Have you ever planned an event on Facebook because you figured that would be the easiest way to contact many people at once about something coming up? A birthday, karaoke night, games night...Facebook not only allows for all the details to be posted at once, but it also allows guests to mark themselves as "going" or "not going" or "maybe going."
So, as your event approaches, you note that 14 people have agreed to come to your event, and that 5 are not sure, whereas 4 have said that they can't make it. Great! you think, that's an awesome turnout! I'll make reservations! So you call the restaurant, or karaoke bar, or whatever place it is you're going to, and you tell them that 15 people are coming, just to be on the safe side. You never know if one of your "maybes" could turn into a "going!" As the event date approaches, you become excited. Finally, that thing that everyone's been saying they want to do since last year is happening!
The date comes around, and you check the Facebook event page. It looks like two of your "goings" have turned into "not goings," and they apologize profusely on the event page, citing late working hours or dogsitting duties that came up last minute. Oh well, you think, 12 is still close to what you were expecting...and no one else has cancelled, so it must mean they are coming! Right? Right??
WRONG. Two hours before the event, the texts and Facebook messages start pouring in: Sorry, something came up! Maybe next time? :(... My cat is sick...I have too much school work...My girlfriend is having a rough night and she really needs me...
From 14 people, your list of "goings" has dwindled to 6 people. You show up at the venue early, just to make sure you're a responsible host and welcome people when they arrive. You wait for half an hour, reassuring the server that your friends are coming. Then one person comes, and fifteen minutes later, another person comes in. You get a text, and three people tell you that they are coming late. The other person just never shows up. And never texts you.
What was meant to be a good party turns into a lame, drawn-out failure of a night. And the saddest thing is, this is SO typical of this generation. People think that just because they've texted some lame excuse or left some "legitimate" reason on the Facebook event page, they can now unburden themselves of the guilt of having made a commitment to come and do something. Commitment to events is fleeting, spontaneous, and easily forgotten. What happened to following through with your word? What happened to respecting the host and letting them know with a lot of time in advance?
I saw a friend of mine spend her birthday seated at two large tables in a nice restaurant, only to have three guests show up. Three. Not even her close friends - no. And she had planned the event a MONTH AND A HALF in advance. What were the excuses? Does it matter? The point is, her friends didn't even have the decency to let her know well in advance that they wouldn't be able to make it. A couple of people just neglected to show up altogether.
And this flakiness of attitude is built into the very communication system we use with each other. Facebook allows for a category called "maybe" in its invitation system. Since when did anyone RSVP with "maybe?" In the good old days, people RSVP'ed "yes" or "no" to those little invitation cards we used to give out. And maybe because the invitations have gone virtual, so have the commitments. What people say online can be different from what they say on the phone, or in person. There is less of a contract to follow through with a simple click of a Facebook "going" button than there is with an actual person talking to you. And not having to call people to let them know you can't make it makes it SO much easier to lie your ass off about the many responsibilities you, as an adult, must attend to instead of attending some frivolous event. Texts are convenient, no-stress, no-small-talk messages that allow for the pretentiousness of sad emoticons and expressions of regret.
I'm not saying that people weren't flaky before. People are flaky, let's face it. But our technology makes it that much easier for us to fall into our flaky ways, guilt-free. When we make promises to computer screens and smartphone displays, it is so much easier to go back on our word.
I would go on, but I'm so sorry guys. I have to go do some homework. :( Maybe next time?
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Saturday, May 10, 2014
Finding Friendship: The risks we take
I've always loved and hated moving somewhere new. I think that starting over will give me the chance to change, to be someone else, to have new friends and maybe find some love. But it's never that easy. The charm of a new city and a new house and new streets wears off as soon as everything beautiful has been photographed and seen and shared on Facebook. Then comes the dry spell of weekends, trying to figure out if anyone really would care whether or not I wanted to hang out or do something together. It's quiet for the first few weekends. And lonely. And loveless.
People always assume that they have enough friends and come to find some kind of comfort spot where they are no longer attentive or open to new people. Meeting new people becomes a time filler, not a purposeful task. And I don't blame them. Finding friends is fucking tiring and difficult. Not only do you need to like another person, but they have to like you. And then you have to have the guts to show interest in that person. The same goes for dating for me, but to a much more vulnerable extent. Which is probably why I find it difficult to find dates. This is not a whiny post about how people make it difficult for other people to find friends. No. This is a post about the constant struggle to find human connection, and what you have to be willing to risk in order to find it.
