XOXO Gossip Girl

I've written a previous post about gossip, where I essentially advocate it. My justfication is that we all need to vent and what someone doesn't know you're saying about them, doesn't hurt them. The problem of course is that many times gossip gets back to someone you don't want it to. And for some, this is their reason for keeping their mouths shut, which is is fair.

It's the sprit in which we talk about each other that needs to be kept in check, imo, not the act of it in general.

The problem with most gossipers is that they begin to feel they have the right to judge others. You don't. None of us does.

I know the freedoms "given" to us by our government are also expressed as inalienable rights and this includes free speech...however when it comes to their word usage, I disagree semantically.

We each have the inalienable freedom to express our opinions, publicly and privately, but none of us has the right in a purely moral sense.

Beautiful Daughters

I was just wondering why it is that a parent telling someone how many kids she has always, and I mean always, inserts "beautiful" between the number (of kids) and the word daughter(s). People don't say, "I have three strapping, athletic boys!" or "I have three handsome sons." But, people feel the need to express to others they've got beautiful daughters.

I guess this is just some thing where a woman's value is tied up, ultimately, in how good looking she is. Parents are going to be biased about their daughters' looks. Not to mention very few young girls are unattractive. They're all pretty adorable--up to a point. At the receiveing end of this message we swoon at the emphasis of the word "beautiful". OH! They're BEAUTIFUL! You made BEAUTIFUL girls! our smiles and raised eyebrows say. Do we believe them? Are we genuinely impressed? Maybe.

What's funny about our gullibility and the continuation of this kind of mildly sexist rhetoric is that chances are "no, you don't actually have beautiful daughters." The odds are greatly against your favor that your daughters are any better than average looking and most likely a little bit below. But, beauty's on the inside anyway, right?

Transgender Models

I just read that a trans-gender model is making headlines because she's becoming quite successful. She's even scheduled to be interviewed by Oprah for one of her last shows. I'm calling it right now, trans-gender models are the wave of the future. And if they aren't, they should be.

The modeling industry plucks children (some as young as 14) from their homes and throws them into big cities with the hopes of making a mint off the child if she becomes successful. Chanel Iman is a good example of this plan working out in the agency's favor. She was 15 when she started, and became a sensation. Sadly, she's made up at endless events to look like a woman in her mid to late twenties. She struts around the red carpet soaking in the attention like only a teenage girl could and is exploited in ways I can't imagine. The fact that parents allow this and are essentially selling their daughters away is a whole other post.

Why does the industry do this? Because the industry wants girls who look like boys. The ideal aesthetic is no waist, no hips.

Enter a trans-gender model. No waist. No hips. Maybe a little extra in between the legs that could pose a problem modeling a bikini...but at least you can send people down the runway who are adults and have the cognitive ability to choose the career for themselves. Everybody wins.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T What the Hell Does That Mean to Me?

I wrote a post a little while ago that got the most comments ever, about five, three of which were from my brother and myself. But, two strangers (exciting!) read the post and were compelled to voice their disapproval while slinging personal judgments, bordering on insults, at me. Ahh...the Internet. We reap what we sow.

The fact is I grew up with four brothers and because of my comfort level hanging with the guys I've had some pretty close friendships with men, the result being the chance to peek into their conversations with other guys. While I suspect a lot of macho BS about not liking their girl nearly as much as they do is expressed, I've found that women project a lot of romantic notions on to their relationships (especially the young ones) that just aren't true. I have a different perspective on relationships than most women (And most women don't like that) If they knew how men really thought, they would too.

One person who commented wanted to focus on cheating and why it's wrong. Apparently, I've never been in an "adult" relationship (no arguments there) and have forgotten about having respect for myself. My response to these comments garnered a "you're being defensive" rebuttal. God forbid I'd like to defend myself against misconceptions.

My only question is what does this term "respect for myself" really mean? Why is the concept that I would want to have sex with someone just to have sex with him and (perish the thought!) not want to see him again after that not an option here?

It would seem that--as a female--a sexual encounter should necessarily lead to a committed relationship and that is always the end game hoped for. To not get it means that I allowed a man to violate me in vain, which also means that I don't have any respect for myself. Right? Is that it? I have to admit, I'm clueless.

I think a lot of men secretly hate women. And I think a lot of women secretly hate sex. To have sex is, in some sense, a violation because they don't allow themselves to like it; Girls who like it are bad, are slutty, are...not kosher. And because sex is a break-in, to do it at all means that part of their sense of integrity is given up when they lay down. The only thing that justifies such an act is to get something in return, i.e., a boyfriend, a husband, without this thing they can covet for their sacrifice they have no self respect and since we all assume everyone is exactly like us, and should be, we accuse them of not having it either. And I think that's dumb. Sorry.

I watched the movie "A Star is Born" recently starring Barbra Streisand. I saw it on Netflix and thought what the hell, "I love Barbra. This was a big hit when it came out; it might be good." In one scene Barbra's rock star husband is in bed with a reporter and Barbra walks in. In the film, it's the one and only time he cheated on her. So, Barb walks in, sees it and stays calm until the girl leaves. She gets pretty pissed after that. But, when her husband asks if it's about the girl she simply says, "Give me more credit than that." And goes on to say that it's about the problems in their marriage. I have to agree. The idea of them breaking up over him being in bed with another women was too stupid to even talk about, because it didn't matter, given that the problem was not habitual.

Times have changed. But, change doesn't alwasy mean progress. Today, women torture themselves about whether or not they should leave their husband/boyfriend after an indescretion. Partly because they're scared to death other women will slander them as "weak", "co-dependent" or some other phrase the feminist movement has painted with a negative conotation when referring to women. It's a personal decision that we don't have the right to judge based on specific and personal circumstances.

