I have a friend who has a couple of blogs on Tumblr, so I decided to check it out. In order to follow her I had to create an account, so I thought I might as well have a blog there as well. But it doesn't feel as customizable as this one and I have no idea how to allow (or even post) comments. Plus I'm pretty sure that I created a blank blog that I now can't seem to get rid of.
It does feel nice, though, to try something new. And I really wanted to get back to more fun posts. So, hopefully this (experience/warm weather/season, etc.) will inspire those.
:)
This is a flower in our back yard. :)
This is a personal blog from my perspective about my life and anything else I may feel like expressing an opinion about.
A Dedication of Sorts
To my most surprisingly loyal reader and her band of blindly following sycophants: Being afraid of the truth does not negate it. I realize that you’re afraid of me because I’m one of few who call you out on your lies and fill in the blanks in your version of the truth. I have a right to tell my side. I have done nothing but defend myself from your vicious lies, and I will not be censored. Having said that, this blog is not about you. But if you piss me off, I have a right to vent about it here.
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Sunday, April 15, 2012
The Meat We Don't Eat
Toward
the end of 2010, we made the decision to stop eating most meat. I say most
because we still occasionally ate seafood, with sushi being a favorite treat.
So, we gave up beef, pork, poultry, and basically anything else that can walk.
I wasn’t sure if we’d ever become fully vegan, but having dropped dairy and
eggs along the way, we were closer rather than further from it. I’ve always
loved the taste of meat, especially beef, and never actually thought I’d be
able to give it up.
I
did try, once, in my early twenties and was able to do it for about two years.
Although I’ve always loved animals, it wasn’t an animal-rights choice then, or
even a health one, really. I worked with a girl at the time who to me was the
epitome of glowing health, who happened to be vegetarian. So, the following New
Year’s Day, that was my resolution – to follow in the footsteps of this tall,
thin, blond, relaxed, happy girl. I think she was a couple of years younger
than I was, so at that time it probably wouldn’t have mattered if she ate toxic
waste for lunch, she would still most likely be the beautiful, energetic
teenager I knew.
The
problem with me giving up meat at that time was that I’ve never been interested
in the preparation of food. I liked eating, just not having anything to do with
how it got to the point of being ready for consumption. And back then there
weren’t very many vegetarian options as easily available in stores and
restaurants as there are now. So, I subsisted mainly on salads. That was okay
for a while, but for a hard core meat eater—whose favorite dish was steak
tartare—a life of simple dinner salads (really, they were all mostly just
lettuce and tomatoes) was just not going to cut it. So, eventually, I went back
to meat. And I found it tastier than ever and thought I would never be able to
overcome the addiction after my failed attempt. But I also didn’t have any real
reasons for trying it, or any real motivation for learning to eat a different
way. It had to come about naturally, slowly.
As
I said, I’ve always loved animals. All animals. Of course dogs and cats were a
given, but really any living being had the potential to end up with a rich
family life and a great back story. Maybe it’s the influence of Disney movies.
Maybe my mom’s harsh bedtime stories, designed to draw out sympathy toward all
things, living or not (which is really very similar to Disney’s
characterizations) were the root of it all. It was most likely a combination of
the two, with my own sappy personality thrown in. (To this day, animated movies
are the most likely to make me cry.)
W,
on the other hand, had been a vegetarian for about 8 years before giving it up
shortly before we started dating. We enjoyed many wonderfully meat-filled meals
together for quite a while. The fact that he likes to cook and is so good at it
made it even more enjoyable. His choice to stop eating meat all those years ago
had been health-based; his body just didn’t like the heaviness of meat. But
eventually he started eating it again and found that he enjoyed food more than
he had in the past. But then we started changing.
W,
who’s always researching topics of interest through as many sources as
possible, started reading things on Buddhism, which led to many other similar
subjects. I then found a radio station that provided a different perspective on
the news than the usual sources, and we both started looking at/into things a
little differently. Most of these things dealt with compassion and a less
selfish way of looking at life.
