I'm not normally an apocalyptic, doom-and-gloom person.
So bear that in mind when I say that the book mentioned in the title of this post has convinced me that it's time to unplug (just a bit) from the overbearing digital infrastructure of today's world.
Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers describes some of the benefits of taking a step back from the hyper-connected world we find ourselves in, and explains why maybe we should all try to cultivate our inner lives a bit more, and monitor our digital avatars and their respective inboxes a little bit less.
The book takes a historical-philosophical look at digital overload, explaining that life has been speeding up since the time of the Ancient Greeks, and that even then they felt a bit overcome by the technological developments of their day. The text then progresses up through the years, touching on Gutenberg, Thoreau, McLuhan, among other philosophical types, and their views on how to find solitude, meaning, and valuable connectedness in life, mainly by taking the time to slow down, make real personal connections, and not to waste time simply keeping busy with things of little importance.
In other words, don't stay busy just because it's the thing to do. And don't think that staring at your cell phone screen while riding the subway is somehow better than looking out its window. Just because your mobile is new, 4G, and you can read status updates AS THEY HAPPEN doesn't mean that your friend's notice that she's "so super psyyyyyched for 2day!" is any more significant than the real landscape before you. Being addicted to a digital screen and its info doesn't necessarily make you in the know and popular, it makes you ADHD and likely to lack introspective thought.
Of course, I understand that the statements made in the book are not universal. For some people, looking at their BlackBerry every 2 minutes is just the thing for them. But it's an interesting theory, and worth an experiment to see if maybe a reduction in screen time could lead to happiness.
Personally, I am resolved to try and reduce the frequency of my computer check-ins, to a few times a day, tops. I can stay on the computer as long as I'd like once I'm on, but I'm trying to bring the number of individual computer rendezvous down. Even in the few days I've been testing this, I've noticed how OFTEN I would have checked my computer for no real reason, had I not stopped myself and said "Let's go find something else to do." I also notice that I feel more calm. In the book, Powers makes mention of the fact that something a lot of us like about vacation is the disconnectedness from the rest of the digital world. Upon reflection, I realize this is very true for me. Any occasion where connectedness is difficult (or expensive), I find I feel better, because rather than constantly feeling tugged to check and click and just be busy, my mind relaxed and works on something else.
This post only touches on a few facets of the book, and I can admit that I can feel my own brain being a bit foggy today (not due to digital overload, more likely due to tiredness and the emotional strain of attending a wedding earlier today), so please excuse any confusion in this post. Simplified message: just read the book. It's great.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Life Lessons
I found this photo on 9gag a few days/weeks ago (I honestly don't remember how long ago it was), and it really struck me as applicable to my life. The top panel especially illustrates a personal fault that I tend to have a lot of trouble with.
I guess this kind of touches on the philosophical question of "What does it mean to lead a good life?" (or, in my words, doing SOMETHING). We're kind of going over that topic in my hyper-speed summer ethics course at LCCC, but given the level of talent in the teacher, I doubt I will be any closer to a conclusion on this personal distress over the purpose of life by the end of the class.
International Musical Invasion
Is it just me, or are French house DJs suddenly becoming the new "it" musicians in the US Pop Scene?
On the radio last summer, it seemed impossible to not hear a song or remix by David Guetta. He worked with mainly US artists, but gave each song his signature beats. To be honest, I liked the more electro-dance sound as opposed to the super-sugary stylings of Spears or Cyrus.
And now, the song "Hello" by Martin Solveig and Dragonette is taking over the worldwide charts.
Solveig is a Paris DJ, and Dragonette is a Canadian band, but I suspect this will make Solveig the name to be known, and Dragonette will likely (unfortunately) never be heard from again.
I wonder if this marks two important changes to the US music industry: 1) an interest in more international musicians and 2) a shift towards dance/electro as predominant in pop music. Of course, on point 1, I doubt that we will suddenly be hearing sitars on all the Clear Channel stations, but maybe there will be a bit more variety than the constant production of white-girls-next-door pop singers and doe-eyed boy bands.
