On Sunday I went shopping with 3 women. OMG, I know, you're in shock! How did I survive it? Apparently next time I need to take mega doses of Tylenol before I go because I did have a raging headache afterward.
Aside from the headache, it was okay. Definitely not something I have the stamina for on a regular basis, but it didn't go quite as awfully as I had thought.
5 hours of shopping in a mall in a group of 4 women. LOTS of body discussions. They tried to get me to buy this very cute black leather jacket. I have to admit that it did look pretty good, but I really don't give off the biker chick vibe and it was $150. Maybe I would give off the biker chick vibe if I wore the black leather jacket + the black leather pants I have + spiky black boots I have...maybe. But, really, black leather pants seem like a recipe for disaster...
I suppose my dilemma on this shopping adventure is that I really have different clothes shopping criteria. First: Is it in my budget? If not, then eliminate from consideration. Second: Does it fit in theory? (I rarely try things on.) Third: Buy if it fulfills the previous two criteria, bonus points if it's made of fleece.
Their shopping criteria seemed to be different than mine. First: Does it make your boobs and/or butt look cute? Second: If you can find any way to afford it, buy it.
I don't really dress up. Take a shower, brush hair, put on comfortable clothes that meet the minimum dress criteria for the occasion, put on lip gloss if I'm feeling feisty. Tada - 15 minutes to get ready including shower. No guy has ever complained about my no-fuss ritual although I have to say that a guy who appreciates a girl who dolls herself up would never ever be interested in me because that's just NOT my personality.
I went shopping with 2 women who do doll themselves up - full face of makeup every day, fancy purses, accessories, 100 shoe options, dress up to go shopping. Let's just say I felt out of place because I violated every one of their cardinal rules.
I quizzed my friend who is, let's just say, high maintenance in the preparations. It probably takes her an hour and a half to get ready every day. I asked her why she does all of that (the makeup, the accessories, the fancy purse, etc.). She said it made her feel good. I acknowledged that, and then followed up with WHY did it make her feel good. Then she said I was being too deep and changed the subject.
It's a serious question. Do you do it because it makes you feel more confident? Do you do it for the attention from men? Do you do it for some other gratification? It matters if it's internally or externally motivated. The why really does matter.
I have found these "why" questions far easier with men. I know the misconception is that men don't ever talk about deep things, and women want to talk about esoteric things like feelings and motivations. But in practice I've found the opposite to be quite true.
There's nothing like plopping down on a chair and asking a guy, "So what's going on?" Within an hour, you can find out So. Much. Stuff. Not just facts, but you can talk about feelings and motivations and aspirations. At least I usually can.
Do that with a girl, and you will have an hour long conversation about liquid vs. powder foundation. I don't know about you, but I do not find that a fulfilling conversation. So yeah, women DO talk more, but I haven't found the majority of it to be less significant discussions than you can have with men.
Yesterday, though, I did come away with what a "good" butt looks like. I have been wondering about that for quite a while, and now I am better at butt analysis on people based on objective butt criteria. Since butts do nothing for me, I don't really subjectively care about the issue.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Yet another reason not to be a girl
Know something I hate?
Multi-level marketing.
I know it's genius in theory. You get other people to sell overpriced crap to their acquaintances and friends, taking a nice percentage of their sales for yourself and your cohorts.
I really feel bad for those people who are suckered into it. It's usually honest people trying to scrape by. They need some spare money, and these stupid MLM schemes usually have them invest in large amounts of inventory. This, of course, puts money into the executives' pockets while taking it from the person trying to scrape by and who is trying to build her business.
Then person who is trying to scrape by pesters everyone she knows about hosting one of these stupid parties to sell her overpriced wares. All of these parties are the same: Mary Kay, purse parties, passion parties, Pampered Chef, Partylite, Scentsy, etc. It's all overpriced crap that you don't need or can get a far less expensive version of at Target or the dollar store.
Mary Kay - let's goop on the overpriced makeup to catch a man...
Purse parties - let's buy cute overpriced purses to impress our friends in our social circle
Passion parties - let's snicker as we fondle overpriced sex toys to keep our man pleased
Pampered Chef - let's show off our impressive cooking skills with overpriced kitchen gadgets
Partylite - let's smell up our house with overpriced candles
Scentsy - candles are dangerous with kids around, let's ooh and aaah over fancy versions of Glade plug ins
Not only are these parties estrogen fests combined with high pressure sales tactics, they are completely discriminatory.
Why can't men be the targets of MLM strategies? WHY WHY WHY WHY??? Why don't they want to get together in groups of 10-20 and ooh & aaah over overpriced crap and sales pitches? Oh yeah, because they'd rather DO something - something like watch a sports game or play a sports game or watch paint dry. For some reason, they don't want to get makeovers, fondle sex toys around other men, or smell candles. Duuuuude, if they knew how much they were missing out on....
So because I was born this way, I have to be the lucky recipient of dozens of evites to these hideous parties while my husband looks at me in a perplexed way as I explain that the "party" I was invited to isn't really a party.
I say all this as a Pampered Chef party is starting in 30 minutes. I don't want to go. I'm tired. I hate MLM. I'm already going to be in a group of 4 women tomorrow all day, so my estrogen tolerance is extremely low.
Multi-level marketing.
I know it's genius in theory. You get other people to sell overpriced crap to their acquaintances and friends, taking a nice percentage of their sales for yourself and your cohorts.