You have to risk not being liked back. This is hard for people to accept. The idea that other people don't like you is one of the toughest to weather. But yet it happens. All the time. And of course you think to yourself that you are not un-likeable - so why do some people not like you? It's human nature. And there will be times when you like someone, but they won't like you back. You will risk showing them that you like them. They will then have to find a way to politely reject you.
You have to risk putting out something personal in the open. How do friends go from being "just friends" to "good friends" or best friends? In my case, it's been times when I've trusted someone enough to let them know how I truly feel in the moment. And about some of the shit I've dealt with in the past. Maybe some shit that I'm still dealing with - either way, it's a vulnerable spot to be in. So much about acceptance comes from understanding where the other person is coming from. If you don't get their issues, then you won't be able to fully accept them. And that is a barrier to making a friendship stronger. Again, this is a naturally occurring problem that is no one's fault, but yet it is such a sad, fragile part of finding friendship.
You have to risk being jealous. Your friends are dear to you, and yet sometimes you can't be entirely happy for them, even when you want to, because somehow you are jealous of where they're at in their lives. If you want to be someone's good friend, you need to muster the willpower to get over yourself and truly feel happy for them, even if you are jealous. The effort is what counts. And sometimes, you need to be willing to let your problems sit and wait if they are dealing with something worse. This shit isn't easy. But it is necessary.
I don't want to lecture at anyone on how to be a good friend. I feel like there are so many different ways to be a good friend. But I will encourage you to keep the friends you have. Stay in touch with them. Because you never know when you're going to want to call them up on a lonely weekend when you are in a new, strange place, trying to figure shit out.
People always assume that they have enough friends and come to find some kind of comfort spot where they are no longer attentive or open to new people. Meeting new people becomes a time filler, not a purposeful task. And I don't blame them. Finding friends is fucking tiring and difficult. Not only do you need to like another person, but they have to like you. And then you have to have the guts to show interest in that person. The same goes for dating for me, but to a much more vulnerable extent. Which is probably why I find it difficult to find dates. This is not a whiny post about how people make it difficult for other people to find friends. No. This is a post about the constant struggle to find human connection, and what you have to be willing to risk in order to find it.
You have to risk not being liked back. This is hard for people to accept. The idea that other people don't like you is one of the toughest to weather. But yet it happens. All the time. And of course you think to yourself that you are not un-likeable - so why do some people not like you? It's human nature. And there will be times when you like someone, but they won't like you back. You will risk showing them that you like them. They will then have to find a way to politely reject you.
You have to risk putting out something personal in the open. How do friends go from being "just friends" to "good friends" or best friends? In my case, it's been times when I've trusted someone enough to let them know how I truly feel in the moment. And about some of the shit I've dealt with in the past. Maybe some shit that I'm still dealing with - either way, it's a vulnerable spot to be in. So much about acceptance comes from understanding where the other person is coming from. If you don't get their issues, then you won't be able to fully accept them. And that is a barrier to making a friendship stronger. Again, this is a naturally occurring problem that is no one's fault, but yet it is such a sad, fragile part of finding friendship.
You have to risk being jealous. Your friends are dear to you, and yet sometimes you can't be entirely happy for them, even when you want to, because somehow you are jealous of where they're at in their lives. If you want to be someone's good friend, you need to muster the willpower to get over yourself and truly feel happy for them, even if you are jealous. The effort is what counts. And sometimes, you need to be willing to let your problems sit and wait if they are dealing with something worse. This shit isn't easy. But it is necessary.
I don't want to lecture at anyone on how to be a good friend. I feel like there are so many different ways to be a good friend. But I will encourage you to keep the friends you have. Stay in touch with them. Because you never know when you're going to want to call them up on a lonely weekend when you are in a new, strange place, trying to figure shit out.
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Stereotypes: Knowing where to stop laughing
After watching the movie The Other Woman, I realized something. We need to change the way characters are depicted in comedies. Not just rom coms - but all movies - although rom coms and comedies do have a bad track record for stock characters and stereotypes. Stereotypes are, to some degree, harmless, but we need to question what they are making fun of - and why these stereotypes are funny to us.
