Ahh, if only we had the life. You know- the money, the cars, the status; the things available to those who live luxuriously doing the job they love. I'm talking about being the ultimate symbol of man: an athlete. I was watching the Tyra Banks show and the topic was male athletes and relationships. Initially, I wasn't going to talk about this because the topic is so overrated, but I felt it was partially one sided, and needed to be addressed. I tuned in at half-time (pun intended), but I caught the most important segment: Oh yes, the groupies!
There were three ladies on stage, all whom professed their physical attraction to the male athlete, NBA players in particular. They had no qualms about making it priority to be in the right place at the right time in order to meet them. However, no one considered themselves a groupie. One, a self-proclaimed "tom-boy" said her attraction to athletes was a result of having four older brothers. Understandable; but what isn't so clear is her choice to wait outside the locker room after games. This is the first lesson in Groupie 101. The other two ladies disagreed whole-heartedly with Ms. Tom Boy and explained they never wait outside locker rooms, and that players approach them, not vice verse. Also understandable, but if this is truly the case, and she is not a groupie, why appear on the Tyra Banks show to begin with, especially when the topic is about NBA players and "groupies?" Perhaps these women went on the show for their own personal gain. I can't blame them, it definitely says alot about the entertainment business and upholds the Hollywood virtue no publicity is bad publicity. Before making the assumption that I believe these women are in fact groupies, I will discuss the NBA players' wives and what they had to say about these type of women.
NBA star Doug Christie and his wife, Jackie, have the traditional understanding between most players and their wives: they vow never to cheat and have established trust, blah blah blah. I am not discounting this is true, but I think it is typical in any marriage, and as much as we want to concede, being married to an athlete is different than being married to a non-athlete or celebrity, or socialite for that matter. Of course any man can cheat, but the only way women are going to be waiting at Jon Doe's hotel room is if he makes the arrangements. Just when I thought this was going to be the typical NBA wife talk, along comes Utah Jazz NBA player Andrei Lopatova and his wife Masha. They have an agreement in which Andrei gets a "free pass" once a year to sleep with another woman if the urge arises. Excuse me? I was shocked when I heard this statement. Not because I think it is a stupid idea for her marriage, if it works for her, then it works for her; who am I to judge. Reasoning behind the "agreement" is what bothered me. She made the statment, more than once, that it is in a man's nature to want to be with other women, and that she understands her husband has needs. In her defense, Andrei states he has never taken her up on the offer and has no desire too, and Masha doesn't have the agreement for herself because she is satisfied at home.
Now, for my point of view(finally! I hate giving synopses!). I actually side with all of the women on Tyra's show. There has to be a certain level of understanding and trust for professional athlete marriages to work. And for some, giving a "free pass" may be the ultimate symbol of trust. In this case the woman is confident enough in her husband that she can make this type of agreement and her husband never cheat; whereas with many similar marriages, it is absolutely out of the question to agree on those terms, he cheats anyway, then lies about it and ultimately makes an ass out of himself (i.e. Kobe Bryant). What works for one marriage may not work for another, but Masha's statement regarding a man's nature to want other women must be addressed. As I have always said in the past, women and men are wired differently in terms of sex and love, but that does not mean it is natural for men to cheat. All men cheat: Yes. Is it in their nature? No. The ideal of what it means to be a man is not an innate ability given at birth, it is a social condition that has taken residency, particularly in American culture. For a woman to believe men are genetically designed to have sex outside of a monogamous relationship is a lifetime free pass, not just once a year. More importantly, this conclusion does not encourage female independence in intimate relationships. It is not OK for your boyfriend or husband to cheat. It is not OK for your boyfriend or husband to cheat. IT IS NOT OK FOR YOUR BOYFRIEND OR HUSBAND TO CHEAT.
At the same time, I think it is a supression of common sense to think any one couple in the NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, etc is immune from adultery because they have trust. I know it is a major part of any relationship, dishonesty is my own personal enemy #1. However, women in these type of relationships must be realistic of the lifestyle they enter when involved with a professional athlete; there are women who know you are a wife, and still want your husband. This brings me to my next point, Why was this show only about groupies and not the men who actually have sex with them. Athletes know better than any "groupie" that there is a wife and children at home. Why does the stigma fall on the women as if athletes are drugged, seduced, made to buy lavish gifts, or have a secret rendevous? Do they not think of their family, or their career and reputation (i.e. Kobe Bryant)? Everyone is an adult in this type of situation. A woman can be standing outside the locker room naked, but the man that respects and loves you as the woman in his life will leave her standing as if she is the ugliest woman on earth. Of course, he will look, stare, gawk, and probably talk about it with the boys, but he will be loyal. No amount of money or status is worth any woman defining her relationship by the material things she receives, not even a $4 million dollar pink diamond ring. No man is ever sorry for cheating, only sorry that he gets caught. To say it was a mistake demoralizes the woman he slept with because he wasn't sorry when he slept with her. And for those women who call "groupies" skanks, tramps, or the like, I pose a question: what does that make the athlete who knowingly sleeps with her? Do not be ignorant in the form of denial, then hide it in the form of acceptance and forgiveness: the result will be you apologizing more to yourself than the man who cheated on you.
