Within the past week, I learned that three of my friends and/or my younger sister's friends have become pregnant in the past 6 months. One is ending in her being basically disowned by her family and rushing into marriage, one resulted in an abortion, and the third is keeping her from her senior soccer season, which most likely would have resulted in a significant athletic scholarship. Hanford High has never really had a reputation for underage pregnancies, and actually I've never known anyone under the age of 20 who found themselves pregnant unexpectedly. (For some reason, there were a handful of college-age girls at my church that got pregnant and then quickly married, but that's about as much scandal as I've ever been exposed to.)
My beef is not with the sex itself; I believe in abstinence until marriage, but I realize that for most people that's not a goal or realistic expectation. And I'm ok with that. My problem comes when the sex is just used as a way to keep a relationship in tact, as if by giving into something you don't necessarily want to do will be pleasing enough to the other person to keep them around. It breaks my heart. Women need to learn that if a man says he'll only "love" you if you sleep with him, he's bad news. A lot of times, this isn't even a spoken expectation, and I would imagine that often the guy isn't thinking that at all. But what is it about women that creates this drive and false understanding that we have to please all the time in order to be respected and loved?
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Friday, July 6, 2007
I'll never take my mouth for granted again
I got my wisdom teeth out Tuesday, and I pretty much never want to have surgery again, like ever. I realize this might seem a little over dramatic, after all I only had four teeth pulled, there was no swelling, I'm a seemingly easy patient. However, it's all the other side effects that are killing me. For example, I came home Tuesday around 10:30 a.m., and spent the rest of the day sleeping, save for every hour when my mom would wake me up, shove some sort of dairy product in front of me and hand me one of three pills. I then would go to sleep, wake up an hour later, and puke up the last hour's consumptions. Yeah, I don't think we'll have to worry about me becoming addicted to oxycodone anytime soon, I have absolutely no desire to ever touch the stuff again. I also never realized how much I would crave having a clean mouth. Sure, you can "brush" your teeth. But that mainly consists of doing small circles on your front four teeth, because I still can't open my mouth all the way without wincing. Granted, I've never been a hygiene freak or anything, I didn't think it would be that big of deal. But the day that I have free range of my mouth and all it's functions again cannot come to soon.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Everything I need to know about biting my tounge I learned at summer camp
I realize that it is shameful for the blogosphere police to post more than a month later than my last update. In all fairness, working for Jesus doesn't leave much time for leisure writing. I haven't had an actual week at real camp yet, so I can't quite speak to the "camp counselor" experience yet. We had two weeks of training, which included CPR, identifying sexual abuse, and handfuls of silly songs about grasshoppers and yodelers. I was in Wenatchee last week on a Day Camp, and now I'm home for a week, getting my wisdom teeth out. However, I would like to touch on a topic that has already been a heated discussion: women.
For my non-Lutheran readers (which as far as I know is everyone but Jess), an important distinction needs to be made. Within the denomination are two main sects: The ELCA (Ecumenical Lutheran church of America) and the LCMS (Lutheran church Missouri synod). Lutherhaven is a pan Lutheran ministry, meaning both divisions are represented. I realized about 15 minutes into staff training how big of a deal this was. The two sects share most of the same priorities, save for one major disagreement: the LCMS does not ordain women. And considering Sarah, who was the youth seat of the ELCA Northwest Senate in high school, wants to be a pastor, let's just say we both have taken on some heated debates with fellow staff members. It has been interesting for me to challenge my belief in building relationships with people despite opposing views, whether that be religiously, racially, politically, or whatever. I really do try to see people as whole people, and not representative of everyone that believes in the same principles as them.