I really feel bad for those people who are suckered into it. It's usually honest people trying to scrape by. They need some spare money, and these stupid MLM schemes usually have them invest in large amounts of inventory. This, of course, puts money into the executives' pockets while taking it from the person trying to scrape by and who is trying to build her business.
Then person who is trying to scrape by pesters everyone she knows about hosting one of these stupid parties to sell her overpriced wares. All of these parties are the same: Mary Kay, purse parties, passion parties, Pampered Chef, Partylite, Scentsy, etc. It's all overpriced crap that you don't need or can get a far less expensive version of at Target or the dollar store.
Mary Kay - let's goop on the overpriced makeup to catch a man...
Purse parties - let's buy cute overpriced purses to impress our friends in our social circle
Passion parties - let's snicker as we fondle overpriced sex toys to keep our man pleased
Pampered Chef - let's show off our impressive cooking skills with overpriced kitchen gadgets
Partylite - let's smell up our house with overpriced candles
Scentsy - candles are dangerous with kids around, let's ooh and aaah over fancy versions of Glade plug ins
Not only are these parties estrogen fests combined with high pressure sales tactics, they are completely discriminatory.
Why can't men be the targets of MLM strategies? WHY WHY WHY WHY??? Why don't they want to get together in groups of 10-20 and ooh & aaah over overpriced crap and sales pitches? Oh yeah, because they'd rather DO something - something like watch a sports game or play a sports game or watch paint dry. For some reason, they don't want to get makeovers, fondle sex toys around other men, or smell candles. Duuuuude, if they knew how much they were missing out on....
So because I was born this way, I have to be the lucky recipient of dozens of evites to these hideous parties while my husband looks at me in a perplexed way as I explain that the "party" I was invited to isn't really a party.
I say all this as a Pampered Chef party is starting in 30 minutes. I don't want to go. I'm tired. I hate MLM. I'm already going to be in a group of 4 women tomorrow all day, so my estrogen tolerance is extremely low.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Separation of Church and Dentistry
I went to a new dentist today. This is the third new dentist I've been to in 3 years. I'm such a dentist whore.
Dentist 1: gave a free electronic toothbrush for switching
Dentist 2: gave a $50 gift card to Trader Joe's for switching + they have massage chairs and TVs
Dentist 3: gave a $50 Visa gift card for switching.
I know I'm a dentist whore. Is it my problem that there's a glut of dentists and they have aggressive marketing strategies? Hey, at least I go to the dentist.
Dentist 3 (today) was kind of a different experience.
As soon as I walk in the door, the receptionist announces my name without me saying anything and then says, "I know you!"
Really? I don't know you, and I remember everyone that I interact with. I realized just how awkward it is for the person who doesn't remember in situations like these although I am 99% confident that I don't know her. There is only one other time that I've been on the receiving side of such awkwardness. A girl I know was introducing me to her new boyfriend, and he said that he knew me. I didn't know him, and I was fearful that the girl was thinking that something had gone on between me and him even though I didn't know him. Yeah, it's just awkward when you're on the receiving end of it. I only try to announce my stalker-like tendencies for remembering things from 1987 only after I have re-met the person. No need to be pre-emptively creepy.
Then she asks me what church I go to. Which is kind of awkward because we're at the dentist's office...Anyway, we come to the conclusion that we don't go to the same church (not that I was thinking that's where she knew me from).
I get called to the back relatively quickly. They have a virtual fish tank instead of a real fish tank, which is kind of easier to deal with logistically but, given that they serve kids, I'm not sure kids accept virtual fish tanks as well as adults.
The music station Spirit 105.3 is being funneled through the intercom. It's only taken me 17 years of my 20 years living here to realize that Spirit 105.3 is the local Christian radio station. I don't listen to Christian music. More power to you if you do. But I just don't think Christian radio should be played at a public place. The dental hygienist is nice and chatty. She also asks what church I go to.
2 church inquiries + being forced to listen to Christian music = suspicion
Dental hygienist starts singing along to Christian music.
Dental assistant comes in. Asks me if I'm related to a church pastor with my same last name. We're up to 3 church-related inquiries.
Dentist comes in and asks if I'm related to the same church pastor the dental assistant asked about. Up to 4.
I was there for an hour and a half. I still have to come back for a cleaning. It was x-rays, church-related inquiries, taking my blood pressure (which I've never had done at the dentist's office before), taking measurements, blah blah blah.
The dentist was highly irritating because he called me "honey" at least 20 times. It was so grating on me. I don't know why. No one ever calls me that, and definitely not a guy who was born after 1960.
On the upside, he seemed thorough and did a good job explaining things. Most times the dentist spends 2 minutes with me and the hygienist spends the other 58 minutes.
On the downside, multiple church interrogations + Christian music sing-a-longs + the condescending sounding "honey."
I think I'm going to continue to be a dental whore.
Dentist 1: gave a free electronic toothbrush for switching
Dentist 2: gave a $50 gift card to Trader Joe's for switching + they have massage chairs and TVs
Dentist 3: gave a $50 Visa gift card for switching.
I know I'm a dentist whore. Is it my problem that there's a glut of dentists and they have aggressive marketing strategies? Hey, at least I go to the dentist.
Dentist 3 (today) was kind of a different experience.
As soon as I walk in the door, the receptionist announces my name without me saying anything and then says, "I know you!"