Let's start with the "dumb blonde." It's 2014, and we all "know" that the "dumb blonde" is just a stupid stereotype. But do we? I have the feeling that maybe, in a way, our society "creates" dumb blondes. Blonde girls who are depicted so routinely as clueless, cute, happy-go-lucky, carefree and chic no doubt have an influence on blonde girls watching these movies. Some may react with outrage, some with lesser degrees of frustration, but the worst is for those blonde girls who are actually LAUGHING at a stock character that is representing THEM, based on nothing more than hair colour. In The Other Woman, the character of Amber is the stereotypical "dumb blonde" who can do nothing but flaunt her double Ds, get distracted easily, and look cute. And I say: What. The. Hell. You would think they'd make her character more genuine. More real.
Next up, skinny pale men who are computer nerds and are socially awkward. Let's call this one "the geek." We're always told that stereotypes are based on something true. OK, so let's say that there is a tendency for "the geek" to be male, socially awkward, and skinny and pale. Let's say they have a tendency to love computer tech, role-playing games, and video games. And as a society, we make fun of their identity. Their love for computers, or role playing games, or whatever the hell it is they are into. Does it matter? Should we have the power to make them feel ridiculous based on what they like? Are their hobbies somehow stupid and ridiculous to us? Why?
Or how about the foreigner with the accent who plays one of two roles: shallow love interest OR clueless, ridiculous tourist. Let's call this one "the foreigner." You can tell who "the foreigner" is either by physical appearance or accent or behaviour. And usually, "the foreigner" is supposed to be laughed at. In Agent Cody Banks, the Mandarin-accented driver's ed teacher does nothing but yell at Cody like a maniac, puke all over himself, and exit the scene. In James Bond, the number of love interests with exotic accents (and boobs) enter into Bond's life, only to be killed off tragically. Just a butterfly for Bond to have sex with. Or let's not forget the character of Gael from How I Met Your Mother. Foreigners need more respect than this in our movies and TV shows. How are we supposed to treat real people with the respect they deserve if all we've ever done is laughed at caricatures of them portrayed in our movies?
I think comedies and rom coms could do better than this. They could actually use funny material that is clever. That is REAL. That doesn't rely on the existence and use of stock characters that border on ridiculous.
Let's start with the "dumb blonde." It's 2014, and we all "know" that the "dumb blonde" is just a stupid stereotype. But do we? I have the feeling that maybe, in a way, our society "creates" dumb blondes. Blonde girls who are depicted so routinely as clueless, cute, happy-go-lucky, carefree and chic no doubt have an influence on blonde girls watching these movies. Some may react with outrage, some with lesser degrees of frustration, but the worst is for those blonde girls who are actually LAUGHING at a stock character that is representing THEM, based on nothing more than hair colour. In The Other Woman, the character of Amber is the stereotypical "dumb blonde" who can do nothing but flaunt her double Ds, get distracted easily, and look cute. And I say: What. The. Hell. You would think they'd make her character more genuine. More real.
Next up, skinny pale men who are computer nerds and are socially awkward. Let's call this one "the geek." We're always told that stereotypes are based on something true. OK, so let's say that there is a tendency for "the geek" to be male, socially awkward, and skinny and pale. Let's say they have a tendency to love computer tech, role-playing games, and video games. And as a society, we make fun of their identity. Their love for computers, or role playing games, or whatever the hell it is they are into. Does it matter? Should we have the power to make them feel ridiculous based on what they like? Are their hobbies somehow stupid and ridiculous to us? Why?
Or how about the foreigner with the accent who plays one of two roles: shallow love interest OR clueless, ridiculous tourist. Let's call this one "the foreigner." You can tell who "the foreigner" is either by physical appearance or accent or behaviour. And usually, "the foreigner" is supposed to be laughed at. In Agent Cody Banks, the Mandarin-accented driver's ed teacher does nothing but yell at Cody like a maniac, puke all over himself, and exit the scene. In James Bond, the number of love interests with exotic accents (and boobs) enter into Bond's life, only to be killed off tragically. Just a butterfly for Bond to have sex with. Or let's not forget the character of Gael from How I Met Your Mother. Foreigners need more respect than this in our movies and TV shows. How are we supposed to treat real people with the respect they deserve if all we've ever done is laughed at caricatures of them portrayed in our movies?
