Yes, I was asked to do this. I figure, what the hell? Might reach some pissy broads like myself who are extra pissy because they're short on time to access the internet.
Enjoy, Kindlers!
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
"Not Really" Is Still "No". One Man's Introspective Article
Anyone who has read this blog can easily detect my feminism within a few posts. It's not something I hide, I don't consider "feminism" a bad word, and I don't use feminism as a way to assault men. As a feminist, I tend to worry less about what men are doing, and find myself most often taking offense at the behaviors of other women who want to reap the rewards of feminism while abandoning the personal responsibility of earning them.
That being said, I'm not a mysogynist. Sexual politics within any culture are complex by nature, built upon historical, religious, economical, and other factors. To unravel an issue, means that one must take the time to untie all of the good intentions and practical measures that somehow developed into a likely unintentional problem. With the efforts of many individuals on different ends of the discussion, there can be some understanding and resolution.
This is why I ADORE you, Hugo Schwyzer.
His bio, from his website:
"Hugo Schwyzer is an American author, speaker and professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College. He presents workshops on body image, sexual harassment, rape prevention, and the “myth of male weakness.” He is also a frequent guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and has appeared on CNN and CTV (Canada) as an expert on body image, sexuality and gender justice."
I came across one of Mr. Schwyzer's articles today, and simply HAD to share it..
From "Accidental rape. I knew I hadn't committed a crime but..."
"Most “good guys” take a woman’s firm “No!” for an answer. (Those who don’t are best left to the ministrations of our criminal justice system.) But lots of men are like the guy I was at 19—assuming that while “no means no” anything short of a firm “no” is either a “yes” or a “keep at it, boy, because you just might get a ‘yes’ soon.” Call it male sexual legalism, the first rule of which is “All that is not expressly prohibited is assumed to be permitted.” That legalism can turn many men into accidental rapists"
We need more of this guy, and less of this guy..
The Feminine Context
That being said, I'm not a mysogynist. Sexual politics within any culture are complex by nature, built upon historical, religious, economical, and other factors. To unravel an issue, means that one must take the time to untie all of the good intentions and practical measures that somehow developed into a likely unintentional problem. With the efforts of many individuals on different ends of the discussion, there can be some understanding and resolution.
This is why I ADORE you, Hugo Schwyzer.
His bio, from his website:
"Hugo Schwyzer is an American author, speaker and professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College. He presents workshops on body image, sexual harassment, rape prevention, and the “myth of male weakness.” He is also a frequent guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and has appeared on CNN and CTV (Canada) as an expert on body image, sexuality and gender justice."
I came across one of Mr. Schwyzer's articles today, and simply HAD to share it..
From "Accidental rape. I knew I hadn't committed a crime but..."
"Most “good guys” take a woman’s firm “No!” for an answer. (Those who don’t are best left to the ministrations of our criminal justice system.) But lots of men are like the guy I was at 19—assuming that while “no means no” anything short of a firm “no” is either a “yes” or a “keep at it, boy, because you just might get a ‘yes’ soon.” Call it male sexual legalism, the first rule of which is “All that is not expressly prohibited is assumed to be permitted.” That legalism can turn many men into accidental rapists"
We need more of this guy, and less of this guy..
The Feminine Context
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Occupy Humanity: Can Empathy Be Saved?
Like most Americans these days, I have worked a variety of jobs over the years. Somehow I have managed to maintain a common thread of occupational skills between jobs, because almost all of the positions I've held have been associated with caregiving. Each new employer could look back on my resume and see that I had been charged with the responsibility of caring for living beings that whose very survival depended on me in one way or another. Whether I cared for children, older adults, disabled persons, or animals, the rules are pretty much the same.
No matter who or what you are responsible for, you must treat them with respect and attempt to maintain the dignity and comfort of that individual. I don't care if you're caring for a sick, aggressive pitbull, or a sick, aggressive older man with dementia; you keep BOTH your prejudice AND "values" the hell out of the room and treat either scenario with the same amount of respect and concern. If you think you can treat either the dog or the man with less respect than the other, then you obviously have no business caring for the one who (due to your bias) receives less of your respect. When it comes to caring for that other living person, their rights are up there nearer to the ceiling, whereas yours are somewhere down below the sewer lines.