Really? I don't know you, and I remember everyone that I interact with. I realized just how awkward it is for the person who doesn't remember in situations like these although I am 99% confident that I don't know her. There is only one other time that I've been on the receiving side of such awkwardness. A girl I know was introducing me to her new boyfriend, and he said that he knew me. I didn't know him, and I was fearful that the girl was thinking that something had gone on between me and him even though I didn't know him. Yeah, it's just awkward when you're on the receiving end of it. I only try to announce my stalker-like tendencies for remembering things from 1987 only after I have re-met the person. No need to be pre-emptively creepy.
Then she asks me what church I go to. Which is kind of awkward because we're at the dentist's office...Anyway, we come to the conclusion that we don't go to the same church (not that I was thinking that's where she knew me from).
I get called to the back relatively quickly. They have a virtual fish tank instead of a real fish tank, which is kind of easier to deal with logistically but, given that they serve kids, I'm not sure kids accept virtual fish tanks as well as adults.
The music station Spirit 105.3 is being funneled through the intercom. It's only taken me 17 years of my 20 years living here to realize that Spirit 105.3 is the local Christian radio station. I don't listen to Christian music. More power to you if you do. But I just don't think Christian radio should be played at a public place. The dental hygienist is nice and chatty. She also asks what church I go to.
2 church inquiries + being forced to listen to Christian music = suspicion
Dental hygienist starts singing along to Christian music.
Dental assistant comes in. Asks me if I'm related to a church pastor with my same last name. We're up to 3 church-related inquiries.
Dentist comes in and asks if I'm related to the same church pastor the dental assistant asked about. Up to 4.
I was there for an hour and a half. I still have to come back for a cleaning. It was x-rays, church-related inquiries, taking my blood pressure (which I've never had done at the dentist's office before), taking measurements, blah blah blah.
The dentist was highly irritating because he called me "honey" at least 20 times. It was so grating on me. I don't know why. No one ever calls me that, and definitely not a guy who was born after 1960.
On the upside, he seemed thorough and did a good job explaining things. Most times the dentist spends 2 minutes with me and the hygienist spends the other 58 minutes.
On the downside, multiple church interrogations + Christian music sing-a-longs + the condescending sounding "honey."
I think I'm going to continue to be a dental whore.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Policies and Ballet
My child goes to a Quaker daycare. They are very nice. Very religious and full of Bible quotes, but very nice. Frustrating in some ways although their feelings will get hurt if you get them to try to do things differently. Hence, this blog post.
Their snow policy: "We'll be open when it snows as long as 2 people can make it to to work. If the school district is closed, we are closed." There are a few more sentences in their policy, which muddle the waters even more but probably aren't that relevant for these purposes. Yesterday the school district was closed, yet the daycare was open. This confused me. Does the 2 people getting to work part of the policy supersede the statement about the school district, or does the school district supersede the 2 people getting to work policy? Today the daycare was closed because the school district was closed. Basically I'm just confused. Isn't the purpose of having a policy so that you have a policy to follow in situations like this? I want to tell them that it might be more helpful if their policy was: "We will mimic the school district's closures in inclement weather, provided that at least 2 staff can make it to work." It just seems that it would be easier for them because their current policy has caused them great consternation. It might make them cry if I suggested it, so I won't.
Now they're starting to offer extracurricular activities during the daycare day. Her official preschool time is 9:30am - noon. Of course since we both work, she's there from about 7:30am - 4:30pm. There's free play and designated snacks in there, but the "official" preschool time is a small chunk of that.
They offer ballet from 10:00am - 10:30am on Tuesdays and soccer from 10:00am - 10:30am on Wednesdays. Each of these lessons is $10, so if you do both ballet and soccer, it's $20 per week for the 1 hour of instruction time. I get so cranky at these lessons being offered. It's irrational and stupid to have these feelings, this I know. It annoys the bejeezus out of me, and instead of ranting to the very nice Quakers, I'll keep my ranting here.
* There is so little official preschool instruction time already, and these lessons infringe on that.
* The teachers guilt you into enrolling your kid in these lessons.
* The kids who get to go = "the haves," everyone else = "the have nots." The teachers reiterate that those who don't get to participate are so sad. Even more guilt after you've already said no.
* $10 for half an hour x 10 kids = $100 for teaching 3 year olds how to bend their knees or to chase a ball for half an hour. Can I sign up for that gig????
* Have you seen a 3 year old move? There is no grace or agility in it.I doubt a couple of classes will make them prima ballerinas or Landon Donovans.
* The parents don't know what's going on during these classes.
* $20 a week might not seem like that much, but it does quickly add up.
* Personally I'd rather spend the money on activities when she can pick what interests her and at least be able to watch the hilarity of the lessons.
This whole thing really rubs me the wrong way. I decided that it's probably wrong to deprive her of both opportunities just because of my opposition. All of her teachers already think she's the poor girl (which she isn't, but we have seriously dressed her in the same clothes for the past two years because it's daycare and she still fits most of them). Then I'd just get gestures of poor girl sympathy, like a scholarship to one of the classes. Plus I don't want her to be a social outcast because I'm cantankerous. So I told her that she could sign up for ballet OR for soccer. Guess which one she picked? (The tutu is quite alluring.) I personally would have preferred soccer, but it's not my life and there are no tutus in soccer.
Ballet. $40 for 4 classes. There are another 12 classes they'll pressure me to buy, but I'm only signing her up for 4. If she begs and begs, we'll go from there.
For what it's worth, I'm not anti-extracurricular activities. She took several sessions of swimming classes. She's now in a tumbling class that we registered her for back in early December. We only knew about the ballet/soccer during school since the beginning of January. So I suppose what adds to my bitterness is that we had already signed her up for an extracurricular, and now we have to do one during school plus the tumbling that we had already signed her up for.