I think comedies and rom coms could do better than this. They could actually use funny material that is clever. That is REAL. That doesn't rely on the existence and use of stock characters that border on ridiculous.
Monday, May 5, 2014
Wearing whatever you want: don't advertise it if you're not selling it
Hello ladies all over the world. How many times have you heard the line "Wear whatever the fuck you want!" with reasonable feminist anger behind it? I get it, women have agency. And we should be able to wear what we want and not have to worry about "tempting" men or whatever other sexist side effects and comments that come from our choice of wardrobe.
But let's face it: clothing is a part of our identity. You wear what you feel will best suit you. And you are sending people messages with your clothing. Tight pants and a fedora? Hipster. Dreads and tie-dye? Hippy. Doc Martens and plaid skirt? Preppy. I hate to make generalizations, but people do this all the time. They just do. They look at you, and then they sum you up. So what kind of message do you think you are sending when you are wearing a low-cut tight dress to the bar? Do you think people will think you are just there to dance and have a great time with your friends? Partially, maybe. But remember that clothing is a performance, and that every time you go out, dressed in anything, you are performing an identity. That low-cut tight dress - did you buy it for you, or did you buy it to impress others? Maybe a combination of both, who knows? Because all that ends up mattering, regarding how you are treated, is what others think of your performance. It's a terrible and harsh reality. But there it is.
I believe in giving your body the respect it deserves. Everyone's notion of respecting their own body differs, depending on what your values are. Are you offended by men staring at your half-exposed boobs as you gyrate on the dance floor? My next question is: why are you offended? If getting looks from others was not part of the reason you wore what you did, and if accentuating your breasts was not something you intended to do, then I would suggest opting for a less revealing article of clothing. There are lots of flattering clothes out there that will accentuate your body, but send a different message. Personally, I would hate to have my body looked at as simply a piece of meat out on a dance floor. Some people will look at you that way regardless of what you wear. But speaking as a woman who is usually not interested in other women's boobs, I still find that I can't help but look at the exposed breasts of someone dressed in a low-cut top, even if just for a second. If your intention was to draw gazes to your chest, then great, you've accomplished your mission. But don't get offended if other people look. That's what you put them out there for, right?
All I'm trying to say is: Yes, you CAN wear whatever the fuck you want. But do so intelligently. Purposefully. And know exactly what kind of message you are sending out there when you put on your next party frock.
But let's face it: clothing is a part of our identity. You wear what you feel will best suit you. And you are sending people messages with your clothing. Tight pants and a fedora? Hipster. Dreads and tie-dye? Hippy. Doc Martens and plaid skirt? Preppy. I hate to make generalizations, but people do this all the time. They just do. They look at you, and then they sum you up. So what kind of message do you think you are sending when you are wearing a low-cut tight dress to the bar? Do you think people will think you are just there to dance and have a great time with your friends? Partially, maybe. But remember that clothing is a performance, and that every time you go out, dressed in anything, you are performing an identity. That low-cut tight dress - did you buy it for you, or did you buy it to impress others? Maybe a combination of both, who knows? Because all that ends up mattering, regarding how you are treated, is what others think of your performance. It's a terrible and harsh reality. But there it is.
I believe in giving your body the respect it deserves. Everyone's notion of respecting their own body differs, depending on what your values are. Are you offended by men staring at your half-exposed boobs as you gyrate on the dance floor? My next question is: why are you offended? If getting looks from others was not part of the reason you wore what you did, and if accentuating your breasts was not something you intended to do, then I would suggest opting for a less revealing article of clothing. There are lots of flattering clothes out there that will accentuate your body, but send a different message. Personally, I would hate to have my body looked at as simply a piece of meat out on a dance floor. Some people will look at you that way regardless of what you wear. But speaking as a woman who is usually not interested in other women's boobs, I still find that I can't help but look at the exposed breasts of someone dressed in a low-cut top, even if just for a second. If your intention was to draw gazes to your chest, then great, you've accomplished your mission. But don't get offended if other people look. That's what you put them out there for, right?
All I'm trying to say is: Yes, you CAN wear whatever the fuck you want. But do so intelligently. Purposefully. And know exactly what kind of message you are sending out there when you put on your next party frock.
