3. That is the number of posts I published in 2009. 365 days in the calendar year and I was only able to find the time during 3 of them to write on here. Was I extraordinarily busy? At times, sure. But mostly no. Did I have bigger and better things going on with my life? Again, there were a few highlights but not as much as I would have liked. Was I lazy? Getting warmer.
Anybody who reads through my posts, and family members aside there is, quite frankly, nobody doing that. But anybody who reads through my posts will see a pattern. I write, then a long time goes by and I start a post by saying something along the lines of, "Oh boy I haven't written on here in a long time but I'm going to start doing it regularly again." That happens for a short while before another long absence followed by another statement of renewed purpose. The sun rises, the world spins, and I renege on my commitments to myself. But if at first you don't succeed...
It's January, the month of resolutions, new beginnings and doomed gym memberships. So here I am again. Recommitted, refreshed and ready to try once more to keep pace with my indefatigable ability to procrastinate. The fact that nobody reads this blog actually bothers me less than I suppose it should. But then, I didn't start it for anybody else. I did it for me. That being the case, every time I quit writing here I'm quitting on myself. Which is a shame really. The world is full of people willing to quit on me, I see no reason to join their majority. I'm ok with being my own biggest fan. I'm even ok with being my only fan. Maybe it's only temporary and maybe it's not. Either way, it seems to me a tragedy to give up on someone I care so deeply about. So, imaginary readers, I'm back on a trial basis. Hopefully this time I stick around for much longer and try much harder. Only time will tell. At the very least, I'm proving myself an optimist. There are worse things to be than someone who hopes against the odds that this time will be different.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Newsed and Abused
I'm trying to get back into the habit of writing on here regularly. Ignoring the fact that I get about 1 visitor a week, I think it's good to be disciplined even when the payoff isn't obvious. So thinking of inspiration today a couple of recent news items came to mind. The first is fading away a bit now but it's in regards to the whole Miss California scandal. The second involves Michael Vick and the huge controversy that's been immediately restored upon his prison release.
So starting things off with the hot blonde (or blond if you prefer, both spellings are actually correct in case you weren't aware), let's take a moment to summarize the details that make her newsworthy. She was a finalist in the Miss America pageant and on track to potentially take home the crown. Many say she would have won had she answered her question differently. Because for the top contenders, after they have them walk around the stage in bikinis and strut around after being all dressed up in gowns, they ask them questions about what they think. The truth is, who the hell cares? The idea is for them to give diplomatic, bland, choreographed responses to the questions to skate through this event. However, when Carrie Prejean (California) was asked what she thought of gay marriage, she spoke truthfully and explained that she doesn't agree with it. A couple of problems here. Firstly, she was asked by an extremely gay man whose name I don't remember or care about. Secondly, she apparently broke the pageant pact by answering honestly instead of in a manner that she knew the judges would be pleased to hear. That's it. The whole thing is that she was asked a question which is hotly debated all across America and she answered honestly. Clearly, this woman is a horrible human being.
The aftermath involved several things, none of which honestly matter much. It turns out she did a photo shoot to try out for Victoria's Secret (note to self: if they hold tryouts I'm getting a spot on the judges panel next year) in which she was topless. Not topless as in you could see her fantastic body completely nude, topless like she didn't have a shirt on and she was facing away from the camera. Still a hot photo, worth checking out. Her opponents say this means she isn't Christian and somehow makes her a hypocrite. I'll be honest, I don't see what a hot girl posing without a shirt on has to do with gay marriage. I really don't see it. Then they said she was speaking too much about the subject and using her pageant title as a pulpit to preach from. They don't want their contestants talking about things that they believe in or the public cares about. That's a no-no. Alright, clearly at this point I'm on her side. Let me tell you why: because this is fucking ridiculous. She was honest. That's what it comes down to, she was asked a question and she answered it. If he didn't want to hear her answer, the judge who asked shouldn't have posed the question, simple as that. I thought the response was tactful and well stated, she wasn't rude or offensive in any way that I could tell. Beyond the fact that all she did was speak her mind, let's take a look at the answer people are so mad about. She opposes gay marriage. Here's a fun fact, CNN just did a poll to see how America feels about the subject. The results? 54% of Americans oppose gay marriage. Want another one? The President currently sitting in the oval office, the one many people are very happy with (including, I'd imagine many of the people who hate Ms. Prejean) has himself stated he opposes gay marriage. Want one more? California just voted against making gay marriage legal. That's odd, the state she represents agrees with her views. So...people hate her because they thought she'd give one answer but gave another. An answer that you're more likely to hear than not when asking the average, random American. Get my point?
Moving on to another hated figure, Michael Vick (former NFL quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons). Mr. Dogmauler himself. Short story, he just got out of prison after spending 2 years there because he was convicted of bankrolling and hosting dog fights. The kind of thing where they get dogs all pissed off and throw them in a ring, place bets and the dogs battle to the death. On top of that, apparently, abuse was pretty common and so was neglect. Pretty bad. It is, you can't really paint a picture that makes him look good there. But he was convicted and went to jail. Now he's out and there's an uproar. A lot of people don't think he should be allowed to play football again. At least not this season, they think teams should either neglect him like the dogs he fought or the commissioner should issue a suspension for the 2009 season. This is stupid. He should be allowed to play if a team is willing to pick him up. He did the crime, surely, but he also did the time. I work for a software company. If I were to steal a car and go to prison for it, when I got out should I be prohibited from getting a job at a different software company? Of course not, that's absurd. What does stealing a car have to do with working on computer programs? About as much as dog fighting has to do with playing football. The crime has nothing to do with his occupation. His occupation happens to pay much, much better than mine and puts him in a public spotlight, but it's still his occupation. He's a football player. That's what he does. The fact that his job is so much more specialized than mine doesn't really mean he should be punished to a greater extreme than me in my opinion. People want him to prove that he's remorseful and that he doesn't want to kill dogs anymore. Really? If he spends the next 365 days campaigning for PETA and wears shirts made of nothing but grass while kissing dogs and going on a vegan diet it still doesn't matter. The dogs are still dead, the whole thing still happened and most importantly, it doesn't prove a damn thing. If he does all that, what it proves to me is that he really wants to play football again. Because that's the truth. He does and due to his abysmal financial position, he'll probably do just about anything to play again because he needs the money. It doesn't mean he isn't remorseful or that he doesn't sincerely want to make amends, it just means that his actions don't prove jack shit because all we'll really know for sure is that he is trying to get back into the NFL. I'm not saying this against him, the fact is anyone in his position faces the same problem. Remorse is a personal thing, you can't prove it when you have more to gain than personal redemption. I'm of the opinion that he should be allowed to play because he paid the price for what he did and should be allowed to go on with his life, which is only right. At the risk of sounding callous (which doesn't bother me), let me put it this way. He acted cruelly to some dogs, get over it and let's all get on with our lives. Yup, I said it. Not that what he doesn't wasn't awful, but I get the feeling that if he'd raped a women or killed a man he wouldn't be facing nearly this level of scrutiny. Which disturbs me. Why do some people value the lives of animals over those of humans? I think this is a question that this situation poses which we should all be looking at. If he had done something awful involving human beings instead of dogs, would people be this angry? I don't know if they would. It also poses the question, do we all deserve a second chance? I'd like to think we do. Yes, it's understandable that dog lovers are mad at him. Yes, he deserved what he got. But he got it. He went to prison and lost his job as starting quarterback for an NFL team. That's pretty severe. Now let him move on, let's all move on. Even if he's denied the option to play for a team this year it won't be indefinite. He will play again. Make no mistake there are teams willing to take the flack for signing Michael Vick. Ultimately, the assigned punishment is going to end and he'll be back out there. But if he's truly remorseful, if he really regrets what he did (and if he doesn't I think he'll come to) then the self inflicted punishment is going to last a lot longer than anything Roger Goodell can impose. And no PETA add is going to make it better for him.
