I got a complaint from a friend's mother (through said friend) that I have been sleeping over too frequently. now this isn't going to be a rant on why I am upset, hurt, frustrated, etc. with this comment, but me trying to figure out what is going on with me. I just don't feel very much like myself recently. I feel like I've been clingier, more interested in a few people's lives as opposed to somewhat interested in many people's lives. does this mean I'm cured?! am I finally able to have commitments?! has my attachment-phobia been fixed?!
...or am I just being clingy and needy and high maintenance and all of those things I swore to myself I would never be?
I do recognize that I need to branch out, to meet new people, to become interested in other people -- but I don't think I have the ability to do that yet because I haven't left one sphere (high school) to enter another (college), a time that seems like a natural breaking point. I am not yet worried for myself that I am needy and high maintenance. I know that I will never be that girl, but I am working on establishing a balance between not making plans (to be alone, of course) and calling tons of people to have a very busy, planned-out week (and then balancing who I see to make sure that I don't see the same person too many times when there are obviously some people I prefer to spend time with compared to other people).
so I don't quite know where I'm leaving myself. I just scratched my head, like a confused little monkey a little bit. I've never overstayed my welcome anywhere so I'm a little upset with the comment because it's a reflection of who I've become and it isn't someone I'm happy with. so, while I'm very happy, I'm not happy with who I am. officially confused yet? yeah, me too.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Sunday, June 13, 2010
jerry maguire -- a feminist film?
so I started watching jerry maguire ('96, directed by cameron crowe, stars tom cruise & renee zellweger) with dan on friday night and finished it tonight by myself, at home, in my lovely, comfy bed and I realized that it is TOTALLY a feminist movie. and not even like a raging '90's feminist movie (although, yes, it is), just like a good, solid, feminist movie.
here this premise of why this movie rocks from a feminist perspective. main theme of the movie for a good, long while is: man cannot be loney, man needs woman, while woman doesn't need man. what a nice, stereotypically different message!
here are our 3 strong females:
1. ex-fiance, terry -- we start with this woman who is a total hottie and is maguire's initial fiancee and totally punches him in the face when he breaks off the engagement. that's kind of a low blow, but her whole deal is complete and total honesty because she's not sensitive (love it!) and can handle the truth -- but apparently jerry can't. granted, bitch totally makes jerry this video interviewing women who all say he's totally incapable of being alone and always needs someone, a woman, in his life, which is kind of an asshole thing to do, but whatever, we can forgive her.
2. aunt laurel -- doesn't have a husband, kind of whiney, but runs a divorce group for women -- which kind of reminded me of my minyan...except they whine more.
3. dorothy -- totally awesome. granted she falls in love with maguire from the first second and you think she's going to be a weak-in-the-knees kind of annoying female lead, but on their first date she tells jerry, "let's not tell our sad stories" because she knows that she's better than that. she stands for what she wants (she leaves with jerry when he leaves smi, the company he was working for before) and supports jerry for who he is. she's strong enough to call him out when he's being an asshole and "end" their marriage when he's running away but is too pussy to say anything for himself. so yeah, she's kind of a g.
so, just figured I would share with the group that next time they're watching a movie, any movie, keep an eye out for cool feminine characters. they're totally out there.
if neuropathways are set, what does that mean for me?
here this premise of why this movie rocks from a feminist perspective. main theme of the movie for a good, long while is: man cannot be loney, man needs woman, while woman doesn't need man. what a nice, stereotypically different message!
here are our 3 strong females:
1. ex-fiance, terry -- we start with this woman who is a total hottie and is maguire's initial fiancee and totally punches him in the face when he breaks off the engagement. that's kind of a low blow, but her whole deal is complete and total honesty because she's not sensitive (love it!) and can handle the truth -- but apparently jerry can't. granted, bitch totally makes jerry this video interviewing women who all say he's totally incapable of being alone and always needs someone, a woman, in his life, which is kind of an asshole thing to do, but whatever, we can forgive her.
2. aunt laurel -- doesn't have a husband, kind of whiney, but runs a divorce group for women -- which kind of reminded me of my minyan...except they whine more.
3. dorothy -- totally awesome. granted she falls in love with maguire from the first second and you think she's going to be a weak-in-the-knees kind of annoying female lead, but on their first date she tells jerry, "let's not tell our sad stories" because she knows that she's better than that. she stands for what she wants (she leaves with jerry when he leaves smi, the company he was working for before) and supports jerry for who he is. she's strong enough to call him out when he's being an asshole and "end" their marriage when he's running away but is too pussy to say anything for himself. so yeah, she's kind of a g.
so, just figured I would share with the group that next time they're watching a movie, any movie, keep an eye out for cool feminine characters. they're totally out there.
if neuropathways are set, what does that mean for me?