However, I will have to say that this has never been as difficult as I've faced in the past few weeks. I love the friends I've made, on both sides of the political and religious isle. (I'm not Lutheran, so a lot of the denominational arguments don't really involve me, until people start thinking I'm weird because I don't stand board stiff during worship.) But I honestly have to bite my tongue when people start saying that the only Biblically-approved role for women is in a submissive position to a husband, running a house and raising children. I'm not kidding. There are people that would wholeheartedly argue that women aren't limited by society, but by God. And I couldn't more wholeheartedly disagree. My beef is not that women are still being coerced into a limited spectrum of roles that are considered "feminine." I believe that women actually have more career freedom than men. However, I just cannot believe that a God who created the universe and is beyond our intellectual understanding would tell any group of people that they are somehow less worthy to share his love with other people.
A large part of this debate also comes to the inevitable question of what exactly the role of a pastor is. But a main point of contingency comes with the fact that taking one or two verses of the Bible and making them an absolute, timeless commandment without context is a dangerous position. This doesn't just apply to women. It applies to many issues the church struggles to deal with, including homosexuality. But I would strongly urge you to think about where your viewpoints come from. Is it from a comprehensive discussion, looking at several sources and weighing all possibilities?
For my non-Lutheran readers (which as far as I know is everyone but Jess), an important distinction needs to be made. Within the denomination are two main sects: The ELCA (Ecumenical Lutheran church of America) and the LCMS (Lutheran church Missouri synod). Lutherhaven is a pan Lutheran ministry, meaning both divisions are represented. I realized about 15 minutes into staff training how big of a deal this was. The two sects share most of the same priorities, save for one major disagreement: the LCMS does not ordain women. And considering Sarah, who was the youth seat of the ELCA Northwest Senate in high school, wants to be a pastor, let's just say we both have taken on some heated debates with fellow staff members. It has been interesting for me to challenge my belief in building relationships with people despite opposing views, whether that be religiously, racially, politically, or whatever. I really do try to see people as whole people, and not representative of everyone that believes in the same principles as them.
However, I will have to say that this has never been as difficult as I've faced in the past few weeks. I love the friends I've made, on both sides of the political and religious isle. (I'm not Lutheran, so a lot of the denominational arguments don't really involve me, until people start thinking I'm weird because I don't stand board stiff during worship.) But I honestly have to bite my tongue when people start saying that the only Biblically-approved role for women is in a submissive position to a husband, running a house and raising children. I'm not kidding. There are people that would wholeheartedly argue that women aren't limited by society, but by God. And I couldn't more wholeheartedly disagree. My beef is not that women are still being coerced into a limited spectrum of roles that are considered "feminine." I believe that women actually have more career freedom than men. However, I just cannot believe that a God who created the universe and is beyond our intellectual understanding would tell any group of people that they are somehow less worthy to share his love with other people.
A large part of this debate also comes to the inevitable question of what exactly the role of a pastor is. But a main point of contingency comes with the fact that taking one or two verses of the Bible and making them an absolute, timeless commandment without context is a dangerous position. This doesn't just apply to women. It applies to many issues the church struggles to deal with, including homosexuality. But I would strongly urge you to think about where your viewpoints come from. Is it from a comprehensive discussion, looking at several sources and weighing all possibilities?
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Fornothology
First of all, if anyone ever wants to get from point A to point B in an efficient manner, do not under any circumstances take Sarah Weakley along as your co-pilot.
With that said, I would like to introduce you to the newest way to giggle at the most mundane words/situations. It's called the "fau" phenomenon, applicable to any person, thing, or idea that isn't quite legit. For example, an almost Mohawk? Fauhawk. A virgin cosmopolitan? Fausmopolitan. Or, as Marcus discovered Thursday, one who thinks he knows a lot about birds and can do a mean impression of a house swallow becomes a fornothologist. (Not to be confused with fornocologist, which just makes you giggle even more in inappropriate public settings. Trust me, it's not a confusion you want to make lightly.)
With that said, I would like to introduce you to the newest way to giggle at the most mundane words/situations. It's called the "fau" phenomenon, applicable to any person, thing, or idea that isn't quite legit. For example, an almost Mohawk? Fauhawk. A virgin cosmopolitan? Fausmopolitan. Or, as Marcus discovered Thursday, one who thinks he knows a lot about birds and can do a mean impression of a house swallow becomes a fornothologist. (Not to be confused with fornocologist, which just makes you giggle even more in inappropriate public settings. Trust me, it's not a confusion you want to make lightly.)