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Muffins worth their weight in gold? The problem with urban-chic food
I was in an artsy kind of bakery in Victoria, BC, today to meet someone. I have been having a bit of a cold lately, so I walked up to the counter in a haze of cough medicine and sniffles. I wanted breakfast and a latte - something to fill me up for the next 3 to 4 hours. Then I looked at the prices of the muffins. CAD$3. Per muffin. Not huge muffins. Not muffins made of gold. Just your standard muffin. Three freaking dollars. So I paid the three dollars to have a banana hazelnut muffin that was good, but frankly, not worth $3. All this got me thinking of price inflation on things considered urban-chic. Good Lord.
I'm not against having artsy bakeries that sell vegan-friendly food that is oh-so-wholesome and good for you. But if you think that adding a few seeds to your bread, or that having something freshly-baked justifies a twice-the-price increase - then this is when it becomes problematic.
Think about it, though: bakeries are meant to sell freshly baked bread. And seeds are not that expensive. Neither is going whole-wheat. Gluten-free might need a slight price increase, but in my experience, people tend to triple the price for gluten-free products. So why are we surrounded by baked goods that cost five times what they should? Why are we paying for lattes that are triple the price of what they should be? And the answer, my friends, is the fad about what food or drinks are considered urban-chic.
Let me demonstrate:
Buying an apple from the grocery store costs you maybe $1, usually less. Now let's take that apple, slice it up, cover it in sugar and cinnamon (which are both very cheap) and bake it with some crumble on top (again, crumble is quite cheap, being a mixture of even parts of flour, butter, oats and sugar). Now, how much does this baked dessert cost you in a bakery? $6, at least. I know you need to factor in labour and energy gone into producing this baked treat, but the fact remains that it is way overpriced. Now, put that baked treat in a fancy window inside a rustic-looking bakery with wood furniture and a fancy glass water dispenser, and the dessert might actually cost closer to $8. The question is: how did we let this happen? How have people everywhere conspired to pay way too much for their creature comforts? I think it's because the price somehow indicates prestige to us. We see a hefty price for a baked good, and suddenly we think that that will be THE best baked good we've ever had. The most wholesome, healthy, and fresh baked good. The best-quality roasted espresso and the most expensive damned milk on the market. We aren't just buying ourselves something to eat, we are buying something urban-chic that will prove to others that we care about our bodies and that we are not afraid to spend in order to take care of it.
But all that fancy food will go through our system the same way everything else does. It all gets turned into poop. And yes, it might have been marginally better for your health. But at its most basic, you are still eating carbs. Whole-wheat carbs, gluten-free carbs, seven-grain carbs...still carbs.
So, the next time you go to buy your FAVOURITE muffin at your FAVOURITE bakery, think about what exactly you are buying: are you buying something that is worth what it costs, or are you buying prestige?
I'm not against having artsy bakeries that sell vegan-friendly food that is oh-so-wholesome and good for you. But if you think that adding a few seeds to your bread, or that having something freshly-baked justifies a twice-the-price increase - then this is when it becomes problematic.
Think about it, though: bakeries are meant to sell freshly baked bread. And seeds are not that expensive. Neither is going whole-wheat. Gluten-free might need a slight price increase, but in my experience, people tend to triple the price for gluten-free products. So why are we surrounded by baked goods that cost five times what they should? Why are we paying for lattes that are triple the price of what they should be? And the answer, my friends, is the fad about what food or drinks are considered urban-chic.
Let me demonstrate:
Buying an apple from the grocery store costs you maybe $1, usually less. Now let's take that apple, slice it up, cover it in sugar and cinnamon (which are both very cheap) and bake it with some crumble on top (again, crumble is quite cheap, being a mixture of even parts of flour, butter, oats and sugar). Now, how much does this baked dessert cost you in a bakery? $6, at least. I know you need to factor in labour and energy gone into producing this baked treat, but the fact remains that it is way overpriced. Now, put that baked treat in a fancy window inside a rustic-looking bakery with wood furniture and a fancy glass water dispenser, and the dessert might actually cost closer to $8. The question is: how did we let this happen? How have people everywhere conspired to pay way too much for their creature comforts? I think it's because the price somehow indicates prestige to us. We see a hefty price for a baked good, and suddenly we think that that will be THE best baked good we've ever had. The most wholesome, healthy, and fresh baked good. The best-quality roasted espresso and the most expensive damned milk on the market. We aren't just buying ourselves something to eat, we are buying something urban-chic that will prove to others that we care about our bodies and that we are not afraid to spend in order to take care of it.
