"The next time you drink in the beauty of a sunset, a flower, or a friend, remember this..."
mmm...yes!!
This is from my psychology book (that I happen to be reading ahead).
I really like that God made humans to be able to appreciate the beauty that He created in nature.
that's all.
30 January 2010
29 January 2010
Nehemiah and Ephesians 6
At church a few months ago, Pastor John Gregory preached a sermon in his series about the Speed Bumps of Life.
That day's Speed Bump was Discouragement. The passage he focused on was Nehemiah 4:6-18.
Verses 12b and 13 say (in the New Living Translation) "'They will come from all directions and attack us.' So I placed armed guards behind the lowest parts of the wall in the exposed areas. I stationed the people to stand guard by families, armed with swords, spears, and bows."
The builders of the wall were discouraged: they had gotten halfway finished with their project
The night before I heard that sermon, I had been talking to a new friend and something she said made me realize something I should have realized a long time ago. She mentioned a verse about someone's enemies attacking, and how God delivered. She applied it to life today.
It changed my world. I had always read the historical books as history, not thinking about the way it could relate to my life.
The enemy is, of course, the Devil. He is constantly scheming, attacking, tempting us. He is trying to turn our focus away from God.
So, when I read those verses, I thought about Ephesians 6. "Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes...Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand." (6:11,13)
Now, Nehemiah's struggle was against flesh and blood (verse 12). He was being attacked by tangible, visible, violent enemies. We are attacked quietly. Satan knows the human nature; he knows when we are vulnerable. And that is often when he makes his move.
We must be ready. Paul gives us a clear list of ways to prepare ourselves.
Be the New Testament Nehemiah.
That day's Speed Bump was Discouragement. The passage he focused on was Nehemiah 4:6-18.
Verses 12b and 13 say (in the New Living Translation) "'They will come from all directions and attack us.' So I placed armed guards behind the lowest parts of the wall in the exposed areas. I stationed the people to stand guard by families, armed with swords, spears, and bows."
The builders of the wall were discouraged: they had gotten halfway finished with their project
The night before I heard that sermon, I had been talking to a new friend and something she said made me realize something I should have realized a long time ago. She mentioned a verse about someone's enemies attacking, and how God delivered. She applied it to life today.
It changed my world. I had always read the historical books as history, not thinking about the way it could relate to my life.
The enemy is, of course, the Devil. He is constantly scheming, attacking, tempting us. He is trying to turn our focus away from God.
So, when I read those verses, I thought about Ephesians 6. "Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes...Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand." (6:11,13)
Now, Nehemiah's struggle was against flesh and blood (verse 12). He was being attacked by tangible, visible, violent enemies. We are attacked quietly. Satan knows the human nature; he knows when we are vulnerable. And that is often when he makes his move.
We must be ready. Paul gives us a clear list of ways to prepare ourselves.
Be the New Testament Nehemiah.
this is not a post about my dad.
I was just reading my dad's recent blog posts. One of them from earlier this week was about apologizing to the college student from Dad's alma mater who called him to ask for money.
The caller had a script that Dad allowed him to run through before declining to donate.
Let me pause for a moment to tell you about my dad. He's really smart. He didn't always apply himself in college, having more or less coasted in high school. But he had good test scores and did well on his GREs. (This is in the post.) He went on to work through higher degrees, including a doctorate in some branch of communication. Yeah. Rev. Jon C. Swanson, Ph.D. That's my dad. I call him Dad. He worked in higher education for the first half of my life; now he's a pastor. I like that.
But this post is not about my dad.
It is about conveying tone in writing. My dad is hilarious and has an interesting commentary on the events of everyday life. He writes every day. And his goal, as I understand it, is to make people think. In this post, I do not believe he was trying to change the entire structure of fundraising, but instead to make those involved in fundraising think about their approach and rethink the way they think about potential donors. A few of the comments on the post seem to almost attack him, telling him that his suggestion is unreasonable and would cost more than it was worth.
I was frustrated as I read this. If these readers are new, having never met my dad or read his blog before, they do not understand his tone or intentions. He proposes "what if" ideas, that are usually brilliant. But that is often not how they are interpreted.
This same situation happens when we write anything (text messages, facebook comments, blog posts). The inflection and facial expression we intend does not make its way through our fingertips, through the keyboard, and onto the screen.
Our words can easily be taken at face value, which is not at all our intention. Is it fair to judge a person you have never met, never heard speak, never seen interviewed, based solely on the words that you have read? I don't think so.
So how do we fix this problem?
Some possible solutions for writers and readers:
1. Parentheses. I use them a lot. It's part of my writing style. It gives me a chance to step away from the words and explain what I'm writing. It helps me stay out of trouble.
2. Make connections. To readers: Make an effort to get to know the writer as more than a writer. Read past posts. Send him/her an email. Understand the story his/her life before he/she wrote the post you are reading. To writers: Give your readers the information they need in order to make an informed decision. Tell your story. Make yourself vulnerable. This might include actually filling out the "about me" section on your profile, which I have not done.
[Digression:
My dad is a speaker, and because I have heard him give sermons, I know how to read his words. Well, I've known him for nearly 19 years, so I can read his words pretty well anyway.]
Connecting the digression:
3. Read the words out loud. You don't have to read them loudly, but read them with a few different tones of voice, approaching the words with different attitudes.
4. Remember that people often write blog posts for their own benefit. Posts express the writer's opinions. No one is saying that you must agree with everything. When you comment, do it graciously. Consider your own words and how you are saying them.
I'm a big fan of number 4. That's the way I write. For me, this is where I say the things that make people annoyed with me. If they want to read it, they can. But they don't have to.
I hope you understand me when I write posts.
Thank you for reading.
The caller had a script that Dad allowed him to run through before declining to donate.
Let me pause for a moment to tell you about my dad. He's really smart. He didn't always apply himself in college, having more or less coasted in high school. But he had good test scores and did well on his GREs. (This is in the post.) He went on to work through higher degrees, including a doctorate in some branch of communication. Yeah. Rev. Jon C. Swanson, Ph.D. That's my dad. I call him Dad. He worked in higher education for the first half of my life; now he's a pastor. I like that.
But this post is not about my dad.
It is about conveying tone in writing. My dad is hilarious and has an interesting commentary on the events of everyday life. He writes every day. And his goal, as I understand it, is to make people think. In this post, I do not believe he was trying to change the entire structure of fundraising, but instead to make those involved in fundraising think about their approach and rethink the way they think about potential donors. A few of the comments on the post seem to almost attack him, telling him that his suggestion is unreasonable and would cost more than it was worth.
I was frustrated as I read this. If these readers are new, having never met my dad or read his blog before, they do not understand his tone or intentions. He proposes "what if" ideas, that are usually brilliant. But that is often not how they are interpreted.
This same situation happens when we write anything (text messages, facebook comments, blog posts). The inflection and facial expression we intend does not make its way through our fingertips, through the keyboard, and onto the screen.
Our words can easily be taken at face value, which is not at all our intention. Is it fair to judge a person you have never met, never heard speak, never seen interviewed, based solely on the words that you have read? I don't think so.
So how do we fix this problem?
Some possible solutions for writers and readers:
1. Parentheses. I use them a lot. It's part of my writing style. It gives me a chance to step away from the words and explain what I'm writing. It helps me stay out of trouble.