Although making love with someone you're with and in love with is wonderful and preferable, engaging in sex, although it doesn't "matter" does not mean you're someone without self respect. It could simply mean you're someone who chooses not to deny their sexuality in the name of man-made morality. I am not advocating cheating. I am acknowledging it happens. I do, however, advocate safe, one-night matterless sex with other singles. With a big ol' brunch the next day loaded with self-respect.

My only regret with this post is that I gave the impression I'm a harlot who sleeps with tons of guys in relationships, when I just meant to say that well, when you're young and not married, relationships aren't the life and death situations we make them out to be. If someone really matters, if you really have a connection, you'll keep in touch. You'll forgive whatever you have to forgive and at the very least you'll be friends. If you can't be lovers, you'll survive, you'll get over it. That's all.

Don't Do That

I'm in a coffee shop in Brooklyn. I almost don't need to explain anything else based on all that is implied from the first sentence. I'm going to explain anyway.

Picture this: A girl. A brunette with a whack bob haircut that is disheveled and badly in need of a trim. She's wearing an oversize Breton striped top and slightly stone washed skinny jeans. I've seen cleaner shoes on homeless people. She is clearly not homeless. Her phone rings. She prattles on and on and on for at least 20 minutes until she says, "I gotta go...I'm in a coffee shop." Then she talks for another 10 minutes. She's not working, she's reading a book. So, far be it from her to consider that other people around her are working. She's definitely from some upper middle class background. That kind of "me as the center of the universe" mentality doesn't grow anywhere else.

The girl behind the counter is wearing a slightly crushed pea green bowler hat; it covers greasy mouse brown hair. She has a tattoo of a viking ship on the underside of her right bicep. She is clearly not a viking.

Back to the girl on the phone. She's talking to a family member, talking aimlessly about possible exit plans for Thanksgiving. She talks about what she did yesterday. It's infinitely boring. She talks shit about a girl she met who "intellectualized" everything! But, thankfully, she didn't seem like a bad person. Whew! I hate when I meet people who over intellectualize and then turn out to be rapists and serial killers. Or people who work in the financial district, which is just as bad.

She talks about buying a "vintage" bag and by her slight look downward to the bag at her side, I can tell that's the one. It literally looks dumb. If bags had an IQ. The word vintage specifically relates to making wine. Sometimes it can refer to something out dated. It entered the lexicon of the fashion world to refer to mint condition high fashion pieces that are decades old. The connection being that high fashion pieces don't loose their charm over time, like a good vintage wine. It is not meant to be a euphemism for used crap sold at a dusty hole in the wall that's little better than a pawn shop. So, if it isn't Chanel or Dior and you're saying it's vintage without the slightest sense of irony--don't do that.

If you're a white person living in Brooklyn and are thinking of getting a tattoo of an old fashioned boat on your arm--don't do that.

If you're in a coffee shop and your phone rings and it's mom who you know is going to want to talk for a minimum of 25 minutes about the mundane details of your life and you're thinking about answering--don't do that.

"How many hipsters does it take to screw in a light bulb?"

"Some barely known obscure number. You've probably never heard of it."

Appetizers is What You Eat to Make You More Hungrier.

I just wrote a great post and then accidentally deleted it. The title of this post is one of my favorite quotes from Eric Cartman of South Park, Colorado. He says the sentence to an Ethiopian child in an effort to explain why we have appetizers.

I was just thinking about how much money there is floating around in the hands of people vs. how many people are poverty stricken. Tons of money, tons of starving people. At a basic level that just doesn't make sense. Is there a lack of donating? Is there a lack of donating to relieve poverty? Millions upon millions of dollars each year are siphoned into charities. And yet, still, so many problems with people being poor.

Think about what Britney Spears and the Sultan of Brunei could do alone? I mean that guy could cause a major inflationary problem all by himself just by buying shit. That is rich. But, it isn't enough to give a man a fish, you have to teach him (or something?). This is why I think the world's billionaires should get together and buy off corrupt politicians in third world country governments, Africa first. They should then either insert themselves or people they hire into office. And THEN donate a drinking well. The infrastructure has to be there.

What Your Mom Should Have Read You Before You Went to Sleep.

A relationship is nothing more than two people who get together because they like to fuck and like eachother's company*. Beyond that, it's a crap shoot. Until marriage there are no guarantees**. Don't listen to some bitch who calls you a home wrecker because she is too dumb to see her relationship for what it is and imagines herself to be one of the Disney Princesses. Blindsightedness isn't your fault. See your relationships for what they are, never call a woman a home wrecker.

The idea isn't to "go the distance" it's to help each other grow for as long as you're lucky enough to be together. Create one life, from two, greater than the sum of its parts.

And when it's time to separate say thank you and appreciate the opportunity to help someone else grow and be helped yourself.

Don't get romantically invovled with someone who doesn't help. Graciously accept whatever (growth) help you're offered, from anyone, but don't project more on to it than what the other person wants it to be. Don't be afraid to ask, no sooner than one month and no later than two. Accept the answer respectfully. Make sure you love fucking yourself and enjoy your own company.

* A lot of people project romantic, egotistical notions on to the simple fact of enjoying the company of another person. "We're on the same wavelength! We like the same books, movies, brand of grape jelly! He gets me! I can be myself with him!" Get over yourself. You (plural) like to hang out. Being yourself, btw, is up to you and not another person.

**Marriage is not always a gurantee either, obviously. But, it is the public act of an explicit and mutual promise. Respect it.