Their snow policy: "We'll be open when it snows as long as 2 people can make it to to work. If the school district is closed, we are closed." There are a few more sentences in their policy, which muddle the waters even more but probably aren't that relevant for these purposes. Yesterday the school district was closed, yet the daycare was open. This confused me. Does the 2 people getting to work part of the policy supersede the statement about the school district, or does the school district supersede the 2 people getting to work policy? Today the daycare was closed because the school district was closed. Basically I'm just confused. Isn't the purpose of having a policy so that you have a policy to follow in situations like this? I want to tell them that it might be more helpful if their policy was: "We will mimic the school district's closures in inclement weather, provided that at least 2 staff can make it to work." It just seems that it would be easier for them because their current policy has caused them great consternation. It might make them cry if I suggested it, so I won't.
Now they're starting to offer extracurricular activities during the daycare day. Her official preschool time is 9:30am - noon. Of course since we both work, she's there from about 7:30am - 4:30pm. There's free play and designated snacks in there, but the "official" preschool time is a small chunk of that.
They offer ballet from 10:00am - 10:30am on Tuesdays and soccer from 10:00am - 10:30am on Wednesdays. Each of these lessons is $10, so if you do both ballet and soccer, it's $20 per week for the 1 hour of instruction time. I get so cranky at these lessons being offered. It's irrational and stupid to have these feelings, this I know. It annoys the bejeezus out of me, and instead of ranting to the very nice Quakers, I'll keep my ranting here.
* There is so little official preschool instruction time already, and these lessons infringe on that.
* The teachers guilt you into enrolling your kid in these lessons.
* The kids who get to go = "the haves," everyone else = "the have nots." The teachers reiterate that those who don't get to participate are so sad. Even more guilt after you've already said no.
* $10 for half an hour x 10 kids = $100 for teaching 3 year olds how to bend their knees or to chase a ball for half an hour. Can I sign up for that gig????
* Have you seen a 3 year old move? There is no grace or agility in it.I doubt a couple of classes will make them prima ballerinas or Landon Donovans.
* The parents don't know what's going on during these classes.
* $20 a week might not seem like that much, but it does quickly add up.
* Personally I'd rather spend the money on activities when she can pick what interests her and at least be able to watch the hilarity of the lessons.
This whole thing really rubs me the wrong way. I decided that it's probably wrong to deprive her of both opportunities just because of my opposition. All of her teachers already think she's the poor girl (which she isn't, but we have seriously dressed her in the same clothes for the past two years because it's daycare and she still fits most of them). Then I'd just get gestures of poor girl sympathy, like a scholarship to one of the classes. Plus I don't want her to be a social outcast because I'm cantankerous. So I told her that she could sign up for ballet OR for soccer. Guess which one she picked? (The tutu is quite alluring.) I personally would have preferred soccer, but it's not my life and there are no tutus in soccer.
Ballet. $40 for 4 classes. There are another 12 classes they'll pressure me to buy, but I'm only signing her up for 4. If she begs and begs, we'll go from there.
For what it's worth, I'm not anti-extracurricular activities. She took several sessions of swimming classes. She's now in a tumbling class that we registered her for back in early December. We only knew about the ballet/soccer during school since the beginning of January. So I suppose what adds to my bitterness is that we had already signed her up for an extracurricular, and now we have to do one during school plus the tumbling that we had already signed her up for.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Financial Forensics
One of my goals (NOT resolutions) in the New Year was to do a financial forensic analysis on how we spent our money in 2011. This results in going through every transaction involving our joint checking account, our joint credit card, my checking account, and my credit card and then categorizing it. This excludes my husband's personal expenses. He will tell you that I take the vast majority of his paychecks for nefarious "joint expenses." He doesn't have much left, and what he does have left it's just easier if I don't know what he does with it. Well, I know he spends some of it on filling his gas tank, some on eating out for lunch (probably more than I would like), electronics, his tae kwon do, gorgeous jewelry gifts for me (ha! I mean, I wish!), and the rest on lap dances, poker & cigarettes. If you knew my husband, you'd probably think the latter set of items is unlikely.
So here are the numbers. I'm going to do a post on my other blog that I will sometime link to via FB about my comments on this. Keep in mind that we don't have a "savings" item on here. I only looked at actual expenses and not transfers between accounts because I might act like a day trader with my transfers among accounts. I could not reconstruct them. We do save other than for retirement, but it's a nebulous amount, especially after we have moved into this house and save for big projects and then pay for big projects. Our new roof isn't included in this because, well, we already had the money saved in an account earmarked for it. However, our new furnace is included because we saved up for that in 2011, using 2011 money.
So here are the numbers. I'm going to do a post on my other blog that I will sometime link to via FB about my comments on this. Keep in mind that we don't have a "savings" item on here. I only looked at actual expenses and not transfers between accounts because I might act like a day trader with my transfers among accounts. I could not reconstruct them. We do save other than for retirement, but it's a nebulous amount, especially after we have moved into this house and save for big projects and then pay for big projects. Our new roof isn't included in this because, well, we already had the money saved in an account earmarked for it. However, our new furnace is included because we saved up for that in 2011, using 2011 money.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
When reason and emotion collide
There are two people I know who are strongly in the "you need to train people how to treat you" camp. They tend to mandate long lists of behavior that they expect from others, and of course this list is subject to new additions at all times. I tend to think a lot of the items on the list and/or their interpretations of this list are unreasonable and stupid and fussy, resulting in these two folks holding all the power while the rest of the world bends to all their whims. Let me tell you, there are a lot of whims, and they are extremely hypocritical whims. Above the hypocrisy, I find the attitude in which the list of items is delivered to be abrasive and condescending.