Monday, May 21, 2007
Two years to go
As of Friday at approximately 8:37 a.m. I completed my first half of college. In light of this somewhat terrifying benchmark, here's a list of practical, and not so practical, skills I think every half-college educated citizen (or just legal worker) should have:
1. Be able to tie a tie- my worldview was shattered when I discovered that in a converstation with 4 boys, only one of them knew how to tie a tie. Especially since 3 of these 4 boys had job interviews in the past month. (The one who didn't was the one who actually knew how to do it.) When in doubt, go to YouTube.
2. Know how to judge a sprinkler cycle so you can run through the sidewalk without getting soaked.
3. If you want to type in a URL that ends in .com, you can type in the main word, hit CTRL+ENTER, and it will automatically add the www. and .com part, as well as take you to the site. No joke, this will change your life.
4. Sometimes it's more important to wait until you have something intelligent to say, rather than talk just for the sound of making noise.
5. Procrastination will ALWAYS bite you in the ass.
I would think that after 2 years of college this list would be longer. Oh well.
1. Be able to tie a tie- my worldview was shattered when I discovered that in a converstation with 4 boys, only one of them knew how to tie a tie. Especially since 3 of these 4 boys had job interviews in the past month. (The one who didn't was the one who actually knew how to do it.) When in doubt, go to YouTube.
2. Know how to judge a sprinkler cycle so you can run through the sidewalk without getting soaked.
3. If you want to type in a URL that ends in .com, you can type in the main word, hit CTRL+ENTER, and it will automatically add the www. and .com part, as well as take you to the site. No joke, this will change your life.
4. Sometimes it's more important to wait until you have something intelligent to say, rather than talk just for the sound of making noise.
5. Procrastination will ALWAYS bite you in the ass.
I would think that after 2 years of college this list would be longer. Oh well.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
a writer's wisdom
Saturday night, author Anne Lamont addressed a packed Whitworth auditorium. Besides reading two of her non-fiction essays and answering audience questions, Lamont informed us that she would tell us everything she knew about everything, and it would take approximately 15 minutes. Though it started out as advice for writers, she easily applied her four nuggets of sagacity to life in a broader picture. I'm not going to get these exactly right, but the idea behind them is still valid.
1. It's ok to not be busy. Each day, take your to-do list, and remove two things. Then spend the time you would have spent anxiously bustling around to just lay on the floor and get licked by the dog, or stare into space. Lamont was adamant that relaxation is the most profoundly spiritual act we can participate in.
2. Failure, screw ups and shitty first drafts are a must. We can't be afraid to make mistakes, or fall on our butts. Often times it takes failure to even realize what you're trying to do in the first place.
3. Everyone is assigned people to help them along the way. We are surrounded by loving and wise people, even if we can't always see them. Allow yourself to ask for their help, whether it's reading a draft or sitting with you watching the mid-term elections on CNN.
I wish I could remember more specifics of what she said, because I remember it all being so deeply profound, but simple. She was a crazy intellectual liberal nut, but she saw the parts of life that were the true gifts, and was able to discern them from the parts that we make important to make ourselves feel important. If you haven't read any of her stuff, you are sorely missing out. I know I added another few books to my summer reading list after hearing her speak.
1. It's ok to not be busy. Each day, take your to-do list, and remove two things. Then spend the time you would have spent anxiously bustling around to just lay on the floor and get licked by the dog, or stare into space. Lamont was adamant that relaxation is the most profoundly spiritual act we can participate in.
2. Failure, screw ups and shitty first drafts are a must. We can't be afraid to make mistakes, or fall on our butts. Often times it takes failure to even realize what you're trying to do in the first place.