So starting things off with the hot blonde (or blond if you prefer, both spellings are actually correct in case you weren't aware), let's take a moment to summarize the details that make her newsworthy. She was a finalist in the Miss America pageant and on track to potentially take home the crown. Many say she would have won had she answered her question differently. Because for the top contenders, after they have them walk around the stage in bikinis and strut around after being all dressed up in gowns, they ask them questions about what they think. The truth is, who the hell cares? The idea is for them to give diplomatic, bland, choreographed responses to the questions to skate through this event. However, when Carrie Prejean (California) was asked what she thought of gay marriage, she spoke truthfully and explained that she doesn't agree with it. A couple of problems here. Firstly, she was asked by an extremely gay man whose name I don't remember or care about. Secondly, she apparently broke the pageant pact by answering honestly instead of in a manner that she knew the judges would be pleased to hear. That's it. The whole thing is that she was asked a question which is hotly debated all across America and she answered honestly. Clearly, this woman is a horrible human being.
The aftermath involved several things, none of which honestly matter much. It turns out she did a photo shoot to try out for Victoria's Secret (note to self: if they hold tryouts I'm getting a spot on the judges panel next year) in which she was topless. Not topless as in you could see her fantastic body completely nude, topless like she didn't have a shirt on and she was facing away from the camera. Still a hot photo, worth checking out. Her opponents say this means she isn't Christian and somehow makes her a hypocrite. I'll be honest, I don't see what a hot girl posing without a shirt on has to do with gay marriage. I really don't see it. Then they said she was speaking too much about the subject and using her pageant title as a pulpit to preach from. They don't want their contestants talking about things that they believe in or the public cares about. That's a no-no. Alright, clearly at this point I'm on her side. Let me tell you why: because this is fucking ridiculous. She was honest. That's what it comes down to, she was asked a question and she answered it. If he didn't want to hear her answer, the judge who asked shouldn't have posed the question, simple as that. I thought the response was tactful and well stated, she wasn't rude or offensive in any way that I could tell. Beyond the fact that all she did was speak her mind, let's take a look at the answer people are so mad about. She opposes gay marriage. Here's a fun fact, CNN just did a poll to see how America feels about the subject. The results? 54% of Americans oppose gay marriage. Want another one? The President currently sitting in the oval office, the one many people are very happy with (including, I'd imagine many of the people who hate Ms. Prejean) has himself stated he opposes gay marriage. Want one more? California just voted against making gay marriage legal. That's odd, the state she represents agrees with her views. So...people hate her because they thought she'd give one answer but gave another. An answer that you're more likely to hear than not when asking the average, random American. Get my point?
Moving on to another hated figure, Michael Vick (former NFL quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons). Mr. Dogmauler himself. Short story, he just got out of prison after spending 2 years there because he was convicted of bankrolling and hosting dog fights. The kind of thing where they get dogs all pissed off and throw them in a ring, place bets and the dogs battle to the death. On top of that, apparently, abuse was pretty common and so was neglect. Pretty bad. It is, you can't really paint a picture that makes him look good there. But he was convicted and went to jail. Now he's out and there's an uproar. A lot of people don't think he should be allowed to play football again. At least not this season, they think teams should either neglect him like the dogs he fought or the commissioner should issue a suspension for the 2009 season. This is stupid. He should be allowed to play if a team is willing to pick him up. He did the crime, surely, but he also did the time. I work for a software company. If I were to steal a car and go to prison for it, when I got out should I be prohibited from getting a job at a different software company? Of course not, that's absurd. What does stealing a car have to do with working on computer programs? About as much as dog fighting has to do with playing football. The crime has nothing to do with his occupation. His occupation happens to pay much, much better than mine and puts him in a public spotlight, but it's still his occupation. He's a football player. That's what he does. The fact that his job is so much more specialized than mine doesn't really mean he should be punished to a greater extreme than me in my opinion. People want him to prove that he's remorseful and that he doesn't want to kill dogs anymore. Really? If he spends the next 365 days campaigning for PETA and wears shirts made of nothing but grass while kissing dogs and going on a vegan diet it still doesn't matter. The dogs are still dead, the whole thing still happened and most importantly, it doesn't prove a damn thing. If he does all that, what it proves to me is that he really wants to play football again. Because that's the truth. He does and due to his abysmal financial position, he'll probably do just about anything to play again because he needs the money. It doesn't mean he isn't remorseful or that he doesn't sincerely want to make amends, it just means that his actions don't prove jack shit because all we'll really know for sure is that he is trying to get back into the NFL. I'm not saying this against him, the fact is anyone in his position faces the same problem. Remorse is a personal thing, you can't prove it when you have more to gain than personal redemption. I'm of the opinion that he should be allowed to play because he paid the price for what he did and should be allowed to go on with his life, which is only right. At the risk of sounding callous (which doesn't bother me), let me put it this way. He acted cruelly to some dogs, get over it and let's all get on with our lives. Yup, I said it. Not that what he doesn't wasn't awful, but I get the feeling that if he'd raped a women or killed a man he wouldn't be facing nearly this level of scrutiny. Which disturbs me. Why do some people value the lives of animals over those of humans? I think this is a question that this situation poses which we should all be looking at. If he had done something awful involving human beings instead of dogs, would people be this angry? I don't know if they would. It also poses the question, do we all deserve a second chance? I'd like to think we do. Yes, it's understandable that dog lovers are mad at him. Yes, he deserved what he got. But he got it. He went to prison and lost his job as starting quarterback for an NFL team. That's pretty severe. Now let him move on, let's all move on. Even if he's denied the option to play for a team this year it won't be indefinite. He will play again. Make no mistake there are teams willing to take the flack for signing Michael Vick. Ultimately, the assigned punishment is going to end and he'll be back out there. But if he's truly remorseful, if he really regrets what he did (and if he doesn't I think he'll come to) then the self inflicted punishment is going to last a lot longer than anything Roger Goodell can impose. And no PETA add is going to make it better for him.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Rantings of an angry Celtics fan
I just got done watching game 6 of the Celtics - Magics series in the NBA playoffs and I'm pissed. No, worse, I'm infuriated. I didn't think I could be this over a loss that didn't end our season. But I am. I've already yelled and punched things and yelled some more. That didn't seem to help. So I'm doing the other thing I do to vent, I'm writing. Maybe talking to an imaginary group of faceless people through here will make me feel better. Can't hurt.