That's not an exaggeration or veiled complaint. It has to be that way. Placing the utmost emphasis on the needs of the being who is dependent on you is the only way to ensure that you meet those needs appropriately. Working within this structure of "them before us" prevents neglect, and oddly enough, high turnover of caregiver employees. If you can complete the tasks necessary for your job, do them correctly, and adhere to the standards expected from someone in your particular position, it's a lot easier to "leave it at work" and feel good about what you've done. Those who can achieve some level of "job satisfaction" are a lot more likely to remain in their line of work.
Certain things really came into focus for me when I became certified as a nurse aide. I decided that I eventually wanted to become a registered nurse. Having researched the field of nursing, I became aware that in a hospital or nursing home, nurse aides perform basic nursing tasks under the direction of registered nurses. RNs have more education and authority than nurse aides, and are paid better because of it. It makes no sense from a financial standpoint to pay for a floor's worth of RNs when you can pay a few of them to supervise a team of aides who are trained for basic nursing tasks. I got that part. What I didn't understand is how anyone thought they could be a good supervisor when they'd never done the actual job of the person below them. Thus, I decided to learn the "grunt work" and become a certified aide. I figured if I could get through physically challenging part of nursing, I could get through the academic parts a lot easier, PLUS I'd be a much more effective supervisory nurse than one who'd never had to work as an aide.
I realize now that I had identified a need to develop empathy.
At the time, I just figured it would be in my best interest to be prepared, and that the discipline of learning the job that "real nurses" didn't want to do could only help me in my studies later on. In retrospect, I think there was some part of me that wasn't quite "ripe" yet, and even then, young and stupid, I knew it. I was trying to develop a part of me that could extend the necessity of my career beyond simply meeting my own needs. An ever nagging, "pragmatic" part of me kept whispering in the background, "This is a waste of time. You're practically a straight-a student and you're dicking around with this diploma when you could be putting time into a degree". The "pragmatic" voices outside of my head, namely two friends who were (respectively) a dentist and a doctor, were both pretty busy calling me a fool for not pursuing a degree that would lead me to medical school. They treated my decision to become a nurse like a mental illness, or some sort of self-destructive habit. Upon finding out that I had chosen to first become a nurse aide and not even a full nurse, they began avoiding me whenever possible. My dad, who I'm sure wanted nothing but the best for me, wanted me to do something with my mad computer skills, but the idea of sitting on my ass working in an office (and the few times I had done so) made me sick. Sometimes I wonder if he didn't get some sort of 1980's power-suit idea in his head, and likened that and the presumably accompanying business/marketing/information technology degree to "success". In short, the thought of me changing bedpans seemed to make him feel like I was pursuing a diploma program as a scullery-maid, or worse, scullery-maid trainee. He thought it was "beneath" my capabilities, which didn't exactly make me feel great about my chosen career when things were tough. I took a little bittersweet solace in the fact that almost every one of my friends who had gotten degrees in those aforementioned fields had ended up working jobs in coffee houses or in offices that I, without a degree of that kind, could easily talk my way into. Even though I felt bad for my friends, whose own dads had clearly won the day, at least I knew I'd have a job eventually taking CARE of their dads.
I think it's kind of funny, in a dry sort of way, to recall that all the disapproving people in my life were politically conservative. I'll get back to that in a moment, though.
During the course of my later work in elder care, I realized that by putting my opinions and feelings on hold while I was on duty, I was actually able to not only do my job, but thrive in it. I've met a lot of "retired" CNAs who are working in other fields, usually due to their decision that caregiving work was "too depressing" for them. It's not like these women are making any more money than they were as aides, but the idea of being around people who were either actively dying or just irreversibly on their way to death, was more than they could bear. I had been taught a lot in my courses and a few rules still stick out, even after all the time that's passed between then and now. Notably..