In closing, I want to comment on why I do not totally disagree with the women labeled as "groupies." To paraphrase, just because a woman did not play in the sandbox, or go to high school/college with a professional athlete before she becomes involved with him, does not make her a groupie. Standing outside the locker room is a stretch, but then again, who really is the groupie if the athlete knows exactly where to find her? I understand there are women who want athletes exclusively for the things mentioned earlier in this piece, but if athletes are more proactive by not participating in this type of behavior, groupies will become less of a concern everywhere. That statement is more idealogical than rationale, so the rest is really up to the the athletes and those who love to love them.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Friday, October 27, 2006
Could you be my...Won't you be my...Won't you be my neighbor?
Ahhh yes, neighbors. Aren't they great? Not always. I recently moved to a different state with new surroundings, and it all takes some getting used to. However, I truly believe I have the neighbor from hell-but not for long...
I am originally from North Carolina, and for some reason, people seem to think if you are from the South, you grew up in a "big 'ole house on a farm". Sorry audience, I actually grew up on a street! With city lights! With cars! On a paved road! I even lived in an apartment!!! I know, I know, please hold your excitement; mainstream cities in the South do exist. Who woulda thunk it? Well, my next door neighbor doesn't seem to think so.
Prior to moving in, my roomate and I were informed by the previous tenant, that the neighbor obviously has sensitive ears because he can hear the TV in the living room, apparently his bedroom is located next to it. So, we took this into consideration, and the first night we moved in while watching TV, knock, knock, knock on our wall. Hmm, ok, maybe it is too loud, so we turned it down. Knock, knock, knock. Wellll, ok, maybe we should move the TV on another wall, the walls are probably thin. You see how southern hospitality can actually work in everyone's favor? Oh no, not for Mr. Rogers evil twin next door.
About a week goes by, Knock, Knock, Knock on our wall. At this point my roomate decides to buy a TV and just watch it in his bedroom. I did not see a point in having a 32 inch TV with mountains of DVDs sitting in the living room turned off 24 hours a day, so I figured, just one person watching TV shouldn't be a bother, especially if I am concious of the sound level, right? I did say this was Mr. Roger's evil twin, right?
So, I am watching TV around 11:30 pm, that is what normal people do when they are at home I think; please someone leave a comment, if I am living in another world. I have the TV so low that our 55 gallon fish tank filters are louder than the TV. Knock, Knock, Knock. I laugh at this point because this man has to be kidding me. He does it again. Ok, southern hospitality obviously only gets you but so far where I am, so I knock back, while almost breaking my remote in the process, yelling I live here to sir! (see, that damn southern hospitality, sir, I should have said Jackass!).
Within 2 minutes, I hear a knock on my door. This man has lost his mind. My roomate and I go downstairs, and this man, who actually could be Mr. Roger's twin if he had a red cardigan, attempts to sound sincere when he says he and his daughter have been living there six years and are just trying to go to bed, and all he hears is this loud thump from music-I was watching a DVD, not a music channel. We go back and forth, and finally my roomate and I tell this wack-o, Listen, you do not pay for us to live here, we are not children, you have been living here for six years, so obviously you know the walls are thin- maybe you should move your bed because we have been MORE than considerate, the tenant prior to us had the same problem with you and we are not going to deal with it, don't knock on our wall again, period. He commences to say, You people obviously want to... What did he say? You people?? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Of course he stumbles on his words, and at this point our conversation is over. We tell him again to not knock on our wall, or there will be a major problem coming his way. While still trying to find the right words to say, he saw a door slam in his face. Wow, that felt great!
Well, needless to say, it's only been a week, but we have not heard any knocking on our walls :-) We informed our landlord of this incident, who happens to be the previous tenant, and he let us know he agrees 100% and the next time this idiot knocks or comes over to call him and he will take care of it, Man I love Jersey!
I am originally from North Carolina, and for some reason, people seem to think if you are from the South, you grew up in a "big 'ole house on a farm". Sorry audience, I actually grew up on a street! With city lights! With cars! On a paved road! I even lived in an apartment!!! I know, I know, please hold your excitement; mainstream cities in the South do exist. Who woulda thunk it? Well, my next door neighbor doesn't seem to think so.
Prior to moving in, my roomate and I were informed by the previous tenant, that the neighbor obviously has sensitive ears because he can hear the TV in the living room, apparently his bedroom is located next to it. So, we took this into consideration, and the first night we moved in while watching TV, knock, knock, knock on our wall. Hmm, ok, maybe it is too loud, so we turned it down. Knock, knock, knock. Wellll, ok, maybe we should move the TV on another wall, the walls are probably thin. You see how southern hospitality can actually work in everyone's favor? Oh no, not for Mr. Rogers evil twin next door.
