I've been carrying around a lot of anger recently. Mostly it's anger at people who don't really give others the respect they deserve, and overbearing people who jump to conclusions and then refuse to communicate or have their perceptions corrected, preferring to squirrel away their own thoughts and ideas behind a veil of ambiguity.
I less of a problem when those people are my peers (I can confront or ignore as I see fit)...it's different when the dynamic is such that one person has more authority than the other.
Any tips for dealing with it? I don't like being as deeply cranky as I have been.
In other news, Christmas came and went. It was a bit odd, in some ways, but good. I saw Young Frankenstein (the musical) with the parents, and it was pretty funny. My parents gave me a Chumby One and the boyfriend gave me a Tarot book and a necklace. Aww. :-)
New Year's resolutions: last year I made way too many. This year I have two:
1. Work out every day
2. Finish that project I've been trying to finish for...years now
There are other things I'd like to accomplish, but I'm not giving them the weight of my official "resolutions." In no particular order:
1. Get my own business off the ground
2. Achieve balance!
3. Blog more, especially with short stories
4. Keep in touch with friends and family, and show them how important they are to me
28 December 2009
05 December 2009
Yule-Season
I've been looking around at various religious belief structures over the past several months.
Well, that's kind of mis-statement. I've been looking around at various religions for years now - but this past summer, I moved to an apartment much farther from my office. That means I've had much more time in the car, which I've mostly filled with listening to various podcasts.
When I was in high school, I took up paganism very briefly. Mostly, it was to be different.
However, I'm revisiting some of those ideals and beliefs now. Something that I still struggle with is the idea of structure - I actually took a lot of comfort in the "structure" of the Church - feeling like there was some validation in practicing something that was carefully designed and vetted by the highest "authority." Paganism is kind of odd because it's one big mishmash of meditative practices and worship of a multitude of deities. It's hard, I think, to get into a religious lifestyle practicing as a pagan simply because there's not as much community.
However, I digress.
One thing that really appeals to me about the pagan mindset (and about some aspects of certain Christian and other faith-based mindsets) is the idea of responsibility. I've seen very little toleration for the helpless victim mindset within pagan communities, and I think that's a great thing. A common Christian theme can be (depending on the Christian community) that "God will provide, God causes everything, God decides everything." The typical Christian argument is that to think or act otherwise is an act of arrogance - how dare we deign to think that we could have absolute power? How dare we get caught up in thinking that we have the ability to shape fate?
While certainly arrogance is unproductive and ultimately harmful, I think that in most cases we are actually more capable of influencing our own lives than we think - and I don't even mean through prayerful intercession, spellcasting, etc - I mean just by recognizing the various factors that come together to create a situation, and by taking the responsibility to interact with those factors in a way that is productive, rather than throwing up our hands and whining.
My favorite example is that of the relationship in which the two participants are of opposing faith systems. I think that most people would agree that when a Christian is in a relationship with a non-Christian, it can tend to make the Christian want to evangelize. It can also lead to discussions with the Christian's church group about how awful it is that their partner hasn't seen the light, and that the other person needs to be prayed for, and saved. I think that it's easy for that Christian's community to see the complainant in a very sympathetic way. (I've seen it happen, and to some extent had it happen to me - I went through a breakup a few years ago in which the ex's Mom told me that if I worked really hard to find Jesus, then her son might eventually want me back. Which helped make the breakup a lot easier for me, actually...)
However, when a very similar topic was brought up within a pagan community, the response was much different. It was basically, "Hey - it stinks that your partner won't support you. But - what the heck are you doing sticking with someone who is so critical of who you are? Why are you looking for sympathy instead of doing something proactive for yourself? Why are you willing to suffer, and be judged?"
So - again - I always argue for moderation. Certainly a world without compromise and understanding is a dismal one, indeed. But - if a situation seems to be beyond compromise and understanding, then yes - yes, I agree wholeheartedly that the responsibility lies with the suffering person to, for goodness' sake, respect and care for their own self enough to maybe do something drastic like saying, "You don't respect me - it's time for you to hit the road."
It's so, so, easy to make excuses. I love the idea of a spiritual practice that won't tolerate excuse making.
On that note, I've decided not to make excuses for not keeping up with people. If you're reading this and would like a Christmas/Yule/Holiday card, just e-mail me your address.
PS: For a great podcast about spirituality, and some pagan topics, check out: spiritscast.com
Well, that's kind of mis-statement. I've been looking around at various religions for years now - but this past summer, I moved to an apartment much farther from my office. That means I've had much more time in the car, which I've mostly filled with listening to various podcasts.
When I was in high school, I took up paganism very briefly. Mostly, it was to be different.
However, I'm revisiting some of those ideals and beliefs now. Something that I still struggle with is the idea of structure - I actually took a lot of comfort in the "structure" of the Church - feeling like there was some validation in practicing something that was carefully designed and vetted by the highest "authority." Paganism is kind of odd because it's one big mishmash of meditative practices and worship of a multitude of deities. It's hard, I think, to get into a religious lifestyle practicing as a pagan simply because there's not as much community.
However, I digress.
One thing that really appeals to me about the pagan mindset (and about some aspects of certain Christian and other faith-based mindsets) is the idea of responsibility. I've seen very little toleration for the helpless victim mindset within pagan communities, and I think that's a great thing. A common Christian theme can be (depending on the Christian community) that "God will provide, God causes everything, God decides everything." The typical Christian argument is that to think or act otherwise is an act of arrogance - how dare we deign to think that we could have absolute power? How dare we get caught up in thinking that we have the ability to shape fate?
While certainly arrogance is unproductive and ultimately harmful, I think that in most cases we are actually more capable of influencing our own lives than we think - and I don't even mean through prayerful intercession, spellcasting, etc - I mean just by recognizing the various factors that come together to create a situation, and by taking the responsibility to interact with those factors in a way that is productive, rather than throwing up our hands and whining.
My favorite example is that of the relationship in which the two participants are of opposing faith systems. I think that most people would agree that when a Christian is in a relationship with a non-Christian, it can tend to make the Christian want to evangelize. It can also lead to discussions with the Christian's church group about how awful it is that their partner hasn't seen the light, and that the other person needs to be prayed for, and saved. I think that it's easy for that Christian's community to see the complainant in a very sympathetic way. (I've seen it happen, and to some extent had it happen to me - I went through a breakup a few years ago in which the ex's Mom told me that if I worked really hard to find Jesus, then her son might eventually want me back. Which helped make the breakup a lot easier for me, actually...)
However, when a very similar topic was brought up within a pagan community, the response was much different. It was basically, "Hey - it stinks that your partner won't support you. But - what the heck are you doing sticking with someone who is so critical of who you are? Why are you looking for sympathy instead of doing something proactive for yourself? Why are you willing to suffer, and be judged?"
So - again - I always argue for moderation. Certainly a world without compromise and understanding is a dismal one, indeed. But - if a situation seems to be beyond compromise and understanding, then yes - yes, I agree wholeheartedly that the responsibility lies with the suffering person to, for goodness' sake, respect and care for their own self enough to maybe do something drastic like saying, "You don't respect me - it's time for you to hit the road."
It's so, so, easy to make excuses. I love the idea of a spiritual practice that won't tolerate excuse making.
On that note, I've decided not to make excuses for not keeping up with people. If you're reading this and would like a Christmas/Yule/Holiday card, just e-mail me your address.
PS: For a great podcast about spirituality, and some pagan topics, check out: spiritscast.com
10 November 2009
God
VA Sniper To Be Executed Tonight
I wonder what it feels like to decide whether or not someone lives? What does it feel like to watch someone die?
When I was in high school, I favored the death penalty. Life looked pretty simple from the perspective of my 16 and 17 year old self: do the right thing, get rewarded; do the wrong thing; get punished. It followed that having strong punishments for doing the "wrong thing" was only common sense - the worse the punishment, the lesser the incidence of "wrong things" and the better for society overall.
I've rethought that. I think that what actually probably deters most people from murdering is a recognition of what it means to deprive another person of life. I also tend to believe that the reality we experience and our perceptions about other people are largely founded on projections of our own opinions and worldviews. By this reasoning, I would argue that someone who murders probably also already sees his own life as relatively meaningless.
I think that the answer is to celebrate life, and to create a cultural norm that respects life. How many studies are there that have proved that positive reinforcement works much better than negative reinforcement?
I don't subscribe to the notion that killing a killer solves anything. Maybe it truly does give closure to the victims' families - all I know is that tonight I am very thankful that I've never been involved in a situation where I'd find out firsthand the answers to some of the questions I've raised here.
I wonder what it feels like to decide whether or not someone lives? What does it feel like to watch someone die?