But all that fancy food will go through our system the same way everything else does. It all gets turned into poop. And yes, it might have been marginally better for your health. But at its most basic, you are still eating carbs. Whole-wheat carbs, gluten-free carbs, seven-grain carbs...still carbs.
So, the next time you go to buy your FAVOURITE muffin at your FAVOURITE bakery, think about what exactly you are buying: are you buying something that is worth what it costs, or are you buying prestige?
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Copping out: The problem with Frozen's storyline
So I just read a couple of very opinionated film reviews re: Frozen. And while I don't entirely agree or disagree with the authors (as any critical reader is likely to do), I do have a bone to pick about Frozen myself.
First of all, while some of the songs and characters were great, it did come off as a tad cheesy. Maybe all Disney movies have a bit of cheesiness to them, I don't know. I guess watching Disney movies as an adult really changes the way I look them. No longer am I looking for fun and happily ever after - I look at the things the characters say, and the plot line. I guess it's also part of being an English literature enthusiast - nothing escapes scrutiny when it comes to plot and character development!
Secondly, I felt that the ending, with Hans turning out to be a bad guy so that Anna could be with Kristoff, was a complete cop-out. I almost admired the choice to have Anna presented with conflicting love interests - I mean, isn't it something we experience at least once in our lifetimes? But after it was revealed that Anna just HAD to neatly end up with one man, I saw Hans's transformation into the villain of the story as rather deus-ex-machina-esque. It's as if the writers suddenly realized: "Wait! What have we done! Crap, now we gotta get rid of one of them!" There was no intelligent choice made on Anna's part - or even the choice to wait a few years before she decides on who to end up with - before the movie decides that yep, she's gonna end up with Kristoff. Sorry, Hans. Maybe you'll get a chance to be a good guy the next time around. All I'm saying is, the choice to make him a villain was completely unnecessary.
Thirdly, when Anna comes after her insanely powerful but (well-intentioned?) sister Elsa, she gets chased away by a snow golem. A deadly snow golem who nearly KILLS Anna. Of course, this would never actually happen in a Disney movie, but we have to consider what Elsa's intentions are. Was she trying to kill her sister? Or just injure her for life? I guess we'll never know, because Anna miraculously survives with no physical harm whatsoever!
I know Disney is geared towards children. I know that. But I think that Disney needs to get ballsy with their choices, the way they used to. Characters like Mulan, who question whether their actions are inspired by selfishness or caring. Endings like The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which aren't 100% happy, but carry a strong message in that choice of ending. Moments like the death of Mufasa, that portray family connection much better than a silly true love's kiss. And songs like Beauty and the Beast's "There's Something There" that portray love as a gradual, getting-to-know-you thing that happens over time.
I loved Disney growing up. I still do. And I want to keep loving it. I just need a reason to do so.
First of all, while some of the songs and characters were great, it did come off as a tad cheesy. Maybe all Disney movies have a bit of cheesiness to them, I don't know. I guess watching Disney movies as an adult really changes the way I look them. No longer am I looking for fun and happily ever after - I look at the things the characters say, and the plot line. I guess it's also part of being an English literature enthusiast - nothing escapes scrutiny when it comes to plot and character development!
Secondly, I felt that the ending, with Hans turning out to be a bad guy so that Anna could be with Kristoff, was a complete cop-out. I almost admired the choice to have Anna presented with conflicting love interests - I mean, isn't it something we experience at least once in our lifetimes? But after it was revealed that Anna just HAD to neatly end up with one man, I saw Hans's transformation into the villain of the story as rather deus-ex-machina-esque. It's as if the writers suddenly realized: "Wait! What have we done! Crap, now we gotta get rid of one of them!" There was no intelligent choice made on Anna's part - or even the choice to wait a few years before she decides on who to end up with - before the movie decides that yep, she's gonna end up with Kristoff. Sorry, Hans. Maybe you'll get a chance to be a good guy the next time around. All I'm saying is, the choice to make him a villain was completely unnecessary.