About a week goes by, Knock, Knock, Knock on our wall. At this point my roomate decides to buy a TV and just watch it in his bedroom. I did not see a point in having a 32 inch TV with mountains of DVDs sitting in the living room turned off 24 hours a day, so I figured, just one person watching TV shouldn't be a bother, especially if I am concious of the sound level, right? I did say this was Mr. Roger's evil twin, right?
So, I am watching TV around 11:30 pm, that is what normal people do when they are at home I think; please someone leave a comment, if I am living in another world. I have the TV so low that our 55 gallon fish tank filters are louder than the TV. Knock, Knock, Knock. I laugh at this point because this man has to be kidding me. He does it again. Ok, southern hospitality obviously only gets you but so far where I am, so I knock back, while almost breaking my remote in the process, yelling I live here to sir! (see, that damn southern hospitality, sir, I should have said Jackass!).
Within 2 minutes, I hear a knock on my door. This man has lost his mind. My roomate and I go downstairs, and this man, who actually could be Mr. Roger's twin if he had a red cardigan, attempts to sound sincere when he says he and his daughter have been living there six years and are just trying to go to bed, and all he hears is this loud thump from music-I was watching a DVD, not a music channel. We go back and forth, and finally my roomate and I tell this wack-o, Listen, you do not pay for us to live here, we are not children, you have been living here for six years, so obviously you know the walls are thin- maybe you should move your bed because we have been MORE than considerate, the tenant prior to us had the same problem with you and we are not going to deal with it, don't knock on our wall again, period. He commences to say, You people obviously want to... What did he say? You people?? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Of course he stumbles on his words, and at this point our conversation is over. We tell him again to not knock on our wall, or there will be a major problem coming his way. While still trying to find the right words to say, he saw a door slam in his face. Wow, that felt great!
Well, needless to say, it's only been a week, but we have not heard any knocking on our walls :-) We informed our landlord of this incident, who happens to be the previous tenant, and he let us know he agrees 100% and the next time this idiot knocks or comes over to call him and he will take care of it, Man I love Jersey!
Interview with the Vampire
In this instance, the "vampire" happens to be a company I interviewed with. I know everyone has that one interview story they believe is the worst experience above all others: sorry ladies and gentleman, that title has just been taken by yours truly.
I will not type the name of this company here, but I will tell you they are a major pharmaceutical company that manufactures popular OTC (over-the-counter) & prescription medication. I applied for this position because I have experience in the industry, and I felt my skills matched the required qualifications. As many job seekers know, we apply for so many jobs that we often forget about them until we receive an interview request. This was exactly the case for myself.
I received the email requesting an updated resume, including a questionnaire regarding the specific position. After another week, I received a phone call to set-up an interview. I was totally excited because I wanted to find employment with a great salary, and this position was perfect for me: so I thought. The minute I stepped into the office, I immediately knew this was going to be a disaster...
I get to the building and am greeted by a wonderful and cheerful receptionist-so far so good. After waiting for a approximately 30 minutes, I am introduced to the administrative assistant, another great first impression- I can see myself working here. Then I am introduced to the Director of the department. She is a very accomplished woman and knows her stuff. She immediately informs me that my prior experience, while in pharmaceuticals, was completely different than what the job description called for. Hmm, I felt a little uncomfortable with the way she said it, but being Ms. Professional, I explained to her that I understood this when I applied for the position, but as I learned at my previous employer, you get experience by learning. I also explained that my experience was actually similar to this position, in addition to being a smooth transition and progression to another level in the same field. What I really wanted to say was You should be telling your human resource recruiter this information, not me.
Next, I meet with a member of human resources to go over employer benefit information, yada, yada, yada. This was routine, much like any other interview. Then, I meet manager Mr. B* (*name has been changed). He sat across from me and looked over my resume, then asked, "So, why did you apply for this position because you do not have a scientific degree?" I literally sat there dumbfounded for 30 seconds. Ms. Professional is slightly deteriorating, so I simply said, "The position did not call for a scientific degree, only a bachelors, which I have, in addition to my pharmaceutical experience." He replied "ok" and continued to scrutinize my resume. Then he explained that he just didn't understand why I applied for the position because of blah, blah, blah ( I actually don't remember because I blanked him out at this point). To put icing on my lovely interview cake, he looked at my accomplishment of receiving a presidential award from my previous employer for my work-a very prestigious award-and basically demeaned it into an award "for archiving and filing." I was livid. Ms. Professional is dead. I calmly looked at him and said, "Sir, you need to ask your HR recruiter why I am here, obviously you do not think I am qualified, but my credentials prove otherwise, so I do not know what to tell you at this point." He replied, "oh no, no, I know you are qualified, it is just I have never seen anyone with this degree in this type of position." Was this his way of smoothing things over? If anything, it was another insult at best.