2. Make connections. To readers: Make an effort to get to know the writer as more than a writer. Read past posts. Send him/her an email. Understand the story his/her life before he/she wrote the post you are reading. To writers: Give your readers the information they need in order to make an informed decision. Tell your story. Make yourself vulnerable. This might include actually filling out the "about me" section on your profile, which I have not done.
[Digression:
My dad is a speaker, and because I have heard him give sermons, I know how to read his words. Well, I've known him for nearly 19 years, so I can read his words pretty well anyway.]
Connecting the digression:
3. Read the words out loud. You don't have to read them loudly, but read them with a few different tones of voice, approaching the words with different attitudes.
4. Remember that people often write blog posts for their own benefit. Posts express the writer's opinions. No one is saying that you must agree with everything. When you comment, do it graciously. Consider your own words and how you are saying them.
I'm a big fan of number 4. That's the way I write. For me, this is where I say the things that make people annoyed with me. If they want to read it, they can. But they don't have to.
I hope you understand me when I write posts.
Thank you for reading.
gah! Edward Rochester!!
Bethel College presents "Jane Eyre the Musical" February 11, 12, and 13. Call the Box Office at 574.807.7080 to order tickets. It is going to be a wonderful show.
If you have not read the book and do not want to know the story until you see the show, stop reading this right now. It will ruin the ending for you. Seriously.
But that is not what this post is about.
And please note that I am writing about the musical, not the book. I haven't read the book.
Also note that this is my opinion. All of my posts are my opinion. And you do not have to agree.
This post is about how I usually want to punch Nate Jackson (Edward Rochester) in the face during Act II, scene vii. (When Alex Cox is playing Rochester, I will probably want to punch him in the face as well, but I've only seen Nate in the role so far.)
Jane Eyre has been living as the governess at Thornfield Hall, Mr. Rochester's residence. She falls in love with him, but he is expected to marry Blanche Ingram. However, he is in love with Jane and makes Blanche stop wanting to marry him. She only wanted to marry him for his money anyway. (Remember the fact that he was intending to marry her. That's part of my point.) He proposes to Jane, calling her his equal. At this point, he seems like a great guy.
Let's move on to the wedding scene. The vicar is performing the ceremony when Mr. Mason enters, declaring that the wedding cannot continue. Rochester encourages the vicar to continue, but Mason insists that Rochester is already married. Rochester tells the vicar to close his book, that there will be no wedding. They return to Thornfield Hall to meet Grace Poole's patient, "[his] lovely wife."
Yep. He's already married. Jerk. As Edward introduces Bertha (who happens to be insane), he says that she's the only woman he will ever sleep with again. He loves Jane and was going to marry her. He was going to marry Blanche.
Jane leaves Thornfield and returns to her aunt, Mrs. Reed. Mrs. Reed dies, leaving Jane a fortune. St. John, the curate of the local parish, befriends Jane, falls in love, and eventually proposes to her. "For now I claim you in holy marriage." Maybe not the best phrasing, but he does acknowledge that she was not made to be the "typical" wife. Unfortunately, Jane does not want to go with him on his missionary journey to India. He tells her to pray for guidance, and while she is praying, she hears Edward's voice calling to her. It's a beautiful scene if you can ignore (forgive) everything he has done. He has not stopped loving her.
I think I feel bad for St. John. And I think I blame Jane. In trying to make herself forget Edward, she tries to love St. John. I think she leads him on a little. He seems to understand her decision to turn him down, but I'm pretty sure he's devastated. I hope he has a good time in India and finds a woman as strong-willed as Jane Eyre.
Jane returns to Thornfield to learn that Bertha has burned the place and jumped to her death. Mr. Rochester is now free to marry Jane. By the way, he was badly injured by the fire and is blind. They get married. They have children. His sight comes back. They are "brave enough for love."
Things I like about Edward Rochester:
He thinks that it is important for Jane to be his "equal."
He sees Jane as a real person, a significant human being, and someone who has value beyond simply wife-hood. (I think I just made up that word.)
He admits to his mistake when he is confronted, and regrets his actions.
He remains committed to Jane.
Things I don't like about Edward Rochester:
He is willing to commit physical adultery by marrying a second wife.
He commits adultery in his heart when he falls in love with Jane.
He lets his physical desires take control with Adele's mother and with Bertha, and does not really love either of them.
I mostly just think he's a jerk. Sure, he feels some remorse. And I believe he truly does love Jane.
And I'm impressed that she can forgive him. I'm not sure how I would conduct myself in that situation.
I really do like this show. It's a wonderful story of forgiveness. In forgiving Edward, Jane gains a love that will last, a new daughter, and later a son.
And it makes a great story to tell at dinner parties.
"Oh, I was just a lowly governess. Then the master and I fell madly in love and were going to be married. But, wait, he already had a wife and she was freaking crazy. So I left, watched my aunt die, got a lot of money, and some guy proposed to me. Then I somehow heard Edward's voice over the moors. So I came back. The crazy wife had destroyed the house and Edward's physique. But that's okay, because she died so I could marry him."
Yep. That's the story of "Jane Eyre the Musical."
In my frustrated words.
If you have not read the book and do not want to know the story until you see the show, stop reading this right now. It will ruin the ending for you. Seriously.
But that is not what this post is about.
And please note that I am writing about the musical, not the book. I haven't read the book.
Also note that this is my opinion. All of my posts are my opinion. And you do not have to agree.
This post is about how I usually want to punch Nate Jackson (Edward Rochester) in the face during Act II, scene vii. (When Alex Cox is playing Rochester, I will probably want to punch him in the face as well, but I've only seen Nate in the role so far.)
Jane Eyre has been living as the governess at Thornfield Hall, Mr. Rochester's residence. She falls in love with him, but he is expected to marry Blanche Ingram. However, he is in love with Jane and makes Blanche stop wanting to marry him. She only wanted to marry him for his money anyway. (Remember the fact that he was intending to marry her. That's part of my point.) He proposes to Jane, calling her his equal. At this point, he seems like a great guy.
Let's move on to the wedding scene. The vicar is performing the ceremony when Mr. Mason enters, declaring that the wedding cannot continue. Rochester encourages the vicar to continue, but Mason insists that Rochester is already married. Rochester tells the vicar to close his book, that there will be no wedding. They return to Thornfield Hall to meet Grace Poole's patient, "[his] lovely wife."
Yep. He's already married. Jerk. As Edward introduces Bertha (who happens to be insane), he says that she's the only woman he will ever sleep with again. He loves Jane and was going to marry her. He was going to marry Blanche.
Jane leaves Thornfield and returns to her aunt, Mrs. Reed. Mrs. Reed dies, leaving Jane a fortune. St. John, the curate of the local parish, befriends Jane, falls in love, and eventually proposes to her. "For now I claim you in holy marriage." Maybe not the best phrasing, but he does acknowledge that she was not made to be the "typical" wife. Unfortunately, Jane does not want to go with him on his missionary journey to India. He tells her to pray for guidance, and while she is praying, she hears Edward's voice calling to her. It's a beautiful scene if you can ignore (forgive) everything he has done. He has not stopped loving her.