On a more minor note, there seems to be a slight second-wave British invasion, what with the likes of Adele becoming more known, and not just as an international peculiarity. Adele certainly has the talent to show the likes of Ke$ha and Rebecca Black what music really could be.
On the radio last summer, it seemed impossible to not hear a song or remix by David Guetta. He worked with mainly US artists, but gave each song his signature beats. To be honest, I liked the more electro-dance sound as opposed to the super-sugary stylings of Spears or Cyrus.
And now, the song "Hello" by Martin Solveig and Dragonette is taking over the worldwide charts.
Solveig is a Paris DJ, and Dragonette is a Canadian band, but I suspect this will make Solveig the name to be known, and Dragonette will likely (unfortunately) never be heard from again.
I wonder if this marks two important changes to the US music industry: 1) an interest in more international musicians and 2) a shift towards dance/electro as predominant in pop music. Of course, on point 1, I doubt that we will suddenly be hearing sitars on all the Clear Channel stations, but maybe there will be a bit more variety than the constant production of white-girls-next-door pop singers and doe-eyed boy bands.
On a more minor note, there seems to be a slight second-wave British invasion, what with the likes of Adele becoming more known, and not just as an international peculiarity. Adele certainly has the talent to show the likes of Ke$ha and Rebecca Black what music really could be.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Stuff
I love love love this George Carlin routine. It's pretty much my approach to buying, getting rid of, or considering stuff. I'm a minimalist (or attempting to be one), and this speaks to my core reasons for being so.
Couponing Fail
So . . . my experiment at couponing has brought me NO success and has been surprisingly time consuming and slightly depressing due to the lack of accomplishment.
First of all, it appears that Wegmans doesn't/only rarely publishes a weekly circular, so I couldn't stick by the guidelines I had set in my first post of only checking that store. Actually, after I found out that Wegman's doesn't have a circular (and therefore I couldn't really abide by my rules anyway), I checked MULTIPLE store flyers and had no success with ANY of them.
Turns out couponing is harder than it looks.
The best I did was find a box of garden pasta that I could get for 50¢, regularly priced at $1.79. But that was IT. I found a few items that would come in at around a dollar, which would be a nice savings, considering these were brand-name full-size items, but they were far from free or bargain-basement priced. Now, I was only working with one week's worth of coupons, which had already been clipped over by my mom, so I figured I was on a limited playing field, and would see what this Saturday and Sunday's paper had to offer in the way of new flyers and new coupons, on top of last week's coupons.
Even less than before.
This time, all I could find were those few items whose prices could be whittled down to a dollar or so, but nothing below that barrier. Even more frustrating was the fact that, for both these attempts, I wasn't even considering if I WANTED these items or not, I was simply checking the prices. The only things I ruled out were items that would be COMPLETELY useless to me, like dog food, baby diapers, and vitamins. Everything else was fair game.
And the terrible part is that this has been completely addicting. Perhaps because it appeals to my organizational nature, the idea of matching up the coupons with the sales to get the greatest return. Or maybe just because I get to play with scissors and paper (I did always like that part of preschool). Whatever the reason, it's good that the paper only comes once a week so that I'm limited that way.
But I have no idea how those people on TV do it. Guess it's just the magic of television.
First of all, it appears that Wegmans doesn't/only rarely publishes a weekly circular, so I couldn't stick by the guidelines I had set in my first post of only checking that store. Actually, after I found out that Wegman's doesn't have a circular (and therefore I couldn't really abide by my rules anyway), I checked MULTIPLE store flyers and had no success with ANY of them.
Turns out couponing is harder than it looks.
The best I did was find a box of garden pasta that I could get for 50¢, regularly priced at $1.79. But that was IT. I found a few items that would come in at around a dollar, which would be a nice savings, considering these were brand-name full-size items, but they were far from free or bargain-basement priced. Now, I was only working with one week's worth of coupons, which had already been clipped over by my mom, so I figured I was on a limited playing field, and would see what this Saturday and Sunday's paper had to offer in the way of new flyers and new coupons, on top of last week's coupons.
Even less than before.