Why am I so pissed? Glad you asked. Maybe because we started off so well. Maybe because we looked like a bunch of high schoolers for most of the second half. Maybe because we turned the ball over 200 times. Or maybe because the Magic played the worst possible elimination game we could have hoped for and we still managed to fuck it up. Maybe because the only team that played worse than the Magic was the Celtics. I don't know, pick your favorite.
If there's one thing I've learned from politicians it's that when something doesn't go the way you want it to, the first thing you need to do is point fingers. Blame the person at fault, blame the person next to him and then blame his parents for bringing him up that way. Just blame someone else. Let's start off with Ray Allen. I love you Ray, you're my favorite player but what the hell was wrong with you tonight? It wasn't just that couldn't sink a bucket to save your own life, it's that you made horrible passes and turned the ball over stupidly. Lesson 1: All the Celtics need to write this down, if you see a Green jersey you want to pass to, before releasing the ball make sure there isn't a White jersey between the two of you. Handing the ball to the other team is a surefire way to look like a bunch of idiots instead of world champions. Who should I point at next? Pierce. Paul Pierce, self proclaimed greatest player in the world (and I love him too but I'm pissed). How about you show up for more than the last 6 minutes? Yeah, he had an okay game but he kept passing the ball off when he should have been taking shots. You're a scorer. Score. Rondo. I've actually got nothing to say about Rondo, he played a fantastic game. Perkins. Stop fucking travelling. When you get the ball you get to dribble until you stop. At that point, you can move one foot but the other one (called the pivot foot) doesn't get to move, it's rooted to the spot it was at when you stopped dribbling. That's pretty basic stuff. Somehow you snuck into the NBA without understanding it. Stop dribbling, planting and then taking 3 steps towards the basket to put it up. Yeah, I know it's the NBA and everyone travels, but even NBA players should know you can't be that blatant and expect to get away with it. Eddie House. I'm not mad at House per se, I'm mad he wasn't in the game more. He's always good for instant offense and when we needed it in the 4th quarter we didn't have him. Which brings me to Doc Rivers. Why the hell wasn't Eddie House in the game? Why couldn't you get your team back in the game after half time, at which point they'd already started fading? You might guess who's coming next. KG. Yup, his sidelined with an injury and that's why I'm pissed at him. If you were in there this game would have been locked up. Shit, we wouldn't have had to push through a 7 game series with Chicago and we'd be better rested. Don't get me started.
I'm not done. I haven't torn into the Magic yet. Like Dwight Howard who bitched publicly after the last game that he didn't get the ball enough. The reason is every time you put up that ugly hook shot it bounces off the rim into Boston hands. Don't act like you're a God because you get boards. A retarded albino with tourettes could get 12 rebounds a game if he was your size. You're bigger than everyone else on the court, you should be getting the rebounds. Shut up. Turkoglu. I hate him, I really do. I'll admit up front he's good but that only makes me hate him worse. I'm not even sure what it is about him, but he's my least favorite player on their team by far. I'm glad he sucked balls tonight. Alston. I'm glad he had a shitty night too. Next time you slap one of our players in the back of the head for "throwing an elbow" (which in slow motion looked a lot like House just brushing past him gently) I hope you get your ass kicked. Who else? Oh, I know. Joakim Noah. I hate Noah. I hate him so much that even though he isn't even in this series and we've already beaten his team I'm mad at him. Just thinking about the NBA and being angry makes me think of Noah and when I think of Noah I want to hit things. He's one of the least likeable players in the entire sport.
Not done. ESPN. Yup, that's right. I am pissed off at ESPN for having the very worst basketball coverage I've ever seen. Your commentators sucked and were less interesting than Ben Stein lecturing on the technical advantages of the already extinct HD-DVD format. After every single play, even unsuccesful ones, the fat, round guy had to say, "And I really liked that". Didn't matter which team, didn't matter if it was in fact a good play. It could be a turnover and this guy would tell us how much he liked what had just happened. I'm going to welcome Reggie and Marv back into my house with open arms after this. And worse than that, is that they assume that everyone watching this possible elimination game is actually just killing time until the Lakers-Rockets game. Honestly, in the 2nd half of the game they kept downsizing the ACTUAL PLAYOFF GAME between 2 of the most popular teams in the sport to show some asshole sitting in the lockerroom listening to an iPod. Or reading something intently. They even interviewed a guy from the Rockets and muted the game during it. Here's a thought that might just break your hearts considering you promoted the living shit out of Kobe Doin Work all night: not everyone watches basketball just to see what Kobe and Lebron do. Not everybody likes those guys. If you want to do a pregame where you can cup the sack of the Lakers and Rockets players, fine. Do it on ESPN2 instead of interupting a game that people want to watch. I hope I never have to watch another game on ESPN for as long as I live. Go TNT.
*Sigh* Alright, alright I think I'm done. You know what? I do feel better. Sometimes a sports fan needs to hate on his team to get things done. But they're still your team after. And I still hope the Celtics come out with a decisive Game 7 victory over the Magic. They just can't play the way they did tonight.
Why am I so pissed? Glad you asked. Maybe because we started off so well. Maybe because we looked like a bunch of high schoolers for most of the second half. Maybe because we turned the ball over 200 times. Or maybe because the Magic played the worst possible elimination game we could have hoped for and we still managed to fuck it up. Maybe because the only team that played worse than the Magic was the Celtics. I don't know, pick your favorite.
If there's one thing I've learned from politicians it's that when something doesn't go the way you want it to, the first thing you need to do is point fingers. Blame the person at fault, blame the person next to him and then blame his parents for bringing him up that way. Just blame someone else. Let's start off with Ray Allen. I love you Ray, you're my favorite player but what the hell was wrong with you tonight? It wasn't just that couldn't sink a bucket to save your own life, it's that you made horrible passes and turned the ball over stupidly. Lesson 1: All the Celtics need to write this down, if you see a Green jersey you want to pass to, before releasing the ball make sure there isn't a White jersey between the two of you. Handing the ball to the other team is a surefire way to look like a bunch of idiots instead of world champions. Who should I point at next? Pierce. Paul Pierce, self proclaimed greatest player in the world (and I love him too but I'm pissed). How about you show up for more than the last 6 minutes? Yeah, he had an okay game but he kept passing the ball off when he should have been taking shots. You're a scorer. Score. Rondo. I've actually got nothing to say about Rondo, he played a fantastic game. Perkins. Stop fucking travelling. When you get the ball you get to dribble until you stop. At that point, you can move one foot but the other one (called the pivot foot) doesn't get to move, it's rooted to the spot it was at when you stopped dribbling. That's pretty basic stuff. Somehow you snuck into the NBA without understanding it. Stop dribbling, planting and then taking 3 steps towards the basket to put it up. Yeah, I know it's the NBA and everyone travels, but even NBA players should know you can't be that blatant and expect to get away with it. Eddie House. I'm not mad at House per se, I'm mad he wasn't in the game more. He's always good for instant offense and when we needed it in the 4th quarter we didn't have him. Which brings me to Doc Rivers. Why the hell wasn't Eddie House in the game? Why couldn't you get your team back in the game after half time, at which point they'd already started fading? You might guess who's coming next. KG. Yup, his sidelined with an injury and that's why I'm pissed at him. If you were in there this game would have been locked up. Shit, we wouldn't have had to push through a 7 game series with Chicago and we'd be better rested. Don't get me started.