Then there are the rest of the people in the world. Although we may not like that we aren't the center of the universe, we conceptually understand that other people have needs and desires and that ours aren't at the forefront some or most of the time.
If you're not particularly passionate about an issue or don't have a strong opinion, you might just go along with things because it would be emotionally draining to protest/argue, you really don't care too much, or you just want to be agreeable or have the appearance of amiability. Over time this results in several things, but most notably a pattern of interaction that gives acceptance and/or tacit approval to the new track of behaviors. Most of the time this new track of behaviors is just fine, but sometimes you expect a little bit more or better treatment. You might get disappointed when your expectations weren't met. Then you get all these feelings of, "well, I guess I'm not worth it," "It's too late to change the pattern now," "I suck," and you just feel kind of crappy.
But then you realize that it's your own darn fault. Those irritating people with their 52 page code of conduct for you to follow when interacting with them are in an enviable position. If I were them, I wouldn't be in the position I'm in now. It would already be clear and understood that such behavior around me would be downright appalling and grounds for dismissal. Instead, I'm sad, frustrated, down on myself, and feel whiny & needy if I say, "Not acceptable. I need better behavior from you. It may seem stupid and pointless to step it up, but it matters in some esoteric way that I can't rationally describe."
It's difficult to balance being reasonable with asserting the needs you have. If your feelings get hurt ever so rarely, it's easier to shake off a minor slight because it feels so petty to point one little thing out. But at what point do you say/do something when the little ones keep adding up or there's a big one? At some point it becomes incredibly difficult.
Then there are the rest of the people in the world. Although we may not like that we aren't the center of the universe, we conceptually understand that other people have needs and desires and that ours aren't at the forefront some or most of the time.
If you're not particularly passionate about an issue or don't have a strong opinion, you might just go along with things because it would be emotionally draining to protest/argue, you really don't care too much, or you just want to be agreeable or have the appearance of amiability. Over time this results in several things, but most notably a pattern of interaction that gives acceptance and/or tacit approval to the new track of behaviors. Most of the time this new track of behaviors is just fine, but sometimes you expect a little bit more or better treatment. You might get disappointed when your expectations weren't met. Then you get all these feelings of, "well, I guess I'm not worth it," "It's too late to change the pattern now," "I suck," and you just feel kind of crappy.
But then you realize that it's your own darn fault. Those irritating people with their 52 page code of conduct for you to follow when interacting with them are in an enviable position. If I were them, I wouldn't be in the position I'm in now. It would already be clear and understood that such behavior around me would be downright appalling and grounds for dismissal. Instead, I'm sad, frustrated, down on myself, and feel whiny & needy if I say, "Not acceptable. I need better behavior from you. It may seem stupid and pointless to step it up, but it matters in some esoteric way that I can't rationally describe."
It's difficult to balance being reasonable with asserting the needs you have. If your feelings get hurt ever so rarely, it's easier to shake off a minor slight because it feels so petty to point one little thing out. But at what point do you say/do something when the little ones keep adding up or there's a big one? At some point it becomes incredibly difficult.
Monday, January 9, 2012
A name by any other
When you have a baby, probably the longest thing you stew on is the baby's name. At least I did. As a victim of a trendy name (as opposed to a horribly trendy name during my birth year like Jennifer or Jessica) myself, I really didn't want to give my kid a trendy name that would forever signify 2007-2009 birth years. Thus, I wanted to stay away from the top 10 names for the year. My mom says that I was named after the college she and her ex-boyfriend went to for a lecture, and then the next week she heard it again at church so she just had to name me that when I came along a few years later. Yeah right, whatever.
One other factor I was opposed to is totally butchering the spelling of a name. A little creative license is fine, but when Tiffany (yet another trendy name during my birth year) becomes Tyfaniie, it's completely inane. Thankfully the horrible name spellings are a more recent trend.
For a girl, those were my only name caveats. Oh, and I didn't want to steal a boy's name for a girl just because I think it's mean. You know how all the girls take over the boys' names...Bailey, Kennedy, Madison, etc.? A girl can steal a boy's name, and then it quickly becomes a girl's name and then the poor boys can't really use it anymore. If that keeps happening, the boys will be stuck with only the top 5 overused boy names (John, Mark, Thomas, Robert, David). I don't know about everyone else, but I know a lot of people with these names, and it's really confusing because you spend so much time clarifying WHICH John or David you're talking about. I wish work was like at school with the Jennifer problem, and the poor Jennifer had to become Jennifer M. Until there were two Jennifer M's, and then she had to be Jennifer Mitchell all. the. time. At work, though, people tend to stick with just the first name and then you have to clarify and hit replay once the other person is thinking of the wrong John.
Naming a boy would have been a little more complicated than a girl because I think so many boy names are overused. I dated a lot of boys with boring, overused names. It didn't help when they started having the same names, which of course got really confusing when talking about them but really simple when talking to them. I think I dated people with all of the more common Bible boys' names.
There were only two exceptions to my dating name roster. My first boyfriend had a hick name. It was bad, at least in my opinion. Of course I didn't date him for his name.
For a boy, I also like a certain style of name. That style would be pretentious. If a boy's name makes you imagine a clean-cut guy playing tennis at the country club with a sweater tied around his neck, I like the name. And if it's followed by "III," I like it even more.