1 - Certain things are never to be brought in to your working hours with someone you are taking care of, specifically your germs and bacteria, your negative emotions, your religion (or lack thereof), your political opinions, and details of your personal life.
2 - Certain things are never to be brought out from your working hours with someone you are taking care of, such as their germs and bacteria, their negative emotions, their religion (or lack thereof), their political opinions, and details of their personal life.
3 - Thou shalt never violate, and always remain alert and in timely practice of the laws of the land. It is your place to adhere to them, not bend, alter, or disrespect them. In remaining vigilant in adherence to legal and ethical standards, the client and caregiver shall both be protected.
4 - Lots of things are simply none of your business. No, really, most things are none of your business. That doesn't mean you get to be snippy and make a comment, gesture, or other flippant, passive-aggressive action that indicates your opinion while somewhat satisfying the job requirement that makes this issue none of your business. If you cannot work with someone without making things your business that shouldn't BE your business, you should call your agency, explain YOUR failing, and ask to be assigned elsewhere (if they still want someone like you to work for them).
5 - It IS your business to care enough about the things that are important to your client (religion, politics, family) to listen, learn, and be able to carry on a conversation that addresses THEIR need for camaraderie, NOT YOURS. If it has to be an act, be Oscar-worthy for it.
6 - If you are treated unkindly or with disrespect, you are never to respond in kind. It is your place to avoid those sorts of outbursts. If your client is too hostile and you cannot seem to resolve the issue OR work with it anymore, contact your supervisor for advice or another assignment. Additionally, consider another line of work. Clearly, something about you that you cannot help is too agitating to your client for you to remain caring for them, OR you're not adhering to rule #1, and/or #2.
These rules are probably read as simply "common sense", but when they have to be put into practice, one finds that most people don't have the discipline to follow them. Worse still, most people do not possess the empathy needed to obviate the need for discipline. If you can empathize with others as well as you need to in order to take full care of another living thing, then it shouldn't be so difficult that you NEED strong discipline to adhere to these fairly simple rules. If this empathy is what it takes to look after someone as their caregiver, then it is reasonable to assume that other positions of authority require the same. In fact, these rules could very easily apply to occupations like teacher, policeman, doctor..
.. politician.
It's really starting to concern me as I watch the ability to empathize, a necessary skill for those in a position of authority or as a representative of others, is not only difficult to discover in our "leaders", it is now something that some of us are beginning to treat with derision. The current crop of hopefuls for the GOP nomination are promoting the poorer sides of human nature to such an extent that public displays of it are not only being accepted, they are being celebrated. Public displays like booing our soldiers for asking questions that someone doesn't want to answer, laughing at the idea of someone dying due to lack of medical treatment, and making rape victims legally and permanently responsible for the ramifications of their attackers actions. Since when did our public opinion change from "Oh how awful, we can't let that happen if we can help it" to "serves them right"?
The "53%" rails against those who "don't pay taxes" because they're old and retired or they are literally so poor that they wouldn't survive if they did pay taxes on the mere pittance they make. The "53%" forget sales tax, payroll tax, and property taxes that everyone pays. Tax refunds are NOT "free money". Tax refunds are exactly that, a refund, of money that very poor people had ripped out of their paychecks over the year, causing strain and hardship to the family hanging on tooth and nail for that paycheck. Worse still, the "53%" have been so indoctrinated with hate, fear, and anger directed at their "opposition", they won't even stop and look at the fact that they are essentially fighting for the right to live a way that THEY don't even want to.
Empathy is defined as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another", which is something that politicians typically make grand attempts to feign, if nothing else. Historically, this has been done because the ability to empathize is typically demonstrated in those people we feel to be the "best" of us. Empathy is the reason your mother knew why you were sad, even when you didn't. It's why she still hugged you and loved you, even when you knowingly broke her rules. Empathy is the reason your friends call, make efforts to comfort, and listen to you cry when they never liked the stupid boyfriend who ended up breaking your heart exactly the way they KNEW he would. Empathy is the reason the best of your friends don't start off with "I told you so".