For
a while, I struggled with reconciling what now seem like two very opposing
ideas of loving animals and not wanting to cause them harm and loving the way a
steak tastes when it’s medium rare. I wasn’t sure I could give it up, but at
the same time, it made me feel guilty.
Eventually,
I decided that we had to stop. It was just going to be “meat that walks” at
first. But the more information we looked at, the more sense it made to go all
the way and exclude as many animal products as we could from our diet.
I’ve
been asked why and have tried to explain it as best as I can. I think it really
boils down to not wanting to be a part of the violence, and believing that our
lives aren’t more important than others’ lives. We do not need to eat animals
in order to survive, or even in order to be healthy. As a matter of fact,
there’s plenty of evidence to show that not eating them is healthier for us
(and obviously them, too).
When
we saw Forks Over Knives, I was so
excited to show it to the people I care about, to share the information with
them and maybe give them a reason to try it my way. I have a very supportive
family, so they watched, complimented it, had a vegan dinner with me…and then
went back to eating the way the always have. And even though I knew that I
wouldn’t be able to just change someone else’s life with the click of a button
on the DVD player, I guess I was a little disappointed that it didn’t actually
have a more lasting impact. Obviously, I care about my family and I want them
to be healthy and live a long time (in as comfortable a way as they can). But I
know that I can’t make these decisions for anyone else. I know how hard it was
for me to come to this on my own – and I know that it had to be on my own, in
my own time.
I’ve
decided that I’m not going to try to change anyone’s mind or even get into a
discussion about it. This is my
choice because I wholeheartedly believe it’s the right one. I feel that I’ve
matured into it. I wish people would stop eating meat and there was no need for
gigantic industries that torture animals for no reason. I wish life in general were
more respected by more people. I wish compassion were something taught as a
part of raising children (something we’re trying to do). And I wish it wasn’t
seen as something out of the ordinary to have this perspective.
I’m
sure this will pop up on here again from time to time when I’m venting about
stuff, but I wanted to put it out there as a starting point for those of you
who didn’t know.
I'm Baaack
At the beginning of last year, wanting to figure out a way
to work together, W asked ex if she would agree to counseling with him. She
agreed. He found a place close by with a very accessible sliding scale. And
they went. Their appointments were on kid days for us, so I left work early to
be home in time to watch the kids before he had to go. They lasted three
sessions.
During those sessions it became very clear that she had not moved
past their separation at all, and was just as bitter and angry as if it had just
happened. She admitted that she didn’t trust his motives for suggesting
counseling, but was willing to go “as long as he was paying for it.” While W
went into this to try to create a more cooperative environment for the
children, she used it as an opportunity to unleash all the anger she’s been
holding onto. At the end of the third session it was very clear to W that ex
wasn’t going to make any effort to work toward a more cooperative relationship,
and he stopped scheduling appointments.
I share this because during their first session ex brought
up that I “write about her,” and the counselor told W to ask me to stop. Not
just to stop mentioning her in my blog (which by then I hadn’t done in a year
and a half), but to take it down completely. When he got to that part in
telling me about his experience that night, we had a fight about how much was
too much to ask of me, and how to me it felt like unnecessary censoring.
From the beginning of my relationship with W, ex has always
told lies about us to anyone who would listen (or, more likely, couldn’t get
away). We were even approached by the principal of the kids’ school once,
complaining that ex would corner people at any social function and endlessly
complain to them with stories that made them uncomfortable. At one point we
found out that she was making secret pacts with their teachers about them not
communicating with me; she convinced all the soccer team moms that I needed to
be ignored; in general, she has always been very actively turning people to
“her side.” I don’t know why the people that we’re all going to come in contact
with can’t be equally kept out of what she obviously sees as some sort of a
war, but I guess she feels that would make her vulnerable to the obvious
attacks we would launch against her. Please, whoever might be reading this,
please pause here and realize that the last part of the previous sentence was
drowning in sarcasm.
I know it may seem ironic that I’m now doing the very thing
I was asked not to do, but I’m seriously very tired of being on the losing end
of this double standard. She gets to say and do whatever she wants and faces no
negative consequences of doing so, while I’m asked to be “the bigger person”
and not even attempt to defend myself.