This time, all I could find were those few items whose prices could be whittled down to a dollar or so, but nothing below that barrier. Even more frustrating was the fact that, for both these attempts, I wasn't even considering if I WANTED these items or not, I was simply checking the prices. The only things I ruled out were items that would be COMPLETELY useless to me, like dog food, baby diapers, and vitamins. Everything else was fair game.
And the terrible part is that this has been completely addicting. Perhaps because it appeals to my organizational nature, the idea of matching up the coupons with the sales to get the greatest return. Or maybe just because I get to play with scissors and paper (I did always like that part of preschool). Whatever the reason, it's good that the paper only comes once a week so that I'm limited that way.
But I have no idea how those people on TV do it. Guess it's just the magic of television.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Photo Fun
I've done a bit of sorting through my photos, and found this one which I've made my laptop background. I love the color and depth to it, plus it reminds me of those learn-to-categorize books from when I was a kid (like the Richard Scarry books that shoved as many different items on a page as possible, with the labels to teach you what each thing was).
A splash of color for your evening.
More Truth of Cats
So, continuing the trolling of the web, another cat comic for your enjoyment. This site, CatGhost.net, doesn't seem to have a whole lot of comics posted, and not many about cats at that, but a few cute ones.Also, The Perry Bible Fellowship is one of my new favorites. Definitely on the sarcastic, cynical, depressing side, but some of the strips actually required that I spend a good 30 seconds thinking to figure out the joke, but they can be quite clever. Part Buttersafe, part Cyanide & Happiness.
PS. I can't figure out quite what is going on with the posted pictures lately, why they only link to themselves and I can't get them to link to external sites . . . something to look into, I suppose.
UPDATE: I was notified that my original link to CatGhost was incorrect, as I had added the .com extension and that the site actually has the .net ending. Everything should be a-okay now. I'm just so unused to the .net ending that I typed in .com automatically.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Late-Night Learning
So, inspired by the love-to-hate TLC show "Extreme Couponing," along with all this spare time that I don't know what to do with, I am going to do an experiment.
I am going to see if I can find any (even one) item that can be purchased for under 25¢ (must have had a purchase price of over 99¢ to begin with) at the local Wegmans in Allentown. Bonus points for something that the store pays me or gives me store credit to buy.
In my egotistical way, I can't imagine that this will be all that difficult. Since the bar for success is fairly low (one item and I win!), I'd imagine I'll do just fine. I do wonder about limiting myself to only one store though, this might be unfairly limiting.
In case you're wondering, I chose Wegmans as the only store a) (minor reason) to make the search a bit easier through limitation, and b) (major reason) because I'm as lazy as sin and I have to go there sometime soon anyway in order to return items (not defective, just decided I didn't need them), and I don't want to make a separate trip anywhere else. (This last point being the case seeing as I am not the primary food shopper in our household and rarely go into food stores anymore except on special trips, like returning items. Which I made a special trip to purchase in the first place.)
The thing that does make me wonder about that show is the fact that everyone buys SO DAMN MUCH. With the exception of one woman (out of maybe the 10 people that I've seen profiled on the show), everyone bought MASSIVE amounts of stuff that there is no way in HELL they will ever use. 200 bars of deodorant. Really? You stink that bad? I am setting my bar for success low in the hopes that it might help me avoid turning into one of those people, who can't seem to realize that yes, they are saving money, but have completely lost sight of the point, which is being frugal, not playing the one-who-dies-with-the-most-toys-wins game.
Besides, last time I checked, 600 boxes of dryer sheets didn't count as toys anyway.
I am going to see if I can find any (even one) item that can be purchased for under 25¢ (must have had a purchase price of over 99¢ to begin with) at the local Wegmans in Allentown. Bonus points for something that the store pays me or gives me store credit to buy.
In my egotistical way, I can't imagine that this will be all that difficult. Since the bar for success is fairly low (one item and I win!), I'd imagine I'll do just fine. I do wonder about limiting myself to only one store though, this might be unfairly limiting.