I was completely fed up with the interview process at this point, but I had to meet yet two other managers. I wish I could apologize to them because my interview had already been ruined, and they were absolutely the nicest people I had met that day. They were funny, witty, knew I could do the work, and loved my attitude and outgoing personality. If I could have only had the interview with them. My last meeting was back with the Director, and she asked me if I had any questions, and I explained to her I didn't have a question, only a comment. I professionally let her know that I am qualified for this position, I am smart, I am determined, and I do not fail. I left her with that and walked out of the building wanting to cry, but I held my head high because I knew they were not worthy of having an employee like myself. Not to mention, this was a complete waste of 4 hours out of my day, and $15.00 in transportation costs-ALOT of money to an unemployed job seeker!
I told you I was taking the title of worst interview ever, believe me now? The purpose of this piece is to discuss interview etiquette. Career sites such as monster.com, careerbuilder.com, and the like, plaster sections exclusively for the do's & dont's during an interview for the job seeker. Why is there not a section for companies or the interviewers? Because they hold our work life in the balance, they no have to abide by these very rules? I found that I was questioning myself for a week, why did they request an interview with me? My first thought was affirmative action-did they just need to interview a woman to meet some gender requirement? That thought lasted all of 1 second-I know I deserved to be interviewed for that position because I am qualified. So, where did this interview go wrong?
I believe that some, not all, but some interviewers have a Napoleon complex in relation to their own position within a company. This is the only time they actually have the power to change the course of someone's life, albeit professionally, and they cannot resist the urge to sit across from the job seeker who obviously wants the position, only to make them feel as if they have not done enough in their career to warrant a better position-especially with them.
What is a job seeker to do in this situation? Maybe these career sites can address this, or hire me to address it ;-) In the meantime, I suggest that all job seekers be overly confident in an interview. I know consultants all over the world are gasping, but it is true. Being overly confident does not mean being egotistical or lying about your skills or accomplishments. It does mean that you will not be intimidated, professionally insulted, or categorically demeaned during an interview. These words are harsh, but the incident does not have to be in order for the job seeker to cut in and profess their career accomplishments. If you, as a job seeker, feel the interviewer crosses a professional line, no matter how small, do not be afraid to respond or comment. Always be professional, but always stand your ground.
I could not let this one incident consume me. Being a job seeker means falling of the wagon, getting up, and pushing onward to the next interview. I just had one recently: same scenario, totally different outcome. I applied for a job in the same industry, slightly different than my own experience, but the interview went extremely well. I do not know if I got the position, but that is not what this is about. I left the interview knowing my professional confidence in an unfamiliar setting impressed my interviewers. How do I know? They told me;-)
So, the next time you have an interview with the vampire, make daylight break in the form of confidence.
I will not type the name of this company here, but I will tell you they are a major pharmaceutical company that manufactures popular OTC (over-the-counter) & prescription medication. I applied for this position because I have experience in the industry, and I felt my skills matched the required qualifications. As many job seekers know, we apply for so many jobs that we often forget about them until we receive an interview request. This was exactly the case for myself.
I received the email requesting an updated resume, including a questionnaire regarding the specific position. After another week, I received a phone call to set-up an interview. I was totally excited because I wanted to find employment with a great salary, and this position was perfect for me: so I thought. The minute I stepped into the office, I immediately knew this was going to be a disaster...
I get to the building and am greeted by a wonderful and cheerful receptionist-so far so good. After waiting for a approximately 30 minutes, I am introduced to the administrative assistant, another great first impression- I can see myself working here. Then I am introduced to the Director of the department. She is a very accomplished woman and knows her stuff. She immediately informs me that my prior experience, while in pharmaceuticals, was completely different than what the job description called for. Hmm, I felt a little uncomfortable with the way she said it, but being Ms. Professional, I explained to her that I understood this when I applied for the position, but as I learned at my previous employer, you get experience by learning. I also explained that my experience was actually similar to this position, in addition to being a smooth transition and progression to another level in the same field. What I really wanted to say was You should be telling your human resource recruiter this information, not me.
Next, I meet with a member of human resources to go over employer benefit information, yada, yada, yada. This was routine, much like any other interview. Then, I meet manager Mr. B* (*name has been changed). He sat across from me and looked over my resume, then asked, "So, why did you apply for this position because you do not have a scientific degree?" I literally sat there dumbfounded for 30 seconds. Ms. Professional is slightly deteriorating, so I simply said, "The position did not call for a scientific degree, only a bachelors, which I have, in addition to my pharmaceutical experience." He replied "ok" and continued to scrutinize my resume. Then he explained that he just didn't understand why I applied for the position because of blah, blah, blah ( I actually don't remember because I blanked him out at this point). To put icing on my lovely interview cake, he looked at my accomplishment of receiving a presidential award from my previous employer for my work-a very prestigious award-and basically demeaned it into an award "for archiving and filing." I was livid. Ms. Professional is dead. I calmly looked at him and said, "Sir, you need to ask your HR recruiter why I am here, obviously you do not think I am qualified, but my credentials prove otherwise, so I do not know what to tell you at this point." He replied, "oh no, no, I know you are qualified, it is just I have never seen anyone with this degree in this type of position." Was this his way of smoothing things over? If anything, it was another insult at best.