As far back as I can remember, writing has been a way for me
to deal with things. If I can’t talk it out with the person I have an issue
with, then I like to write it out (preferably with a more comedic touch than
this piece). And yes, she’s given me plenty to write about. But my blogs have
never been about her – gossiping, bad-mouthing, or whatever else she’s afraid
of. They’ve been about me sharing my frustrating experiences with whoever happens
to stumble upon them and is willing to read them. It’s not even unusual. Anyone
with access to the internet can have their own little space on it. Many do.
Most are personal accounts written by people who like the writing equivalent of
hearing themselves speak. I’m
including myself at the head of this list.
I feel that I have the right to write about my own life, and
anything that happens to be a part of it. If something’s bothering me, I want
to be able to vent about it. To keep from driving my husband crazy with my
venting, I want to be able to write about and share it with the world (or in my
case, the few people who know about my blog). It’s a way for me to get out my
frustrations; to spend some time writing; to possibly receive support in the
form of feedback; to explain my side of the story. And yes, secretly I hoped
that the people who only get to hear her version of events would also get to
read my side and maybe realize that there are two sides to every story. It’s
not even that far-fetched, since she was obviously reading my blog herself.
At the time, a little over a year ago, I changed the
settings on my blog to private. I felt censored, and strongly talked into it. My
husband made a strong case: It was supposed to be for a good cause. It was
supposed to be a sign of good faith and a step toward promoting a better
relationship between our homes. (At the next meeting, she acknowledged that the
blog was marked private, and therefore inaccessible to the general public.) The
problem is that there was no fair exchange made, nothing offered in return. She
didn’t even complete the exercise she was assigned by the counselor. And it was
obvious she wasn’t looking for peace.
Among the things I don’t understand is why someone would
prefer to think that there are things being said about them but not want to
know what. I’d much rather know what is being said than have it all be done in
secret. Why not be open about what you have to say? The only way I embellish my
accounts is by adding comedic commentary to factual events. It actually makes
me think that she’s just afraid of having the other side of the story out
there. If she’s not the sole storyteller then she can’t control what’s being
heard, and her constant stance of being the poor victim is challenged.
I’ve been through many stages of feelings toward ex, and I
tried many different approaches. I’ve even acknowledged and apologized for my
part in our negative interactions. Mainly, I’ve just wanted to have a
cooperative relationship between both homes with decent communication. This
obviously won’t happen. (I need to mention here that W and I have been together
for 7 years at this point.)
At some point, ex stopped being a person for me. I no longer
acknowledge her, and would definitely never help her with anything again. Her
phone number is blocked on my phone.
But my blog is mine. I am reclaiming it. I’ve gone back (into
previous posts) and changed names of my family to initials, and hid the
comments that I did receive. I even renamed it. If she decides to find it and
read it, I wish she would see the truth in it instead of deciding that I’m just
doing something to hurt her. I want my side known, if the situation calls for
it.
And if she wants me to shut up, then I have this wonderful
quote for her from a Michael Douglas movie: “I’ll make you a deal. You stop telling lies about me and
I’ll stop telling the truth about you.”
If she wants to apologize and start over, I’m here. Until
then, I am not going to be bullied by someone who’s afraid of the truth getting
out.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Pray Tell
I just got one of those beloved forwarded e-mails that overrun our mailboxes. This one was talking about how bad things happen because we’ve taken God out of so many of our public institutions. Apparently, if we don’t have prayer in schools, kids turn into criminals and the only way to stop that is to find God again. Gee, I didn’t realize he was lost. Or that, as a result, we were too.
I find it interesting that God is such a crutch that not only does everything good happen because of him, but everything bad happens because he wasn’t there. (This is confusing in itself because I’ve always been told that, much like Santa Claus watching our behavior, he is always there.) Can’t raise your children to be decent human beings? That must be because they’ve removed prayer from schools – not because you’re a failure as a parent. Your kid steals, does drugs and beats up little old ladies? Why, it can’t possibly be because you’ve spent most of his life ignoring him while enjoying your weekly girls’ night out, trying to impress the new guy you’re seeing, or spending hours playing WoW. The most obvious reason is so simple – we as a society have strayed from God. No Bible reading or prayer in schools? Prepare for more terrorist attacks, school shootings, and kicking of puppies.
