Wednesday, March 20, 2013

True Love is. . .

True love is always a changing definition. It changes by what one of the two people in love values. Here is my latest definition of true love:

True love is waiting in line at a Time Warner Cable satellite office to get a new remote control because the remote in the bedroom where your wife watches TV doesn't control the volume so your wife has to get out of bed several times in the night and adjust the volume accordingly.

Guess who demonstrated this? My true love. Thanks, Chef.

By the way, when did cable TV offices become the new Bank or DMV when it comes to shitty lines and notorious service?

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Can We Stop Being Girly and Just Be Women?

I read an interesting article last week on the rise of "girly" media, specifically "Hello Giggles." And it got me thinking, because this fact I know to be true: I've never been really girly.

It's not something I would consider a struggle, but something I've always noticed. My husband phrased it as I'm more of a "guy's girl." But even that makes me a cringe a little, because nowadays when I picture a "guy's girl," I picture a girl wearing pink-colored NFL gear while watching a game with her man because he's happy when his team wins. I know this is a stereotype, but I've only met a few girls who truly love sports like I do. And most of them are friends.

But the girly thing has become more blatant and in your face over the last couple of years. I blame the rise of Zooey Deschanel and Pinterest for bringing this to the forefront. Suddenly it's hip to be cute and doe-eyed and ultra-feminine. Professing love of a glittery vampire or a RomCom or nail art is what makes a woman into a girl. But do we really need to be girls again? Really?

I'm all for letting people be themselves, but are we doing ourselves justice as women if we are more overt of our differences just  to be seen as "cute"? I always felt this growing up. I may do my hair and make-up on a daily basis and I love shoes, but I don't go around telling people about my love of shoes just for shits and giggles. I do it on my blog or when someone asks--and by someone, I mean my friends or other women. The only man that I subject my love of shoes to is Chef and that's because he needed to know when he was marrying into.

I feel like as women we are taking feminism in the wrong direction. Instead of celebrating strong women, we hate them. This isn't all that new. But now we must all be cute and girly (and seemingly weak) to be women? Why can't women see ourselves outside of what is reflected back to us? I spent way too much of my youth feeling like loving sports and being smart and sarcastic wasn't ever going to lead me anywhere or at least not lead me anywhere with a man. I feel like this "girly" throwback now means that being smart, sarcastic and loving sports is again not a part of today's womanhood.

When is being strong and smart going to be celebrated and embraced? When will women be allowed to finally outgrow the pink sparkly unicorn way of our childhood? Being a woman is just as fun as being a girl. Even more so.

Monday, March 11, 2013

Sometimes it pays to be a geek....

Yesterday I watched my beloved Hoosiers, but the experience was a little bit different than normal. Not because the Hoosiers won their first outright Big 10 championship in 20 years (although that was awesome), but because I got a lesson on perseverance.

I was watching the game behind real time on my DVR, which is not something I love doing, but considering my west coast time zone I am forced to do a lot. In this case, I was doing it to watch the SNL with Justin Timberlake with Chef. Anyway, as I was watching the middle of the first half of the game, I knew it was starting the second half. Considering the Hoosiers were down by 11, I wanted a sneak peek as to whether I was going to be happy or upset at the turn of events.

They started to make it close and by the start of the second half, I was addicted to sneaking peeks at the score on my Yahoo! sports app. I should've known better. I was reloading the score furiously and when I still had about 10 minutes of game time to watch, I saw the final that Yahoo! sports app had posted:

Michigan 70, Indiana 66. "End of 2nd"

I was crushed. But I knew that I wanted to watch the end anyway and see what happened. So I kept watching the game and then with about 3 minutes left, the Hoosiers hit the 66 point mark. I figured "Well, if they can't score in the last 3 minutes of a game, no wonder they lost."

Then with about a minute left, Michigan hit a free throw (their made one of the game) and the score was 71-66. Hmm, I thought. That's weird.  Then the Hoosiers scored: 71-68. Now I was convinced that the Hoosiers were still going to lose, but there was a slight hope that the Internet was wrong. I mean, when was the last time that the Internet has been wrong?

Imagine my excitement when this happened:

I'm glad that I watched until the end.

Tuesday, March 05, 2013

Poor Man's Steve Buscemi

John Hawkes
This is a brief synopsis of a conversation Chef and I had this weekend. You are joining the conversation already in progress. . .

Me: She (Jennifer Lawrence) had already been nominated for an Oscar like two years ago.

Chef: For what?

Me: Some movie called Winter's Bone.

Chef: Never heard of it.

Me: It wasn't super popular. She was in it and that John Hawkes guy.

Chef: Who?

Me: John Hawkes. He's kind of the poor man's Steve Buscemi.

Chef: Steve Buscemi is the poor man's Steve Buscemi.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...