Sunday, June 6, 2010
shiza!
have not written in so many moons! ideas to come soon (as I graduate on thursday!) but for now, shout out to my favorite all-boy band, SUNNY SIDE UP, playing at the mercury lounge on monday at 10:30pm -- check it out, they're too good to miss (especially before they all leave for college).
seriously, though. come armed with your fids (fake ids, a la sophie mortner) and be prepared to groove jam & rock out.
seriously, though. come armed with your fids (fake ids, a la sophie mortner) and be prepared to groove jam & rock out.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
hi june 1st
funny how it's june 1st already so that would mean that I've been blogging for 7 months? that's a really long time. shit. the year went by really fast. ay mami.
so along with june 1st and the end of the year come a lovely bunch of articles in magazines about obesity and skin cancer. I'm not kidding, every summer it's the same thing. so I decided to write a little article about the lack of originality in the magazines that I consistently read.
granted: the two magazines I read consistently are (I'm ashamed to say) seventeen and (not so embarrassingly) teenvogue -- which, did you know, is designed to be so poquito so that it could be hidden in a notebook? supah clever! so I've noticed before that there is always an article on obesity in one of these two magazines pretty much every month (which is annoying because it's coming from magazine corporations that "pride themselves" (17, at least) on wanting girls to be comfortable with their bodies, yet the girls pictured are NOT the "average teenager" and the articles are on obesity a lot which I guess is good because it's raising awareness but it doesn't really do anything to solve the problems that it has identified...) and there is almost really nothing wrong with that (see rant in previous paragraph) but I'm getting kind of sick of reading about obesity in america. and then, to top it off, every summer (or few months, sometimes they shake things up and stick it in say in like, december) there is article on the harms of tanning -- usually it's about tanning salons.
honestly, it's not a bad thing that these are the two issues that the magazines choose to identify with and try to solve, it's just an issue when the magazines depict skinny, sun-kissed girls. there's just a little, tiny bit of hypocrisy with the suntanned bodies in the magazines if tanning is so bad for you.
and also, it's just annoying to read the same articles every few months. there comes a point where magazine subscribers get frustrated.
side note: probably one of the funniest things in seventeen this month was that on the cover there was this tagline that read: MUST READ: THE PARTY DRUG THAT MAKES YOU OLD AND FAT. this really caught my eye because I had to keep my eye out for this one, you know? so...turns out it was marijuana. two things:
#1. weed is not a party drug.
#2. not a single part of the article was about getting wrinkles/looking old OR getting fat.
#3. they forgot to mention the economic and medical benefits of marijuana. but like, whatever. you get fat, you know? can't have that happening to our youth. because so many people in america are overweight because of the munchies. ha.
anyway I just needed to mention that there is a huge dearth of creativity and creative research going on in these magazines. I know that going to a tanning salon will give me skin cancer (now caused by uva AND uvb rays!) and will rip out my corneas (now a major cause of cataracts!) and I know that obesity is an epidemic affecting the lives of many people in this country that must be solved by decreasing our intake and dependence on fast food and the fast food industry.
so let's get a little creative. if we're going to write about articles that affect the nation (specifically the outer appearance of us americans), let's try and take a break from obesity & skin cancer? they're really overstaying their welcome.
so along with june 1st and the end of the year come a lovely bunch of articles in magazines about obesity and skin cancer. I'm not kidding, every summer it's the same thing. so I decided to write a little article about the lack of originality in the magazines that I consistently read.
granted: the two magazines I read consistently are (I'm ashamed to say) seventeen and (not so embarrassingly) teenvogue -- which, did you know, is designed to be so poquito so that it could be hidden in a notebook? supah clever! so I've noticed before that there is always an article on obesity in one of these two magazines pretty much every month (which is annoying because it's coming from magazine corporations that "pride themselves" (17, at least) on wanting girls to be comfortable with their bodies, yet the girls pictured are NOT the "average teenager" and the articles are on obesity a lot which I guess is good because it's raising awareness but it doesn't really do anything to solve the problems that it has identified...) and there is almost really nothing wrong with that (see rant in previous paragraph) but I'm getting kind of sick of reading about obesity in america. and then, to top it off, every summer (or few months, sometimes they shake things up and stick it in say in like, december) there is article on the harms of tanning -- usually it's about tanning salons.
honestly, it's not a bad thing that these are the two issues that the magazines choose to identify with and try to solve, it's just an issue when the magazines depict skinny, sun-kissed girls. there's just a little, tiny bit of hypocrisy with the suntanned bodies in the magazines if tanning is so bad for you.
and also, it's just annoying to read the same articles every few months. there comes a point where magazine subscribers get frustrated.
side note: probably one of the funniest things in seventeen this month was that on the cover there was this tagline that read: MUST READ: THE PARTY DRUG THAT MAKES YOU OLD AND FAT. this really caught my eye because I had to keep my eye out for this one, you know? so...turns out it was marijuana. two things:
#1. weed is not a party drug.
#2. not a single part of the article was about getting wrinkles/looking old OR getting fat.
#3. they forgot to mention the economic and medical benefits of marijuana. but like, whatever. you get fat, you know? can't have that happening to our youth. because so many people in america are overweight because of the munchies. ha.
anyway I just needed to mention that there is a huge dearth of creativity and creative research going on in these magazines. I know that going to a tanning salon will give me skin cancer (now caused by uva AND uvb rays!) and will rip out my corneas (now a major cause of cataracts!) and I know that obesity is an epidemic affecting the lives of many people in this country that must be solved by decreasing our intake and dependence on fast food and the fast food industry.
so let's get a little creative. if we're going to write about articles that affect the nation (specifically the outer appearance of us americans), let's try and take a break from obesity & skin cancer? they're really overstaying their welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
