my own experiences, such as they may be. The vehicle through which we experience reality is limited, our understanding is limited, and it's easy to make something out of nothing.
Also, October and the upcoming Samhain, always make me nostalgic. Make me miss things I've left behind and feel the pulse and pull of them more acutely than I do at any other time of the year.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
SPN: The Girl Next Door
I wasn't feeling well last night (stupid female biology) so this is a day late. :)
I do worry/wonder about that cut of Sam's. Not that I think he's infected by Leviathan's or anything, but it was Purgatory magic blood glass. That's got to be bad.
Oh, hey. So I know this is supposed to be all serious and worrying, but Dean in a backless hospital gown! Full rear nudity anyone?
BOBBY!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew he couldn't be dead.
I like stoned!Dean.
Limp faster!
Ha! It's cute that Dean and Bobby are addicted to Spanish soap operas.
Again: Bobby is the smartest guy on this show. I really do need to do the Bobby & Hendricks appreciation post.
Wasn't Mistress Magda the lady that Chuck was talking to? I think she was.
No, Sam. Cake <> pie.
Kitsune! Youko Kurama! Naruto! I'm having an anime moment.
Also, bb!Sam.
And Sam's doing something stupid.
My Bloody Valentine ref.
This will not end well Dean.
Red Hood tshirt!
Sammy's talking to Dean, right? I mean, bb!Sammy in the flashbacks.
bb!Sammy is adorable. And his brothers repository of knowledge. 'How do you talk to girls?'
Her necklace. Isn't there something about kitsune and moons? Too lazy to look it up.
Hey! I love her!
Ah, I want kitsune girl and her kid to live. Let them live!
Dude. Sam needs to stop dating. It never works out.
Oh, Dean. Shit.
Seriously, I mean. Okay, that was cold. But uh...if you want to be responsible, you kind of should have killed that kid too.
'Everything is better with cheese.' That's just so wrong.
JO!!!!!
I do worry/wonder about that cut of Sam's. Not that I think he's infected by Leviathan's or anything, but it was Purgatory magic blood glass. That's got to be bad.
Oh, hey. So I know this is supposed to be all serious and worrying, but Dean in a backless hospital gown! Full rear nudity anyone?
BOBBY!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew he couldn't be dead.
I like stoned!Dean.
Limp faster!
Ha! It's cute that Dean and Bobby are addicted to Spanish soap operas.
Again: Bobby is the smartest guy on this show. I really do need to do the Bobby & Hendricks appreciation post.
Wasn't Mistress Magda the lady that Chuck was talking to? I think she was.
No, Sam. Cake <> pie.
Kitsune! Youko Kurama! Naruto! I'm having an anime moment.
Also, bb!Sam.
And Sam's doing something stupid.
My Bloody Valentine ref.
This will not end well Dean.
Red Hood tshirt!
Sammy's talking to Dean, right? I mean, bb!Sammy in the flashbacks.
bb!Sammy is adorable. And his brothers repository of knowledge. 'How do you talk to girls?'
Her necklace. Isn't there something about kitsune and moons? Too lazy to look it up.
Hey! I love her!
Ah, I want kitsune girl and her kid to live. Let them live!
Dude. Sam needs to stop dating. It never works out.
Oh, Dean. Shit.
Seriously, I mean. Okay, that was cold. But uh...if you want to be responsible, you kind of should have killed that kid too.
'Everything is better with cheese.' That's just so wrong.
JO!!!!!
The Three Parts of Morality
Back to Mere Christianity!
I actually don't have much to say or argue with for this chapter.
Lewis posits that there are actually three facets to morality.
1. It is concerned with fair play and harmony between human individuals
2. Harmonizing the internal drives of an individual
3. The general purpose of human life
I have no argument with those. I even agree with Lewis when he says that people tend to focus far too much on only the first aspect, thereby ignoring the second two.
People can legislate morality, sort of, by making laws. But as Lewis says, all the laws in the world won't actually *make* a person moral, internally. They can act moral on the outside and still turn around and beat their spouse when no one can see. An immoral person, a bad person, will still be like that no matter what the law says. They'll just have to find ways to go about doing what they want without getting caught.
It does lead back to the question of where morality comes from. I tend to think that it is not something that we know innately as I think you all remember, but that it is something that is taught to us. The teaching starts so young and is so pervasive that it seems innate to many people but if you took a child and raised them on an island without ever teaching them right from wrong they would not have the same moral values as any society on earth. They wouldn't understand why theft is wrong, or killing someone else because they'd never had the interactions that would teach them the consequences of those things.
We invented morality (or it was invented for us) to protect and preserve society and the human race from extinction. Morality is not universal - the details vary so widely from age to age and society to society that I don't know how anyone could make that claim with a straight face.
But I digress. As I said, I don't disagree with Lewis that morality has three aspects. And they're all related - they all lend themselves towards the goal of morality which is to help keep humans from killing ourselves off.
This was just an introductory chapter so we'll see what else Lewis has to say.
I actually don't have much to say or argue with for this chapter.
Lewis posits that there are actually three facets to morality.
1. It is concerned with fair play and harmony between human individuals
2. Harmonizing the internal drives of an individual
3. The general purpose of human life
I have no argument with those. I even agree with Lewis when he says that people tend to focus far too much on only the first aspect, thereby ignoring the second two.
People can legislate morality, sort of, by making laws. But as Lewis says, all the laws in the world won't actually *make* a person moral, internally. They can act moral on the outside and still turn around and beat their spouse when no one can see. An immoral person, a bad person, will still be like that no matter what the law says. They'll just have to find ways to go about doing what they want without getting caught.
It does lead back to the question of where morality comes from. I tend to think that it is not something that we know innately as I think you all remember, but that it is something that is taught to us. The teaching starts so young and is so pervasive that it seems innate to many people but if you took a child and raised them on an island without ever teaching them right from wrong they would not have the same moral values as any society on earth. They wouldn't understand why theft is wrong, or killing someone else because they'd never had the interactions that would teach them the consequences of those things.
We invented morality (or it was invented for us) to protect and preserve society and the human race from extinction. Morality is not universal - the details vary so widely from age to age and society to society that I don't know how anyone could make that claim with a straight face.
But I digress. As I said, I don't disagree with Lewis that morality has three aspects. And they're all related - they all lend themselves towards the goal of morality which is to help keep humans from killing ourselves off.
This was just an introductory chapter so we'll see what else Lewis has to say.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Why's it always got to be the pets?
I was watching the premier of American Horror Story last night and the wife has a little dog. And I watched the entire episode waiting for that dog to get killed and knowing that, frankly, the story so far is not good enough for me to keep watching the show after they kill that dog.
People have different squicks, different things that just kill a story for them. Animal death is mine. I have to be very invested in a story to keep going after that.
I know that they're going to kill this dog because that's what happens whenever there's a pet in a story like this.
Supernatural killed a dog a couple seasons back and if it had been any other show? I probably would have stopped watching for a while if not all together. Puppy...
I Am Legend? The dog dies. I hate that movie for that reason alone.
I'll never see Marley & Me (or read the book). Where the Red Fern Grows? Forget it. Old Yeller. The movie coming out in December called War Horse? I'm pretty sure that horse dies. I won't see the movie until I know for sure otherwise. There was an article a long time ago about a Richard Gere movie and it was all about him and this dog. I got the impression from the article that the dog dies and I have wiped all knowledge of that movie from my mind. Paranormal Activity 2 escapes this just because the dog lives.
You can do pretty much anything you want to the humans in the story and I'll be okay. But throw in a pet that gets hurt or killed and I'm gone...
People have different squicks, different things that just kill a story for them. Animal death is mine. I have to be very invested in a story to keep going after that.
I know that they're going to kill this dog because that's what happens whenever there's a pet in a story like this.
Supernatural killed a dog a couple seasons back and if it had been any other show? I probably would have stopped watching for a while if not all together. Puppy...
I Am Legend? The dog dies. I hate that movie for that reason alone.
I'll never see Marley & Me (or read the book). Where the Red Fern Grows? Forget it. Old Yeller. The movie coming out in December called War Horse? I'm pretty sure that horse dies. I won't see the movie until I know for sure otherwise. There was an article a long time ago about a Richard Gere movie and it was all about him and this dog. I got the impression from the article that the dog dies and I have wiped all knowledge of that movie from my mind. Paranormal Activity 2 escapes this just because the dog lives.
You can do pretty much anything you want to the humans in the story and I'll be okay. But throw in a pet that gets hurt or killed and I'm gone...
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
*pouts* begin wank/
The Playboy Club was cancelled.
Okay, this happens. TV shows don't do well and they get canned. I get that. But what I don't understand is the shit fit that people were/are having about it being degrading and sexist. I mean, I guess intellectually I get it. I see their angle I just don't agree with it.
*Can* it be degrading to show women wearing skimpy clothes and being hit on by men?
Sure. Not arguing that. But I think the difference is in the attitude of the women and the portrayal (since this is fiction) of the reasons for them being there. Is it falling into the cliche of women who are only escorts/porn stars/exotic dancers/Bunnies/whatever because they have low self esteem and they need men to lust after them and take care of them to have value in their own or any other persons eyes?
Then it's degrading.
Is it degrading to show women who are doing their jobs because they like them? If the jobs just happen to have less clothing involved? I don't think so. One of the Bunnies was working there to pay for her medical degree because her father told her that 'women don't do that' and refused to help her like he would have a son. One of them was saving the money to buy land so she could have something that was hers. And there were other stories that we didn't get to see yet with depth to them.
Why is their method of earning money less valid than a woman who works waitressing? Or secretarial work or any other kind of job that a woman does? I don't think it is.
On the flip side, they're running a show where the woman is a hard boiled detective type in the place of The Playboy Club until the other replacement show is ready.
I want to know why it's not sexist and degrading to portray a woman who has to act and dress in a stereotypical 'male' fashion in order to get respect but it's degrading to portray women who are proud of their gender and their sexuality? They don't want to be men and they don't want to be kept pets. They just want to be given the same respect and opportunity as a man would be, no matter what the job that they choose is.
Why is it fair game to make women feel like they have to have a metaphorical penis before they can be equal?
/end wank
Okay, this happens. TV shows don't do well and they get canned. I get that. But what I don't understand is the shit fit that people were/are having about it being degrading and sexist. I mean, I guess intellectually I get it. I see their angle I just don't agree with it.
*Can* it be degrading to show women wearing skimpy clothes and being hit on by men?
Sure. Not arguing that. But I think the difference is in the attitude of the women and the portrayal (since this is fiction) of the reasons for them being there. Is it falling into the cliche of women who are only escorts/porn stars/exotic dancers/Bunnies/whatever because they have low self esteem and they need men to lust after them and take care of them to have value in their own or any other persons eyes?
Then it's degrading.
Is it degrading to show women who are doing their jobs because they like them? If the jobs just happen to have less clothing involved? I don't think so. One of the Bunnies was working there to pay for her medical degree because her father told her that 'women don't do that' and refused to help her like he would have a son. One of them was saving the money to buy land so she could have something that was hers. And there were other stories that we didn't get to see yet with depth to them.
Why is their method of earning money less valid than a woman who works waitressing? Or secretarial work or any other kind of job that a woman does? I don't think it is.
On the flip side, they're running a show where the woman is a hard boiled detective type in the place of The Playboy Club until the other replacement show is ready.
I want to know why it's not sexist and degrading to portray a woman who has to act and dress in a stereotypical 'male' fashion in order to get respect but it's degrading to portray women who are proud of their gender and their sexuality? They don't want to be men and they don't want to be kept pets. They just want to be given the same respect and opportunity as a man would be, no matter what the job that they choose is.
Why is it fair game to make women feel like they have to have a metaphorical penis before they can be equal?
/end wank
I don't even know. It's 2:17 am here and I'm still up because I was writing something for someone. That's done, so I answered a few emails and now I'm going to bed.
I'm determined to get the whole Mere Christianity posts going again. Now that I'm off of vacation and have less time to do them - it would have made sense to do them last week when I was off, but that didn't happen. I did Florida things and when it was rainy I sat in the house and read Stephen King novels. And then I watched scary movies just to help freak myself out. Moving on...
Actually, I'm not moving on. That's it. Bed now.
Sleep is god. And in addition. I watched this show about ten people who went out to live like cave people for 10 day. Or maybe it was 11 people. Whatever. I want to do that! It needs to be like one of those retreats people go on. So I can go out and run around and see if I've got hunter/gatherer instincts left. and also so I can erase the shame of almost all of the women on the show being whiny lazy people who didn't help with the hard work. Like, three of them did work, after periods of asshatery. One even helped kill the elk. But two of them sat and did fuck all and whined because the freaking fish still had it's head on it and then she wouldn't eat the elk because it used to be alive and all. Whinebitchmoan.
I'm determined to get the whole Mere Christianity posts going again. Now that I'm off of vacation and have less time to do them - it would have made sense to do them last week when I was off, but that didn't happen. I did Florida things and when it was rainy I sat in the house and read Stephen King novels. And then I watched scary movies just to help freak myself out. Moving on...
Actually, I'm not moving on. That's it. Bed now.
Sleep is god. And in addition. I watched this show about ten people who went out to live like cave people for 10 day. Or maybe it was 11 people. Whatever. I want to do that! It needs to be like one of those retreats people go on. So I can go out and run around and see if I've got hunter/gatherer instincts left. and also so I can erase the shame of almost all of the women on the show being whiny lazy people who didn't help with the hard work. Like, three of them did work, after periods of asshatery. One even helped kill the elk. But two of them sat and did fuck all and whined because the freaking fish still had it's head on it and then she wouldn't eat the elk because it used to be alive and all. Whinebitchmoan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