I was completely fed up with the interview process at this point, but I had to meet yet two other managers. I wish I could apologize to them because my interview had already been ruined, and they were absolutely the nicest people I had met that day. They were funny, witty, knew I could do the work, and loved my attitude and outgoing personality. If I could have only had the interview with them. My last meeting was back with the Director, and she asked me if I had any questions, and I explained to her I didn't have a question, only a comment. I professionally let her know that I am qualified for this position, I am smart, I am determined, and I do not fail. I left her with that and walked out of the building wanting to cry, but I held my head high because I knew they were not worthy of having an employee like myself. Not to mention, this was a complete waste of 4 hours out of my day, and $15.00 in transportation costs-ALOT of money to an unemployed job seeker!
I told you I was taking the title of worst interview ever, believe me now? The purpose of this piece is to discuss interview etiquette. Career sites such as monster.com, careerbuilder.com, and the like, plaster sections exclusively for the do's & dont's during an interview for the job seeker. Why is there not a section for companies or the interviewers? Because they hold our work life in the balance, they no have to abide by these very rules? I found that I was questioning myself for a week, why did they request an interview with me? My first thought was affirmative action-did they just need to interview a woman to meet some gender requirement? That thought lasted all of 1 second-I know I deserved to be interviewed for that position because I am qualified. So, where did this interview go wrong?
I believe that some, not all, but some interviewers have a Napoleon complex in relation to their own position within a company. This is the only time they actually have the power to change the course of someone's life, albeit professionally, and they cannot resist the urge to sit across from the job seeker who obviously wants the position, only to make them feel as if they have not done enough in their career to warrant a better position-especially with them.
What is a job seeker to do in this situation? Maybe these career sites can address this, or hire me to address it ;-) In the meantime, I suggest that all job seekers be overly confident in an interview. I know consultants all over the world are gasping, but it is true. Being overly confident does not mean being egotistical or lying about your skills or accomplishments. It does mean that you will not be intimidated, professionally insulted, or categorically demeaned during an interview. These words are harsh, but the incident does not have to be in order for the job seeker to cut in and profess their career accomplishments. If you, as a job seeker, feel the interviewer crosses a professional line, no matter how small, do not be afraid to respond or comment. Always be professional, but always stand your ground.
I could not let this one incident consume me. Being a job seeker means falling of the wagon, getting up, and pushing onward to the next interview. I just had one recently: same scenario, totally different outcome. I applied for a job in the same industry, slightly different than my own experience, but the interview went extremely well. I do not know if I got the position, but that is not what this is about. I left the interview knowing my professional confidence in an unfamiliar setting impressed my interviewers. How do I know? They told me;-)
So, the next time you have an interview with the vampire, make daylight break in the form of confidence.
Technical Difficulties Solved!
My comment dilema has been resolved, and can now accept feedback! Please leave a comment, click on "Got an Opinion? Tell Diva." (I absolutely love that line- it's so much better than "Comments" :-) So, what are you waiting for....Tell Diva!
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Forbes.comE ON!
Just when you thought the world finally leveled the professional playing field, along comes an ill-informed, overpaid, testosterone-induced, columnist to ruin what women have worked so hard to achieve: balancing a professional and personal life. Michael Noer, editor of forbes.com used his site, known for their business savvy reporting, to waste space explaining why men should not marry "career women."
My passion for writing comes from the belief that life cannot be derived through finite equations. For this very reason, statistical facts have always been unappealing to me when explaining human experience. Mr. Noer is an obvious mathematical follower since he bases his entire rant (I refuse to give his work any journalistic value) on statistics. He references The Journal of Marriage and Family when writing with full confidence that career women will "be unhappy [if they quit their jobs and stay home with the kids]" or "...if they make more money than [men]." The Journal of Marriage and Family is a reputable research journal, and I do not dispute any of the findings they collected; however, one does not have to be a social scientist to know this cannot be true of every woman who makes above $30,000 per year.
For one, I can say with 100% certainty they never asked me; did they ask you? One, ten, one thousand, even ten million women can never speak for a whole. I am positive the Journal of Marriage and Family is appalled that their name was used in vain. Secondly, are these findings based strictly on divorce rates in America? Did they read each and every legal document to see why these women ended their marriage? That would be too simple, of course. Instead, Mr. Noer uses the labor specialization theory [when traditional roles of husband (breadwinner) and wife (home maker) become less defined, the value of marriage decreases, leading to divorce] to rationalize his debate. I am sure if researchers put down their statistical models and truly ask women the cause of their divorce, the answer needs no extrapolations: adultery, deceit, abuse, neglect, etc. are only a few of the many causes that lead to divorce. Labor specialization has nothing do with divorce. Men are unwilling to accept the fact women can be in a higher financial position than them: it is a hit to their fragile ego. Lastly, this verbal hodgepodge insists that statistics prove women with higher education are more likely to cheat. Cheating on your mate or spouse, no matter the gender, has nothing to do with education and EVERYTHING to do with accepting responsibility for one's actions, period. Only in America does every aspect of human action have an excuse. When are we going to stop hiding behind numbers and be adults?