3. Everyone is assigned people to help them along the way. We are surrounded by loving and wise people, even if we can't always see them. Allow yourself to ask for their help, whether it's reading a draft or sitting with you watching the mid-term elections on CNN.
I wish I could remember more specifics of what she said, because I remember it all being so deeply profound, but simple. She was a crazy intellectual liberal nut, but she saw the parts of life that were the true gifts, and was able to discern them from the parts that we make important to make ourselves feel important. If you haven't read any of her stuff, you are sorely missing out. I know I added another few books to my summer reading list after hearing her speak.
Monday, May 7, 2007
Happily ever after
In the newest development in over-the-top wedding ceremonies, a designer named Kirstie Kelly unveiled a new line of dresses inspired by Disney princesses. The dresses are not costumes, as some people in my editing class though as Laura and I oogled over the site. They are full-fledged formal and gorgeous dresses that were inspired by Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Jasmine, Ariel, and Belle. For example, one of the 5 dresses in the Belle collection is very similar to the yellow dress the character wears at the climax of the movie. Dresses in the Cinderella and Snow White collections are much more traditional (full skirts, corsetts, etc.) while the Ariel collection features slinky and more provocative cuts.
When I first was shown the collection, I couldn't stop drooling over the exquisite gowns. But let's face it, I drool over any fabulous dress, bridal or otherwise. And as the class went on, more and more people realized that this was a much more interesting conversation than whatever we were supposed to be learning about (I think it was infobox day, so really no competition.) And we got to thinking, what kind of message are you sending when you "dress" up like a fictional character, especially one that carries as much weight as a prominent Disney figure in the lives of almost every girl. Both consciously and not, we remember the images of our childhood as our examples of womanhood and definitions of romance.
No matter how much I say that I recognize that Prince Charming is unrealistic and "happily ever after" doesn't have to manifest itself in a white carriage and field of roses, we hope that, someday, it will. I'm not saying this out of any particular bitterness, as I'm sure it comes off, but just in the recognition that for many girls, these are serious expectations. As much as I love Ariel and the gang, I wouldn't want their life. So what does it say if one of the most significant dresses I'll ever choose is directly influenced by those characters?
And then there's the issue of your actual Prince Charming. I would think that a dress like this, or the motivation behind the dress, puts unnecessary and unfair pressure on the groom. Because honestly, you should think whoever you marry could kick the crap out of Eric or Aladdin (though it would take a real bad-ass to beat Aladdin, he's legit.)
And for my final argument, no one needs to spend that much money on something you'll wear for one day. It's not worth it.
http://www.disneybridal.com/collections/cn/bridal/cn1.html
When I first was shown the collection, I couldn't stop drooling over the exquisite gowns. But let's face it, I drool over any fabulous dress, bridal or otherwise. And as the class went on, more and more people realized that this was a much more interesting conversation than whatever we were supposed to be learning about (I think it was infobox day, so really no competition.) And we got to thinking, what kind of message are you sending when you "dress" up like a fictional character, especially one that carries as much weight as a prominent Disney figure in the lives of almost every girl. Both consciously and not, we remember the images of our childhood as our examples of womanhood and definitions of romance.
No matter how much I say that I recognize that Prince Charming is unrealistic and "happily ever after" doesn't have to manifest itself in a white carriage and field of roses, we hope that, someday, it will. I'm not saying this out of any particular bitterness, as I'm sure it comes off, but just in the recognition that for many girls, these are serious expectations. As much as I love Ariel and the gang, I wouldn't want their life. So what does it say if one of the most significant dresses I'll ever choose is directly influenced by those characters?
And then there's the issue of your actual Prince Charming. I would think that a dress like this, or the motivation behind the dress, puts unnecessary and unfair pressure on the groom. Because honestly, you should think whoever you marry could kick the crap out of Eric or Aladdin (though it would take a real bad-ass to beat Aladdin, he's legit.)
And for my final argument, no one needs to spend that much money on something you'll wear for one day. It's not worth it.
http://www.disneybridal.com/collections/cn/bridal/cn1.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments