|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
|
Folks, I am ashamed to admit I have been trapped by a mommy guilt trap that I was not
expecting. Since my son was born I have managed to avoid or rationalize my way out of
most of the traditional guilt traps I was expecting: I was vigilant about responding to any
and all crying until age six months, I planned for daily times of stimulating developmental
activities, I joined playgroups and even went so far to make my own baby food to ensure
the most nutritious meals. By becoming a stay-at-home mother, I avoided the guilt trap of
child care. So imagine my surprise when I was struck with a guilt I had not anticipated -
feeling guilty about my lack of fashion credibility!
This notion took me completely by surprise as I waited in line for my Diet Coke
at a McDonald's drive through lane. As I glanced at the car in front of me
(if you could call it a car - more like a tank-sized SUV!), I could not help but notice the woman driving
it was perfectly coiffed, with trendy shades perched upon her head.
The two young girls in the back seat, who I am assuming were her children, were also perfectly dressed to boot.
I am embarrassed to admit I actually begin to feel guilty for not having the trendiest duds to wear.
It also occurred to me that I had not been to the hair dresser for a cut, let alone a color, in over 6 months.
Suddenly my side-part ponytail that I thought could pass for trendy seemed silly and contrived.
In addition to this weird, unanticipated form of mommy guilt, I was shocked by my own
shallowness. Here I was, a well-adjusted person on her way to a prep-class for graduate
school entrance, seriously considering basing any importance on how my hair looked?
Were it not for the cool refuge of the carbonated beverage, I might have made myself sick! Magazines are full of stories warning women against trying to become Super Mom, yet they
mostly address how to avoid multitasking oneself to death. I suppose the lesson I learned
is that Super Mom not only does everything and does it perfectly, but she also
accessorizes well. This all but proves that Super Mom does not exist and can not be
someone I push myself to become. This instance of mommy guilt has passed and the side-part ponytail remains. Trends come
and go, but a mommy with a ponytail endures forever!
| | |
| I think it may be time to change the name of this site to something that reflects the fact that I tend to write about random people I see or meet in public. I fully confess to being a people watcher. While this is certainly not the most effective method for judging people, it certainly is amusing. Take for example the woman in my weekend prep courses for an upcoming graduate school entrance exam. She completed her undergraduate work in the 70s and is looking to enter law school next fall. She is a sincere and earnest person who is simply trying way to hard to prove to all of the 22 year olds in the room that she "still has it." We have all been in a class with this type of person, who I call "The Clarifier." Last night our prep course lasted from 6:30 - 9:00 and thank goodness we had The Clarifier! Following any questions asked by anyone else in the room, The Clarifier was sure to ask a follow up question to pull an additional explanation from the professor. Note that I said additional, not necessary. I am sure I even caught the professor fighting the urge to say "As I just said 2 seconds ago, arguments should never ..." Let's give her the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps she really did need more info on each topic. That would be fine. The nail in the coffin was the look she shot at the original question asker each time she tacked a follow up on his or her inquiry. The look appeared to be almost smug, with an attitude of "you will thank me for this later." It appeared The Clarifier felt as if she was doing us all a favor by restating the original questions in a way that would make them more understandable to us. She wants to make sure we all get it. I have to say these types of insecure antics bother me less in my old age. This time around I did not find her actions insulting, but amusing. Though I am not quite at the age of The Clarifier, I am long in the tooth compared to the aforementioned 22 year olds. I have accepted the fact that I will never again be cool to a college aged kid and therefore present the only image I have - my own. Perhaps at today's prep classes I will be able to observe the rare mortal enemy of The Clarifier - the Ambiguous Big Talker. | | |
| Folks, we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. Just last week our nation's finest - the good men and women of the US House of Representatives- banded together to address a bipartisan issue that weighs heavily on the minds of anyone who calls themselves an American. Effective September 7, the House passed a bill to outlaw the slaughter of horses expressly for the purposes of using the meat as food. Because the Senate must also vote on the issue, we must wait with bated breath to see how this bill fares. While I appreciate the concerns of our lawmakers and the parties lobbying them, I just don't see how this is really an issue. Amidst all of the other things happening in our country and world today, how does a horse being served as an entree in Asia (where the majority of the meat is exported to) impact me? Are these people serious? I'm actually surprised that with today's "not-that-there's-anything-wrong-with-that" attitude our leaders were emboldened enough to pass a bill that essentially declares another culture's preference wrong. America's international stance on the treatment of animals seems to be that if it's not fit for our dinner tables, it's not fit for yours. Some of the more compelling evidence used to persuade the voting members was a collection of bloody-faced horses, statements that cited Mr. Ed and Secretariat as national heroes, and the lobbying efforts of "celebrities" Bo Derek and Willie Nelson. All I am asking for is some B-list celebrities who are willing to go to bat for my concerns. Clearly this is not a successful method for your bigger ticket votes, but the pairing of lower level celebrities with lower level issues is a winner Christopher Knight, if you are out there, can you please voice your support of any efforts to make the cat vaccinations available to the public at no cost? Hayley Duff, join me in my quest to regulate the earnings and work conditions of lemonade stands everywhere! Please, Melissa Rivers, take the time to sign my petition to end the pruning of trees! Support your celebrities as fervently as you support your elected representatives and make this country all it can be. The time is now, people! Speaking of which, I wonder what issues Mr. Ed would have endorsed? | | |
| After a weak attempt to avoid Wal-Mart for any number of political and hygiene reasons, I have found myself frequenting the brand new store located a convenient 2.5 miles from my house. If you have not been in a new Wal-Mart lately, you may not know they are trying to be a little more posh in an effort to attract customers who don't take public transportation to get there. Our city's new store features hardwood flooring and shelves in the card and gift wrap area, super wide aisles and faux marble tiles in the grocery section and lots of fancy flat panel televisions that broadcast commercials while you walk the aisles. Couple all this with all of the organic products Wal-Mart now carries and you can see that the store is trying to class it up. No amount of improved decor can really alter the Wal-Mart experience, though, and this is a marketing problem they may never surpass. Thanks to it's ultra low prices and presumably ultra low paid workforce, you can always count on running into the ghetto fabulous hillbilly and the completely incompetent employee. While there today, I needed to return an item before I began shopping. I was aware that the lines at customer service are generally long and I was prepared to wait calmly. Like all journeys made to Wal-Mart during the weekday, my 2-year-old sidekick (son) was along for the ride. I truly did not mind waiting in line as I have been on the other side of the customer service counter and experienced embarrassment and humiliation at the hands of an irate customer. Today's amusement comes from the man in front of me in line. Wearing a 100 year old Tommy Hilfiger t-shirt, Target khaki shorts, Payless loafers, and a cheap metal and rope necklace, he believes he is styling. As a woman behind me proclaims the line to be "ridiculous," this man, now dubbed Good Time Charlie, is quick to agree and tells her (and everyone else within earshot b/c he is posturing loudly) that he hates Wal-Mart and is planning to sue them for an incident that happened last week. He was only there today, he stated, to return things because Wal-Mart will get no more of his money. He claims he and his wife were stopped at the door upon leaving last week b/c they were pulling a rolling suitcase with them through the store while shopping and security searched it before they could leave. Please note he did NOT purchase this suitcase in Wal-Mart, he entered the store with it and pulled it behind him from aisle to aisle. Does he not see how that could be suspicious? Here is where it just gets funny... Security asked him why he would bring a suitcase in the store and did he have a car he could have kept it in instead? This made Good Time Charlie irate. According to him it is not the security guard's "f$$king business" if he wants to carry a suitcase everywhere or how he gets to the store. Next, Good Time Charlie says that he suffered an "illegal search and seizure." In my mind, I am wondering if I should tell him that he was on private property with private security doing the search and the search led to no criminal charges, ere go his rights were not violated....Before I can decide, he says "they didn't have to be so rude - I volunteered to let them search the suitcase!" So much for his illegal search and seizure charge! Following this he claims he and his wife experienced "defamation of character" because her intimate apparel and toiletries were pulled from the bag during the search. All I can say is that I would like to know exactly what she had packed that would defame her character simply by being taken out in public!!! The final demonstration of utter exaggeration is thrown out and I can hardly contain myself at this point. He says that he "drops 1,000-2,000 dollars a month in this store and they will no longer get his business." He also wants us to know that he has the money to get a shark of an attorney, who has already taken his case and is filing charges for the great suitcase debacle. Seriously people. If you had seen this man, you would have doubted he has ever seen $200 at one time, let alone $2000. If you are spending that much a month at Wal-Mart, I respectfully recommend that you branch out and try other retailers. You know, the kind that let you wheel a suitcase behind you as you shop. The agony of listening to him speak ends when it is his turn to step up to the register and return his item. Recall earlier that he was only returning things here b/c he didn't even want Wal-Mart products in his home after his horrible experience last week. When asked by the customer service rep if would like his refund back on his credit card or in the form of a Wal-Mart Shopping Card, guess which he selected. THE SHOPPING CARD! I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt...maybe his shark of an attorney accepts Wal-Mart shopping cards as payment for billable hours. | | |
| As I am waiting for my favorite aformentioned reality show to hit the airwaves this evening, I decide to check up on email that I have received today. The following is a forwarded message I received from a woman whom I attended church with in the town I lived in before moving to my current home. The following message is copied directly from the forwarded email: Yes, Christmas cards. This is coming early (really early) so that you can get ready to include an important address to your list. Read on........ What A GREAT idea! Fun with the ACLU...... Wanna have some fun this CHRISTMAS? Send the ACLU a CHRISTMAS CARD this year. As they are working so very hard to get rid of the CHRISTMAS part of this Holiday, we should all send them a nice, CHRISTIAN, card to brighten up their dark, sad, little world. Make sure it says "Merry Christmas" on it Here's the Address, just don't be rude or crude. (It's Not the Christian way, you know!) ACLU 125 Broad Street 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 Two tons of Christmas cards would freeze their operations because they wouldn't know if any were regular mail containing contributions. So spend 39 cents and tell the ACLU to leave Christmas alone. Also tell them that there is no such thing as a "Holiday Tree". . ... It's a Christmas Tree even in the fields!!And pass this on to your email lists. We really want to communicate with the ACLU! They really DESERVE us!! END FORWARDED MESSAGE Now I ask you, is it truly a CHRISTmas card if it is sent in spite? While I, too, have a hard time with some of the things that the ACLU promotes or defends, is it really in the best interest of Christianity to send mail with the sole intention of clogging up an organizations mail system? I am not a criminal lawyer, but this might even border on some type of postal-related crime. What if instead of spending money on the card and stamp, each Christian who would have sent the card instead donates that money to a missionary or organization that serves the less fortunate? Wouldn't that fit in with the meaning of Christmas a little more logically? Trust me, I enjoy the irony of the ACLU's day-to-day operations being impeded by a group of citizens exercising their protected rights to use the USPS and celebrate a Christian holiday, I just don't think it's good business. Let's realize that life isnt' fair and that being vindictive or spiteful really doesn't balance the scales. | | |
|