A massive load of "us against them" is being heaved upon our society, and the core premise is that the dirty, unwashed "them" is stealing undeserved resources from the noble, moral pockets of "us". Through misdirection of fear and anxiety, some (like the" 53%") are blinded to the fact that there's an effort to divide the ACTUAL "us", and apparently it's working. The truth is that there's only about 1% of "them", and they're doing all they can to bleed "us" dry and cast us into a million tiny factions until we don't recognize anyone else as one of "us". Worse still, "they" are claiming to be devout followers of Christianity, which requires empathy and love for others. "They" profess faith in an effort to make themselves appear moral, ethical, and inarguable. Real "faith" dictates that charity, tolerance, love, and concern for others is what makes you a morally upright human in the eyes of your God. Clearly "they" have no faith whatsoever in God, or they would trust that He would do His works and that their micromanagerial efforts here on Earth were not only unnecessary, but possibly an affront to Him.
With a bit of empathy for those that share your humanity, it's not hard to see that most of "us" are all suffering under the same tyranny brought about by just a few of "them".
The Feminine Context
No matter who or what you are responsible for, you must treat them with respect and attempt to maintain the dignity and comfort of that individual. I don't care if you're caring for a sick, aggressive pitbull, or a sick, aggressive older man with dementia; you keep BOTH your prejudice AND "values" the hell out of the room and treat either scenario with the same amount of respect and concern. If you think you can treat either the dog or the man with less respect than the other, then you obviously have no business caring for the one who (due to your bias) receives less of your respect. When it comes to caring for that other living person, their rights are up there nearer to the ceiling, whereas yours are somewhere down below the sewer lines.
That's not an exaggeration or veiled complaint. It has to be that way. Placing the utmost emphasis on the needs of the being who is dependent on you is the only way to ensure that you meet those needs appropriately. Working within this structure of "them before us" prevents neglect, and oddly enough, high turnover of caregiver employees. If you can complete the tasks necessary for your job, do them correctly, and adhere to the standards expected from someone in your particular position, it's a lot easier to "leave it at work" and feel good about what you've done. Those who can achieve some level of "job satisfaction" are a lot more likely to remain in their line of work.
Certain things really came into focus for me when I became certified as a nurse aide. I decided that I eventually wanted to become a registered nurse. Having researched the field of nursing, I became aware that in a hospital or nursing home, nurse aides perform basic nursing tasks under the direction of registered nurses. RNs have more education and authority than nurse aides, and are paid better because of it. It makes no sense from a financial standpoint to pay for a floor's worth of RNs when you can pay a few of them to supervise a team of aides who are trained for basic nursing tasks. I got that part. What I didn't understand is how anyone thought they could be a good supervisor when they'd never done the actual job of the person below them. Thus, I decided to learn the "grunt work" and become a certified aide. I figured if I could get through physically challenging part of nursing, I could get through the academic parts a lot easier, PLUS I'd be a much more effective supervisory nurse than one who'd never had to work as an aide.
I realize now that I had identified a need to develop empathy.
At the time, I just figured it would be in my best interest to be prepared, and that the discipline of learning the job that "real nurses" didn't want to do could only help me in my studies later on. In retrospect, I think there was some part of me that wasn't quite "ripe" yet, and even then, young and stupid, I knew it. I was trying to develop a part of me that could extend the necessity of my career beyond simply meeting my own needs. An ever nagging, "pragmatic" part of me kept whispering in the background, "This is a waste of time. You're practically a straight-a student and you're dicking around with this diploma when you could be putting time into a degree". The "pragmatic" voices outside of my head, namely two friends who were (respectively) a dentist and a doctor, were both pretty busy calling me a fool for not pursuing a degree that would lead me to medical school. They treated my decision to become a nurse like a mental illness, or some sort of self-destructive habit. Upon finding out that I had chosen to first become a nurse aide and not even a full nurse, they began avoiding me whenever possible. My dad, who I'm sure wanted nothing but the best for me, wanted me to do something with my mad computer skills, but the idea of sitting on my ass working in an office (and the few times I had done so) made me sick. Sometimes I wonder if he didn't get some sort of 1980's power-suit idea in his head, and likened that and the presumably accompanying business/marketing/information technology degree to "success". In short, the thought of me changing bedpans seemed to make him feel like I was pursuing a diploma program as a scullery-maid, or worse, scullery-maid trainee. He thought it was "beneath" my capabilities, which didn't exactly make me feel great about my chosen career when things were tough. I took a little bittersweet solace in the fact that almost every one of my friends who had gotten degrees in those aforementioned fields had ended up working jobs in coffee houses or in offices that I, without a degree of that kind, could easily talk my way into. Even though I felt bad for my friends, whose own dads had clearly won the day, at least I knew I'd have a job eventually taking CARE of their dads.