In case you're wondering, I chose Wegmans as the only store a) (minor reason) to make the search a bit easier through limitation, and b) (major reason) because I'm as lazy as sin and I have to go there sometime soon anyway in order to return items (not defective, just decided I didn't need them), and I don't want to make a separate trip anywhere else. (This last point being the case seeing as I am not the primary food shopper in our household and rarely go into food stores anymore except on special trips, like returning items. Which I made a special trip to purchase in the first place.)
The thing that does make me wonder about that show is the fact that everyone buys SO DAMN MUCH. With the exception of one woman (out of maybe the 10 people that I've seen profiled on the show), everyone bought MASSIVE amounts of stuff that there is no way in HELL they will ever use. 200 bars of deodorant. Really? You stink that bad? I am setting my bar for success low in the hopes that it might help me avoid turning into one of those people, who can't seem to realize that yes, they are saving money, but have completely lost sight of the point, which is being frugal, not playing the one-who-dies-with-the-most-toys-wins game.
Besides, last time I checked, 600 boxes of dryer sheets didn't count as toys anyway.
Slow Times
So, I seem to be lagging when it comes to posting lately. I think this is due to my general slowing down in getting anything done with the end of the semester. My life is an exact demostration of the saying "If you want something done, give it to a busy person to do." When I am busy, though I might sometimes complain about the work I have to do, I get it done, and I get a lot of extraneous stuff done at the same time. But when I don't have things I need to do, I get NOTHING done. I'm like an engine, once I'm going, I can keep going, and go faster if I want, but pretty much nothing gets done if the engine isn't on in the first place.
So that is why I am not blogging much these days . . . I don't have enough other stuff to do. Odd as that sounds.
But on to other things. With all of this extra time that I have (that I am not using productively), I have been trolling the interwebs for fun. This comic (the first panel of which you can see at the side) I found to be highly entertaining and true. As we all know, cats will someday completely take over the internet, so I am getting a jump on things and aiding their cause by sharing this comic. In general I think this site The Oatmeal is kind of funny and quirky . . . in a very Gen Y internety way.Friday, May 13, 2011
Watching Watches
I've been on the lookout for a good watch lately. While my current one hasn't complete fallen apart (yet), I'm pretty sure it's only a matter of time. Considering my current timepiece was bought at Target for about 20 dollars back in the fall, I'm not all that surprised that it's deteriorating in a matter of months. The faceplate is getting scratched, and those little loops that hold down the "tail" of the band are pulling out and one fell clean off a few days ago. My previous watch before this one only lasted about 1 month total before it died.
I've been looking at some higher-end brands in the hopes that higher price will = longevity and quality, but I'm not so sure. I mean, I'm sure getting an actual watch from an actual reputable company would be a good thing, but not spending hundreds of dollars like some places I've seen.
My thinking right now is to go with a Citizen EcoDrive, mainly because it shouldn't ever need to have a battery replaced (that is, of course, assuming it lasts long enough that it might actually warrant such concerns). While pricey, they do have some models that are under $200, and assuming it lasts for a few years, at the rate I go through $20 watches, the price would be justifiable.
I happen to be partial to square-faced watches with black backgrounds and bands, and have found one at a $185 price point. Not like I really have that much money just lying around to spend on a watch, but when this current one goes, I'll figure out a way of getting this watch as a present from someone (I am so manipulative sometimes).
Click here to view the watch I am pondering.
I've been looking at some higher-end brands in the hopes that higher price will = longevity and quality, but I'm not so sure. I mean, I'm sure getting an actual watch from an actual reputable company would be a good thing, but not spending hundreds of dollars like some places I've seen.
My thinking right now is to go with a Citizen EcoDrive, mainly because it shouldn't ever need to have a battery replaced (that is, of course, assuming it lasts long enough that it might actually warrant such concerns). While pricey, they do have some models that are under $200, and assuming it lasts for a few years, at the rate I go through $20 watches, the price would be justifiable.
I happen to be partial to square-faced watches with black backgrounds and bands, and have found one at a $185 price point. Not like I really have that much money just lying around to spend on a watch, but when this current one goes, I'll figure out a way of getting this watch as a present from someone (I am so manipulative sometimes).