When I was in high school, I favored the death penalty. Life looked pretty simple from the perspective of my 16 and 17 year old self: do the right thing, get rewarded; do the wrong thing; get punished. It followed that having strong punishments for doing the "wrong thing" was only common sense - the worse the punishment, the lesser the incidence of "wrong things" and the better for society overall.
I've rethought that. I think that what actually probably deters most people from murdering is a recognition of what it means to deprive another person of life. I also tend to believe that the reality we experience and our perceptions about other people are largely founded on projections of our own opinions and worldviews. By this reasoning, I would argue that someone who murders probably also already sees his own life as relatively meaningless.
I think that the answer is to celebrate life, and to create a cultural norm that respects life. How many studies are there that have proved that positive reinforcement works much better than negative reinforcement?
I don't subscribe to the notion that killing a killer solves anything. Maybe it truly does give closure to the victims' families - all I know is that tonight I am very thankful that I've never been involved in a situation where I'd find out firsthand the answers to some of the questions I've raised here.
28 October 2009
More Parsing
Before I went to college, I felt like I was pretty good at figuring out what someone meant. I could read context, make connections, and even if something was unspecified or stated very indirectly I could pretty much figure out what was required.
College changed that. I remember getting assignment after assignment, particularly in my Engineering & Computer Science classes that would specify problems, projects, and programs using language that would trick me - I would think I understood what was needed, plow ahead, get stuck, look back and re-read, think about what else the writer of the assignment could have meant with his or her words, try again, etc. I feel like it was a valuable experience because it taught me to question all of my assumptions about a person's perspective, and to think of as many meanings for a statement as possible, and then assess all of the options, selecting the most consistent one.
That's all great. Except now sometimes I wonder if I'm too literal - particularly at work - sometimes I feel like I'm missing connections that a manager might think are obvious, sometimes I feel like I seek out too much of the "so, what do you actually want me to do?" kind of details, because I just don't think I have enough information to know what I'm supposed to do. Hard to tell, really, if the college experience impacted the way I can make connections and draw inferences without having much information, or if my manager is just naturally the type of person I don't communicate well with.
In other news. I started an online business. We'll see how it goes. Most people have been supportive, and a few people have told me I'm completely nuts. It's not like I'm being impractical and doing something like quitting my full time job for it, or taking out loans, or anything like that. It's something I enjoy doing and think I can earn a few bucks from. Hopefully I can grow it, but there's absolutely no risk involved for me since I've already got a steady income.
College changed that. I remember getting assignment after assignment, particularly in my Engineering & Computer Science classes that would specify problems, projects, and programs using language that would trick me - I would think I understood what was needed, plow ahead, get stuck, look back and re-read, think about what else the writer of the assignment could have meant with his or her words, try again, etc. I feel like it was a valuable experience because it taught me to question all of my assumptions about a person's perspective, and to think of as many meanings for a statement as possible, and then assess all of the options, selecting the most consistent one.
That's all great. Except now sometimes I wonder if I'm too literal - particularly at work - sometimes I feel like I'm missing connections that a manager might think are obvious, sometimes I feel like I seek out too much of the "so, what do you actually want me to do?" kind of details, because I just don't think I have enough information to know what I'm supposed to do. Hard to tell, really, if the college experience impacted the way I can make connections and draw inferences without having much information, or if my manager is just naturally the type of person I don't communicate well with.
In other news. I started an online business. We'll see how it goes. Most people have been supportive, and a few people have told me I'm completely nuts. It's not like I'm being impractical and doing something like quitting my full time job for it, or taking out loans, or anything like that. It's something I enjoy doing and think I can earn a few bucks from. Hopefully I can grow it, but there's absolutely no risk involved for me since I've already got a steady income.
01 October 2009
Parsing
So, I went to Mass this past Sunday for the first time in quite a few months. I don't remember when the last time I went to Mass in the US was - and even overseas, I generally went to Protestant services.
It felt stale. For quite some time over the past couple years, I got a lot of comfort out of going. It seemed like some huge remnant of my past that was predictable and soothing in the midst of a lot of change and challenges. I think it felt the way it did this past Sunday for a few reasons:
- I'm starting to feel more comfortable with my life now, and so am less inclined to seek out items from my childhood merely for solace.
- Most of the people there were families. I can't imagine having a family right now. I love my boyfriend very much, and I enjoy being with him and everything we do together - but the thought of settling down that much - getting into that much of a routine, having that much less free time - doesn't appeal to me now. It's likely that it will in several years, but definitely not now.
- The Gospel was parsed out in such a way - leaving out several contextual details that really emphasized the meaning of the whole passage - and then explained in such a way - in a homily ignoring several contextual details that were by some miracle left in - that I felt as though my time at Mass had honestly been wasted. It's so easy to make excuses when there are extenuating reasons for wanting to be at Mass, but with those diminished I felt myself once again very discomforted by the things that drove me away from the Church back when I was a teenager. I've started listening to a podcast entitled "Pray As You Go" each morning on my drive in to work. It's published by the Jesuits, and it is amazing. AND - even more impressive to me - when *they* presented the Gospel with the passage in question, they included the needed context and actually acknowledged what it was saying.
At the bottom, I've included quotations of the Gospel reading from Mass, and of the Podcast reading.
In the Homily at Mass, the priest ignored the entire first paragraph of the Gospel, which is a clear directive from Jesus that says for the Apostles not to get caught up in factions, and NOT TO PERSECUTE OTHER CHRISTIANS WHO DID NOT WORSHIP EXACTLY AS THEY DO. The words are RIGHT THERE. Jesus is like, hey the point is just to be good people, alright? Don't even go there. And, by the way, if you are tempted to go there, you should do everything in your power to prevent yourself from even thinking about going there. What's much more important is how you treat others, and what sorts of ideas you put into other people's heads about what is right and wrong. And, so, if you end up corrupting people in my name or doing the wrong things because your ego gets you too fired up, then that's a much worse problem then someone having a slightly divergent theological belief.
Like I was saying, pre-rant, the priest ignored that bit - the part that *was* included, anyway - and focused his whole time on sin: how easy it is to sin, get caught up in sin, slip into sin, etc. All of which are valid points - but it seemed so superficial. He wasn't asking people to look deep inside and figure out what's reasonable, just, and compassionate - he was talking about how easy it is to stop following the rules of the church - he was basically absolutely contradicting what the gospel actually said. Almost worse, the Gospel itself leaves out something key to the whole thing: Jesus talking about how important it is to let go of ego. The passage taken as a whole shows the Apostles trying to figure out how to be the "best" and trying to compare themselves to others. I think that's all necessary to understand the mindset of the Apostles - and how like them we can be, easily, when we too have the best intentions - and then to get at the heart of what Jesus was actually trying to teach.
My conclusion is that the Biblical Christ is probably the first, or a very early, western Buddhist. I think that sometime I will go through the Bible and write a book explaining very carefully and clearly how it's really a collection of teachings that convey most of the same ideas found in Buddhism, but from a Western worldview. It will be most excellent.
Observe:
---------------------------
Gospel
Mk 9:38-43, 45, 47-48
At that time, John said to Jesus,
"Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name,
and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us."
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him.
There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name
who can at the same time speak ill of me.
For whoever is not against us is for us.
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink
because you belong to Christ,
amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him if a great millstone
were put around his neck
and he were thrown into the sea.
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.
It is better for you to enter into life maimed
than with two hands to go into Gehenna,
into the unquenchable fire.
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut if off.
It is better for you to enter into life crippled
than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out.
Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye
than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'"
----------------------------
Podcast Passage:
Mk 9:34-48
But they remained silent. They had been discussing among themselves on the way who was the greatest.
35
Then he sat down, called the Twelve, and said to them, "If anyone wishes to be first, he shall be the last of all and the servant of all."
36
Taking a child he placed it in their midst, and putting his arms around it he said to them,
37
"Whoever receives one child such as this in my name, receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but the one who sent me."
38
John said to him, "Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us."
39
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me.
40
For whoever is not against us is for us.
41
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
42
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe (in me) to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.
43
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed than with two hands to go into Gehenna, into the unquenchable fire.
45
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life crippled than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
47
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
48
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'
--------------------------------------
It felt stale. For quite some time over the past couple years, I got a lot of comfort out of going. It seemed like some huge remnant of my past that was predictable and soothing in the midst of a lot of change and challenges. I think it felt the way it did this past Sunday for a few reasons:
- I'm starting to feel more comfortable with my life now, and so am less inclined to seek out items from my childhood merely for solace.
- Most of the people there were families. I can't imagine having a family right now. I love my boyfriend very much, and I enjoy being with him and everything we do together - but the thought of settling down that much - getting into that much of a routine, having that much less free time - doesn't appeal to me now. It's likely that it will in several years, but definitely not now.