Thirdly, when Anna comes after her insanely powerful but (well-intentioned?) sister Elsa, she gets chased away by a snow golem. A deadly snow golem who nearly KILLS Anna. Of course, this would never actually happen in a Disney movie, but we have to consider what Elsa's intentions are. Was she trying to kill her sister? Or just injure her for life? I guess we'll never know, because Anna miraculously survives with no physical harm whatsoever!
I know Disney is geared towards children. I know that. But I think that Disney needs to get ballsy with their choices, the way they used to. Characters like Mulan, who question whether their actions are inspired by selfishness or caring. Endings like The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which aren't 100% happy, but carry a strong message in that choice of ending. Moments like the death of Mufasa, that portray family connection much better than a silly true love's kiss. And songs like Beauty and the Beast's "There's Something There" that portray love as a gradual, getting-to-know-you thing that happens over time.
I loved Disney growing up. I still do. And I want to keep loving it. I just need a reason to do so.
Sunday, April 27, 2014
A letter to missionaries: Please respect my non-religious faith
Today I was approached by missionaries from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I don't mind people sharing their religious views...when I know them, and when the topic turns towards religion. I do, however, mind it when random people in the street approach me, asking me if I pray, if I believe in God, and tell me that God knows my name and cares for me. Why? I have several reasons. I think I will write this in letter-form, as it best captures my feelings.
Dear missionaries,
First of all, in a world that relies so heavily on technology, and in a world where information is so accessible, I already know what Mormonism is, and what they believe in - enough so that I don't need random strangers telling me about it. If I want to know more about your religion, I will look it up online, thank you very much. Give me your info card, tell me to have a good day, and please move on. I have spent a good 5 years when I was younger questioning my faith - and it's taken me a long time to feel like I can accept not believing in religion. I believe in God - but not religion. I don't need you to tell me what God does, and what God is. It's a personal question. I don't think it would be acceptable to go around asking people if they are currently sexually active - this, to me, is the same as asking them if they believe in God. In other words, it's none of your bloody business.
Secondly, I am uncomfortable telling you about my beliefs because I know that you are judging me, or trying to convert me. Your efforts are purely towards getting me to believe that you are right about God. You are not approaching me in order to have an open-minded discussion about God and religion - you are approaching me to tell me how right you are, and how I should change what I believe so that I, too, can be right. I have the feeling that if I start to criticize or question your religion, you would not like it. Why? Perhaps because we don't know each other. Perhaps because it would feel like a personal attack. So, then, think about it: if you would feel that way about me questioning your faith, how do you imagine I feel when you are questioning mine?
Thirdly, you ask me if I would be interested in joining a group of people who are my age to go to church, right after I tell you that I am not a church-goer, and that I am not religious. I feel insulted by your suggestion, because by telling me this, you are implying that I would be interested in the social aspect of religion more than I would in the inner faith part of it. It's as if you're telling me: "Oh, well, I guess if you don't go to church for your soul, then at least you can go to make some friends! That way you can still be saved!" It seems pretty clear to me that if I tell you that I am not a church-goer, and not religious, then you should back off and preach your suggestions to someone else.
Fourthly, after all this, you then ask me if I know anyone WHO MIGHT NEED HELP. Do you know what you have just asked me, indirectly? You have just asked me: "Do you have any non-believer friends who are clearly depressed because they are non-believers, and who need our God?" Yeah, because you assume that I hang out with a bunch of non-believers like me who CLEARLY NEED HELP. Again, although you might not mean to insult me, your implications ARE in fact very insulting. By using the word "help," you imply that we are lacking something, and that you have just the thing to make us better. So, my answer to that is: no, I don't know anyone who needs HELP. And even if I did, I'm not giving their name or contact info to a random stranger I met on the street who just thoroughly insulted me. Not a chance.
Lastly, please learn how to read body language. I was clearly not enjoying our chat, despite the polite smile on my face. I could not wait for you to finish and leave me alone. If you see someone feeling uncomfortable about the subject of discussion, you STOP TALKING. You do not, in fact, continue to make them squirm by pushing on with your agenda, because it accomplishes nothing. In fact, it might even make them like you less - which is exactly what happened. If you had stopped with your first three sentences: "Hi, how's it going? We're missionaries. Here's our website if you want to check it out," then I would have probably liked you much, much more. As a result of you pushing on past three or four personal questions, however, I have come to dislike you.