Click here to view the watch I am pondering.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Demographics
The Claritas PRIZM is one of my favorite demographic breakdowns I think I have ever seen. It was designed as a marketing and advertising aid, but for the average lowly consumer like me, seeing the research makes it more like a giant personality test. With 66 unique demographic options to choose from, it is a very thorough look at the American lifestyle. Designed to be printed as a giant banner (I think), the report I found is a little bit hard to navigate on the standard computer screen, but well worth the hassle. Click here to see. (You'll have to click that link, the image below is just a tiny sample of the page to give you an idea of what it looks like, I couldn't fit the whole thing on this post.)
Based on my analysis, I am somewhere between a "Bohemian Mix" and "Young Digerati" type.
Based on my analysis, I am somewhere between a "Bohemian Mix" and "Young Digerati" type.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Math Art
This makes me appreciate math for how pretty it can be.
Side note: I loved the movie Donald in Mathamagic Land when I was little and this video made me think of it. Apparently, at some distant point in the past, Disney actually made educational films.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Sexist Quote of the Day
" . . . the first item on the groom's agenda is to give his fiancée an engagement ring as a sign of their commitment to get married. This is definitely a classy gesture and has the added benefit of scoring big bonus poins with the bride, her female friends, and her mother. A pleasing feminine quirk is the way a woman will walk around with her left hand extended for weeks after receiving an engagement ring, greeting old friends and strangers by waving her new bauble in their faces . . . your fiancée will love any ring you choose. However, she will love a diamond more."
from The Groom's Survival Manual by Michael R. Perry
from The Groom's Survival Manual by Michael R. Perry
Friday, May 6, 2011
Photobook
Is it just me, or since the birth of Facebook and its photo sharing ability, has there been an astronomical increase in the number (and pointlessness) of photos taken?
I come from the school of thought where pictures are taken of unique things, special things, events worth remembering. Now, it seems like there are 20 photos of completely pointless events, uploaded, tagged, and Picnik-ed for every one truly amazing photo of an interesting event. Do you really need to remember drunken party #349? Or date #87? Or the 683th time your dog played dead? And even if you do, why on earth do ALL of your Facebook friends need to see this moment captured on film (or pixel) as well?
Maybe I'm just a cynic. The number of things I complain about would seem to point in that direction.
I prefer to think of myself as opinionated and steadfast in those opinions.
Anyway, back to the photos. On my Facebook profile you will find a number of photos from the various trips I have taken, and considering that I will probably only get to Cambodia once, I think they fall fairly clearly into the "unique" category of things. But you won't find picture after picture of my with my boyfriend, or doing a self shot just to keep things "fresh". In general, I just don't see the point of posting photos with nothing remarkable going on. What is the point, really?
This leads me to the conclusion that Facebook is making people narcissistic.
Perhaps a bit of a leap in logic there. But honestly, with the ability to post an unlimited (does Facebook have an upload limit?) number of photos, people can feed their inner celebrity with ease. And with the nanosecond speed with which Facebook friends can "Like" a photo, it serves to reinforce the idea that this mirror shot of you in your bathroom is actually worth taking. Most of the time, the only reason I can justify for why some photos were posted were to get attention and as an ego boost. Fishing for a compliment, in other words.
I know I sound like one of those Web 2.0 doomsday preachers where they mourn the downfall of real talent in the face of the new ability for everyone to be famous. And I guess I do sort of agree with them, but perhaps not to their extremes. I wish everyone would post just one nice photo rather than 20 boring ones.
Why?
Because it annoys me. And if this goes on too long, no one will be able to figure out what photos are really worth looking at and remarkable if you've uploaded 20,000.
And it makes you seem like an attention whore (pardon my terminology, I couldn't find an appropriate substitute).
Remember, it's quality, not quantity, that counts.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Accomplishment
Now this is what I call getting things done:
My checklist for everything that needs to be done before the end of the semester.
Update: Since this photo was taken, I have gotten done with the Gender Studies final. Oh yeah.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Counterintuitive
As counterintuitive as this might seem, coming from someone who has a blog, I consider myself a very private person.