- The Gospel was parsed out in such a way - leaving out several contextual details that really emphasized the meaning of the whole passage - and then explained in such a way - in a homily ignoring several contextual details that were by some miracle left in - that I felt as though my time at Mass had honestly been wasted. It's so easy to make excuses when there are extenuating reasons for wanting to be at Mass, but with those diminished I felt myself once again very discomforted by the things that drove me away from the Church back when I was a teenager. I've started listening to a podcast entitled "Pray As You Go" each morning on my drive in to work. It's published by the Jesuits, and it is amazing. AND - even more impressive to me - when *they* presented the Gospel with the passage in question, they included the needed context and actually acknowledged what it was saying.
At the bottom, I've included quotations of the Gospel reading from Mass, and of the Podcast reading.
In the Homily at Mass, the priest ignored the entire first paragraph of the Gospel, which is a clear directive from Jesus that says for the Apostles not to get caught up in factions, and NOT TO PERSECUTE OTHER CHRISTIANS WHO DID NOT WORSHIP EXACTLY AS THEY DO. The words are RIGHT THERE. Jesus is like, hey the point is just to be good people, alright? Don't even go there. And, by the way, if you are tempted to go there, you should do everything in your power to prevent yourself from even thinking about going there. What's much more important is how you treat others, and what sorts of ideas you put into other people's heads about what is right and wrong. And, so, if you end up corrupting people in my name or doing the wrong things because your ego gets you too fired up, then that's a much worse problem then someone having a slightly divergent theological belief.
Like I was saying, pre-rant, the priest ignored that bit - the part that *was* included, anyway - and focused his whole time on sin: how easy it is to sin, get caught up in sin, slip into sin, etc. All of which are valid points - but it seemed so superficial. He wasn't asking people to look deep inside and figure out what's reasonable, just, and compassionate - he was talking about how easy it is to stop following the rules of the church - he was basically absolutely contradicting what the gospel actually said. Almost worse, the Gospel itself leaves out something key to the whole thing: Jesus talking about how important it is to let go of ego. The passage taken as a whole shows the Apostles trying to figure out how to be the "best" and trying to compare themselves to others. I think that's all necessary to understand the mindset of the Apostles - and how like them we can be, easily, when we too have the best intentions - and then to get at the heart of what Jesus was actually trying to teach.
My conclusion is that the Biblical Christ is probably the first, or a very early, western Buddhist. I think that sometime I will go through the Bible and write a book explaining very carefully and clearly how it's really a collection of teachings that convey most of the same ideas found in Buddhism, but from a Western worldview. It will be most excellent.
Observe:
---------------------------
Gospel
Mk 9:38-43, 45, 47-48
At that time, John said to Jesus,
"Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name,
and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us."
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him.
There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name
who can at the same time speak ill of me.
For whoever is not against us is for us.
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink
because you belong to Christ,
amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him if a great millstone
were put around his neck
and he were thrown into the sea.
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.
It is better for you to enter into life maimed
than with two hands to go into Gehenna,
into the unquenchable fire.
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut if off.
It is better for you to enter into life crippled
than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out.
Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye
than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'"
----------------------------
Podcast Passage:
Mk 9:34-48
But they remained silent. They had been discussing among themselves on the way who was the greatest.
35
Then he sat down, called the Twelve, and said to them, "If anyone wishes to be first, he shall be the last of all and the servant of all."
36
Taking a child he placed it in their midst, and putting his arms around it he said to them,
37
"Whoever receives one child such as this in my name, receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but the one who sent me."
38
John said to him, "Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us."
39
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me.
40
For whoever is not against us is for us.
41
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
42
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe (in me) to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.
43
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed than with two hands to go into Gehenna, into the unquenchable fire.
45
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life crippled than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
47
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
48
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'
--------------------------------------
22 September 2009
Puppy Love + More
So, three and a half weeks ago I adopted a 9 year old yellow lab from a local lab rescue group. There have been some ups and downs - in spite of having wanted a dog for several years now, I think I wasn't fully prepared for what it would actually be like - but really, she's been a joy. The day before I got her, Colin and I discovered a large park right down the street from my apartment, so I've been taking her there on most days after work. In addition to just enjoying her company, it's been a lot of fun to participate more in my community - just being out there, smiling at people, making small talk with parents when their kids approach me and want to pet her. Yesterday a little boy no taller than she is came up, very bravely, and wanted to pet her...he got covered in puppy kisses in short order. His mom and I just looked at each other and laughed.
In other news, if anyone wants a free tarot reading, you can send an e-mail to yoursongs1986@yahoo.com with a question, and I'll give a reading to the first 15 individuals I hear from. I recently picked up a deck and started playing with the cards - I've been told that I give pretty good readings, and I'm trying to see how well that translates online. If it seems viable, I might start up an online side business. I think giving useful advice might be a function of how well I can read people (no pun intended, actually) in person, though, so we'll see how this goes.
In other news, if anyone wants a free tarot reading, you can send an e-mail to yoursongs1986@yahoo.com with a question, and I'll give a reading to the first 15 individuals I hear from. I recently picked up a deck and started playing with the cards - I've been told that I give pretty good readings, and I'm trying to see how well that translates online. If it seems viable, I might start up an online side business. I think giving useful advice might be a function of how well I can read people (no pun intended, actually) in person, though, so we'll see how this goes.
13 September 2009
R-E-S-P-E-C-T
I was fairly appalled to see the outcry over President Obama's speech to schoolchildren last week.
I'm not really a supporter of some of his policies.
But I *am* a supporter of the values he spoke about during that speech. And just as much, I'm a supporter of the idea of maintaining respect for the office of President. I want my children, when I have them, to grow up seeing the President as an honorable person - one who has achieved the position through the same hard work and perseverance that he was talking about, and one that has the best intentions for the nation at heart. I want my children to debate the ideas, and not simply attack and mistrust the person.
I don't want politics to become so ugly that we can't at least maintain some sense of idealism about the person that is, at least in theory, leading us all.
I'm not really a supporter of some of his policies.
But I *am* a supporter of the values he spoke about during that speech. And just as much, I'm a supporter of the idea of maintaining respect for the office of President. I want my children, when I have them, to grow up seeing the President as an honorable person - one who has achieved the position through the same hard work and perseverance that he was talking about, and one that has the best intentions for the nation at heart. I want my children to debate the ideas, and not simply attack and mistrust the person.
I don't want politics to become so ugly that we can't at least maintain some sense of idealism about the person that is, at least in theory, leading us all.
20 August 2009
Saccharin
I had another pretty frustrating day today. It really shocks me sometimes - it seems like there can be so many hidden and double standards in the places that should be the most straightforward. I think back to being in, say, second or third grade. I remember what it felt like to just be concerned with doing my best - not worrying about how to make myself look better compared to others, or dealing with the uncomfortable situation of being told nice words that weren't backed by any substantive actions. It hurt to have a teacher say, "You didn't follow my directions, so you're being punished" or to hear from a friend that, "You hurt me, so I'm upset at you," and it was even worse on those occasions when there wasn't any second chance - but you know, that was infinitely preferable to, and infinitely more respectful of me than, not truly letting me know where I stand.
Sometimes I think about the concept of "original sin" - and instead of thinking of it as some arbitrary "punishment" or "designation" handed down by an angry God as the result of a more or less arbitrary transgression (eating some fruit?) I think of it as an allegory for simple self awareness, and the development of human ego. As soon as we realize who we are and what potential we possess (gaining the "fruit" of the "tree of knowledge") and as soon as we taste the fruit of success or even love, we face so much more temptation to be disingenuous, untruthful, lazy, spiteful, etc just for the sake of preserving that initial good feeling. Humanity and sentience seems to carry with it this enormous burden of awareness of "self" that really just gets in the way of doing the best we can, in whatever setting, regardless of the peripheral factors.
Seeking a more straightforward life, a few years ago I thought very seriously about joining a convent, but after some discernment and a very vivid dream I realized that that path isn't for me.
Anyway, new topic on the blog soon, I promise. I know this one is getting worn out.
Sometimes I think about the concept of "original sin" - and instead of thinking of it as some arbitrary "punishment" or "designation" handed down by an angry God as the result of a more or less arbitrary transgression (eating some fruit?) I think of it as an allegory for simple self awareness, and the development of human ego. As soon as we realize who we are and what potential we possess (gaining the "fruit" of the "tree of knowledge") and as soon as we taste the fruit of success or even love, we face so much more temptation to be disingenuous, untruthful, lazy, spiteful, etc just for the sake of preserving that initial good feeling. Humanity and sentience seems to carry with it this enormous burden of awareness of "self" that really just gets in the way of doing the best we can, in whatever setting, regardless of the peripheral factors.