The other exception to my dating roster was my husband. He by far has the most pretentious name of any guy I dated. It's not as pretentious as I would prefer, but it's pretentious enough to almost tie that sweater around his shoulders.
The funny part of this whole boy name preference thing is that I don't like pretentious guys. I've never dated the frat guy or the country club guy because I think they tend to be too fake and superficial. I just like their names.
I really liked Nathaniel Prescott LastName III (he wouldn't have been the II or the III, but I just want to throw that in at the end of the name for pretentious kicks), Andrew Wentworth III (no Andy nickname), Sebastian Oliver III, Jefferson Bradford III.
Basically, I liked any boy name that would ensure he would spend all of junior high in a locker or with his head submerged in a toilet. My husband would have lobbied to tone the pretentiousness down. He had lobbied Nathaniel Prescott down, and we had agreed on Nathan Husband'sMiddleName since he wouldn't give me Prescott.
Sometimes I wonder if my husband was named JoeBob if I would have married him. Okay, I'm teasing. I probably would have, but I would have called him Joseph Robert all of the time just like I currently call him FirstName MiddleName all the time without nicknames.
One other factor I was opposed to is totally butchering the spelling of a name. A little creative license is fine, but when Tiffany (yet another trendy name during my birth year) becomes Tyfaniie, it's completely inane. Thankfully the horrible name spellings are a more recent trend.
For a girl, those were my only name caveats. Oh, and I didn't want to steal a boy's name for a girl just because I think it's mean. You know how all the girls take over the boys' names...Bailey, Kennedy, Madison, etc.? A girl can steal a boy's name, and then it quickly becomes a girl's name and then the poor boys can't really use it anymore. If that keeps happening, the boys will be stuck with only the top 5 overused boy names (John, Mark, Thomas, Robert, David). I don't know about everyone else, but I know a lot of people with these names, and it's really confusing because you spend so much time clarifying WHICH John or David you're talking about. I wish work was like at school with the Jennifer problem, and the poor Jennifer had to become Jennifer M. Until there were two Jennifer M's, and then she had to be Jennifer Mitchell all. the. time. At work, though, people tend to stick with just the first name and then you have to clarify and hit replay once the other person is thinking of the wrong John.
Naming a boy would have been a little more complicated than a girl because I think so many boy names are overused. I dated a lot of boys with boring, overused names. It didn't help when they started having the same names, which of course got really confusing when talking about them but really simple when talking to them. I think I dated people with all of the more common Bible boys' names.
There were only two exceptions to my dating name roster. My first boyfriend had a hick name. It was bad, at least in my opinion. Of course I didn't date him for his name.
For a boy, I also like a certain style of name. That style would be pretentious. If a boy's name makes you imagine a clean-cut guy playing tennis at the country club with a sweater tied around his neck, I like the name. And if it's followed by "III," I like it even more.
The other exception to my dating roster was my husband. He by far has the most pretentious name of any guy I dated. It's not as pretentious as I would prefer, but it's pretentious enough to almost tie that sweater around his shoulders.
The funny part of this whole boy name preference thing is that I don't like pretentious guys. I've never dated the frat guy or the country club guy because I think they tend to be too fake and superficial. I just like their names.
I really liked Nathaniel Prescott LastName III (he wouldn't have been the II or the III, but I just want to throw that in at the end of the name for pretentious kicks), Andrew Wentworth III (no Andy nickname), Sebastian Oliver III, Jefferson Bradford III.
Basically, I liked any boy name that would ensure he would spend all of junior high in a locker or with his head submerged in a toilet. My husband would have lobbied to tone the pretentiousness down. He had lobbied Nathaniel Prescott down, and we had agreed on Nathan Husband'sMiddleName since he wouldn't give me Prescott.
Sometimes I wonder if my husband was named JoeBob if I would have married him. Okay, I'm teasing. I probably would have, but I would have called him Joseph Robert all of the time just like I currently call him FirstName MiddleName all the time without nicknames.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
A semi-retraction
My husband got a wee bit defensive about my post a few days ago. As in, I hadn't even gotten in the door, and he gave me a full daycare report with names all accounted for, and then he said he would notice if I disappeared and was replaced by some other woman.
So this is a semi-retraction. You see, in my arsenal is still the Christmas of 2006 confusion. It goes something like this. Two sets of neighbors moved in during 2006.
Cast of Neighborhood Characters Before These Sets of Neighbors Moved In:
- 50ish couple with 2 teenage boys
- 50ish doctor from India with his wife
- 50ish couple with grown kids
- 60ish couple - curmudgeonly husband who had gout and a recluse wife
Then in 2006 things got all confusing because we added:
- 30ish guy with his new 21 year old wife and a baby
- couple approaching their 40s with a boy (age 4-5) and a girl (age 6-7)
When I wasn't home one day near the holidays in 2006, a woman with a kid dropped off homemade cookies when my husband answered the door. Of course, he didn't ask the logical question of which house she lived in. He just told me later that day that a woman dropped by with a kid. The woman had ever-so-noteworthy hair of who knows what color and the kid was of who knows what age. (Of course I asked him - numerous times - without any answers.) I got exasperated because OF COURSE you should be able to tell a 21 year old woman from a late 30s woman, and even if you couldn't do that, you should be able to tell an infant from a child.
Right? Right? Right? Or do I have special superpowers for being able to do that?
I ended up guessing which neighbor it had been. I go off to make cookies, drop off cookies because no one was at the door with my phone number on it, she calls to thank us, and then we start to get all neighborly and go over to each other's houses to eat and stuff like that.