I understand the need for religion. I do. And I have great respect for those who can be religious and respectful of others who have different beliefs. I have some very good friends who are religious, and I love them. I love them not because they are religious, and I love them not in spite of it. In fact, my love for them is not connected whatsoever to their religiousness. We get along because they can understand where I come from when I tell them that I have my own beliefs, and that I am not likely to agree with them on their views of the world. I am accepting of their views of the world, and they are accepting of mine. So, please, if you are a missionary, learn how to be respectful of others who are not religious. We do not need your "help." And we don't need you to question us. Because I can guarantee you that most of us have already questioned ourselves. And for many of us, being non-religious is a choice that is just as difficult as being religious. It takes a lot of faith.
Dear missionaries,
First of all, in a world that relies so heavily on technology, and in a world where information is so accessible, I already know what Mormonism is, and what they believe in - enough so that I don't need random strangers telling me about it. If I want to know more about your religion, I will look it up online, thank you very much. Give me your info card, tell me to have a good day, and please move on. I have spent a good 5 years when I was younger questioning my faith - and it's taken me a long time to feel like I can accept not believing in religion. I believe in God - but not religion. I don't need you to tell me what God does, and what God is. It's a personal question. I don't think it would be acceptable to go around asking people if they are currently sexually active - this, to me, is the same as asking them if they believe in God. In other words, it's none of your bloody business.
Secondly, I am uncomfortable telling you about my beliefs because I know that you are judging me, or trying to convert me. Your efforts are purely towards getting me to believe that you are right about God. You are not approaching me in order to have an open-minded discussion about God and religion - you are approaching me to tell me how right you are, and how I should change what I believe so that I, too, can be right. I have the feeling that if I start to criticize or question your religion, you would not like it. Why? Perhaps because we don't know each other. Perhaps because it would feel like a personal attack. So, then, think about it: if you would feel that way about me questioning your faith, how do you imagine I feel when you are questioning mine?
Thirdly, you ask me if I would be interested in joining a group of people who are my age to go to church, right after I tell you that I am not a church-goer, and that I am not religious. I feel insulted by your suggestion, because by telling me this, you are implying that I would be interested in the social aspect of religion more than I would in the inner faith part of it. It's as if you're telling me: "Oh, well, I guess if you don't go to church for your soul, then at least you can go to make some friends! That way you can still be saved!" It seems pretty clear to me that if I tell you that I am not a church-goer, and not religious, then you should back off and preach your suggestions to someone else.
Fourthly, after all this, you then ask me if I know anyone WHO MIGHT NEED HELP. Do you know what you have just asked me, indirectly? You have just asked me: "Do you have any non-believer friends who are clearly depressed because they are non-believers, and who need our God?" Yeah, because you assume that I hang out with a bunch of non-believers like me who CLEARLY NEED HELP. Again, although you might not mean to insult me, your implications ARE in fact very insulting. By using the word "help," you imply that we are lacking something, and that you have just the thing to make us better. So, my answer to that is: no, I don't know anyone who needs HELP. And even if I did, I'm not giving their name or contact info to a random stranger I met on the street who just thoroughly insulted me. Not a chance.
Lastly, please learn how to read body language. I was clearly not enjoying our chat, despite the polite smile on my face. I could not wait for you to finish and leave me alone. If you see someone feeling uncomfortable about the subject of discussion, you STOP TALKING. You do not, in fact, continue to make them squirm by pushing on with your agenda, because it accomplishes nothing. In fact, it might even make them like you less - which is exactly what happened. If you had stopped with your first three sentences: "Hi, how's it going? We're missionaries. Here's our website if you want to check it out," then I would have probably liked you much, much more. As a result of you pushing on past three or four personal questions, however, I have come to dislike you.
I understand the need for religion. I do. And I have great respect for those who can be religious and respectful of others who have different beliefs. I have some very good friends who are religious, and I love them. I love them not because they are religious, and I love them not in spite of it. In fact, my love for them is not connected whatsoever to their religiousness. We get along because they can understand where I come from when I tell them that I have my own beliefs, and that I am not likely to agree with them on their views of the world. I am accepting of their views of the world, and they are accepting of mine. So, please, if you are a missionary, learn how to be respectful of others who are not religious. We do not need your "help." And we don't need you to question us. Because I can guarantee you that most of us have already questioned ourselves. And for many of us, being non-religious is a choice that is just as difficult as being religious. It takes a lot of faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)