Really.
I know I sometimes rant and spread my feelings, but I don't think that what I say compromises my dignity, or would be something that I would be embarrassed if someone I didn't know found - most of my posts are the truth as I see it, though I have been accused of overreacting or overstating facts. For this, I can only say that I never TRY to rub people the wrong way, and 95% of the time I do usually agree later with what I've written in the past - though perhaps wording or delivery could have been improved to "soften the blow," shall we say.
But I digress.
For some reason, espeically lately, it seems that everyone feels the need to spread EVERYTHING over the interwebs. I will log on to my Facebook account and be greeted by statuses and photos that give me beyond TMI (too much information). The things I see and read stray into territory that I would only venture into with my family or partner, and only then when I was sure that no one else was around. I highly doubt that you could convince someone to stand up on a ladder in a crowded shopping mall filled with hundreds of people and shout or show the things they are posting . . . yet this more or less happens when that stupid status or disgusting photo wanders on to your account. I have read things that have made me want to gag, cringe, or cry, and have permanently altered the way I see some of my friends, because now I can only think of those posts when I come in contact with them.
This post is on my own personal disgust, but let us not also forget all the horror stories of people losing jobs and relationships for things that have surfaced on their social Internet pages.
What is WITH people? Why have they suddenly found it appropriate to publish the icky gory intimate details of their lives all over the Internet? And how can we make it stop?
Really.
I know I sometimes rant and spread my feelings, but I don't think that what I say compromises my dignity, or would be something that I would be embarrassed if someone I didn't know found - most of my posts are the truth as I see it, though I have been accused of overreacting or overstating facts. For this, I can only say that I never TRY to rub people the wrong way, and 95% of the time I do usually agree later with what I've written in the past - though perhaps wording or delivery could have been improved to "soften the blow," shall we say.
But I digress.
For some reason, espeically lately, it seems that everyone feels the need to spread EVERYTHING over the interwebs. I will log on to my Facebook account and be greeted by statuses and photos that give me beyond TMI (too much information). The things I see and read stray into territory that I would only venture into with my family or partner, and only then when I was sure that no one else was around. I highly doubt that you could convince someone to stand up on a ladder in a crowded shopping mall filled with hundreds of people and shout or show the things they are posting . . . yet this more or less happens when that stupid status or disgusting photo wanders on to your account. I have read things that have made me want to gag, cringe, or cry, and have permanently altered the way I see some of my friends, because now I can only think of those posts when I come in contact with them.
This post is on my own personal disgust, but let us not also forget all the horror stories of people losing jobs and relationships for things that have surfaced on their social Internet pages.
What is WITH people? Why have they suddenly found it appropriate to publish the icky gory intimate details of their lives all over the Internet? And how can we make it stop?
Monday, May 2, 2011
One of THOSE Days
Today I had my final Political Science class for the semester!
And it's made me decide (with, say, 75% surity) to change my major. Seriously.
Considering this is my first semester at Cedar Crest, I've been slow in passing judgement for any of my teachers. Every school has its own "flavor," and I didn't want to decide that a teacher was crazy when this might just the way things are done here. But now I can say with a fair degree of surity that this teacher in question is just OFF on his own planet. Unfortunately, he is the professor I would be stuck with for a large percentage of classes if I stick with my existing plan of graduating with a Political Science degree.
And aside from the teacher's insanity, I am starting to get an itch in the back of my mind that's saying that this major is just not quite my thing . . .
I find political topics quite interesting, but learning about the court system and this and that bill and policy is enough to drive me up the wall. I'm thinking this might not be quite my bag.
I'm off to the registrar's office to inquire. I don't know how much of a bind this would put me in as far as classes and schedules and graduating. Hopefully not to much of one . . . but I've been wrong before.
ADDENDUM: He also forgot to bring/use the course evaluation sheets. I hope that failure to do so automatically results in a meeting with the provost. It was my impression that course evaluations were mandatory at Cedar Crest . . . but who knows. It wouldn't surprise me if he just blew them off.
And it's made me decide (with, say, 75% surity) to change my major. Seriously.