Seeking a more straightforward life, a few years ago I thought very seriously about joining a convent, but after some discernment and a very vivid dream I realized that that path isn't for me.
Anyway, new topic on the blog soon, I promise. I know this one is getting worn out.
29 July 2009
Unhelpful &*#$*&@$#*^
I abhor trying to collaborate on anything, in any facet of life, with a person that is so utterly listless and disengaged that they can't be bothered to give me any sort of complete answer to the questions I have, and then when I take initiative to try and be useful anyway, they can't even be compelled to make use of anything I try to do to assist them. It's even worse being in a position of having to rely on these people (and their arbitrary judgment of whether or not you're "worth" helping, or whether or not they "feel" like getting off their asses to be a part of the team) to get anything done.
Sometimes I'm way too sensitive. I'll take it personally when people brush me off and refuse to engage enough to let me learn enough to help them, even though I should know that it has nothing to do with me and more to do with them and their attitude. But I end up feeling so naive, and so small, as a result of getting treated like it's just not worth anyone's time to have any kind of productive exchange when I try to extend myself. I'm sorry but few people in life are so perfectly capable and competent and on top of their shit as to truly be burdened and held back by someone who just wants to find out enough to help, and I'm sick of getting treated like that.
I know it's supposed to be a part of growing up: getting used to the fact that there's no controlling or programming the way that other people act and feel, and that it's useless and unproductive to waste time and energy feeling upset about it. So, this should be a valuable opportunity for me to get good at being mature and taking the high road, finding ways around unproductive people and situations. I should be excited! I can be such a better person from this!
But mostly I just want to scream.
BAH!!!!!!!
Sometimes I'm way too sensitive. I'll take it personally when people brush me off and refuse to engage enough to let me learn enough to help them, even though I should know that it has nothing to do with me and more to do with them and their attitude. But I end up feeling so naive, and so small, as a result of getting treated like it's just not worth anyone's time to have any kind of productive exchange when I try to extend myself. I'm sorry but few people in life are so perfectly capable and competent and on top of their shit as to truly be burdened and held back by someone who just wants to find out enough to help, and I'm sick of getting treated like that.
I know it's supposed to be a part of growing up: getting used to the fact that there's no controlling or programming the way that other people act and feel, and that it's useless and unproductive to waste time and energy feeling upset about it. So, this should be a valuable opportunity for me to get good at being mature and taking the high road, finding ways around unproductive people and situations. I should be excited! I can be such a better person from this!
But mostly I just want to scream.
BAH!!!!!!!
24 July 2009
Messages
So, I learned my lesson from my last post. Shortly after I put it up, I realized that a handful of my friends (whom I guess read this?) were having somewhat awkward conversations with me. It was like...everyone...was being careful about what they said.
Whoops. That's a danger of the digital age, I guess. I had been referring to one specific situation with one specific person, and everyone wondered if I was talking about them? Awkward. So I took the post down. I guess a better idea would have been to just have personal conversations a) with people I might seek advice from, and b) with the person I was frustrated with.
Also, I've noticed that when I'm bored I tend to get really frustrated, really easily. It's like I'm happier when I have lots of (intellectually, not emotionally) challenging thing on my plate. Isn't it supposed to work the other way around? What gives? You would think that even if being bored isn't optimal, I wouldn't be necessarily *grouchy* or more argumentative as a result, but sometimes I definitely seem to be.
In other news, the US and N Korea appear to have degenerated to finger pointing and name calling.
Whoops. That's a danger of the digital age, I guess. I had been referring to one specific situation with one specific person, and everyone wondered if I was talking about them? Awkward. So I took the post down. I guess a better idea would have been to just have personal conversations a) with people I might seek advice from, and b) with the person I was frustrated with.
Also, I've noticed that when I'm bored I tend to get really frustrated, really easily. It's like I'm happier when I have lots of (intellectually, not emotionally) challenging thing on my plate. Isn't it supposed to work the other way around? What gives? You would think that even if being bored isn't optimal, I wouldn't be necessarily *grouchy* or more argumentative as a result, but sometimes I definitely seem to be.
In other news, the US and N Korea appear to have degenerated to finger pointing and name calling.
10 July 2009
Lists
Things I loved about being overseas:
- Learning to drive on the other side of the road
- Small, functional grocery stores without much bloat
- Amazing food (particularly Indian food...)
- Good beer
- Courtesy as a default, not as an exception
- Some of the most peaceful countryside imaginable
- Castles and buildings much older than the US
- Choral Evensong
- Outstanding public transportation
- Equal access to "city" events as well as relaxing spots in the countryside
- TV that wasn't total rubbish
- TV that was total rubbish, just a different kind of rubbish
Things that make me glad to be back in the US:
- Baseball/SportsCenter on ESPN (vice Cricket on SKY)
- People with accents that are more southern than mine
- Jack Daniels
- Steaks big enough to be worth eating
- Mass (I only saw one Catholic Church in two months; it was on the Welsh coast...)
- Friends & Family
- Feeling more able to understand others and communicate with them
- More variety on the radio/tv
- Manageably sized plugs for electronics
- Friends & family
- The comfort of being home
- Making use of the "Discover America" pamphlet that Colin and I picked up at a rest stop in Yorkshire
I think it's fair to say that I changed a bit over the past couple months. I definitely feel more independent, and in a lot of ways more clear-headed and sure of myself. It was great to have a big break in my routine and to find myself in a series of totally new situations, learning to adapt. Coming back is always a little bittersweet, but I think it's fair to say that I got what I wanted out of the trip. I'm feeling pretty excited about life at home, and like I worked myself out of some of the rut I felt like I was in before I left.
Still no major insight on "what I want to do when I grow up" - right now I have a good job, and I'm taking interesting classes, and I really can't complain at all. I think at some point I'd really like to work for myself.
- Learning to drive on the other side of the road
- Small, functional grocery stores without much bloat
- Amazing food (particularly Indian food...)
- Good beer
- Courtesy as a default, not as an exception
- Some of the most peaceful countryside imaginable
- Castles and buildings much older than the US
- Choral Evensong
- Outstanding public transportation
- Equal access to "city" events as well as relaxing spots in the countryside
- TV that wasn't total rubbish
- TV that was total rubbish, just a different kind of rubbish
Things that make me glad to be back in the US:
- Baseball/SportsCenter on ESPN (vice Cricket on SKY)
- People with accents that are more southern than mine
- Jack Daniels
- Steaks big enough to be worth eating
- Mass (I only saw one Catholic Church in two months; it was on the Welsh coast...)
- Friends & Family
- Feeling more able to understand others and communicate with them
- More variety on the radio/tv
- Manageably sized plugs for electronics
- Friends & family
- The comfort of being home
- Making use of the "Discover America" pamphlet that Colin and I picked up at a rest stop in Yorkshire
I think it's fair to say that I changed a bit over the past couple months. I definitely feel more independent, and in a lot of ways more clear-headed and sure of myself. It was great to have a big break in my routine and to find myself in a series of totally new situations, learning to adapt. Coming back is always a little bittersweet, but I think it's fair to say that I got what I wanted out of the trip. I'm feeling pretty excited about life at home, and like I worked myself out of some of the rut I felt like I was in before I left.
Still no major insight on "what I want to do when I grow up" - right now I have a good job, and I'm taking interesting classes, and I really can't complain at all. I think at some point I'd really like to work for myself.
03 July 2009
02 July 2009
Follow-Up
Last night I was so tired that I literally passed out in the middle of writing.
What I didn't say is that, until recently, I always thought it was kind of frivolous for a woman to hold onto her maiden name - it seemed as though taking her husband's name did a lot to create a new family unit - instead of "you + me" it becomes "us." I understand that, and still agree with the idea that a new family should reflect that it is a new family, and not appendages of other families, bound together. I'm still not sure that I have a definite opinion on last names, either way.
There are a lot of times in life when a little acceptance seems necessary - if everyone fulfilled every impulse they had, and every desire they wanted - especially in the name of fulfilling ideological beliefs*, I think in the long run things would fall apart a little bit - cohesiveness and relationships would certainly suffer.
As with most (all?) things, I suppose the answer is moderation - knowing where to find the line of reasonableness, and respecting that.
*I really do think that any strict ideology in the end does become self-limiting.
What I didn't say is that, until recently, I always thought it was kind of frivolous for a woman to hold onto her maiden name - it seemed as though taking her husband's name did a lot to create a new family unit - instead of "you + me" it becomes "us." I understand that, and still agree with the idea that a new family should reflect that it is a new family, and not appendages of other families, bound together. I'm still not sure that I have a definite opinion on last names, either way.
There are a lot of times in life when a little acceptance seems necessary - if everyone fulfilled every impulse they had, and every desire they wanted - especially in the name of fulfilling ideological beliefs*, I think in the long run things would fall apart a little bit - cohesiveness and relationships would certainly suffer.
As with most (all?) things, I suppose the answer is moderation - knowing where to find the line of reasonableness, and respecting that.
*I really do think that any strict ideology in the end does become self-limiting.
01 July 2009
Grandpa
It's July 1, which means that it's the day for me to think of my Grandpa. It's been 9 years since he died - it struck me today that while on one hand, he never knew most of the person I am today, on the other hand he still knew and appreciated who I was as a person.
This date always seems like a good time for me to look back, and re-evaluate how things are going. What's different this year than last? How have I changed?
Last year at this time I was struggling to fit into an uncomfortable office environment, adjusting to having graduated from college, and trying to figure out a direction for my life.
This year, the office discomfort is gone, I'm pretty passed the graduated life adjustment, but I'm still not sure what I want to do with my life. I guess it's not really that big of a deal, given that most people never quite figure out what they want, but I've still given it some thought.
Today I was thinking a lot about last names, middle names, etc. I know some women take their original surname as a middle name, and that some women get married but just keep their original last name. I'm wondering how much more common that sort of thing will do. It just made me a little sad to think today about my family tree and realize that that the name, or at least the clear paternally based linkages, might become spread even more thin. I'm not sure how I feel about all of that. I know that a name is only a name and doesn't mean a whole lot in terms of preserving someone's memory, but it's going to feel weird to not have at least that link to him if I ever do get married and take the husband's last name.
This date always seems like a good time for me to look back, and re-evaluate how things are going. What's different this year than last? How have I changed?
Last year at this time I was struggling to fit into an uncomfortable office environment, adjusting to having graduated from college, and trying to figure out a direction for my life.
This year, the office discomfort is gone, I'm pretty passed the graduated life adjustment, but I'm still not sure what I want to do with my life. I guess it's not really that big of a deal, given that most people never quite figure out what they want, but I've still given it some thought.
Today I was thinking a lot about last names, middle names, etc. I know some women take their original surname as a middle name, and that some women get married but just keep their original last name. I'm wondering how much more common that sort of thing will do. It just made me a little sad to think today about my family tree and realize that that the name, or at least the clear paternally based linkages, might become spread even more thin. I'm not sure how I feel about all of that. I know that a name is only a name and doesn't mean a whole lot in terms of preserving someone's memory, but it's going to feel weird to not have at least that link to him if I ever do get married and take the husband's last name.
25 June 2009
Birmingham
I have a new city to add to my list of "Cities that I Really Really Like": Birmingham.
(No, not the one in Alabama.)
I'm in Birmingham, UK for the next few days - I've only been here a few hours, and I love it. The center of the town has a big open air international food market with stands selling all sorts of ethnic deliciousness (and a huge beer tent). I love the architecture of the Cathedral (and I'm slowly getting used to the layout of Anglican Cathedrals vice Catholic ones...) Tonight I heard a lecture by Malcom Gladwell at the "Town Hall" (it's a big lecture hall) and tomorrow night I'm going to go to a performance by the Birmingham Royal Ballet.
The weather is phenomenal, the streets are bustling, the food and beer are cheap and delicious, and there's a ton to do.
Happiness, meet my life.
(In other news, the Gladwell lecture was pretty interesting. I felt like his theme wasn't terribly original - he was talking about the blindness that arises from overconfidence, with reference to how that caused the current economic crisis - but he illustrated his point via a tremendously vivid recounting of the events leading up to and including the Battle of Chancellorsville during the American Civil War, so I felt like I got a remarkably solid history lesson out of it if nothing else, and his point was well made. It reminded me of high school and Mr. Rakel's history class - never mind that I never got to be in his class, the few times I heard him were enough - I digress...probably the beer...time for sleep...)
(No, not the one in Alabama.)
I'm in Birmingham, UK for the next few days - I've only been here a few hours, and I love it. The center of the town has a big open air international food market with stands selling all sorts of ethnic deliciousness (and a huge beer tent). I love the architecture of the Cathedral (and I'm slowly getting used to the layout of Anglican Cathedrals vice Catholic ones...) Tonight I heard a lecture by Malcom Gladwell at the "Town Hall" (it's a big lecture hall) and tomorrow night I'm going to go to a performance by the Birmingham Royal Ballet.
The weather is phenomenal, the streets are bustling, the food and beer are cheap and delicious, and there's a ton to do.
Happiness, meet my life.
(In other news, the Gladwell lecture was pretty interesting. I felt like his theme wasn't terribly original - he was talking about the blindness that arises from overconfidence, with reference to how that caused the current economic crisis - but he illustrated his point via a tremendously vivid recounting of the events leading up to and including the Battle of Chancellorsville during the American Civil War, so I felt like I got a remarkably solid history lesson out of it if nothing else, and his point was well made. It reminded me of high school and Mr. Rakel's history class - never mind that I never got to be in his class, the few times I heard him were enough - I digress...probably the beer...time for sleep...)
11 June 2009
Lunar
Been a month since I've posted here.
I was saddened yesterday to hear about the shooting at the Holocaust museum in D.C. It sounded like the attacker was old and perhaps in some kind of an irrational "nothing left to lose" state of mind. It also appears that he didn't actually lose much, given that he's still alive and one security guard is dead.
One thing that upset me, hearing the news reports, was the talk of "additional security measures" that might be implemented in the near future. Why is there a need for that? I feel like DC is probably one of the safest cities in the US, (or at least I would hope so) - and what everyone seems to be overlooking is that while YES, a psycho with a gun managed to get inside the door of a museum, no civilians at all were killed. The security forces that were already there did exactly what they were supposed to do, and they did it flawlessly. Why is there nobody out there THANKING the guards and police force for executing the defense of the museum so well? If nothing else, this shows that we HAVE learned from the past, from episodes like the VT shootings, and that we're getting better at protecting our citizens. Why isn't there more emphasis on that?
In any case, anyone who's visited a museum anytime recently in DC can't have missed the extremely watchful security guards in every room of every wing of every building. I feel safe with them there. What else can anyone ask for? What other measures could possibly be implemented in the name of keeping us safe?
I feel like there's a different message here, one that the media could be doing us all a favor by broadcasting: trying something like that simply won't work. There's no point in trying.
One news channel was interviewing people who were saying things like, "Yeah, it sounds like the awful economy really pushed this guy over the edge." What. The. Fuck. Everyone is suffering from the economy, and MOST people aren't handling it like he did. It made me sick - taking an occasion like this to make potshots about the economy seemed in really poor taste. I know that media companies are really in it for the profits, but it would have been really, really, nice if they'd just passed off the event with something like "Holocaust museum security guard dead in tragic shooting after 89-year old perpetrator enters building, firing shots." That's all that anyone needs to say: it happened, the guy failed, it's over.
There was another news channel interviewing a fairly prominent female about the day's events, and it was disgusting to watch her - she was just eating up the attention. One wondered if she was truly, at the bottom of her heart, cared about what'd happened. Is this really what we're turning into, as a society?
I was saddened yesterday to hear about the shooting at the Holocaust museum in D.C. It sounded like the attacker was old and perhaps in some kind of an irrational "nothing left to lose" state of mind. It also appears that he didn't actually lose much, given that he's still alive and one security guard is dead.
One thing that upset me, hearing the news reports, was the talk of "additional security measures" that might be implemented in the near future. Why is there a need for that? I feel like DC is probably one of the safest cities in the US, (or at least I would hope so) - and what everyone seems to be overlooking is that while YES, a psycho with a gun managed to get inside the door of a museum, no civilians at all were killed. The security forces that were already there did exactly what they were supposed to do, and they did it flawlessly. Why is there nobody out there THANKING the guards and police force for executing the defense of the museum so well? If nothing else, this shows that we HAVE learned from the past, from episodes like the VT shootings, and that we're getting better at protecting our citizens. Why isn't there more emphasis on that?
In any case, anyone who's visited a museum anytime recently in DC can't have missed the extremely watchful security guards in every room of every wing of every building. I feel safe with them there. What else can anyone ask for? What other measures could possibly be implemented in the name of keeping us safe?
I feel like there's a different message here, one that the media could be doing us all a favor by broadcasting: trying something like that simply won't work. There's no point in trying.