My major concern regards what Mr. Noer and social research scientists believe to be "professional women." I didn't know one had to make a certain amount to be considered professional. So, what does this make other women who work forty hours a week? Meaningless? Not worthy of being statistically analyzed? Maybe they don't matter- that would explain the state of America's socio-economic divide. I graduated from a nationally recognized university and worked in the financial industry, all while bringing in less than $25, 000 a year. It is a slap in any woman's face to be called anything other than a professional when she is a hardworking, law-abiding, and tax paying citizen. I would like to personally apologize to any woman who happens to be a "high school dropout minding a cash register."
As women, finding a niche in the workplace traditionally dominated by men is stressful enough. To know in 2006, there are actual men who would rather we dumb ourselves into not acquiring as much education as possible is an insult at best. How can today's professionals be any type of role model or positive influence for tomorrow's leaders, especially females, when a financial magazine's editor thinks it's worth a thought to not educate yourself in order to have a life of marriage and happiness?
I believe Mr. Noer should have spent more time as a Thomas J. Watson Fellow studying social behavior rather than the history of Santa Claus...this is the man we want to lead our nation's most respected financial news website? I believe it is every woman's right to educate herself, find love & the pursuit of happiness, and have a wonderful career. Women can do this and work 1st, 2nd, or 3rd shift. My final words for Mr. Noer: Bah, Humbug!
My passion for writing comes from the belief that life cannot be derived through finite equations. For this very reason, statistical facts have always been unappealing to me when explaining human experience. Mr. Noer is an obvious mathematical follower since he bases his entire rant (I refuse to give his work any journalistic value) on statistics. He references The Journal of Marriage and Family when writing with full confidence that career women will "be unhappy [if they quit their jobs and stay home with the kids]" or "...if they make more money than [men]." The Journal of Marriage and Family is a reputable research journal, and I do not dispute any of the findings they collected; however, one does not have to be a social scientist to know this cannot be true of every woman who makes above $30,000 per year.
For one, I can say with 100% certainty they never asked me; did they ask you? One, ten, one thousand, even ten million women can never speak for a whole. I am positive the Journal of Marriage and Family is appalled that their name was used in vain. Secondly, are these findings based strictly on divorce rates in America? Did they read each and every legal document to see why these women ended their marriage? That would be too simple, of course. Instead, Mr. Noer uses the labor specialization theory [when traditional roles of husband (breadwinner) and wife (home maker) become less defined, the value of marriage decreases, leading to divorce] to rationalize his debate. I am sure if researchers put down their statistical models and truly ask women the cause of their divorce, the answer needs no extrapolations: adultery, deceit, abuse, neglect, etc. are only a few of the many causes that lead to divorce. Labor specialization has nothing do with divorce. Men are unwilling to accept the fact women can be in a higher financial position than them: it is a hit to their fragile ego. Lastly, this verbal hodgepodge insists that statistics prove women with higher education are more likely to cheat. Cheating on your mate or spouse, no matter the gender, has nothing to do with education and EVERYTHING to do with accepting responsibility for one's actions, period. Only in America does every aspect of human action have an excuse. When are we going to stop hiding behind numbers and be adults?
My major concern regards what Mr. Noer and social research scientists believe to be "professional women." I didn't know one had to make a certain amount to be considered professional. So, what does this make other women who work forty hours a week? Meaningless? Not worthy of being statistically analyzed? Maybe they don't matter- that would explain the state of America's socio-economic divide. I graduated from a nationally recognized university and worked in the financial industry, all while bringing in less than $25, 000 a year. It is a slap in any woman's face to be called anything other than a professional when she is a hardworking, law-abiding, and tax paying citizen. I would like to personally apologize to any woman who happens to be a "high school dropout minding a cash register."
As women, finding a niche in the workplace traditionally dominated by men is stressful enough. To know in 2006, there are actual men who would rather we dumb ourselves into not acquiring as much education as possible is an insult at best. How can today's professionals be any type of role model or positive influence for tomorrow's leaders, especially females, when a financial magazine's editor thinks it's worth a thought to not educate yourself in order to have a life of marriage and happiness?
I believe Mr. Noer should have spent more time as a Thomas J. Watson Fellow studying social behavior rather than the history of Santa Claus...this is the man we want to lead our nation's most respected financial news website? I believe it is every woman's right to educate herself, find love & the pursuit of happiness, and have a wonderful career. Women can do this and work 1st, 2nd, or 3rd shift. My final words for Mr. Noer: Bah, Humbug!