I think I feel bad for St. John. And I think I blame Jane. In trying to make herself forget Edward, she tries to love St. John. I think she leads him on a little. He seems to understand her decision to turn him down, but I'm pretty sure he's devastated. I hope he has a good time in India and finds a woman as strong-willed as Jane Eyre.
Jane returns to Thornfield to learn that Bertha has burned the place and jumped to her death. Mr. Rochester is now free to marry Jane. By the way, he was badly injured by the fire and is blind. They get married. They have children. His sight comes back. They are "brave enough for love."
Things I like about Edward Rochester:
He thinks that it is important for Jane to be his "equal."
He sees Jane as a real person, a significant human being, and someone who has value beyond simply wife-hood. (I think I just made up that word.)
He admits to his mistake when he is confronted, and regrets his actions.
He remains committed to Jane.
Things I don't like about Edward Rochester:
He is willing to commit physical adultery by marrying a second wife.
He commits adultery in his heart when he falls in love with Jane.
He lets his physical desires take control with Adele's mother and with Bertha, and does not really love either of them.
I mostly just think he's a jerk. Sure, he feels some remorse. And I believe he truly does love Jane.
And I'm impressed that she can forgive him. I'm not sure how I would conduct myself in that situation.
I really do like this show. It's a wonderful story of forgiveness. In forgiving Edward, Jane gains a love that will last, a new daughter, and later a son.
And it makes a great story to tell at dinner parties.
"Oh, I was just a lowly governess. Then the master and I fell madly in love and were going to be married. But, wait, he already had a wife and she was freaking crazy. So I left, watched my aunt die, got a lot of money, and some guy proposed to me. Then I somehow heard Edward's voice over the moors. So I came back. The crazy wife had destroyed the house and Edward's physique. But that's okay, because she died so I could marry him."
Yep. That's the story of "Jane Eyre the Musical."
In my frustrated words.
28 January 2010
chivalry.
Tonight I opened doors for a few different guys at a couple different times.
The first time, the guy's hands were full. He thanked me for holding the door.
The second time, I was with two friends. (That sounds like the first guy was not a friend. He was. He is. Whatever, I'm tired.) I got to the door first and opened it. One of them walked in and it wasn't a big deal. The second friend insisted that I enter the room before him. He used chivalry as an explanation.
This annoyed me, and I wasted no time in expressing my frustration. I opened the door because I was the first one there. I was being nice. And I fully intended to hold the door for both friends. I almost always hold doors open. It's a way of serving people. Sometimes they thank me, sometimes they don't, sometimes it gets awkward. But it's something I don't mind doing.
When a guy tells me that he should open the door for me just because I happen to be female, I don't really find it that impressive. If I'm on a date, sure, I'll let the guy open the door. But if he doesn't, that's fine. I'm not a huge fan of traditional (stereotypical) gender roles. I don't think that doors should be opened for me because of genetics and anatomy. I think that doors should be opened for me because people are being friendly.
If I open the door for you and you happen to be male, don't argue or stand there waiting for me, just go through the freaking door. I made an effort and I think it should be appreciated.
Chivalry, according to Dictionary.com, is "the sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor, and dexterity in arms." The rest of the definitions also pertain to knighthood. Boys, we live in the 21st century. We live in the United States. As much as we want to believe that our "knight in shining armor" is coming for us, I think we're all resigned to the idea that he doesn't really exist. At least not in the way he's presented in the modern kind of fairy tales. Prince Charming isn't out there, either.
Maybe I'm just a cynic. Okay, I'm definitely a cynic. But I do believe in love. Real love. The love that is an action, not a feeling. The love that "wills good of another" (Dale and Jonalyn Fincher). I'm not expecting someone to come sweep me off my feet and carry me away. Honestly, if someone sweeps me off my feet, I'll probably be wary of his intentions. Been there, made that mistake, learned from it. I'm waiting for someone who will see me and accept me as an equal partner in a relationship.
When the Finchers were at Bethel, the girls had a special session with Jonalyn. She said something that I think about every time someone thanks a guy for holding a door, just because he's a guy. She said to thank him because what he did was kind and friendly, rather than because it was chivalrous. I think it was about projecting an image on him and forcing him into a certain role. Even if it wasn't, I like that reasoning. I don't want any guy to think that, in order to be "masculine" and fulfill his role as a male, he must have certain characteristics and tendencies.
That's what's been on my mind for the past couple of days.
Good night.
The first time, the guy's hands were full. He thanked me for holding the door.
The second time, I was with two friends. (That sounds like the first guy was not a friend. He was. He is. Whatever, I'm tired.) I got to the door first and opened it. One of them walked in and it wasn't a big deal. The second friend insisted that I enter the room before him. He used chivalry as an explanation.
This annoyed me, and I wasted no time in expressing my frustration. I opened the door because I was the first one there. I was being nice. And I fully intended to hold the door for both friends. I almost always hold doors open. It's a way of serving people. Sometimes they thank me, sometimes they don't, sometimes it gets awkward. But it's something I don't mind doing.
When a guy tells me that he should open the door for me just because I happen to be female, I don't really find it that impressive. If I'm on a date, sure, I'll let the guy open the door. But if he doesn't, that's fine. I'm not a huge fan of traditional (stereotypical) gender roles. I don't think that doors should be opened for me because of genetics and anatomy. I think that doors should be opened for me because people are being friendly.
If I open the door for you and you happen to be male, don't argue or stand there waiting for me, just go through the freaking door. I made an effort and I think it should be appreciated.
Chivalry, according to Dictionary.com, is "the sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor, and dexterity in arms." The rest of the definitions also pertain to knighthood. Boys, we live in the 21st century. We live in the United States. As much as we want to believe that our "knight in shining armor" is coming for us, I think we're all resigned to the idea that he doesn't really exist. At least not in the way he's presented in the modern kind of fairy tales. Prince Charming isn't out there, either.
Maybe I'm just a cynic. Okay, I'm definitely a cynic. But I do believe in love. Real love. The love that is an action, not a feeling. The love that "wills good of another" (Dale and Jonalyn Fincher). I'm not expecting someone to come sweep me off my feet and carry me away. Honestly, if someone sweeps me off my feet, I'll probably be wary of his intentions. Been there, made that mistake, learned from it. I'm waiting for someone who will see me and accept me as an equal partner in a relationship.
When the Finchers were at Bethel, the girls had a special session with Jonalyn. She said something that I think about every time someone thanks a guy for holding a door, just because he's a guy. She said to thank him because what he did was kind and friendly, rather than because it was chivalrous. I think it was about projecting an image on him and forcing him into a certain role. Even if it wasn't, I like that reasoning. I don't want any guy to think that, in order to be "masculine" and fulfill his role as a male, he must have certain characteristics and tendencies.
That's what's been on my mind for the past couple of days.
Good night.
27 January 2010
"what it means in movies" expanded and explained.
Posts like these usually get me in trouble, so I'm going to be VERY vague.
But I haven't posted a "here's what's going on in my life" type post in a while.
So, there's this guy. Obviously. and I guess like him as much. I like him as I can say that I like someone after only speaking to him a couple times and noticing his behavior in class. Which, for me, is actually not very much, but for the purpose of this post, I like him.