I know, I know, I should have made BOTH neighbors (or, ideally, ALL neighbors) some cookies to cover my butt. But I'm inherently lazy and didn't think the whole dilemma through.
And of course I guessed wrong, but the worst part was that I didn't realize my error until the next Christmas when the late 30s neighbor dropped off cookies again with her daughter. And then my new neighbor friend told me she hadn't ever made homemade cookies.
Whoops!
But this is further evidence that I should only submit a semi-retraction because my husband does kind of suck at names and faces.
So this is a semi-retraction. You see, in my arsenal is still the Christmas of 2006 confusion. It goes something like this. Two sets of neighbors moved in during 2006.
Cast of Neighborhood Characters Before These Sets of Neighbors Moved In:
- 50ish couple with 2 teenage boys
- 50ish doctor from India with his wife
- 50ish couple with grown kids
- 60ish couple - curmudgeonly husband who had gout and a recluse wife
Then in 2006 things got all confusing because we added:
- 30ish guy with his new 21 year old wife and a baby
- couple approaching their 40s with a boy (age 4-5) and a girl (age 6-7)
When I wasn't home one day near the holidays in 2006, a woman with a kid dropped off homemade cookies when my husband answered the door. Of course, he didn't ask the logical question of which house she lived in. He just told me later that day that a woman dropped by with a kid. The woman had ever-so-noteworthy hair of who knows what color and the kid was of who knows what age. (Of course I asked him - numerous times - without any answers.) I got exasperated because OF COURSE you should be able to tell a 21 year old woman from a late 30s woman, and even if you couldn't do that, you should be able to tell an infant from a child.
Right? Right? Right? Or do I have special superpowers for being able to do that?
I ended up guessing which neighbor it had been. I go off to make cookies, drop off cookies because no one was at the door with my phone number on it, she calls to thank us, and then we start to get all neighborly and go over to each other's houses to eat and stuff like that.
I know, I know, I should have made BOTH neighbors (or, ideally, ALL neighbors) some cookies to cover my butt. But I'm inherently lazy and didn't think the whole dilemma through.
And of course I guessed wrong, but the worst part was that I didn't realize my error until the next Christmas when the late 30s neighbor dropped off cookies again with her daughter. And then my new neighbor friend told me she hadn't ever made homemade cookies.
Whoops!
But this is further evidence that I should only submit a semi-retraction because my husband does kind of suck at names and faces.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Planning Process
For the past few weeks, I've had another public blog. Yes, y'all, I've been cheating on you. (I actually do feel guilty about this, which says how well the nuns drilled guilt into me during my Catholic school first and second grade education.)
I finally created a new public blog...but no one has seen it.
I have a few internal struggles.
First of all, I don't want it to be linked in any way, shape or form to this blog. Which means a separate e-mail sign-up, separate login, blah blah blah, pain in the butt.
Second of all, I really like the current set-up. I love my little bloggy world. I get free therapy as I type in the wee hours of the night. There are only two groups of people that arrive here. Group 1: random people from the interwebz. They don't know me other than this blog, I'm fairly un-identifiable, I don't really care if they choose to read because, heck, there's not much that come from it. Group 2: select people I know that I don't mind who read this. It's a small-ish group, I don't force or compel anyone to come here and by now they may or may not be used to my random-ish nature. They've likely learned to enter at their own risk. If they were going to blow my cover, they probably already would have done it after almost 3 years. Right? Being that I like the current set-up, I really don't want to risk things changing for the worse.
Third of all, I need to push myself out of my comfort zone. I've been too complacent in a few different areas. Not that I really *mind* being complacent with certain things, but to grow you have to push yourself.
But the thing is, if I want to push myself on a new and different blogging adventure that involves - ummm - readers, I have three routes I could take. 1) Link to this one, which I don't want to do since I want to keep this one as is. 2) Link to it via Facebook. Not terribly excited about that option, but it's the most reasonable place to start. 3) Self-promotion through blog networking, which could be extremely slow and tedious (and time-consuming).
Fourth of all, whenever I think about the self-promotion on Facebook idea, I want to hyperventilate. All of my insecurities come to the surface, and I feel extremely panicky. Why? It doesn't make logical sense, but emotions don't always make sense. There's something about that population of people that gets me all jittery because I feel judged, and I don't think I'll be good enough, and and ... I need a stiff drink to get myself off the proverbial ledge.
And then I go back to the few cogent thoughts I have:
1. I am a fairly consistent blogger.
2. I like to blog and whether I'm good or not at it doesn't really matter if I enjoy it.
3. There's a topic area that I really enjoy discussing.
4. Taking on this adventure will help me learn even more about the topic.
5. When you combine 1 through 4, it really does seem to make sense to do it.
6. Thus, make a list of people on FB who I wouldn't mind who saw it, get tipsy one night, post the link, go hyperventilate if the wine didn't work or go to sleep if it did, and wake up the next morning relatively unharmed.
Sounds like a plan, and it's an all the more attractive plan because it involves wine and sleeping!
I finally created a new public blog...but no one has seen it.
I have a few internal struggles.
First of all, I don't want it to be linked in any way, shape or form to this blog. Which means a separate e-mail sign-up, separate login, blah blah blah, pain in the butt.