Monday, August 21, 2006
Big Girls Don't Cry!!!
Why did I not get that memo!?? If I had a diary, I would write this entry there; but, I need to share my experiences. How can I offer a perspective on all that life is, does, and will be, if I cannot incorporate my own life? Dear Diary...
I could write a novel on the stress that has been consuming my thought processes and actions lately. I do not share my problems with others because #1: They cannot [literally] do anything about it, #2: Why bring someone else down with my troubles?, #3: It is, after all, my problem. I deal with stress differently than most: I cry. I know, everybody cries at some point due to stress. My stressful experiences, however, compound and multiply in a matter of moments. The only way I can describe it to imagine your chest becoming heavier and heavier, then the thought of everything you have to deal with when you open your eyes makes it hard for you to breathe. Could I be going through a mild depression-like episode? Maybe. Could I be having an anxiety attack? Possibly. But experiencing what I did today has no clinical textbook definition.
I truly believe there is a right time & place for everything, even if it may not seem so to everyone else. Yet, the right time could be meaningless if it does not evoke the response one needs. Of course, crying will not make problems go away, but it is a release. I know society uses the phrase He/She will cry at the drop of a hat, but today I found that this phrase is categorically wrong. I do not consider myself an emotional person: if I was, I am sure I would cry at the sign of any stress, no matter how small. But today I learned that one can never understand what a person has on their mind & and in their heart at any given moment. My episode was sparked by something so innocent and non-threatening, I surprised myself and, of course, the person who unfortunately witnessed it. Then again, was it truly an unfortunate event?
I can only imagine I looked like a fool. I was embarassed of course. But, after thinking about it, and sharing my feelings, I feel liberated in a sense. Tomorrow is another day; but for right now, I know that there could have not been a better time for me to just be. Be whatever I was feeling; Be whomever I needed in order to release, and finally, breathe. Maybe big girls do cry afterall, and are better for it...
I could write a novel on the stress that has been consuming my thought processes and actions lately. I do not share my problems with others because #1: They cannot [literally] do anything about it, #2: Why bring someone else down with my troubles?, #3: It is, after all, my problem. I deal with stress differently than most: I cry. I know, everybody cries at some point due to stress. My stressful experiences, however, compound and multiply in a matter of moments. The only way I can describe it to imagine your chest becoming heavier and heavier, then the thought of everything you have to deal with when you open your eyes makes it hard for you to breathe. Could I be going through a mild depression-like episode? Maybe. Could I be having an anxiety attack? Possibly. But experiencing what I did today has no clinical textbook definition.
I truly believe there is a right time & place for everything, even if it may not seem so to everyone else. Yet, the right time could be meaningless if it does not evoke the response one needs. Of course, crying will not make problems go away, but it is a release. I know society uses the phrase He/She will cry at the drop of a hat, but today I found that this phrase is categorically wrong. I do not consider myself an emotional person: if I was, I am sure I would cry at the sign of any stress, no matter how small. But today I learned that one can never understand what a person has on their mind & and in their heart at any given moment. My episode was sparked by something so innocent and non-threatening, I surprised myself and, of course, the person who unfortunately witnessed it. Then again, was it truly an unfortunate event?
I can only imagine I looked like a fool. I was embarassed of course. But, after thinking about it, and sharing my feelings, I feel liberated in a sense. Tomorrow is another day; but for right now, I know that there could have not been a better time for me to just be. Be whatever I was feeling; Be whomever I needed in order to release, and finally, breathe. Maybe big girls do cry afterall, and are better for it...
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Karma Chameleon...
I love the Culture Club tune "Karma Chameleon." Although the song had more to do with love than Karma itself, I think the literal version of the title has a powerful message. Have you ever been told you shouldn't say the word "swear" because it is inappropriate or sinful? I think Karma should be high on the list of words to be careful when using as well. Many people say Karma is a bitch; it is anything but. Unlike fate or a higher spiritual being, Karma does not pre-determine one's life experience. It is the end product of an individuals actions throughout their life. In Karma, you ultimately define your life path.
Many use Karma, Fate, and Destiny interchangeably. This is incorrect, and shows how little those who do not understand can pass them off as insignificant words; not the powerful energies I know they are. I will discuss Karma at length, since it is the topic at hand. But first, a quick definitive lesson on the others. Fate is the order of events that are planned and cannot be changed. They are not determined by an individual, rather a high power or spiritual being. Destiny is a direction towards a given ending. The end result is something that was guided by the individual. It can be seen in advance, given the guided direction is followed, and can change at any time if one wants their destiny to go in a different direction. Destiny cannot be forced; to force it would make it Fate.