I'm not done. I haven't torn into the Magic yet. Like Dwight Howard who bitched publicly after the last game that he didn't get the ball enough. The reason is every time you put up that ugly hook shot it bounces off the rim into Boston hands. Don't act like you're a God because you get boards. A retarded albino with tourettes could get 12 rebounds a game if he was your size. You're bigger than everyone else on the court, you should be getting the rebounds. Shut up. Turkoglu. I hate him, I really do. I'll admit up front he's good but that only makes me hate him worse. I'm not even sure what it is about him, but he's my least favorite player on their team by far. I'm glad he sucked balls tonight. Alston. I'm glad he had a shitty night too. Next time you slap one of our players in the back of the head for "throwing an elbow" (which in slow motion looked a lot like House just brushing past him gently) I hope you get your ass kicked. Who else? Oh, I know. Joakim Noah. I hate Noah. I hate him so much that even though he isn't even in this series and we've already beaten his team I'm mad at him. Just thinking about the NBA and being angry makes me think of Noah and when I think of Noah I want to hit things. He's one of the least likeable players in the entire sport.
Not done. ESPN. Yup, that's right. I am pissed off at ESPN for having the very worst basketball coverage I've ever seen. Your commentators sucked and were less interesting than Ben Stein lecturing on the technical advantages of the already extinct HD-DVD format. After every single play, even unsuccesful ones, the fat, round guy had to say, "And I really liked that". Didn't matter which team, didn't matter if it was in fact a good play. It could be a turnover and this guy would tell us how much he liked what had just happened. I'm going to welcome Reggie and Marv back into my house with open arms after this. And worse than that, is that they assume that everyone watching this possible elimination game is actually just killing time until the Lakers-Rockets game. Honestly, in the 2nd half of the game they kept downsizing the ACTUAL PLAYOFF GAME between 2 of the most popular teams in the sport to show some asshole sitting in the lockerroom listening to an iPod. Or reading something intently. They even interviewed a guy from the Rockets and muted the game during it. Here's a thought that might just break your hearts considering you promoted the living shit out of Kobe Doin Work all night: not everyone watches basketball just to see what Kobe and Lebron do. Not everybody likes those guys. If you want to do a pregame where you can cup the sack of the Lakers and Rockets players, fine. Do it on ESPN2 instead of interupting a game that people want to watch. I hope I never have to watch another game on ESPN for as long as I live. Go TNT.
*Sigh* Alright, alright I think I'm done. You know what? I do feel better. Sometimes a sports fan needs to hate on his team to get things done. But they're still your team after. And I still hope the Celtics come out with a decisive Game 7 victory over the Magic. They just can't play the way they did tonight.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Forgetting the Unforgettable
I've recently lost someone who was very important to me. Was being the key word in that sentence. I didn't lose this person to death, but rather because of a certain set of circumstances (read: her being a whore). Moving past the sadness, which I'm over at this point. And moving past the anger, which I'm not really over, leaves me pondering a difficult question that I've been forced to pose to myself: what do you do with some of the greatest memories of your life when the person you shared them with turned into a person you detest?
One of the real tragedies of a break-up is that you not only lose the other person, but that you lose a part of yourself in the process. The person that you came to be around someone you trust completely and share a special connection with. When the relationship is over, so are the inside jokes, shared experiences and memories you had with the other person. You'll never get those things back. In time, when you find someone else you begin to build a new set of experiences and inside jokes and whatnot. But they'll never be exactly the same as the ones you lost when an important person walks out of your life. What you are left with, are the memories you created together. The things you used to look back on to feel good about life, to get you through the bad times, to let yourself know that no matter what, someone out there cares about you. When that other person is gone, how are you supposed to deal with these memories that have suddenly become painful reminders of what used to be? Well, there are a few different ways to deal with them as far as I can see.
The first and most obvious to me, is to consciously not think about them. Try to cut those memories away and let them fade and eventually die from misuse. The benefit here being that you don't experience the pain that comes from thinking about happy times with a person you'll never talk to again. You don't have to compare your life now to your life when it was at its best. The old saying out of sight, out of mind really makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Constant reminders of a past that doesn't resemble your future seems like a one way trip to Misery Town to me. However, this method means you may be forcefully forgetting defining moments in your life. Option B?
The next course of action would be to embrace the memories. Remember the good for the good and to hell with the way things ended. Don't concentrate on the end but on the parts that were good. Think about the good times, the reasons the relationship meant so much, even the times you'll miss having now that it's over. If some of the best memories in your life happened with a person you now hate, does that mean you should have to give them up? Isn't that almost another victory for the person from your past? Why should I have to stop smiling about my past because she destroyed our future? The only problem is, looking back and dwelling in the past is a surefire way to miss the present and to be affected by the loss for a very long time. I don't want to swim amongst my memories if it means I had to shed the tears they're floating in.
Damned if I do, damned if I don't. The truth is, I'm on here writing because I'm still trying to figure it out. I don't have an answer. I can tell you that right now, I'm pushing every single thought of her out of my mind when she finds her way. Which, I'm happy to say, isn't as often as it was a week ago. Which was less than the week before that, and so on. Time takes away the pain and slowly you're able to move on. The question I ask myself is, when I no longer think about her anymore, should I? Should the eventual downfall preclude me from thinking about the climb? I've been here before but in the past I could push past the memories and move on because they didn't mean as much to me. They didn't cover such a long, significant portion of my life. As I write that I realize that forgetting our time together isn't possible. Not because she was so amazing, and not because I can't move on. Because we were together for so long, through so much that to forget every moment with her would be to forget my own life. Not every happy memory I have with her in it is special because of her. On the contrary, much of the times were just great times that she happened to be there for. They would still be happy if she'd never been there. She enhanced them at the time, but that doesn't mean I should forget about the times I had with other people while she was around.
The truth is, I can throw out the photo albums and delete the pictures from my computer, but the memories probably aren't going anywhere. Not the big ones. I'll always remember my first Sox game at Fenway not because I went with her but because it was my first Sox game at Fenway. I'll always remember partying in college and getting caught fooling around in conspicuous places, not because I was fooling around with her but because that was an integral part of my college experience. I'm going to keep these memories in my data bank because they're worth having. They're everything. And they're so much bigger than her. After time she can fade away as the memories remain strong and instead of "that time her and I went to so and so's wedding and had a blast", it'll become "so and so's wedding where I had a blast, I think whatsherface might have been my date". I don't have to get rid of the picture, I can just cut her out of it. Call me spiteful, or immature if you'd like, but that seems like a pretty good way to deal with the problem to me.
Of course, there are still those memories that really were special to me because of her. Those I guess I'll just have to deal with in a different way. For now, I think I'll choose not to think about movie nights and special dinners and those moments that make the rest of the world fade to gray around you. Those moments are important, for sure. But I don't want them. I'll remember enough to know that there was a time someone made me feel like I was the most important person in their life. I might even allow myself to remember that I felt the same way about them. But dwelling on lost love is as fruitless as any labor I could possibly attempt. So I'll try to avoid thinking about those moments that are just about the two of us, and I think that if I do that long enough, I'll have found somebody new. Then I can overwrite those memories because they won't matter anymore. I can get that feeling from memories I forge with somebody more worthy. When that'll happen, I have no idea. But I'm not worried, I know that there are more important things to do than worry about the past. I can still live my life. Who knows, in a few years I might look back on the times I'm having with my friends right now and remember them as some of the best in my life.