One news channel was interviewing people who were saying things like, "Yeah, it sounds like the awful economy really pushed this guy over the edge." What. The. Fuck. Everyone is suffering from the economy, and MOST people aren't handling it like he did. It made me sick - taking an occasion like this to make potshots about the economy seemed in really poor taste. I know that media companies are really in it for the profits, but it would have been really, really, nice if they'd just passed off the event with something like "Holocaust museum security guard dead in tragic shooting after 89-year old perpetrator enters building, firing shots." That's all that anyone needs to say: it happened, the guy failed, it's over.
There was another news channel interviewing a fairly prominent female about the day's events, and it was disgusting to watch her - she was just eating up the attention. One wondered if she was truly, at the bottom of her heart, cared about what'd happened. Is this really what we're turning into, as a society?
10 May 2009
Star Crap
I can't even think of a creative title for this entry.
No spoiler: the new Star Trek movie sucks, big time. I'm not by any means a die hard Trekkie, but that was hard to sit through. I felt like the movie trampled all over a lot of what made Star Trek...special.
Spoiler: What the heck, Spock. Making out on the transporter pad?????
Will a real Trekkie please convince me that it wasn't so bad?
No spoiler: the new Star Trek movie sucks, big time. I'm not by any means a die hard Trekkie, but that was hard to sit through. I felt like the movie trampled all over a lot of what made Star Trek...special.
Spoiler: What the heck, Spock. Making out on the transporter pad?????
Will a real Trekkie please convince me that it wasn't so bad?
28 April 2009
Love
It really bothers me sometimes to see parents that seem to have kids entirely for the sake of glorifying themselves - they want to become the center of someone's universe, so they have sex, incubate, and then pop out a tiny little helpless bundle of nerves and energy. The child becomes "theirs" - a way for them to redeem the mistakes of their past, a way for them to "fix" things that went wrong with their own childhood, and a way for them to assure themselves that they have value in this world. It seems to become so much a part of them that they forget that the child is a person, independent and free.
Based on my own family experiences, I wouldn't have seen having kids as an egotistical thing. I saw having kids as a way of establishing a cohesive family unit, and as of, honestly, just perpetuating the species - bringing people into the world and hopefully equipping them to lead the best lives they can, so that they can carry on the world the best they can. I felt like my family experiences growing up were, on the whole, pretty good. Having a family seemed great - we had so many good times together. However, I never felt as though my parents wanted me in the world in order for them to feel good about themselves. Certainly they LOVE me, and care deeply for me, and would be utterly distraught if anything happened to me - that's not what I'm getting at - more just that they seemed pretty comfortable in their own skin, independent of my existence, and that was fine. My point is that I never felt as though they needed me in order to define themselves, and that I wasn't held close just so that they could bask in the glory of being creators, and of being needed. I was given the space to be my own person. They provided for me, guided me, cared for me, raised me the best way that made sense to them, and then let me go. They are still there for me, which is good.
Anyway, the last time I was looking at scripture, I was reminded of the ideal of God - a loving parent, who wants us to love Him, (and who maybe did make us for egotistical reasons) but who won't intercede in our lives on a daily basis for the same reason that some parents step back a bit and let their kids have the reigns a bit more and make their own decisions - or at least not try to protect them from every last thing, or to be so wrapped up in glorifying themselves through their kids that they lose sight of what it actually means to raise an independent person. In the end, it's better for the kids - they learn more, and more importantly they experience more and grow more fully into themselves. The love is always there, though, and THAT is the important part - the comfort, the trust, the ability to reach out a hand whenever needed. I guess that's my answer for why "God lets" bad things happen to good people - he may have made us in His own image, but I think the point is that we're given a *life* with everything that that encompasses, all of the opportunities that come from challenge, and all of the experiences that truly shape us. Even if He *wants* us desperately to love Him, there seems to be a kind of selfless "letting go" (free will).
And for what it's worth, I really *like* the idea of God that I presented here. (I wouldn't argue for it otherwise, I guess).
In other news, I am massively stressed out.
Based on my own family experiences, I wouldn't have seen having kids as an egotistical thing. I saw having kids as a way of establishing a cohesive family unit, and as of, honestly, just perpetuating the species - bringing people into the world and hopefully equipping them to lead the best lives they can, so that they can carry on the world the best they can. I felt like my family experiences growing up were, on the whole, pretty good. Having a family seemed great - we had so many good times together. However, I never felt as though my parents wanted me in the world in order for them to feel good about themselves. Certainly they LOVE me, and care deeply for me, and would be utterly distraught if anything happened to me - that's not what I'm getting at - more just that they seemed pretty comfortable in their own skin, independent of my existence, and that was fine. My point is that I never felt as though they needed me in order to define themselves, and that I wasn't held close just so that they could bask in the glory of being creators, and of being needed. I was given the space to be my own person. They provided for me, guided me, cared for me, raised me the best way that made sense to them, and then let me go. They are still there for me, which is good.
Anyway, the last time I was looking at scripture, I was reminded of the ideal of God - a loving parent, who wants us to love Him, (and who maybe did make us for egotistical reasons) but who won't intercede in our lives on a daily basis for the same reason that some parents step back a bit and let their kids have the reigns a bit more and make their own decisions - or at least not try to protect them from every last thing, or to be so wrapped up in glorifying themselves through their kids that they lose sight of what it actually means to raise an independent person. In the end, it's better for the kids - they learn more, and more importantly they experience more and grow more fully into themselves. The love is always there, though, and THAT is the important part - the comfort, the trust, the ability to reach out a hand whenever needed. I guess that's my answer for why "God lets" bad things happen to good people - he may have made us in His own image, but I think the point is that we're given a *life* with everything that that encompasses, all of the opportunities that come from challenge, and all of the experiences that truly shape us. Even if He *wants* us desperately to love Him, there seems to be a kind of selfless "letting go" (free will).
And for what it's worth, I really *like* the idea of God that I presented here. (I wouldn't argue for it otherwise, I guess).
In other news, I am massively stressed out.
24 April 2009
Blank
When I was in college, I'd write on here all the time - it would be my way to kill time between classes, or procrastinate before/while doing homework.
I feel like I have so much more to SAY now, big grown-up thoughts, but I'm too busy living my big grown-up life to write any of it down.
I'm about to head into the "red zone" of craziness over the next few weeks.
Not sure when things will settle down again. Though, class ends in early May (for better or worse, to be completely dramatic about it) so that will help a lot. This course (digital satellite communications) has been completely fascinating, but also eaten most of my time. If I'd done a better job remembering non-linear circuits / transfer functions from undergrad that would have made it moderately easier...but now we're into antenna gain patterns and all kinds of stuff I haven't seen before...apparently I've seen the math before, though.
I went to a technical conference earlier this week, and had a revelation: maybe I *do* want to be an engineer for the rest of my life. Unclear. I'm still taking the summer off from class, to give myself time to think and figure things out...but...I was really inspired, and excited, by a lot of what I saw.
I feel like I have so much more to SAY now, big grown-up thoughts, but I'm too busy living my big grown-up life to write any of it down.
I'm about to head into the "red zone" of craziness over the next few weeks.
Not sure when things will settle down again. Though, class ends in early May (for better or worse, to be completely dramatic about it) so that will help a lot. This course (digital satellite communications) has been completely fascinating, but also eaten most of my time. If I'd done a better job remembering non-linear circuits / transfer functions from undergrad that would have made it moderately easier...but now we're into antenna gain patterns and all kinds of stuff I haven't seen before...apparently I've seen the math before, though.
I went to a technical conference earlier this week, and had a revelation: maybe I *do* want to be an engineer for the rest of my life. Unclear. I'm still taking the summer off from class, to give myself time to think and figure things out...but...I was really inspired, and excited, by a lot of what I saw.
23 March 2009
Punditry
Sometimes in the morning I'll switch back and forth between CNN and FOXNEWS while I'm getting ready for work. The differences between the two are pretty funny, but the similarities disturb me.
For example, this morning at 6:30 CNN was running another attack story on Sarah Palin. I feel like Palin is a complicated issue - she comes across way too naive to me, and perhaps not knowledgeable enough, for politics, and it's pretty easy to take advantage of that. I'm not saying that she's an innocent victim, but I think that a lot of what she's said or actions that she's taken have been taken a few steps out of context by CNN. Here are my feelings about Palin: if she's honestly not qualified for politics, then fine - leave her *alone* and shut her out of your political coverage, and that'll do more than any attack story (without being so personally vicious) to ensure that she doesn't bring her naivete into a forum where she's impacting everyone's lives.
FOXNEWS, meanwhile, was running a story about how damn annoying it is that Obama has been in the news, and on entertainment shows, pretty much non-stop since being elected. He's been laughing about the economic situation (to try and "reassure" Americans) but he's starting to come off blase, according to them. Of course, there's always the argument that Obama is trying to make the public feel like they're connected with the person / administration that is making all sorts of momentous decisions about our MONEY and what's going to HAPPEN with it over the next few DECADES. If someone is going to be spending a large part of my paychecks for me, then yeah, I damn well wanna feel comfortable and familiar with the guy. I'm not sure that I AM entirely comfortable with Obama, but I think it's a cheap shot to criticize him for making so many TV appearances.