I think it's kind of funny, in a dry sort of way, to recall that all the disapproving people in my life were politically conservative. I'll get back to that in a moment, though.
During the course of my later work in elder care, I realized that by putting my opinions and feelings on hold while I was on duty, I was actually able to not only do my job, but thrive in it. I've met a lot of "retired" CNAs who are working in other fields, usually due to their decision that caregiving work was "too depressing" for them. It's not like these women are making any more money than they were as aides, but the idea of being around people who were either actively dying or just irreversibly on their way to death, was more than they could bear. I had been taught a lot in my courses and a few rules still stick out, even after all the time that's passed between then and now. Notably..
1 - Certain things are never to be brought in to your working hours with someone you are taking care of, specifically your germs and bacteria, your negative emotions, your religion (or lack thereof), your political opinions, and details of your personal life.
2 - Certain things are never to be brought out from your working hours with someone you are taking care of, such as their germs and bacteria, their negative emotions, their religion (or lack thereof), their political opinions, and details of their personal life.
3 - Thou shalt never violate, and always remain alert and in timely practice of the laws of the land. It is your place to adhere to them, not bend, alter, or disrespect them. In remaining vigilant in adherence to legal and ethical standards, the client and caregiver shall both be protected.
4 - Lots of things are simply none of your business. No, really, most things are none of your business. That doesn't mean you get to be snippy and make a comment, gesture, or other flippant, passive-aggressive action that indicates your opinion while somewhat satisfying the job requirement that makes this issue none of your business. If you cannot work with someone without making things your business that shouldn't BE your business, you should call your agency, explain YOUR failing, and ask to be assigned elsewhere (if they still want someone like you to work for them).
5 - It IS your business to care enough about the things that are important to your client (religion, politics, family) to listen, learn, and be able to carry on a conversation that addresses THEIR need for camaraderie, NOT YOURS. If it has to be an act, be Oscar-worthy for it.
6 - If you are treated unkindly or with disrespect, you are never to respond in kind. It is your place to avoid those sorts of outbursts. If your client is too hostile and you cannot seem to resolve the issue OR work with it anymore, contact your supervisor for advice or another assignment. Additionally, consider another line of work. Clearly, something about you that you cannot help is too agitating to your client for you to remain caring for them, OR you're not adhering to rule #1, and/or #2.
These rules are probably read as simply "common sense", but when they have to be put into practice, one finds that most people don't have the discipline to follow them. Worse still, most people do not possess the empathy needed to obviate the need for discipline. If you can empathize with others as well as you need to in order to take full care of another living thing, then it shouldn't be so difficult that you NEED strong discipline to adhere to these fairly simple rules. If this empathy is what it takes to look after someone as their caregiver, then it is reasonable to assume that other positions of authority require the same. In fact, these rules could very easily apply to occupations like teacher, policeman, doctor..
.. politician.
It's really starting to concern me as I watch the ability to empathize, a necessary skill for those in a position of authority or as a representative of others, is not only difficult to discover in our "leaders", it is now something that some of us are beginning to treat with derision. The current crop of hopefuls for the GOP nomination are promoting the poorer sides of human nature to such an extent that public displays of it are not only being accepted, they are being celebrated. Public displays like booing our soldiers for asking questions that someone doesn't want to answer, laughing at the idea of someone dying due to lack of medical treatment, and making rape victims legally and permanently responsible for the ramifications of their attackers actions. Since when did our public opinion change from "Oh how awful, we can't let that happen if we can help it" to "serves them right"?