One of the real tragedies of a break-up is that you not only lose the other person, but that you lose a part of yourself in the process. The person that you came to be around someone you trust completely and share a special connection with. When the relationship is over, so are the inside jokes, shared experiences and memories you had with the other person. You'll never get those things back. In time, when you find someone else you begin to build a new set of experiences and inside jokes and whatnot. But they'll never be exactly the same as the ones you lost when an important person walks out of your life. What you are left with, are the memories you created together. The things you used to look back on to feel good about life, to get you through the bad times, to let yourself know that no matter what, someone out there cares about you. When that other person is gone, how are you supposed to deal with these memories that have suddenly become painful reminders of what used to be? Well, there are a few different ways to deal with them as far as I can see.
The first and most obvious to me, is to consciously not think about them. Try to cut those memories away and let them fade and eventually die from misuse. The benefit here being that you don't experience the pain that comes from thinking about happy times with a person you'll never talk to again. You don't have to compare your life now to your life when it was at its best. The old saying out of sight, out of mind really makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Constant reminders of a past that doesn't resemble your future seems like a one way trip to Misery Town to me. However, this method means you may be forcefully forgetting defining moments in your life. Option B?
The next course of action would be to embrace the memories. Remember the good for the good and to hell with the way things ended. Don't concentrate on the end but on the parts that were good. Think about the good times, the reasons the relationship meant so much, even the times you'll miss having now that it's over. If some of the best memories in your life happened with a person you now hate, does that mean you should have to give them up? Isn't that almost another victory for the person from your past? Why should I have to stop smiling about my past because she destroyed our future? The only problem is, looking back and dwelling in the past is a surefire way to miss the present and to be affected by the loss for a very long time. I don't want to swim amongst my memories if it means I had to shed the tears they're floating in.
Damned if I do, damned if I don't. The truth is, I'm on here writing because I'm still trying to figure it out. I don't have an answer. I can tell you that right now, I'm pushing every single thought of her out of my mind when she finds her way. Which, I'm happy to say, isn't as often as it was a week ago. Which was less than the week before that, and so on. Time takes away the pain and slowly you're able to move on. The question I ask myself is, when I no longer think about her anymore, should I? Should the eventual downfall preclude me from thinking about the climb? I've been here before but in the past I could push past the memories and move on because they didn't mean as much to me. They didn't cover such a long, significant portion of my life. As I write that I realize that forgetting our time together isn't possible. Not because she was so amazing, and not because I can't move on. Because we were together for so long, through so much that to forget every moment with her would be to forget my own life. Not every happy memory I have with her in it is special because of her. On the contrary, much of the times were just great times that she happened to be there for. They would still be happy if she'd never been there. She enhanced them at the time, but that doesn't mean I should forget about the times I had with other people while she was around.
The truth is, I can throw out the photo albums and delete the pictures from my computer, but the memories probably aren't going anywhere. Not the big ones. I'll always remember my first Sox game at Fenway not because I went with her but because it was my first Sox game at Fenway. I'll always remember partying in college and getting caught fooling around in conspicuous places, not because I was fooling around with her but because that was an integral part of my college experience. I'm going to keep these memories in my data bank because they're worth having. They're everything. And they're so much bigger than her. After time she can fade away as the memories remain strong and instead of "that time her and I went to so and so's wedding and had a blast", it'll become "so and so's wedding where I had a blast, I think whatsherface might have been my date". I don't have to get rid of the picture, I can just cut her out of it. Call me spiteful, or immature if you'd like, but that seems like a pretty good way to deal with the problem to me.
Of course, there are still those memories that really were special to me because of her. Those I guess I'll just have to deal with in a different way. For now, I think I'll choose not to think about movie nights and special dinners and those moments that make the rest of the world fade to gray around you. Those moments are important, for sure. But I don't want them. I'll remember enough to know that there was a time someone made me feel like I was the most important person in their life. I might even allow myself to remember that I felt the same way about them. But dwelling on lost love is as fruitless as any labor I could possibly attempt. So I'll try to avoid thinking about those moments that are just about the two of us, and I think that if I do that long enough, I'll have found somebody new. Then I can overwrite those memories because they won't matter anymore. I can get that feeling from memories I forge with somebody more worthy. When that'll happen, I have no idea. But I'm not worried, I know that there are more important things to do than worry about the past. I can still live my life. Who knows, in a few years I might look back on the times I'm having with my friends right now and remember them as some of the best in my life.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Retarding Over-Sensitivity
So I like to think of myself as an educated guy and I try to keep up with what's going on with the world. I read CNN.com on a daily basis (not because I like the network AT ALL, but because the site is well laid out, covers relevant stories and updates constantly). So I read a story today that I felt compelled to write a little something about. Think I'm gonna say something about the Olympics? I love em, but nope. The conflict between Russia and Georgia? I'm sick of it already. No, what I'd like to point your attention to is an article titled "Dozens Protest at 'Tropic Thunder' Premiere". I'll save you some time so you don't have to run over there and take a look. Basically, a lot of people are very upset that the movie has fun at the expense of the mentally disabled.
Yeah, the protesters lined up because apparently during the new Ben Stiller comedy the characters throw the word retard around like it's their job. Oops, am I not supposed to say "that" word? Don't be retarded, I can say whatever the hell I want. Retard advocacy groups are upset, the Special Olympics is trying to organize a boycott of the film and signs like "Ban the movie, Ban the word" are being flashed by protesters. I hope you'll excuse me for a lack of sympathy, but are you serious? Welcome to America assholes.
I'm sure many people think I'm an insensitive jerk, but things like this really piss me off. Ban the movie? Are these people aware that the same Bill of Rights that gives them the right to protest the movie gives the movie makers the right to make and show the movie? Or is this irony lost on them as it is on most morons who walk around with signs trying to promote censorship? They sound like retards when I put it that way don't they? Ok, I'm getting mean, but I'm offended by their being offended. I don't know where this incredible sensitivity comes from, but it's extremely prevalent in America and I'm damned tired of it. If these people don't like the way the movie portrays retarded people, don't go see it. Hell if you're really offended, ask your family not to see it. But saying the movie needs to be banned is, well, retarded. If you don't like the fact that I'm throwing in the word retard as much as possible in this entry, you can go to hell. Don't keep reading, I won't be mad. Retarded retards acting like frickin retards are retarding their own efforts and looking like retards in the process. Still here? That's your choice. There are a lot of movies that offend me. The recent Sex and The City movie comes to mind, but you know what I always do when this happens? I spend my money elsewhere and I let other people with bad taste go and watch movies like that. It's really that simple.