Second of all, I really like the current set-up. I love my little bloggy world. I get free therapy as I type in the wee hours of the night. There are only two groups of people that arrive here. Group 1: random people from the interwebz. They don't know me other than this blog, I'm fairly un-identifiable, I don't really care if they choose to read because, heck, there's not much that come from it. Group 2: select people I know that I don't mind who read this. It's a small-ish group, I don't force or compel anyone to come here and by now they may or may not be used to my random-ish nature. They've likely learned to enter at their own risk. If they were going to blow my cover, they probably already would have done it after almost 3 years. Right? Being that I like the current set-up, I really don't want to risk things changing for the worse.
Third of all, I need to push myself out of my comfort zone. I've been too complacent in a few different areas. Not that I really *mind* being complacent with certain things, but to grow you have to push yourself.
But the thing is, if I want to push myself on a new and different blogging adventure that involves - ummm - readers, I have three routes I could take. 1) Link to this one, which I don't want to do since I want to keep this one as is. 2) Link to it via Facebook. Not terribly excited about that option, but it's the most reasonable place to start. 3) Self-promotion through blog networking, which could be extremely slow and tedious (and time-consuming).
Fourth of all, whenever I think about the self-promotion on Facebook idea, I want to hyperventilate. All of my insecurities come to the surface, and I feel extremely panicky. Why? It doesn't make logical sense, but emotions don't always make sense. There's something about that population of people that gets me all jittery because I feel judged, and I don't think I'll be good enough, and and ... I need a stiff drink to get myself off the proverbial ledge.
And then I go back to the few cogent thoughts I have:
1. I am a fairly consistent blogger.
2. I like to blog and whether I'm good or not at it doesn't really matter if I enjoy it.
3. There's a topic area that I really enjoy discussing.
4. Taking on this adventure will help me learn even more about the topic.
5. When you combine 1 through 4, it really does seem to make sense to do it.
6. Thus, make a list of people on FB who I wouldn't mind who saw it, get tipsy one night, post the link, go hyperventilate if the wine didn't work or go to sleep if it did, and wake up the next morning relatively unharmed.
Sounds like a plan, and it's an all the more attractive plan because it involves wine and sleeping!
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
You are who again?
My husband puzzles me. I'm not sure if it is just him who coincidentally has this particular affliction or if most men share this affliction - as in, I wonder if there's a lot of overlap in the Venn diagram when you draw a circle representing men and another circle representing people with this particular affliction.
There's about 8-10 staff people at the daycare. Julia has been going there for 3 YEARS, and my dear husband does not know any of the women's names. Or, more precisely, he knows some of their names, but he doesn't know who the names belong to. He gets all confused because more than one has brown hair or something like that.
Seriously?!
I swear that over the past 3 years we've had tens of hours of conversations trying to discern who he was talking to that day. Because, to me, the context of who says what is extremely important. Is it just me? Or is it that the Venn diagram of "caring about context" and "being a girl" take up almost the same real estate?
To me, if A said something then it is likely meaningless, B just says things to start trouble, C is thoughtful and I greatly consider her opinions, D could very well be on speed, E is in her own little world where there is a yellow brick road and talking scarecrows, F is smart and observant, G is just cranky, and H is too new for me to have formed an opinion.
Thus when my husband tells me that D or maybe it's E or maybe it's B - it's so hard to tell - said something, I try to contain my incredulity that his 3 years with these people has not improved his ability for name or face recognition. Nada. When I ask what the person looked like, I get, "Brown hair" (i.e., anything other than red hair) or "Hair pulled back" or "I dunno." I go through the list of suspects, trying to impersonate, and his face is still blank. I can meet someone once and remember their full name, hobbies, and vital statistics for YEARS afterward, and my husband can't remember which one is Jennifer at daycare, despite her working there for three years.
One time after an hour of me trying to quiz him to figure out who it was, I asked, "How long did it take to remember me after you met me?"
His reply: "Not THAT long."
In other words, if someone kills me in the dead of night and replaces me with someone who has hair that's not bright red and within 50 pounds of my weight in either direction, I doubt my husband will ever notice that I was gone.
There's about 8-10 staff people at the daycare. Julia has been going there for 3 YEARS, and my dear husband does not know any of the women's names. Or, more precisely, he knows some of their names, but he doesn't know who the names belong to. He gets all confused because more than one has brown hair or something like that.
Seriously?!
I swear that over the past 3 years we've had tens of hours of conversations trying to discern who he was talking to that day. Because, to me, the context of who says what is extremely important. Is it just me? Or is it that the Venn diagram of "caring about context" and "being a girl" take up almost the same real estate?
To me, if A said something then it is likely meaningless, B just says things to start trouble, C is thoughtful and I greatly consider her opinions, D could very well be on speed, E is in her own little world where there is a yellow brick road and talking scarecrows, F is smart and observant, G is just cranky, and H is too new for me to have formed an opinion.
Thus when my husband tells me that D or maybe it's E or maybe it's B - it's so hard to tell - said something, I try to contain my incredulity that his 3 years with these people has not improved his ability for name or face recognition. Nada. When I ask what the person looked like, I get, "Brown hair" (i.e., anything other than red hair) or "Hair pulled back" or "I dunno." I go through the list of suspects, trying to impersonate, and his face is still blank. I can meet someone once and remember their full name, hobbies, and vital statistics for YEARS afterward, and my husband can't remember which one is Jennifer at daycare, despite her working there for three years.
One time after an hour of me trying to quiz him to figure out who it was, I asked, "How long did it take to remember me after you met me?"
His reply: "Not THAT long."
In other words, if someone kills me in the dead of night and replaces me with someone who has hair that's not bright red and within 50 pounds of my weight in either direction, I doubt my husband will ever notice that I was gone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)