Does anyone honestly believe that a child being raised by neglectful or borderline psychotic parents would grow into Atticus Finch if he was forced to read the Bible at school?
How about a little accountability? If you’re religious and it makes you feel good and happy, and you feel that it helps keep you from randomly killing people, that’s great. Keep praying. But if you’re semi-disturbed and you feel that you wouldn’t have clubbed that baby seal if only someone had made you recite some prayers while you were in school, possibly you may need help from someone with a degree in medicine, not theology. Either way, do whatever it takes for you to feel fulfilled, calm, and happy. But don’t assume that everyone is the same as you and that they need the same type of motivation. I believe most people would not kill anyone, whether or not they’ve read the Bible. Blaming the bad in the world—whether caused by people or nature—on the proposal that one religion ruling a country is a terrible idea is seriously missing the target by – um, like several Middle Eastern countries at once.
I find it difficult to understand why the solutions proposed by these very opinionated people aren’t seen as something tangible. It’s not let’s make sure there aren’t any unwanted babies brought into the world; let’s figure out the best way to provide the most support to overwhelmed parents; what can we actually do about the levels of poverty and the disturbingly imbalanced distribution of wealth? In other words, what can actually be done by the people who live on this planet to make things more tolerable for everyone? No, let’s not actually take any responsibility for anything. Let’s not try to change anything. Let’s pray.
I find it interesting that God is such a crutch that not only does everything good happen because of him, but everything bad happens because he wasn’t there. (This is confusing in itself because I’ve always been told that, much like Santa Claus watching our behavior, he is always there.) Can’t raise your children to be decent human beings? That must be because they’ve removed prayer from schools – not because you’re a failure as a parent. Your kid steals, does drugs and beats up little old ladies? Why, it can’t possibly be because you’ve spent most of his life ignoring him while enjoying your weekly girls’ night out, trying to impress the new guy you’re seeing, or spending hours playing WoW. The most obvious reason is so simple – we as a society have strayed from God. No Bible reading or prayer in schools? Prepare for more terrorist attacks, school shootings, and kicking of puppies.
Does anyone honestly believe that a child being raised by neglectful or borderline psychotic parents would grow into Atticus Finch if he was forced to read the Bible at school?
How about a little accountability? If you’re religious and it makes you feel good and happy, and you feel that it helps keep you from randomly killing people, that’s great. Keep praying. But if you’re semi-disturbed and you feel that you wouldn’t have clubbed that baby seal if only someone had made you recite some prayers while you were in school, possibly you may need help from someone with a degree in medicine, not theology. Either way, do whatever it takes for you to feel fulfilled, calm, and happy. But don’t assume that everyone is the same as you and that they need the same type of motivation. I believe most people would not kill anyone, whether or not they’ve read the Bible. Blaming the bad in the world—whether caused by people or nature—on the proposal that one religion ruling a country is a terrible idea is seriously missing the target by – um, like several Middle Eastern countries at once.
I find it difficult to understand why the solutions proposed by these very opinionated people aren’t seen as something tangible. It’s not let’s make sure there aren’t any unwanted babies brought into the world; let’s figure out the best way to provide the most support to overwhelmed parents; what can we actually do about the levels of poverty and the disturbingly imbalanced distribution of wealth? In other words, what can actually be done by the people who live on this planet to make things more tolerable for everyone? No, let’s not actually take any responsibility for anything. Let’s not try to change anything. Let’s pray.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Oh, To Always Be Right
I initially started thinking about this in terms of political affiliation. There seems to be this belief held by a particular side that the way to win an argument is by either talking over those who disagree with your view or simply insulting them. Facts be damned. Rational arguments are of no use in such cases. It’s all a matter of that squeaky wheel getting all the oil in the world.