The "53%" rails against those who "don't pay taxes" because they're old and retired or they are literally so poor that they wouldn't survive if they did pay taxes on the mere pittance they make. The "53%" forget sales tax, payroll tax, and property taxes that everyone pays. Tax refunds are NOT "free money". Tax refunds are exactly that, a refund, of money that very poor people had ripped out of their paychecks over the year, causing strain and hardship to the family hanging on tooth and nail for that paycheck. Worse still, the "53%" have been so indoctrinated with hate, fear, and anger directed at their "opposition", they won't even stop and look at the fact that they are essentially fighting for the right to live a way that THEY don't even want to.
Empathy is defined as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another", which is something that politicians typically make grand attempts to feign, if nothing else. Historically, this has been done because the ability to empathize is typically demonstrated in those people we feel to be the "best" of us. Empathy is the reason your mother knew why you were sad, even when you didn't. It's why she still hugged you and loved you, even when you knowingly broke her rules. Empathy is the reason your friends call, make efforts to comfort, and listen to you cry when they never liked the stupid boyfriend who ended up breaking your heart exactly the way they KNEW he would. Empathy is the reason the best of your friends don't start off with "I told you so".
A massive load of "us against them" is being heaved upon our society, and the core premise is that the dirty, unwashed "them" is stealing undeserved resources from the noble, moral pockets of "us". Through misdirection of fear and anxiety, some (like the" 53%") are blinded to the fact that there's an effort to divide the ACTUAL "us", and apparently it's working. The truth is that there's only about 1% of "them", and they're doing all they can to bleed "us" dry and cast us into a million tiny factions until we don't recognize anyone else as one of "us". Worse still, "they" are claiming to be devout followers of Christianity, which requires empathy and love for others. "They" profess faith in an effort to make themselves appear moral, ethical, and inarguable. Real "faith" dictates that charity, tolerance, love, and concern for others is what makes you a morally upright human in the eyes of your God. Clearly "they" have no faith whatsoever in God, or they would trust that He would do His works and that their micromanagerial efforts here on Earth were not only unnecessary, but possibly an affront to Him.
With a bit of empathy for those that share your humanity, it's not hard to see that most of "us" are all suffering under the same tyranny brought about by just a few of "them".
The Feminine Context
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Statement of Purpose
Hello.
This blog is intended to be interesting to both men and women, due to its emphasis on male/female communication.
If I go on writing in this blog with the same dryness contained in that description, it will no doubt be interesting to NO ONE.
So.. let's just get this out of the way.
This blog will probably be updated in a somewhat random fashion, but I'm REALLY going to try and do it with some sort of regularity. I've attempted to maintain several blogs over the years, but like houseplants, I just can't seem to keep them alive. This time, I think I've got a topic that's entertaining enough to ME that it can keep my interest. We'll see.
Right now, it's September of 2011, and come September of 2014 you might run across this blog with a total of 15 posts that end abruptly in October of 2011. If that's YOU and you're reading this in 09/2014 and I've killed another potentially fun blog through pure neglect.. well, to hell with you and your judgments! I at least left a trace of myself to float out in the e-cosmos, probably with as many bad puns and puerile humor as I could possibly shove into the pitiful number of posts this blog contains. For like, ten minutes worth of reading, I WAS SOMEBODY... that you probably didn't want to hang out with... BUT I WAS STILL SOMEBODY, DAMMIT!
Tirade break.
In case anyone is wondering, I'm female, over 30, and an avid bullshit-enthusiast. Some have called me an "artist", but as far as bullshit is concerned, I really consider myself more of a hobbyist. Perhaps a connoisseur of fine bullshit artistry. Believe it or not, this rambling preamble is actually leading to the point of this blog. Points, really.