It seems like every week there's a new example of overly sensitive people crying about something new. Quite frankly I hope they cry themselves to death, because at least then they'll spare the rest of us their constant bitching. Why are people getting so worked up in this case? Presumably because the word retard is being applied in a derogatory manner. Sure, but 20 years ago it was PC. 20 years from now people may be calling other people mentally handicapped in the exact same way and then the "cognitively challenged" will be pissed. Whatever, what we're talking about are semantics. It's just a word. If you don't consider yourself retarded (as another sign proclaimed), then why be offended? It's like black people calling each other "niggas" and getting unbelievably offended when any other color calls them the same. It's dumb. This is the United States and people are allowed to say what they want, why can't people get used to that? Athiests, agnostics and Jews getting all angry over Christians expressing their beliefs: fuck you. Christians getting uptight because The DaVinci Code says Jesus got married: get over it, it was a fictional novel. Chinese offended because a Spanish team took a photo holding their eyes in a slanted position: I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you do indeed have eyes that appear slanted, it's not racist to point out facts. Mentally handicapped upset because a new comedy uses the word retard a couple of times: don't go see it, all you're doing is giving it free publicity by protesting it like this.
The moral of the story is stop being a bunch of pussies America. Land of the free, that's what they call us. So stop getting your panties in a bunch just because people are saying things that offend you. People say stuff that offends me all the time. Hell people being offended by retarded shit offends me. You probably barely even noticed my use of retard in the last sentence now that I've saturated your eyes with it. Just another tip for the easily offended, words lose their edge when overused and left to fade away. Call it immersion therapy 101. But just like it's your right to be offended, it's the other person's right to offend. Remember that freedom is a two way street.
Yeah, the protesters lined up because apparently during the new Ben Stiller comedy the characters throw the word retard around like it's their job. Oops, am I not supposed to say "that" word? Don't be retarded, I can say whatever the hell I want. Retard advocacy groups are upset, the Special Olympics is trying to organize a boycott of the film and signs like "Ban the movie, Ban the word" are being flashed by protesters. I hope you'll excuse me for a lack of sympathy, but are you serious? Welcome to America assholes.
I'm sure many people think I'm an insensitive jerk, but things like this really piss me off. Ban the movie? Are these people aware that the same Bill of Rights that gives them the right to protest the movie gives the movie makers the right to make and show the movie? Or is this irony lost on them as it is on most morons who walk around with signs trying to promote censorship? They sound like retards when I put it that way don't they? Ok, I'm getting mean, but I'm offended by their being offended. I don't know where this incredible sensitivity comes from, but it's extremely prevalent in America and I'm damned tired of it. If these people don't like the way the movie portrays retarded people, don't go see it. Hell if you're really offended, ask your family not to see it. But saying the movie needs to be banned is, well, retarded. If you don't like the fact that I'm throwing in the word retard as much as possible in this entry, you can go to hell. Don't keep reading, I won't be mad. Retarded retards acting like frickin retards are retarding their own efforts and looking like retards in the process. Still here? That's your choice. There are a lot of movies that offend me. The recent Sex and The City movie comes to mind, but you know what I always do when this happens? I spend my money elsewhere and I let other people with bad taste go and watch movies like that. It's really that simple.
It seems like every week there's a new example of overly sensitive people crying about something new. Quite frankly I hope they cry themselves to death, because at least then they'll spare the rest of us their constant bitching. Why are people getting so worked up in this case? Presumably because the word retard is being applied in a derogatory manner. Sure, but 20 years ago it was PC. 20 years from now people may be calling other people mentally handicapped in the exact same way and then the "cognitively challenged" will be pissed. Whatever, what we're talking about are semantics. It's just a word. If you don't consider yourself retarded (as another sign proclaimed), then why be offended? It's like black people calling each other "niggas" and getting unbelievably offended when any other color calls them the same. It's dumb. This is the United States and people are allowed to say what they want, why can't people get used to that? Athiests, agnostics and Jews getting all angry over Christians expressing their beliefs: fuck you. Christians getting uptight because The DaVinci Code says Jesus got married: get over it, it was a fictional novel. Chinese offended because a Spanish team took a photo holding their eyes in a slanted position: I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you do indeed have eyes that appear slanted, it's not racist to point out facts. Mentally handicapped upset because a new comedy uses the word retard a couple of times: don't go see it, all you're doing is giving it free publicity by protesting it like this.
The moral of the story is stop being a bunch of pussies America. Land of the free, that's what they call us. So stop getting your panties in a bunch just because people are saying things that offend you. People say stuff that offends me all the time. Hell people being offended by retarded shit offends me. You probably barely even noticed my use of retard in the last sentence now that I've saturated your eyes with it. Just another tip for the easily offended, words lose their edge when overused and left to fade away. Call it immersion therapy 101. But just like it's your right to be offended, it's the other person's right to offend. Remember that freedom is a two way street.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Why I'm Getting an STi or The Auto Enthusiast Defined
Let me begin my saying that I consider myself a legitimate car nut. Since before I could drive I’ve drooled over the curvaceous sheet metal and stared slack jawed at the performance figures of sports cars. I love memorizing the horsepower figures, engine configurations and 0-60 times of exotic supercars like Ferrari and Porsche. I thoroughly enjoy arguing the supremacy of my favorite cars against those of my friends.
So when I got a decent paying job I decided to get a car that a car enthusiast such as me would enjoy. My choice would be familiar to anybody who has paid any attention to the low priced sports car market over the past few years: a Subaru WRX. It’s quick, it handles well, it looks good and it has AWD which is a nice thing up here in VT. I bought the exact year (2005) and color (Black Obsidian Pearl) that I wanted and I haven’t been disappointed by the car once since. I love it. For 2 years now, I have loved it. However, I’m going to sell it.
Allow me to explain why I’ve decided to sell a car that I just confessed to loving. Like Brutus, it’s not that I loved my WRX less, but that I love the STi more. The Subaru WRX STi is the top dog model in the lineup of the Impreza line. It’s essentially my car with an improvement in everything; from the engine to the suspension to the interior. Basically, it’s much faster.
I knew, after my first test drive, that the WRX was the car for me. I’d driven perhaps 3 or 4 other cars that I was interested in, but none of them provided the feeling of “right” I got when I drove the WRX. So I got one. But when I drove the STi, it was as though that feeling of “right” had been ratcheted up another 5 notches. It seemed somehow “more right”. Many things between the two models were similar, and that familiarity made me instantly comfortable in the STi. But the things that were different seemed, at least to me, different for the better. So I have longed for the STi since that test drive and debated internally whether or not I should get one.
It’s taken a few months to come up with a final answer, but I did just the same. The answer is yes, I should. But it wasn’t a straight up answer to a simple question. The problem is, the decision makes almost no sense. Because I have inherited from my father an overly developed logic center, I had trouble convincing myself it was a good idea. This small doubt was fueled by friends and family telling me that I already had a nice car, one that I liked very much and it would be stupid to get a car that is so similar at this point. After all, I’ve paid off 2 years of the loan on my car. My favorite year for the STi is 2005, the same year as my car. So it’s not like I’m trading up into a newer vehicle. On top of that my car doesn’t get fantastic gas mileage as it is and the STi’s is even worse. In the world of $4/gallon gas ,that matters. Also most STi’s come with high performance summer tires to take advantage of the handling capabilities that the car possesses. But in Vermont, I need a good set of dedicated winter tires, especially with 300hp spinning my wheels. Since the STi has bigger, wider rims, those are going to cost more than my WRX’s. Then there’s insurance to consider, because the STi costs more to insure of course. And the ride is stiff, some people complain that it is uncomfortably so, which might matter since I do about 75% of my driving on frost heaved highways. It’s got a great set of Brembo brakes but the pads are very expensive to replace, and they cause a lot of brake dust which requires cleaning the rims and car frequently. Aside from brake pads most of the fluids are more expensive on the STi, either because they require a higher quality or simply a larger quantity. To finish it off, my WRX has the Premium package including a power moonroof, heated seats, heated rear view mirrors and windshield wiper defrosters (surprisingly useful). None of those things are available on the STi, and I really do enjoy each feature.
That is the list of Cons on the Pro/Con list in my mind. It’s fairly long and it makes a good argument against selling my car to get an STi. Adding to the confusion is the fact that the WRX has great aftermarket support and I can spend some time and money modifying my WRX to be almost as fast as the stock STi. So considering this, you may wonder why I’ve chosen to make the move anyway. Well that would be the list of things in my Pros column. There aren’t many, but they’ve got weight where it counts. It’s faster, it handles better, it looks more aggressive, but most importantly: it puts a bigger smile on my face. Yup, back to that feeling of “right”. In a contest between two cars that feel it, the STi feels it much more so. I can point to the reasons but they don’t matter. It’s like asking why you fall for a certain girl. She’s pretty, she’s funny, she’s whatever. What matters is she makes you happier than you would be without her. It’s the same with the right car.
After mulling it over for a while I looked at it like this: I’m an auto enthusiast. I love cars for what they are and what they do and I want to own the nicest car I can for these reasons. For me, that means owning the car that performs as close as possible to the cars I hung on my walls as a kid and still buy car magazines to read about. I need a car anyway, why not get one that fulfills a desire for a hobby as well? Being a car guy means being passionate about automobiles. Does getting an STi make logical or financial sense for me? Nope, not really. Am I going to get one anyway? You bet. Because when it comes down to it I don’t give a damn what makes sense. Since when is that the only good reason to do something? Because passion and practicality can exist separate from one another. Because having more of one often means less of the other. Because I know I place more importance on passion. And because I’m not promised a tomorrow. Who knows if I’ll be able to afford a car like this 10 years from now. Maybe I can get a nicer, faster car. Maybe not. But knowing that I can do it right now, that maybe this is the only chance I’ll get, I don’t think I have much of a choice. Being passionate sometimes means getting what you want, not what you need. But it also means that maybe, in the case of the car guy, those two mean exactly the same thing.
So when I got a decent paying job I decided to get a car that a car enthusiast such as me would enjoy. My choice would be familiar to anybody who has paid any attention to the low priced sports car market over the past few years: a Subaru WRX. It’s quick, it handles well, it looks good and it has AWD which is a nice thing up here in VT. I bought the exact year (2005) and color (Black Obsidian Pearl) that I wanted and I haven’t been disappointed by the car once since. I love it. For 2 years now, I have loved it. However, I’m going to sell it.
Allow me to explain why I’ve decided to sell a car that I just confessed to loving. Like Brutus, it’s not that I loved my WRX less, but that I love the STi more. The Subaru WRX STi is the top dog model in the lineup of the Impreza line. It’s essentially my car with an improvement in everything; from the engine to the suspension to the interior. Basically, it’s much faster.
I knew, after my first test drive, that the WRX was the car for me. I’d driven perhaps 3 or 4 other cars that I was interested in, but none of them provided the feeling of “right” I got when I drove the WRX. So I got one. But when I drove the STi, it was as though that feeling of “right” had been ratcheted up another 5 notches. It seemed somehow “more right”. Many things between the two models were similar, and that familiarity made me instantly comfortable in the STi. But the things that were different seemed, at least to me, different for the better. So I have longed for the STi since that test drive and debated internally whether or not I should get one.
It’s taken a few months to come up with a final answer, but I did just the same. The answer is yes, I should. But it wasn’t a straight up answer to a simple question. The problem is, the decision makes almost no sense. Because I have inherited from my father an overly developed logic center, I had trouble convincing myself it was a good idea. This small doubt was fueled by friends and family telling me that I already had a nice car, one that I liked very much and it would be stupid to get a car that is so similar at this point. After all, I’ve paid off 2 years of the loan on my car. My favorite year for the STi is 2005, the same year as my car. So it’s not like I’m trading up into a newer vehicle. On top of that my car doesn’t get fantastic gas mileage as it is and the STi’s is even worse. In the world of $4/gallon gas ,that matters. Also most STi’s come with high performance summer tires to take advantage of the handling capabilities that the car possesses. But in Vermont, I need a good set of dedicated winter tires, especially with 300hp spinning my wheels. Since the STi has bigger, wider rims, those are going to cost more than my WRX’s. Then there’s insurance to consider, because the STi costs more to insure of course. And the ride is stiff, some people complain that it is uncomfortably so, which might matter since I do about 75% of my driving on frost heaved highways. It’s got a great set of Brembo brakes but the pads are very expensive to replace, and they cause a lot of brake dust which requires cleaning the rims and car frequently. Aside from brake pads most of the fluids are more expensive on the STi, either because they require a higher quality or simply a larger quantity. To finish it off, my WRX has the Premium package including a power moonroof, heated seats, heated rear view mirrors and windshield wiper defrosters (surprisingly useful). None of those things are available on the STi, and I really do enjoy each feature.
That is the list of Cons on the Pro/Con list in my mind. It’s fairly long and it makes a good argument against selling my car to get an STi. Adding to the confusion is the fact that the WRX has great aftermarket support and I can spend some time and money modifying my WRX to be almost as fast as the stock STi. So considering this, you may wonder why I’ve chosen to make the move anyway. Well that would be the list of things in my Pros column. There aren’t many, but they’ve got weight where it counts. It’s faster, it handles better, it looks more aggressive, but most importantly: it puts a bigger smile on my face. Yup, back to that feeling of “right”. In a contest between two cars that feel it, the STi feels it much more so. I can point to the reasons but they don’t matter. It’s like asking why you fall for a certain girl. She’s pretty, she’s funny, she’s whatever. What matters is she makes you happier than you would be without her. It’s the same with the right car.
After mulling it over for a while I looked at it like this: I’m an auto enthusiast. I love cars for what they are and what they do and I want to own the nicest car I can for these reasons. For me, that means owning the car that performs as close as possible to the cars I hung on my walls as a kid and still buy car magazines to read about. I need a car anyway, why not get one that fulfills a desire for a hobby as well? Being a car guy means being passionate about automobiles. Does getting an STi make logical or financial sense for me? Nope, not really. Am I going to get one anyway? You bet. Because when it comes down to it I don’t give a damn what makes sense. Since when is that the only good reason to do something? Because passion and practicality can exist separate from one another. Because having more of one often means less of the other. Because I know I place more importance on passion. And because I’m not promised a tomorrow. Who knows if I’ll be able to afford a car like this 10 years from now. Maybe I can get a nicer, faster car. Maybe not. But knowing that I can do it right now, that maybe this is the only chance I’ll get, I don’t think I have much of a choice. Being passionate sometimes means getting what you want, not what you need. But it also means that maybe, in the case of the car guy, those two mean exactly the same thing.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Excuse Me
I rarely post on here anymore and I truly do consider that unfortunate. I could once again use the excuse that I'm just too busy, but it's a tired excuse that should be allowed to rest without the likes of me calling upon it to stand up for me every time I lose dedication or focus. It's an easy excuse because it's one we can all relate to. "Yeah, well I mean, he's busy. I can understand that, I'm busy too it must be hard to find the time..." The real trouble with an excuse is that it doesn't ever really go away. We kind of tuck it away in the back of our life toolbox and let it sit there, because you never know when you're going to need a good excuse; especially one that's worked in the past. And excuses are addictive. There's no doubt about it. I mean, a good excuse is a little like magic. You find yourself in trouble and you rummage through your past to find a good excuse, or perhaps spend time building a brand new one, and you pull it out and use it...and the problem disappears in a smoke of understanding.
Hi, my name is Josh Taylor, and I'm an excuse addict.
I'm trying to repent of my excusing-ways and move on, to get to a place where honesty and accountability are the expectation rather than the exception. I have no misconceptions about getting help from friends and family, this is something I'll need to do on my own. Because the truth of it is folks, each and every one of us is surrounded by excuse addicts. They're showing up late to restaurants in the form of our friends; they're writing excuses for the masses in health journals; hell, some of the biggest addicts I've ever seen are running the very country I live in. We live in an excuse addicted society that will accept our twisting of the truth (or outright lie if it's well designed) just so long as we promise to do the same when the roles are reversed. It's like a game we allow ourselves to play, as though nothing more than some antiquated notion of truth is at stake.
Perhaps it isn't, who can say? But for a minute I'd like to take the idealistic stance that truth is not an antiquated notion. That perhaps the way we have been syphoning away the moral reserves of our responsibility and accountability is less a one way street than it is a wrong turn. That maybe, just maybe, we can move closer from where we are now to where we all know we should be. A daunting task to be sure. An uphill struggle, undoubtedly. But a worthy cause? As worthy as they come. But I think we can all help each other. I'm taking the first step, putting myself out there. Welcome to Excusers Anonymous. Next time you come, bring a friend, or two, or three. I know there's no shortage of qualifying candidates.
The rules we will follow are very simple. First and foremost, we must take every effort to stop making excuses for ourselves. Own up to your mistakes. Looks so nice and easy written on a computer screen doesn't it? Almost trivial. "Of course I was raised to do that, it's simple. I mean, the only time I don't really is when other people are doing it too and if they're going to I might as well too." We're all guilty of trying to create an umbrella for ourselves so the shitstorm might slide off to one side or the other, rather than landing directly on our own heads. So what if it splashes someone else's shoes, they're the ones who chose to stand there. Because that's the real truth: an excuse almost always serves to not only get the blame off of ourselves, but actually point it as someone else. Re-assigning blame is the ugly stepsister of the excuse. Just look at politicians, they're literally professionals in this regard.
The second rule is that we cannot allow others to go on making excuses either. That means two different things. First, we can't make excuses for others. That's not much better than making them for ourselves. Secondly, we need to call them out on their bullshit when we hear it and recognize it. And let's be honest, excuses are rarely so well camouflaged that we mistake them for the truth. If we break that pact, then they aren't going to accept our excuses either and we've created a cycle where excuses are no longer acceptable.
So the next time you're late for work, or a dinner, or a meeting, don't blame traffic when you know damned well you left 15 minutes late. Don't say you can't quit smoking because all of your friends do it and it's impossible to quit when you're surrounded by it. Don't blame work for not spending enough time with your family when you find time to manage a fantasy baseball team or catch your team's game 3 nights a week. And don't tell us you misunderstood the question when you're running for public office and accidentally answered from your heart rather than using the scripted responses expected by your party. I'm so sick of one dimensional politicians who put more stock in keeping their political party happy than following their own beliefs I can't stand it. Most importantly, if you piss someone off because you listened to the advice I've written here, don't blame me. If you do, I'm just gonna blame Blogger for giving me the opportunity to write here anyway.
Hi, my name is Josh Taylor, and I'm an excuse addict.
I'm trying to repent of my excusing-ways and move on, to get to a place where honesty and accountability are the expectation rather than the exception. I have no misconceptions about getting help from friends and family, this is something I'll need to do on my own. Because the truth of it is folks, each and every one of us is surrounded by excuse addicts. They're showing up late to restaurants in the form of our friends; they're writing excuses for the masses in health journals; hell, some of the biggest addicts I've ever seen are running the very country I live in. We live in an excuse addicted society that will accept our twisting of the truth (or outright lie if it's well designed) just so long as we promise to do the same when the roles are reversed. It's like a game we allow ourselves to play, as though nothing more than some antiquated notion of truth is at stake.
Perhaps it isn't, who can say? But for a minute I'd like to take the idealistic stance that truth is not an antiquated notion. That perhaps the way we have been syphoning away the moral reserves of our responsibility and accountability is less a one way street than it is a wrong turn. That maybe, just maybe, we can move closer from where we are now to where we all know we should be. A daunting task to be sure. An uphill struggle, undoubtedly. But a worthy cause? As worthy as they come. But I think we can all help each other. I'm taking the first step, putting myself out there. Welcome to Excusers Anonymous. Next time you come, bring a friend, or two, or three. I know there's no shortage of qualifying candidates.
The rules we will follow are very simple. First and foremost, we must take every effort to stop making excuses for ourselves. Own up to your mistakes. Looks so nice and easy written on a computer screen doesn't it? Almost trivial. "Of course I was raised to do that, it's simple. I mean, the only time I don't really is when other people are doing it too and if they're going to I might as well too." We're all guilty of trying to create an umbrella for ourselves so the shitstorm might slide off to one side or the other, rather than landing directly on our own heads. So what if it splashes someone else's shoes, they're the ones who chose to stand there. Because that's the real truth: an excuse almost always serves to not only get the blame off of ourselves, but actually point it as someone else. Re-assigning blame is the ugly stepsister of the excuse. Just look at politicians, they're literally professionals in this regard.
The second rule is that we cannot allow others to go on making excuses either. That means two different things. First, we can't make excuses for others. That's not much better than making them for ourselves. Secondly, we need to call them out on their bullshit when we hear it and recognize it. And let's be honest, excuses are rarely so well camouflaged that we mistake them for the truth. If we break that pact, then they aren't going to accept our excuses either and we've created a cycle where excuses are no longer acceptable.
So the next time you're late for work, or a dinner, or a meeting, don't blame traffic when you know damned well you left 15 minutes late. Don't say you can't quit smoking because all of your friends do it and it's impossible to quit when you're surrounded by it. Don't blame work for not spending enough time with your family when you find time to manage a fantasy baseball team or catch your team's game 3 nights a week. And don't tell us you misunderstood the question when you're running for public office and accidentally answered from your heart rather than using the scripted responses expected by your party. I'm so sick of one dimensional politicians who put more stock in keeping their political party happy than following their own beliefs I can't stand it. Most importantly, if you piss someone off because you listened to the advice I've written here, don't blame me. If you do, I'm just gonna blame Blogger for giving me the opportunity to write here anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