He's a funny guy. He's a nice guy. He's a pretty dang smart guy. And, most important, he's a solid Christian guy. Apparently he has a really cool story, that I will ask him about someday. A friend of mine told about me three months ago to ask this guy about his life. Instead, I'm learning about him as we get to know each other.
Last week, I was watching him a little bit during an event we both happened to be attending, and I noticed (probably because I was hoping for it) that as he was glancing around the room through the night he happened to hold my gaze for an extra couple of seconds. I wanted so badly to keep looking at him and let the moment develop. But I'm always afraid that a guy is going to think I'm a creeper, and I looked away every time, always smiling. "Sticky eyes" is the phrase used in Angus, Thongs, and Full-Frontal Snogging (the book, not the new television series). You hold the guy's gaze as you look away. It's supposed to be romantic and flirtatious. It's just weird, but I do it anyway.
You know that moment in every love story movie? The one when the main guy and the main girl see each other for the first time. The scene slows down, the music changes, and it's like they're the only people in the room. Well, if I read into what was happening that night, it would have been that moment. Unfortunately, I don't have the greatest track record with guys. This has made me believe that I will never have that moment. I watch those movies all the time and I make fun of them because it's never like that. (Of course, I secretly want that moment with every fiber of my being.) So I convinced myself that we just happened to be glancing at each other at the same time. It happened every time he happened to glance at me, but was just a coincidence. (If you know me well, you probably know that I tend to believe in coincidences.)
More recently, we've been making and maintaining eye contact. We've been hanging out. We've been having real conversations about all kinds of things. It's a grand time. It isn't going anywhere, and that's fine. I like being friends with this guy. I'd like to eventually be more than friends. But it's okay for now.
Hooray for Hope's personal life. :-)
Now, to all the people (and there are about six people in this group) who are encouraging me to date a certain someone, shut up. I know that he's a great guy. He's smart, relatively funny, he loves Jesus, and I can have intelligent conversations with him. I love my friendship with him. But I don't have any interest in ever dating him. He's not my "someday guy." (That was a "Cougar Town" reference. I hope someone picked up on it.) I'm not attracted to him. We have some fundamental disagreements. I'M NOT GOING TO DATE HIM, NO MATTER HOW OFTEN YOU BRING IT UP. So please, for the sake of my friendship with you and with him, STOP!!
Thanks.
But I haven't posted a "here's what's going on in my life" type post in a while.
So, there's this guy. Obviously. and I guess like him as much. I like him as I can say that I like someone after only speaking to him a couple times and noticing his behavior in class. Which, for me, is actually not very much, but for the purpose of this post, I like him.
He's a funny guy. He's a nice guy. He's a pretty dang smart guy. And, most important, he's a solid Christian guy. Apparently he has a really cool story, that I will ask him about someday. A friend of mine told about me three months ago to ask this guy about his life. Instead, I'm learning about him as we get to know each other.
Last week, I was watching him a little bit during an event we both happened to be attending, and I noticed (probably because I was hoping for it) that as he was glancing around the room through the night he happened to hold my gaze for an extra couple of seconds. I wanted so badly to keep looking at him and let the moment develop. But I'm always afraid that a guy is going to think I'm a creeper, and I looked away every time, always smiling. "Sticky eyes" is the phrase used in Angus, Thongs, and Full-Frontal Snogging (the book, not the new television series). You hold the guy's gaze as you look away. It's supposed to be romantic and flirtatious. It's just weird, but I do it anyway.
You know that moment in every love story movie? The one when the main guy and the main girl see each other for the first time. The scene slows down, the music changes, and it's like they're the only people in the room. Well, if I read into what was happening that night, it would have been that moment. Unfortunately, I don't have the greatest track record with guys. This has made me believe that I will never have that moment. I watch those movies all the time and I make fun of them because it's never like that. (Of course, I secretly want that moment with every fiber of my being.) So I convinced myself that we just happened to be glancing at each other at the same time. It happened every time he happened to glance at me, but was just a coincidence. (If you know me well, you probably know that I tend to believe in coincidences.)
More recently, we've been making and maintaining eye contact. We've been hanging out. We've been having real conversations about all kinds of things. It's a grand time. It isn't going anywhere, and that's fine. I like being friends with this guy. I'd like to eventually be more than friends. But it's okay for now.
Hooray for Hope's personal life. :-)
Now, to all the people (and there are about six people in this group) who are encouraging me to date a certain someone, shut up. I know that he's a great guy. He's smart, relatively funny, he loves Jesus, and I can have intelligent conversations with him. I love my friendship with him. But I don't have any interest in ever dating him. He's not my "someday guy." (That was a "Cougar Town" reference. I hope someone picked up on it.) I'm not attracted to him. We have some fundamental disagreements. I'M NOT GOING TO DATE HIM, NO MATTER HOW OFTEN YOU BRING IT UP. So please, for the sake of my friendship with you and with him, STOP!!
Thanks.
25 January 2010
what it means in movies.
Ten days ago
I noticed that you looked at me
While I was looking at you
And I wondered what it meant.
But I didn't want to think too much about it
Because I never would have noticed
If I hadn't been looking at you first.
Our eyes met across the room
And I make it more poetic
Than I think it really was.
I wish that it meant
What it means in movies
When a girl's eyes and a boy's eyes meet.
But I've given up believing
That life can ever be that way:
That a glance will mean
What it means in movies.
In movies, when a girl's eyes and a boy's eyes meet
You know that they'll fall in love.
But when my eyes and your eyes meet
I lose my nerve and just stare at my feet.
I convince myself that you're just scanning the room
And I drag myself down,
I hold myself back.
Thinking I know that you're thinking
"Who is this girl?
and why is she so prone to smiling?"
But then today
You glanced at me
At the same time that I glanced at you
We both looked away
And then we both looked back.
And it could be from a scene in some movie.
So maybe I'm not crazy
And maybe we can write a story
And all of this will mean
Exactly what it means in movies.
I noticed that you looked at me
While I was looking at you
And I wondered what it meant.
But I didn't want to think too much about it
Because I never would have noticed
If I hadn't been looking at you first.
Our eyes met across the room
And I make it more poetic
Than I think it really was.
I wish that it meant
What it means in movies
When a girl's eyes and a boy's eyes meet.
But I've given up believing
That life can ever be that way:
That a glance will mean
What it means in movies.
In movies, when a girl's eyes and a boy's eyes meet
You know that they'll fall in love.
But when my eyes and your eyes meet
I lose my nerve and just stare at my feet.
I convince myself that you're just scanning the room
And I drag myself down,
I hold myself back.
Thinking I know that you're thinking
"Who is this girl?
and why is she so prone to smiling?"
But then today
You glanced at me
At the same time that I glanced at you
We both looked away
And then we both looked back.
And it could be from a scene in some movie.
So maybe I'm not crazy
And maybe we can write a story
And all of this will mean
Exactly what it means in movies.
21 January 2010
a facebook note from June, before I remembered my blog.
why is it okay to completely ignore the Word of God?
He said things very clearly and yet we decide that we know better.
let me tell you, we don't. He designed the world and everything in it for His glory.
after the Fall, the design didn't change. sin came into existence but it wasn't okay.
the purpose of mankind was, and is, to worship God in everything we do.
breaking God's law is not worship.
I watched "Prop 8 the Musical" a few months ago.
it made me rather angry. Jesus didn't change the Law. he didn't make sin okay.
everything still applied. the only change was the sacrifice. Jesus' death and resurrection made the sacrifice unnecessary.
the thing about stoning your daughter or your wife: that's why Jesus died, so we don't have to.
also, the love of money is the root of evil. sorry Neil Patrick Harris. God will take care of our economy.
I'm a bit wary of posting this next section because I know it might offend some people. but I think I need to say it on the outside of my head.
premarital sex is not okay. I don't care if you're engaged. I don't care about any of your excuses.
sex was created to be between one man and one woman in the context of marriage.
if you've already done it, what do you have to look forward to on your wedding night?
and sexual immorality is actually a broad term.
"anything that turns you on and leaves you wanting more." is what the words mean. (thank you Bay Forrest.)
so seeing "Transformers" just because of Megan Fox is not okay.
making out might not be okay.
taking a second glance is not really okay. (and I speak from experience.)
"God smiles when sex is done right." (Bay Forrest)
"And the sexual act, when lawful-which means chiefly when consistent with good faith and charity-can, like all other merely natural acts ('whether we eat or drink etc.,' as the apostle says), be done to the glory of God, and will then be holy." (C.S. Lewis in Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer.)
when sex is done God's way, it can be an act of worship.
I say all these things because it is what I believe.
I know I'm a critical person and I know I have the tendency to judge.
and I ignore God sometimes, too. but I'm not proud of it.
I don't try to flaunt my sinful behavior. I deal with it with God.
so I guess the answer to my question would be: it's not okay.
it's not okay to ignore God.
He said things very clearly and yet we decide that we know better.
let me tell you, we don't. He designed the world and everything in it for His glory.
after the Fall, the design didn't change. sin came into existence but it wasn't okay.
the purpose of mankind was, and is, to worship God in everything we do.
breaking God's law is not worship.
I watched "Prop 8 the Musical" a few months ago.
it made me rather angry. Jesus didn't change the Law. he didn't make sin okay.
everything still applied. the only change was the sacrifice. Jesus' death and resurrection made the sacrifice unnecessary.
the thing about stoning your daughter or your wife: that's why Jesus died, so we don't have to.
also, the love of money is the root of evil. sorry Neil Patrick Harris. God will take care of our economy.
I'm a bit wary of posting this next section because I know it might offend some people. but I think I need to say it on the outside of my head.
premarital sex is not okay. I don't care if you're engaged. I don't care about any of your excuses.
sex was created to be between one man and one woman in the context of marriage.
if you've already done it, what do you have to look forward to on your wedding night?
and sexual immorality is actually a broad term.
"anything that turns you on and leaves you wanting more." is what the words mean. (thank you Bay Forrest.)
so seeing "Transformers" just because of Megan Fox is not okay.
making out might not be okay.
taking a second glance is not really okay. (and I speak from experience.)
"God smiles when sex is done right." (Bay Forrest)
"And the sexual act, when lawful-which means chiefly when consistent with good faith and charity-can, like all other merely natural acts ('whether we eat or drink etc.,' as the apostle says), be done to the glory of God, and will then be holy." (C.S. Lewis in Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer.)
when sex is done God's way, it can be an act of worship.
I say all these things because it is what I believe.
I know I'm a critical person and I know I have the tendency to judge.
and I ignore God sometimes, too. but I'm not proud of it.
I don't try to flaunt my sinful behavior. I deal with it with God.
so I guess the answer to my question would be: it's not okay.
it's not okay to ignore God.
conditioning
and I'm not talking about hair.
if you've ever read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, you have an idea of what kind of conditioning I mean.
repeating phrases while children are sleeping, so that they will learn an automatic response.
this has happened to me, though not to such an extreme.
"bright lights, fast cars."
I don't know where he got it, but my dad says this all the time.
now, any time anyone says "bright lights," my immediate response is "fast cars."
it's ridiculous, but I love it.
I noticed a similar situation last week during chapel. David Cramer was reading a verse that contained the word manifold. the next word he said was witness. the word in the verse was actually wisdom.
I sat there smirking, because I completely understand. the phrase "manifold witness" is from the hymn "Great is Thy Faithfulness." how often to people use the word manifold in everyday life? I'm pretty sure I've only used that word in the song. the natural continuation of the phrase will probably always be witness.
think about natural responses you have to certain phrases.
do you know where they came from?
if you've ever read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, you have an idea of what kind of conditioning I mean.
repeating phrases while children are sleeping, so that they will learn an automatic response.
this has happened to me, though not to such an extreme.
"bright lights, fast cars."
I don't know where he got it, but my dad says this all the time.
now, any time anyone says "bright lights," my immediate response is "fast cars."
it's ridiculous, but I love it.
I noticed a similar situation last week during chapel. David Cramer was reading a verse that contained the word manifold. the next word he said was witness. the word in the verse was actually wisdom.
I sat there smirking, because I completely understand. the phrase "manifold witness" is from the hymn "Great is Thy Faithfulness." how often to people use the word manifold in everyday life? I'm pretty sure I've only used that word in the song. the natural continuation of the phrase will probably always be witness.
think about natural responses you have to certain phrases.
do you know where they came from?
we have eaten the lotus, but can we find the will to return to the ships?
We're reading The Odyssey in my World Literature class right now, and the assignment for tomorrow is to write about how one of the episodes in books 9-12 relates to something that has happened during our time at Bethel. "Think carefully about what each episode is really about in terms of a test, trial, temptation, or obstacle to/for Odysseus’ homecoming. Who is your Circe, Cyclops, or Sirens? What’s your underworld?"
I was at the designer run for "Jane Eyre" tonight.
"For as sirens call the sailors/ She calls me now."
This line is sung several times through the show, and I love the allusion.
So, when I read the assignment, which I am currently avoiding, I got excited.
a few brief character descriptions and plot summaries:
Circe: lives on an island, turns people into swine (I played her in 8th grade.)
Odysseus tricks her, convinces her to let him and his sailors leave. She is helpful.
Cyclops (Polyphemus): kills and eats two of Odysseus' men. plans to kill and eat all of them. Odysseus blinds him, tricks him, escapes. Polyphemus happens to be Poseidon's son. Poseidon is angry and causes Odysseus to be delayed in his return to Ithaca. Odysseus is pretty much at fault for his troubles.
Sirens: sing beautiful songs to attract sailors. Odysseus wants to hear them, so he makes his sailors tie him up, stuff wax in their ears, and row past them. no matter how much Odysseus shouted at the men and struggled at his bindings, the sailors do not hear him and leave him tied up.
The story of what happened in the land of the Lotus-Eaters is only about fifteen lines long, but I find it to be a significant metaphor. After nine days of bad winds, Odysseus and his men arrive at the land of the Lotus-Eaters. They go ashore and three of the men are sent to meet the locals. the Lotus-Eaters are a harmless people, but they give the men some of their delicious fruit. Those who ate the fruit "Lost the will to report back, preferring instead/ To stay there, munching lotus, oblivious of home." They must be dragged back to the ships and tied up. Odysseus hurries the rest of the men to leave the land.