Considering this is my first semester at Cedar Crest, I've been slow in passing judgement for any of my teachers. Every school has its own "flavor," and I didn't want to decide that a teacher was crazy when this might just the way things are done here. But now I can say with a fair degree of surity that this teacher in question is just OFF on his own planet. Unfortunately, he is the professor I would be stuck with for a large percentage of classes if I stick with my existing plan of graduating with a Political Science degree.
And aside from the teacher's insanity, I am starting to get an itch in the back of my mind that's saying that this major is just not quite my thing . . .
I find political topics quite interesting, but learning about the court system and this and that bill and policy is enough to drive me up the wall. I'm thinking this might not be quite my bag.
I'm off to the registrar's office to inquire. I don't know how much of a bind this would put me in as far as classes and schedules and graduating. Hopefully not to much of one . . . but I've been wrong before.
ADDENDUM: He also forgot to bring/use the course evaluation sheets. I hope that failure to do so automatically results in a meeting with the provost. It was my impression that course evaluations were mandatory at Cedar Crest . . . but who knows. It wouldn't surprise me if he just blew them off.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Sunburn
I got sunburn today. I guess that means it's summer. Or summer-ish.
This is going to be a strange week. It's the last week of classes/first week of finals at Cedar Crest College. I work one of my odd shifts at the library this week, which means that I work all day on Friday and Saturday, and I have a number of odd tasks to complete this week, like selling back my textbooks, an optometrist appointment, a staff meeting, and my final orientation meeting for my study abroad program to South Korea. Fun fun fun.
This past week has been one of introspection. For no good reason, really, just various factors have aligned and illustrated (again) that my view of the world is different than many of the ones I run up against in day-to-day life. Not to say that there's anything wrong with that (my views or the others), it's just interesting. Not yet sure how to completely mesh my views with others into a working framework so that I don't go crazy every time there's a conflict of opinion (conflict resolution never was my strong point). Which is kind of ironic, really, because I love making conflict and bringing up topics that people are divided over. I guess that makes me a masochist?
. . . . . . . . . . .
So, for something completely different, to give this post a little substance (and conflict), let's change gears completely. What do you think of toddler high heels?
Creepy, no? I mean, I get it, it's funny, but it also kind of makes me want to throw up in my mouth a little. Like . . . can we objectify women/girls/little girls/baby girls any more? Not like I honestly think a little kid who wears these is more likely to actually turn into a hooker or something down the road, but . . . I think it shows something about the parents. What, exactly, I don't know. That they might not take an adequate concern in growing their baby's mind as much as her fashion sense? Possibly. But, regardless, the idea of baby high heels still scares me witless.
This is going to be a strange week. It's the last week of classes/first week of finals at Cedar Crest College. I work one of my odd shifts at the library this week, which means that I work all day on Friday and Saturday, and I have a number of odd tasks to complete this week, like selling back my textbooks, an optometrist appointment, a staff meeting, and my final orientation meeting for my study abroad program to South Korea. Fun fun fun.
This past week has been one of introspection. For no good reason, really, just various factors have aligned and illustrated (again) that my view of the world is different than many of the ones I run up against in day-to-day life. Not to say that there's anything wrong with that (my views or the others), it's just interesting. Not yet sure how to completely mesh my views with others into a working framework so that I don't go crazy every time there's a conflict of opinion (conflict resolution never was my strong point). Which is kind of ironic, really, because I love making conflict and bringing up topics that people are divided over. I guess that makes me a masochist?
. . . . . . . . . . .
So, for something completely different, to give this post a little substance (and conflict), let's change gears completely. What do you think of toddler high heels?
Creepy, no? I mean, I get it, it's funny, but it also kind of makes me want to throw up in my mouth a little. Like . . . can we objectify women/girls/little girls/baby girls any more? Not like I honestly think a little kid who wears these is more likely to actually turn into a hooker or something down the road, but . . . I think it shows something about the parents. What, exactly, I don't know. That they might not take an adequate concern in growing their baby's mind as much as her fashion sense? Possibly. But, regardless, the idea of baby high heels still scares me witless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)