This blog is intended to be interesting to both men and women, due to its emphasis on male/female communication.
If I go on writing in this blog with the same dryness contained in that description, it will no doubt be interesting to NO ONE.
So.. let's just get this out of the way.
This blog will probably be updated in a somewhat random fashion, but I'm REALLY going to try and do it with some sort of regularity. I've attempted to maintain several blogs over the years, but like houseplants, I just can't seem to keep them alive. This time, I think I've got a topic that's entertaining enough to ME that it can keep my interest. We'll see.
Right now, it's September of 2011, and come September of 2014 you might run across this blog with a total of 15 posts that end abruptly in October of 2011. If that's YOU and you're reading this in 09/2014 and I've killed another potentially fun blog through pure neglect.. well, to hell with you and your judgments! I at least left a trace of myself to float out in the e-cosmos, probably with as many bad puns and puerile humor as I could possibly shove into the pitiful number of posts this blog contains. For like, ten minutes worth of reading, I WAS SOMEBODY... that you probably didn't want to hang out with... BUT I WAS STILL SOMEBODY, DAMMIT!
Tirade break.
In case anyone is wondering, I'm female, over 30, and an avid bullshit-enthusiast. Some have called me an "artist", but as far as bullshit is concerned, I really consider myself more of a hobbyist. Perhaps a connoisseur of fine bullshit artistry. Believe it or not, this rambling preamble is actually leading to the point of this blog. Points, really.
Point One :
Men and Women are different. Their BRAINS are wired differently. They have equal needs, usually the same needs, but they communicate, learn, and prioritize differently from one another.
Point Two :
This causes a lot of problems. A lot. A lot of problems that could potentially be avoided by keeping Point One in mind before anyone says ANYTHING to ANYBODY.
What I plan (hah.. "plan") to do with this blog is to effectively illustrate these two points, as often and obnoxiously as I possibly can. I plan to assist you men out there by decoding the subtle, hidden messages that the women around you are lobbing at you at every possible opportunity. You know how your mom/sister/ex/current/female friend is constantly trying to tell you that so-and-so is a total bitch? Believe it or not, she probably is. However, its pretty dumb to make decisions based on one person's interpretation of this hidden, foreign language. I think it would be better to work on a sort of "travel phrase" guide here, just so you get some idea of what the HELL is going on between the women around you. Trust me, its enough to scare you NOT straight.
Ladies? I'm not forgetting you. Men are loading you down with the same type of conversational manure that they are mired in as a result of our communication differences. Between us girls... well, let's be honest, we're not getting ANYWHERE trying to translate it together. All of our girls nights out are loaded with questions.. questions about men. Usually we're in a small group of women without enough testosterone between us to support ONE testicle, let alone the fact that we're all squawking the same damn questions at each other. It doesn't help that our groups diminish and repopulate based on a bunch of illogical assumptions about what some other girl "meant by that". It could be something as simple as a facial expression. An item of clothing that someone deems inappropriate. Talking to the wrong man or talking to him at the wrong time. It could be anything. We will recognize it as some great personal (or worse) group insult. We will ostracize that girl within an inch of her life, and bring her back only when she has been sufficiently punished for that thing that ACTUALLY meant this other thing that was SO GODDAMN OFFENSIVE that we were momentarily motivated to burn her for the bitch witch she was ...
.. FOR WEARING THAT BLOUSE WHEN SARA WAS TRYING TO TALK TO THAT GUY THAT SHE DOESN'T KNOW. OMG.
Yes, men. It is that bad. Shame on us. Shame on you guys for running about willy-nilly in a gender-integrated world and not realizing the intensity of the female-to-female interactions that go on around you at all times.
Shame on all of us for not being honest. Shame on us for playing this retarded game that makes no one happy.
Maybe, if I can stay interested long enough, I can dig a couple gold nuggets out of the giant shit-pile of confusion that we all work so hard to build, dividing us a species into two, confused, bitter groups of people who aren't getting laid and don't like each other most of the time. I can give it a try.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)