As I thought about what to write, I began to realize how much this relates to our daily struggles with sin. it is so easy to be stuck in a rut, lacking any desire to escape. We can lose sight of the glory that is waiting for us when this life is over. this realization terrifies me. As I read Homer's epic, I tend to think of the characters as foolish. Their struggles are often the results of their own choices and actions. I'm not a fan of comparing myself to fools and finding that we are similar.
What can I do to avoid making the same mistakes?
First of all, I only believe in one God.
Along that line of thinking, the God I believe in is not much like the gods of the Greeks. He forgives me; He loves me; He desires a relationship with me. How cool is that? He gives me strength.
When God created humans, He created them in His image. I know that this is a complicated and controversial topic, but I'm not going to talk about physical appearance or anything like that. It's not worth it. No, I'm talking about free will. God can do anything He wants. (I do remember the series on Things That Are Impossible For God that we did with the Junior High last year, but I think that those were not things that God would want to do.) My point is, God gave mankind the ability to choose. He did not operate Adam and Eve like machines. They were allowed to give in to temptation. We have this choice, too. We can decide what to do when faced with the temptation to sin. We don't have to take the lotus that we are given. Homer doesn't tell us how much the sailors knew about what they were eating, so we don't know whether or not they knew what they were getting into. Did Eve know what she was doing? I wasn't there, so I can't be sure, but I do know that the Devil is a liar. He knows a lot about human nature, and has a way with words. Eve had a choice. She didn't have to eat the fruit, but she did. Adam did, too. And for that, mankind is cursed.
"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
We've all tasted the lotus and we know that it is delicious. Let's be real, it's fun to sin. The fun doesn't always last, but for a while it feels great to do things our own way. It's no good to be content with sinning.
What do we do next? How do we get out of the rut?
Surround yourself with people who are going to show you some tough love. The sailors had Odysseus to help them out. It's important to have a trusted friend or group of friends to keep you accountable, even if you don't always want to hear what they have to say. Make sure they are willing to bind you under the benches.
Educate yourself. Understand sin. Figure out ways to identify it and avoid it. Learn how to listen to the Holy Spirit's prompts. If you're not sure about whether or not something is sin, DON'T DO IT!! Ask someone you know to be spiritually mature.
Spend time with God. He gives you every second of every day. He deserves your attention. If a Father is willing to send His Son to be slaughtered so that we can live with Him forever, you can give up some of "your" precious time.
Friends, I'm writing these things to myself, too. I don't have it all figured out, and I fully acknowledge that. But I hope that we can learn together.
I was at the designer run for "Jane Eyre" tonight.
"For as sirens call the sailors/ She calls me now."
This line is sung several times through the show, and I love the allusion.
So, when I read the assignment, which I am currently avoiding, I got excited.
a few brief character descriptions and plot summaries:
Circe: lives on an island, turns people into swine (I played her in 8th grade.)
Odysseus tricks her, convinces her to let him and his sailors leave. She is helpful.
Cyclops (Polyphemus): kills and eats two of Odysseus' men. plans to kill and eat all of them. Odysseus blinds him, tricks him, escapes. Polyphemus happens to be Poseidon's son. Poseidon is angry and causes Odysseus to be delayed in his return to Ithaca. Odysseus is pretty much at fault for his troubles.
Sirens: sing beautiful songs to attract sailors. Odysseus wants to hear them, so he makes his sailors tie him up, stuff wax in their ears, and row past them. no matter how much Odysseus shouted at the men and struggled at his bindings, the sailors do not hear him and leave him tied up.
The story of what happened in the land of the Lotus-Eaters is only about fifteen lines long, but I find it to be a significant metaphor. After nine days of bad winds, Odysseus and his men arrive at the land of the Lotus-Eaters. They go ashore and three of the men are sent to meet the locals. the Lotus-Eaters are a harmless people, but they give the men some of their delicious fruit. Those who ate the fruit "Lost the will to report back, preferring instead/ To stay there, munching lotus, oblivious of home." They must be dragged back to the ships and tied up. Odysseus hurries the rest of the men to leave the land.
As I thought about what to write, I began to realize how much this relates to our daily struggles with sin. it is so easy to be stuck in a rut, lacking any desire to escape. We can lose sight of the glory that is waiting for us when this life is over. this realization terrifies me. As I read Homer's epic, I tend to think of the characters as foolish. Their struggles are often the results of their own choices and actions. I'm not a fan of comparing myself to fools and finding that we are similar.
What can I do to avoid making the same mistakes?
First of all, I only believe in one God.
Along that line of thinking, the God I believe in is not much like the gods of the Greeks. He forgives me; He loves me; He desires a relationship with me. How cool is that? He gives me strength.
When God created humans, He created them in His image. I know that this is a complicated and controversial topic, but I'm not going to talk about physical appearance or anything like that. It's not worth it. No, I'm talking about free will. God can do anything He wants. (I do remember the series on Things That Are Impossible For God that we did with the Junior High last year, but I think that those were not things that God would want to do.) My point is, God gave mankind the ability to choose. He did not operate Adam and Eve like machines. They were allowed to give in to temptation. We have this choice, too. We can decide what to do when faced with the temptation to sin. We don't have to take the lotus that we are given. Homer doesn't tell us how much the sailors knew about what they were eating, so we don't know whether or not they knew what they were getting into. Did Eve know what she was doing? I wasn't there, so I can't be sure, but I do know that the Devil is a liar. He knows a lot about human nature, and has a way with words. Eve had a choice. She didn't have to eat the fruit, but she did. Adam did, too. And for that, mankind is cursed.
"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
We've all tasted the lotus and we know that it is delicious. Let's be real, it's fun to sin. The fun doesn't always last, but for a while it feels great to do things our own way. It's no good to be content with sinning.
What do we do next? How do we get out of the rut?
Surround yourself with people who are going to show you some tough love. The sailors had Odysseus to help them out. It's important to have a trusted friend or group of friends to keep you accountable, even if you don't always want to hear what they have to say. Make sure they are willing to bind you under the benches.
Educate yourself. Understand sin. Figure out ways to identify it and avoid it. Learn how to listen to the Holy Spirit's prompts. If you're not sure about whether or not something is sin, DON'T DO IT!! Ask someone you know to be spiritually mature.
Spend time with God. He gives you every second of every day. He deserves your attention. If a Father is willing to send His Son to be slaughtered so that we can live with Him forever, you can give up some of "your" precious time.
Friends, I'm writing these things to myself, too. I don't have it all figured out, and I fully acknowledge that. But I hope that we can learn together.
17 January 2010
OCD
is not something you are. it is not just about hating crooked pictures. it is not diagnosed by a quiz on facebook.
it is something you have. it is a disorder Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
stop throwing it around. it's serious. it's a difficult struggle. severe cases can require therapy.
don't decide that you "are OCD" because facebook told you that you are.
because you can't "be" OCD.
thanks.
it is something you have. it is a disorder Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
stop throwing it around. it's serious. it's a difficult struggle. severe cases can require therapy.
don't decide that you "are OCD" because facebook told you that you are.
because you can't "be" OCD.
thanks.