So I felt like both stories were pretty worthless, in terms of adding substance to my life. I can do without the character attacks on both sides. It was kind of funny to see both sides bending over backwards to vilify the other.
Here's what bothers me: when I turn on a news channel, particularly a news channel - I want to SEE THE NEWS!! Hello? I want updates on Iraq. I want to know how many people died where, and how, and what progress we're making. I want to know the political situation over there. Did you know that they had wildly successful elections several weeks ago? I want to know how the political transition is going. I want to know what new members have been installed in which provinces, and how they're relating to the public.
I want to KNOW about the economy. I want to hear about the stock market. I want updates on every single piece of legislation that's been passed recently, and every single piece of policy. Did you know that they recently introduced policy or legislation (I'm not sure which) to basically just CREATE more money, dump it into the economy, and hope that stimulates spending without causing hyperinflation. That could cause MASSIVE damage economically, or if the fed is careful to cut off the money supply at just the right time, it could actually do a lot of good. But - either way, I want to know what's going on.
I honestly don't care if both channels want to be completely partisan in their approaches. If FOXNEWS wants to only cover the good news from Iraq, and CNN the bad, and CNN only the good economic news, and FOXNEWS the bad - that's honestly fine with me. If I can look at both sides and hear intelligent arguments on their perspectives, then fine - I can look at both channels and make up my own mind. But for goodness sake, I want to see substance coming from both. What bothered me most about the Palin/Obama stories was that neither one DIRECTLY related to ANY of the major news happening in the world. Neither one talked about policy, or perspective, or policy makers, or really much of anything.
That bothers me. How hard is it supposed to be to find out about what's really happening....?
End rant.
For example, this morning at 6:30 CNN was running another attack story on Sarah Palin. I feel like Palin is a complicated issue - she comes across way too naive to me, and perhaps not knowledgeable enough, for politics, and it's pretty easy to take advantage of that. I'm not saying that she's an innocent victim, but I think that a lot of what she's said or actions that she's taken have been taken a few steps out of context by CNN. Here are my feelings about Palin: if she's honestly not qualified for politics, then fine - leave her *alone* and shut her out of your political coverage, and that'll do more than any attack story (without being so personally vicious) to ensure that she doesn't bring her naivete into a forum where she's impacting everyone's lives.
FOXNEWS, meanwhile, was running a story about how damn annoying it is that Obama has been in the news, and on entertainment shows, pretty much non-stop since being elected. He's been laughing about the economic situation (to try and "reassure" Americans) but he's starting to come off blase, according to them. Of course, there's always the argument that Obama is trying to make the public feel like they're connected with the person / administration that is making all sorts of momentous decisions about our MONEY and what's going to HAPPEN with it over the next few DECADES. If someone is going to be spending a large part of my paychecks for me, then yeah, I damn well wanna feel comfortable and familiar with the guy. I'm not sure that I AM entirely comfortable with Obama, but I think it's a cheap shot to criticize him for making so many TV appearances.
So I felt like both stories were pretty worthless, in terms of adding substance to my life. I can do without the character attacks on both sides. It was kind of funny to see both sides bending over backwards to vilify the other.
Here's what bothers me: when I turn on a news channel, particularly a news channel - I want to SEE THE NEWS!! Hello? I want updates on Iraq. I want to know how many people died where, and how, and what progress we're making. I want to know the political situation over there. Did you know that they had wildly successful elections several weeks ago? I want to know how the political transition is going. I want to know what new members have been installed in which provinces, and how they're relating to the public.
I want to KNOW about the economy. I want to hear about the stock market. I want updates on every single piece of legislation that's been passed recently, and every single piece of policy. Did you know that they recently introduced policy or legislation (I'm not sure which) to basically just CREATE more money, dump it into the economy, and hope that stimulates spending without causing hyperinflation. That could cause MASSIVE damage economically, or if the fed is careful to cut off the money supply at just the right time, it could actually do a lot of good. But - either way, I want to know what's going on.
I honestly don't care if both channels want to be completely partisan in their approaches. If FOXNEWS wants to only cover the good news from Iraq, and CNN the bad, and CNN only the good economic news, and FOXNEWS the bad - that's honestly fine with me. If I can look at both sides and hear intelligent arguments on their perspectives, then fine - I can look at both channels and make up my own mind. But for goodness sake, I want to see substance coming from both. What bothered me most about the Palin/Obama stories was that neither one DIRECTLY related to ANY of the major news happening in the world. Neither one talked about policy, or perspective, or policy makers, or really much of anything.
That bothers me. How hard is it supposed to be to find out about what's really happening....?
End rant.
18 March 2009
OW!
I got a tetanus shot yesterday and now my left arm fugghin hurts. I remember getting them as a kid and being a bit stiff but nothing like this.
I know, kind of a crappy update after not writing anything for a long time.
Not much is new, I suppose. Work and school continue to go on. I'm starting to second guess whether or not I should really take a class over the summer. On one hand, I really want to finish the degree as quickly as possible, and don't have much interest in stretching out the process even longer. (It's already going to take me at least 3 1/3 years). On the other hand, I'm getting really burned out and given that I'll have a number of other things to juggle this summer I'm not sure it's a great idea. Thankfully I have awhile to decide.
There's also the fact that I kind of want to switch careers...not yet, but in a few years. I think I'd really like to be a teacher or counselor. I want to do something where I work with people, and do something slightly different every day. I find my classes really interesting now, so that's good, but if I'm honestly planning on switching then it's kind of pointless to keep working on a degree toward the current one instead of a degree toward the future one. Taking different classes would cost more, though (more than I really have to spare at the moment) and would also commit me to the switch. I'm not sure that I'm ready for that commitment. I love my job now, it's just not something I see myself doing forever.
Ahh there's so much to do in life!! How to do everything?
I know, kind of a crappy update after not writing anything for a long time.
Not much is new, I suppose. Work and school continue to go on. I'm starting to second guess whether or not I should really take a class over the summer. On one hand, I really want to finish the degree as quickly as possible, and don't have much interest in stretching out the process even longer. (It's already going to take me at least 3 1/3 years). On the other hand, I'm getting really burned out and given that I'll have a number of other things to juggle this summer I'm not sure it's a great idea. Thankfully I have awhile to decide.
There's also the fact that I kind of want to switch careers...not yet, but in a few years. I think I'd really like to be a teacher or counselor. I want to do something where I work with people, and do something slightly different every day. I find my classes really interesting now, so that's good, but if I'm honestly planning on switching then it's kind of pointless to keep working on a degree toward the current one instead of a degree toward the future one. Taking different classes would cost more, though (more than I really have to spare at the moment) and would also commit me to the switch. I'm not sure that I'm ready for that commitment. I love my job now, it's just not something I see myself doing forever.
Ahh there's so much to do in life!! How to do everything?
09 February 2009
Science Faction
What makes good science fiction?
I’m serious. As a female, I picked up science fiction books a lot later than many of my male counterparts. When I was an adolescent, I was more interested in books that talked about romance or other interpersonal situations, or mysteries. (As a kid, I mostly read Nancy Drew, the Hardy Boys, and whatever other random paperbacks I could find at the library). It took me until I was just bored by those (usually somewhat formulaic) books to even consider branching out to something more science-y. And, while I love a good science fiction read, there are still the days when I regress to the comforts of a good romance novel.
I had a conversation today about “hard science fiction” – comprised of those books dealing more with plausible, or semi-plausible, science as the focal point of the books, and how those contrast with “soft science fiction” comprised of stories set in some kind of unrealistic setting – either a fantasy one, or a technologically advanced one, but one that could for all intents and purposes take place in any setting.
Thinking about the huge variety in types of science fiction made me realize that there are probably a variety of reasons people read it. It also made me consider exactly how difficult it is to be truly forward-looking, much less forward-looking in a realistic manner. Will there ever be another Asimov? Many people would say that it’s not likely, but I think that the human race has enough generations left to produce a few more visionaries.
Why do you read science fiction? Are you interested in thinking about ways that humans might thrive and survive in new settings? Curious about potential technological inventions? Curious about the implications of those inventions (or alternately, completely disinterested in the implications?) Are you really just looking for a good story in a unique setting? Given whatever your focus is, how much of the other ingredients would you enjoy (or tolerate) before you lost interest?