It seems that some groups are trying to monopolize this arguing-without-an argument strategy. They probably have handbooks. Maybe they have secret meetings where the secret handbooks are given out and they all stand around practicing yelling over each other. Then they all take turns coming up with insults that they throw out before quickly turning to walk away to have theirs be the last word. This zinger is supposed to take place of any actual, reasonable argument they might have (but usually don’t, hence the need for the zinger). I don’t think the secret meetings touch on any content, since that’s not the arguing strategy taught there. It’s all about saying as little as possible about the actual topic, throwing in some supposedly patriotic statement while questioning the opponent’s patriotism, and then of course ending with a personal attack on their character, intelligence, etc.
But the more I started thinking about putting this down on paper (after a mini confrontation with someone who thought the way to disagree with my opinion was to just call me nuts), the more I realized how unfair it would be to associate this with a group based solely on politics. Honestly, I’ve been frustrated enough with someone in the past to question their sanity (of course, her sanity is often in question). And I’m sure many of us have an embarrassing memory of having resorted to angry name-calling at some point. So, while it seems that to be unwilling to listen to reason, to use irrational gibberish to try to win an argument, or when presented with irrefutable facts, to revert to tactics of 3-year-olds is the domain of a particular political set, it’s not as simple as that. For though they are the true leaders of this “Nah-nah-I-can’t-hear-you” defense, they are not the only users.
It’s come to my attention that the people who have the weakest arguments are more inclined to do more of the yelling. I guess their theory is if you have nothing to say, just make more noise than your opponent. Definitely don’t stop long enough to listen (or you may be confused by their use of reason). And never back down. Can you imagine the horror of actually having to admit to your opponent that maybe you’ve rethought your previous position and have come to the conclusion that you were—gasp—wrong? Some groups are never wrong. It’s against their religion or political beliefs – or both. Just like some individuals can never be wrong. I don’t know what would happen to them if they were to admit that maybe the possibility of it exists – spontaneously combust, maybe? Who would want to take that chance?
It seems that some groups are trying to monopolize this arguing-without-an argument strategy. They probably have handbooks. Maybe they have secret meetings where the secret handbooks are given out and they all stand around practicing yelling over each other. Then they all take turns coming up with insults that they throw out before quickly turning to walk away to have theirs be the last word. This zinger is supposed to take place of any actual, reasonable argument they might have (but usually don’t, hence the need for the zinger). I don’t think the secret meetings touch on any content, since that’s not the arguing strategy taught there. It’s all about saying as little as possible about the actual topic, throwing in some supposedly patriotic statement while questioning the opponent’s patriotism, and then of course ending with a personal attack on their character, intelligence, etc.
But the more I started thinking about putting this down on paper (after a mini confrontation with someone who thought the way to disagree with my opinion was to just call me nuts), the more I realized how unfair it would be to associate this with a group based solely on politics. Honestly, I’ve been frustrated enough with someone in the past to question their sanity (of course, her sanity is often in question). And I’m sure many of us have an embarrassing memory of having resorted to angry name-calling at some point. So, while it seems that to be unwilling to listen to reason, to use irrational gibberish to try to win an argument, or when presented with irrefutable facts, to revert to tactics of 3-year-olds is the domain of a particular political set, it’s not as simple as that. For though they are the true leaders of this “Nah-nah-I-can’t-hear-you” defense, they are not the only users.
It’s come to my attention that the people who have the weakest arguments are more inclined to do more of the yelling. I guess their theory is if you have nothing to say, just make more noise than your opponent. Definitely don’t stop long enough to listen (or you may be confused by their use of reason). And never back down. Can you imagine the horror of actually having to admit to your opponent that maybe you’ve rethought your previous position and have come to the conclusion that you were—gasp—wrong? Some groups are never wrong. It’s against their religion or political beliefs – or both. Just like some individuals can never be wrong. I don’t know what would happen to them if they were to admit that maybe the possibility of it exists – spontaneously combust, maybe? Who would want to take that chance?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