16 January 2010
the woman I want to be.
as a college-age female, there seems to be so much pressure to show the boys that girls can do anything. we are "supposed to" get a degree, or several degrees, and find a career. we are "supposed to" work as hard as we can in that career so we can advance and make lots of money, enough money to support ourselves. we "should not" need to depend on a man for anything.
well, actually, the Savior of the world came as a man. and I depend on Him for my life.
and yes, I do want to have a job when I graduate from college. however, I'm not looking to support myself for the rest of my life. I'm not looking for a career. I'm not wanting to be completely independent. I truly aspire to be a wife and mother. not the weak, submissive wife people seem to think Paul describes, but a strong woman who can have intelligent conversations about all kinds of things: spiritual, academic, parental, spousal, political, everything.
I love making people happy. I like to cook and bake and do laundry and wash dishes.
my room is never clean, but I love cleaning. I like organizing.
I want to do those things for my husband and my children.
I'm not saying that it's wrong for a woman to have a career. that's a great thing for a woman to do.
I think it's great for a woman to be able to support herself. Paul was a huge supporter of singleness. if you are certain that that's God's plan for your life, go for it.
but I won't listen to you if you tell me that what I want to do is wrong. I'm not saying that I have it all figured out. I believe (and was told during a time of prayer) that this semester with be a time of figuring things out and learning about myself and learning about God and what He has planned for me.
I'm not in that group of people that thinks that your life begins when you go to college, or when you graduate from college, or when you move into your own apartment/house/trailer.
my life began over 18 years ago. it's been a journey that will last until the day I die.
and, I hope, my legacy will last after my death. I hope that I can leave a lasting, positive mark on the lives of those around me.
and, that's my idea of what I want for my life.
it's a lot different from what I wanted when I came to school in August.
and it might change by the end of April.
but it's good for right now, and I don't think that it's in contradiction at all with Scripture.
if I'm wrong, let me know.
that's the social part of social media.
well, actually, the Savior of the world came as a man. and I depend on Him for my life.
and yes, I do want to have a job when I graduate from college. however, I'm not looking to support myself for the rest of my life. I'm not looking for a career. I'm not wanting to be completely independent. I truly aspire to be a wife and mother. not the weak, submissive wife people seem to think Paul describes, but a strong woman who can have intelligent conversations about all kinds of things: spiritual, academic, parental, spousal, political, everything.
I love making people happy. I like to cook and bake and do laundry and wash dishes.
my room is never clean, but I love cleaning. I like organizing.
I want to do those things for my husband and my children.
I'm not saying that it's wrong for a woman to have a career. that's a great thing for a woman to do.
I think it's great for a woman to be able to support herself. Paul was a huge supporter of singleness. if you are certain that that's God's plan for your life, go for it.
but I won't listen to you if you tell me that what I want to do is wrong. I'm not saying that I have it all figured out. I believe (and was told during a time of prayer) that this semester with be a time of figuring things out and learning about myself and learning about God and what He has planned for me.
I'm not in that group of people that thinks that your life begins when you go to college, or when you graduate from college, or when you move into your own apartment/house/trailer.
my life began over 18 years ago. it's been a journey that will last until the day I die.
and, I hope, my legacy will last after my death. I hope that I can leave a lasting, positive mark on the lives of those around me.
and, that's my idea of what I want for my life.
it's a lot different from what I wanted when I came to school in August.
and it might change by the end of April.
but it's good for right now, and I don't think that it's in contradiction at all with Scripture.
if I'm wrong, let me know.
that's the social part of social media.
jazz: I prefer the concept over the actual music.
it's all about interpretation and improvisation.
creativity and expression.
I'm really impressed when I hear a talented jazz musician.
but I don't really enjoy listening to improvisational jazz.
the idea, though, is wonderful.
making music out of notes and chords that somehow fit together in a way that makes sense.
wow.
one night last semester, while I was still in my prob&stats class, my dad told me that he was praying that God would help me understand the order He created in the universe that is revealed by math.
music kinda reveals order, too. eh, don't ask me about that one. I don't remember a lot about what I've heard about it. but believe me, it's true.
something about what I was talking about with everything fitting together in a certain way.
music, math, order.
God is incredible.
He created everything to work together.
and, yeah, sometimes we mess it up. okay, a lot of times we mess it up.
but the thing about jazz is, it can be fixed. a jazz master can make a bad note sound good.
yes, the bad note still happened, but Someone can make it work, can make it better.
and that's amazing.
so, I don't really like listening to improvisational jazz.
but to think that someone can understand the way music works, the way notes and chords work together...
it boggles my mind. and it's so great.
to the jazz musicians of the world, keep it up. I'm amazed by what you do, even if I don't want to listen to it.
creativity and expression.
I'm really impressed when I hear a talented jazz musician.
but I don't really enjoy listening to improvisational jazz.
the idea, though, is wonderful.
making music out of notes and chords that somehow fit together in a way that makes sense.
wow.
one night last semester, while I was still in my prob&stats class, my dad told me that he was praying that God would help me understand the order He created in the universe that is revealed by math.
music kinda reveals order, too. eh, don't ask me about that one. I don't remember a lot about what I've heard about it. but believe me, it's true.
something about what I was talking about with everything fitting together in a certain way.
music, math, order.
God is incredible.
He created everything to work together.
and, yeah, sometimes we mess it up. okay, a lot of times we mess it up.
but the thing about jazz is, it can be fixed. a jazz master can make a bad note sound good.
yes, the bad note still happened, but Someone can make it work, can make it better.
and that's amazing.
so, I don't really like listening to improvisational jazz.
but to think that someone can understand the way music works, the way notes and chords work together...
it boggles my mind. and it's so great.
to the jazz musicians of the world, keep it up. I'm amazed by what you do, even if I don't want to listen to it.
06 January 2010
love advice from Seventeen. part three.
the next two page: "How to say 'I love you' (without freaking him out!)"
I just love this one. oh, wait, did it freak out? maybe I used the L-word too soon!!
anyway.
this page includes a checklist! ha! it really makes me laugh that someone would think that checking off four items is enough for a girl to know that she is in love with someone. "he is constantly on your mind." "you have fun with him." "you feel no insecurities." "you're 100-percent certain."
"he is constantly on your mind."
so is a person you're obsessed with.
"you have fun with him."
I have fun with a lot of people.
"you feel no insecurities."
this is important in any friendship.
"you're 100-percent certain."
what does "certain" mean? that you feel right about it. is it all about feelings with Seventeen? because I'm pretty sure that true love isn't about feelings. everything I've heard about true love has said that it's an action, not a feeling. of course, I've never been in love, so I can't speak as an authority on the subject. but it's whatever.
there's another box on the pages that tells you how to say it right.
it does say to wait. "two months or less is too soon!"
yes!! thank you!! finally, some good advice.
it also says to say it after a date, rather than after a fight.
also good advice.
then it says to kiss him. because it "will give him a second to gather his thoughts--so he can get the guts to say it back!" um. well. I hope he doesn't really have to think about it. honestly, I'd like the guy to say it first. I'm not saying that the guy must say it first, just that it would be nice.
nor am I saying that I'm an authority on this subject. I'm just a kid who has watched too many kids throw away their innocence and pride.
also, I have strong opinions, and I have a blog.
dear Seventeen Magazine,
I'm disappointed. virginity is not relative and it's not something to speak so casually about. love is a serious subject and cannot be decided by a checklist. the way a girl feels about herself should not be decided by the way a guy feels about her.