Some people would even argue that science fiction is, contrary to what one’s assumptions might be, truly about distilling down human nature to its very essentials and using unique settings to expose and explore humanity.*
And at the risk of opening the gender debate (once again) – do you think that girls are more disposed to like “certain types” of science fiction? (That’s just drawing primarily on my own experience ... and I’m wondering if that’s at all common, at the risk of drawing fire for generalizing based on a social construct. Good for me!)
For what it’s worth, I tend to read science fiction primarily for technology, and secondarily for the exposition of human nature. I don’t do well with fantasy – I tend to get numb trying to remember complicated names, settings, and social rites, and usually end up putting them down in favor of something more practical.
*This is similar to a discussion we had in my digital satellite communications class last week, wherein the professor discussed the difference between using a spectrum analyzer to measure a signal, and using a signal to measure the frequency response of the spectrum analyzer’s selector filter.
I’m serious. As a female, I picked up science fiction books a lot later than many of my male counterparts. When I was an adolescent, I was more interested in books that talked about romance or other interpersonal situations, or mysteries. (As a kid, I mostly read Nancy Drew, the Hardy Boys, and whatever other random paperbacks I could find at the library). It took me until I was just bored by those (usually somewhat formulaic) books to even consider branching out to something more science-y. And, while I love a good science fiction read, there are still the days when I regress to the comforts of a good romance novel.
I had a conversation today about “hard science fiction” – comprised of those books dealing more with plausible, or semi-plausible, science as the focal point of the books, and how those contrast with “soft science fiction” comprised of stories set in some kind of unrealistic setting – either a fantasy one, or a technologically advanced one, but one that could for all intents and purposes take place in any setting.
Thinking about the huge variety in types of science fiction made me realize that there are probably a variety of reasons people read it. It also made me consider exactly how difficult it is to be truly forward-looking, much less forward-looking in a realistic manner. Will there ever be another Asimov? Many people would say that it’s not likely, but I think that the human race has enough generations left to produce a few more visionaries.
Why do you read science fiction? Are you interested in thinking about ways that humans might thrive and survive in new settings? Curious about potential technological inventions? Curious about the implications of those inventions (or alternately, completely disinterested in the implications?) Are you really just looking for a good story in a unique setting? Given whatever your focus is, how much of the other ingredients would you enjoy (or tolerate) before you lost interest?
Some people would even argue that science fiction is, contrary to what one’s assumptions might be, truly about distilling down human nature to its very essentials and using unique settings to expose and explore humanity.*
And at the risk of opening the gender debate (once again) – do you think that girls are more disposed to like “certain types” of science fiction? (That’s just drawing primarily on my own experience ... and I’m wondering if that’s at all common, at the risk of drawing fire for generalizing based on a social construct. Good for me!)
For what it’s worth, I tend to read science fiction primarily for technology, and secondarily for the exposition of human nature. I don’t do well with fantasy – I tend to get numb trying to remember complicated names, settings, and social rites, and usually end up putting them down in favor of something more practical.
*This is similar to a discussion we had in my digital satellite communications class last week, wherein the professor discussed the difference between using a spectrum analyzer to measure a signal, and using a signal to measure the frequency response of the spectrum analyzer’s selector filter.
28 January 2009
Plans
So, I had a conversation today about the following:
It seems like often times, people will initiate plan-making conversations by saying something like the following:
"Hey, what are you doing on xyz day?"
The debate I had centered around this: is it rude for people to ask that, instead of just asking if a person is interested/able in partaking in whatever the asker had in mind? In some ways it's an efficient thing to ask - the inviting person wouldn't want to waste time extending the invitation if it's a moot point. In other ways, it puts the invitee on the spot, and it can sound rather invasive. It can make the invitee feel like they need to justify what they're choosing to spend their time on.
It seems like often times, people will initiate plan-making conversations by saying something like the following:
"Hey, what are you doing on xyz day?"
The debate I had centered around this: is it rude for people to ask that, instead of just asking if a person is interested/able in partaking in whatever the asker had in mind? In some ways it's an efficient thing to ask - the inviting person wouldn't want to waste time extending the invitation if it's a moot point. In other ways, it puts the invitee on the spot, and it can sound rather invasive. It can make the invitee feel like they need to justify what they're choosing to spend their time on.
13 January 2009
Resolutions
After some thought and revision, I think I'm ready to make my official New Year's Resolutions.
1. Dispense with excuse-making. One of my biggest pet peeves I had when I was a kid - and in high school - was that my Mom would often make up excuses (sometimes annoyingly flimsy ones) for certain behaviors, decisions, etc. Sometimes I'd get in trouble for blurting out the real reason for a family decision to the other parties involved - but it always bugged me that there had to be misleading statements. It seemed like the other party deserved at least the respect of knowing what was going on, and to my child's mind it always seemed like the real reasons weren't such a big deal, anyhow. Now that I understand a lot more about social subtleties, I can appreciate the intent to protect another person's feelings, but I still can't say that I feel that behaving that way is the "right" thing to do. I feel like making excuses is a way to avoid taking responsibility for one's own feelings, decisions, etc - seldom is it really about caring about the other party's feelings. Not only that, but it seldom ever offers a permanent solution to a problem.
I think of all the friends that I've respected the most, and the ones that come to mind are those who never had any problem saying, "Sorry Jenn, I just don't feel like going out tonight" or "Sorry, but I don't really get along with that group of people, so I'll see you another time" or even "Sorry, I don't feel comfortable helping you with that homework because I'm unsure about the line between help and academic dishonesty for that class, and I don't want either of us to get in trouble."
Anyway, that was a long rant. The short of it is, that I really don't think there are any good reasons for using excuses. It bugs me when other people do it, so I'm going to stop.
2. Live a balanced life.
I think I make this resolution every year. This year is different (famous last words!) because I thought about ways I'm going to make it balanced. Stuff includes: working out four days a week (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday), and making sure I leave a day each week free for myself.
3. Finish that Project (And Start Another)
We all have secret dreams we're afraid to pursue, but I don't want to go through life just wishing and daydreaming. I'm not about to quit my job and throw my whole life off track, but I'm making a conscious effort to make my Dream Project a part of my life every day. I gave myself a deadline. Hopefully that'll work out well for me.
4. Religion
Being a Christian, and particularly being a Catholic, has influenced my life immeasurably. I didn't feel like I gave myself enough time to pursue religious studies and go to Mass last year, and in some ways I've felt the effects of that. I don't want to lose the hope and ideals, and beliefs about humankind and life that go along with my personal religious practice and views. In a lot of ways, making time for religion is a part of balance.
1. Dispense with excuse-making. One of my biggest pet peeves I had when I was a kid - and in high school - was that my Mom would often make up excuses (sometimes annoyingly flimsy ones) for certain behaviors, decisions, etc. Sometimes I'd get in trouble for blurting out the real reason for a family decision to the other parties involved - but it always bugged me that there had to be misleading statements. It seemed like the other party deserved at least the respect of knowing what was going on, and to my child's mind it always seemed like the real reasons weren't such a big deal, anyhow. Now that I understand a lot more about social subtleties, I can appreciate the intent to protect another person's feelings, but I still can't say that I feel that behaving that way is the "right" thing to do. I feel like making excuses is a way to avoid taking responsibility for one's own feelings, decisions, etc - seldom is it really about caring about the other party's feelings. Not only that, but it seldom ever offers a permanent solution to a problem.
I think of all the friends that I've respected the most, and the ones that come to mind are those who never had any problem saying, "Sorry Jenn, I just don't feel like going out tonight" or "Sorry, but I don't really get along with that group of people, so I'll see you another time" or even "Sorry, I don't feel comfortable helping you with that homework because I'm unsure about the line between help and academic dishonesty for that class, and I don't want either of us to get in trouble."
Anyway, that was a long rant. The short of it is, that I really don't think there are any good reasons for using excuses. It bugs me when other people do it, so I'm going to stop.
2. Live a balanced life.
I think I make this resolution every year. This year is different (famous last words!) because I thought about ways I'm going to make it balanced. Stuff includes: working out four days a week (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday), and making sure I leave a day each week free for myself.
3. Finish that Project (And Start Another)
We all have secret dreams we're afraid to pursue, but I don't want to go through life just wishing and daydreaming. I'm not about to quit my job and throw my whole life off track, but I'm making a conscious effort to make my Dream Project a part of my life every day. I gave myself a deadline. Hopefully that'll work out well for me.
4. Religion
Being a Christian, and particularly being a Catholic, has influenced my life immeasurably. I didn't feel like I gave myself enough time to pursue religious studies and go to Mass last year, and in some ways I've felt the effects of that. I don't want to lose the hope and ideals, and beliefs about humankind and life that go along with my personal religious practice and views. In a lot of ways, making time for religion is a part of balance.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)