I canceled my subscription because your magazine is annoying and degrading. yep. degrading. and I know that I owe you $10. you'll get it eventually. I promise.
love,
Hope Swanson
I just love this one. oh, wait, did it freak out? maybe I used the L-word too soon!!
anyway.
this page includes a checklist! ha! it really makes me laugh that someone would think that checking off four items is enough for a girl to know that she is in love with someone. "he is constantly on your mind." "you have fun with him." "you feel no insecurities." "you're 100-percent certain."
"he is constantly on your mind."
so is a person you're obsessed with.
"you have fun with him."
I have fun with a lot of people.
"you feel no insecurities."
this is important in any friendship.
"you're 100-percent certain."
what does "certain" mean? that you feel right about it. is it all about feelings with Seventeen? because I'm pretty sure that true love isn't about feelings. everything I've heard about true love has said that it's an action, not a feeling. of course, I've never been in love, so I can't speak as an authority on the subject. but it's whatever.
there's another box on the pages that tells you how to say it right.
it does say to wait. "two months or less is too soon!"
yes!! thank you!! finally, some good advice.
it also says to say it after a date, rather than after a fight.
also good advice.
then it says to kiss him. because it "will give him a second to gather his thoughts--so he can get the guts to say it back!" um. well. I hope he doesn't really have to think about it. honestly, I'd like the guy to say it first. I'm not saying that the guy must say it first, just that it would be nice.
nor am I saying that I'm an authority on this subject. I'm just a kid who has watched too many kids throw away their innocence and pride.
also, I have strong opinions, and I have a blog.
dear Seventeen Magazine,
I'm disappointed. virginity is not relative and it's not something to speak so casually about. love is a serious subject and cannot be decided by a checklist. the way a girl feels about herself should not be decided by the way a guy feels about her.
I canceled my subscription because your magazine is annoying and degrading. yep. degrading. and I know that I owe you $10. you'll get it eventually. I promise.
love,
Hope Swanson
05 January 2010
love advice from Seventeen. part two.
next page: "your most personal sex questions."
yippee!
question: "my boyfriend wants to have anal sex--he says I'll still be a virgin. is that true?"
initial reaction: he's a boy. he wants to get into your pants. he'll tell you anything.
plus, anal sex? really? so gross.
the answer says that virginity is "what's right for you."
it also mentions the fact that, although it will not result in pregnancy, anal sex can result in HIV and other STDs.
and that the girl is allowed to say "no" to her boyfriend.
I hope the girl was able to resist his approaches until she got her copy of the magazine.
this entire page just made me very angry.
and a little hopeless for teenage girls.
yippee!
question: "my boyfriend wants to have anal sex--he says I'll still be a virgin. is that true?"
initial reaction: he's a boy. he wants to get into your pants. he'll tell you anything.
plus, anal sex? really? so gross.
the answer says that virginity is "what's right for you."
it also mentions the fact that, although it will not result in pregnancy, anal sex can result in HIV and other STDs.
and that the girl is allowed to say "no" to her boyfriend.
I hope the girl was able to resist his approaches until she got her copy of the magazine.
this entire page just made me very angry.
and a little hopeless for teenage girls.
04 January 2010
love advice from Seventeen. part one.
which, naturally, follows the pages about getting "your hottest body."
these pages usually are followed by a letter from Body Peace expert Jess Weiner about being comfortable and happy with the way you look. I've always (since I started receiving the magazine) thought that the Body Peace Treaty was about being okay with your own body, and not caring about how other people thought about you.
apparently, I'm wrong. the February issue the Body Peace page is about "what guys really think of your body."
"soft is feminine!" (to that I say, "what does 'feminine' actually mean?)
"less is more!" (about his "good female friend" who keeps dyeing her hair.)
"we like your butt!" (he loves his girlfriend's big butt. "That said, if a girl has a flat butt, that's fine too. I'd probably just notice the other beautiful parts about her--her eyes or her smile." or her beautiful personality? or sense of humor?)
"we love any size breasts!" (at least this guy admits that his first reaction is a "mix of lust and curiosity.")
and "bashing your body is a turnoff!" (this one is less annoying, but it seems critical of the way a girl feels.)
are you telling me that I should be at peace with my body because guys are looking at me and wanting me? sorry, but that's not the kind of guy I want. I mean, yeah, it's nice to get noticed for the way I look, but I don't want that to be the reason he wants to hang out with me. and I admit, I do have some self-esteem issues. but they don't take over my life, and they rarely hold me back from anything.
these pages usually are followed by a letter from Body Peace expert Jess Weiner about being comfortable and happy with the way you look. I've always (since I started receiving the magazine) thought that the Body Peace Treaty was about being okay with your own body, and not caring about how other people thought about you.
apparently, I'm wrong. the February issue the Body Peace page is about "what guys really think of your body."
"soft is feminine!" (to that I say, "what does 'feminine' actually mean?)
"less is more!" (about his "good female friend" who keeps dyeing her hair.)
"we like your butt!" (he loves his girlfriend's big butt. "That said, if a girl has a flat butt, that's fine too. I'd probably just notice the other beautiful parts about her--her eyes or her smile." or her beautiful personality? or sense of humor?)
"we love any size breasts!" (at least this guy admits that his first reaction is a "mix of lust and curiosity.")
and "bashing your body is a turnoff!" (this one is less annoying, but it seems critical of the way a girl feels.)
are you telling me that I should be at peace with my body because guys are looking at me and wanting me? sorry, but that's not the kind of guy I want. I mean, yeah, it's nice to get noticed for the way I look, but I don't want that to be the reason he wants to hang out with me. and I admit, I do have some self-esteem issues. but they don't take over my life, and they rarely hold me back from anything.
03 January 2010
Owl City.
this goes out to everyone who "LOVES Owl City" after only hearing "Fireflies."
please, people, Owl City is pretty much one guy. did you know that?
also, did you know that he's been around for more than six months? yeah, his first album came out in 2007.
another thing, his songs start to sound the same after a while. they're still pretty good, there's just not a whole lot of variety.
don't get me wrong, I like Owl City.
please don't decide that you love a band after hearing one of their songs. that's like love at first sight. which is called lust. it's like musical sin.
do some research. go beyond the disco ball that's just hanging by a thread.
discover the happy-all-the-time that is Owl City.
take another step and discover The Ready Set. similar music making technique, more variety. and they've toured with BoysLikeGirls.
and are more or less from Fort Wayne.
and that's about all I have to say about that.
please, people, Owl City is pretty much one guy. did you know that?
also, did you know that he's been around for more than six months? yeah, his first album came out in 2007.
another thing, his songs start to sound the same after a while. they're still pretty good, there's just not a whole lot of variety.
don't get me wrong, I like Owl City.
please don't decide that you love a band after hearing one of their songs. that's like love at first sight. which is called lust. it's like musical sin.
do some research. go beyond the disco ball that's just hanging by a thread.
discover the happy-all-the-time that is Owl City.
take another step and discover The Ready Set. similar music making technique, more variety. and they've toured with BoysLikeGirls.
and are more or less from Fort Wayne.
and that's about all I have to say about that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)