The word is used so loosely, but do you truly know what it means to experience Karma? Karma is defined as the sum of all that an individual has done, is currently doing and will do...Thus making one responsible for one's own life, and the pain in others. This definition is precisely what each individual on this earth will experience, whether they willingly believe in Karma or not. It does not discriminate according to your age, race, sex, gender, or religious belief. It has no timeline or deadline; karma can happen in an instant, a moment, or the rest of a lifetime. Yet, it does not offer the same conclusion for similar circumstances. For instance, different people who commit the same crime or offense may not necessarily experience the same Karma. Remember, Karma is the sum of all the actions that has brought that person to the present day. For one, their Karma may be jail time, for another it may be jail time and a lifetime of bad fortune. Do not be mistaken; not all Karma is bad. Unfortunate events happen to everyone in life, but those events are not automatically Karma itself. How one handles the events may determine their Karma.
This philosophy can be (and should be-in my opinion) applied to the world in general: politics, consumerism, socio-economics, etc. It has always been my experience that, as a society, we spend so much time focusing on the lives of others that we stray from living our own lives to its' full potential. If everyone applies even half of this ideal [of being responsible for one's own life], and not how someone else chooses to live, I foresee, at a minimum, less classism, racism, religiocentrism, etc. We have let outside influences dictate who we are. Of course you need laws, a government, and justices to keep order in a society where order is a way of life. However, I believe if we consciously reminded ourselves daily- I am the sum of all that I do, am currently doing and will do...thus making me responsible for my own life, and the pain in others; voting on whether its legal to love someone no matter who they are; or determining what a woman can & cannot do with her body; or contemplating that the Black voting rights act will technically expire August 6, 2007 , would no longer be a decision for majority rule.
The phrase Karma Chameleon interests me because I understand that Karma does come in infinite forms. True believers in Karma never wait for it to happen because Karma wears no watch. The beauty of Karma is that those who believe can experience life without becoming consumed in their troubles or triumphs. Knowing that Karma will happen is conclusion enough in any situation. Sure, I hurt, cry, get angry, laugh, love; all of the emotions that come with being a human being. But, if I did not believe in the true energy of Karma, my life would be heavy with the burden of wanting tangible closure to experiences only Karma can finalize. I am content knowing that I am living my life for me, and whatever happens to me-good or bad- is a result of what I have done and no one else.
It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles.
Then the victory is yours.
It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell.
Buddha
Many use Karma, Fate, and Destiny interchangeably. This is incorrect, and shows how little those who do not understand can pass them off as insignificant words; not the powerful energies I know they are. I will discuss Karma at length, since it is the topic at hand. But first, a quick definitive lesson on the others. Fate is the order of events that are planned and cannot be changed. They are not determined by an individual, rather a high power or spiritual being. Destiny is a direction towards a given ending. The end result is something that was guided by the individual. It can be seen in advance, given the guided direction is followed, and can change at any time if one wants their destiny to go in a different direction. Destiny cannot be forced; to force it would make it Fate.
The word is used so loosely, but do you truly know what it means to experience Karma? Karma is defined as the sum of all that an individual has done, is currently doing and will do...Thus making one responsible for one's own life, and the pain in others. This definition is precisely what each individual on this earth will experience, whether they willingly believe in Karma or not. It does not discriminate according to your age, race, sex, gender, or religious belief. It has no timeline or deadline; karma can happen in an instant, a moment, or the rest of a lifetime. Yet, it does not offer the same conclusion for similar circumstances. For instance, different people who commit the same crime or offense may not necessarily experience the same Karma. Remember, Karma is the sum of all the actions that has brought that person to the present day. For one, their Karma may be jail time, for another it may be jail time and a lifetime of bad fortune. Do not be mistaken; not all Karma is bad. Unfortunate events happen to everyone in life, but those events are not automatically Karma itself. How one handles the events may determine their Karma.
This philosophy can be (and should be-in my opinion) applied to the world in general: politics, consumerism, socio-economics, etc. It has always been my experience that, as a society, we spend so much time focusing on the lives of others that we stray from living our own lives to its' full potential. If everyone applies even half of this ideal [of being responsible for one's own life], and not how someone else chooses to live, I foresee, at a minimum, less classism, racism, religiocentrism, etc. We have let outside influences dictate who we are. Of course you need laws, a government, and justices to keep order in a society where order is a way of life. However, I believe if we consciously reminded ourselves daily- I am the sum of all that I do, am currently doing and will do...thus making me responsible for my own life, and the pain in others; voting on whether its legal to love someone no matter who they are; or determining what a woman can & cannot do with her body; or contemplating that the Black voting rights act will technically expire August 6, 2007 , would no longer be a decision for majority rule.
The phrase Karma Chameleon interests me because I understand that Karma does come in infinite forms. True believers in Karma never wait for it to happen because Karma wears no watch. The beauty of Karma is that those who believe can experience life without becoming consumed in their troubles or triumphs. Knowing that Karma will happen is conclusion enough in any situation. Sure, I hurt, cry, get angry, laugh, love; all of the emotions that come with being a human being. But, if I did not believe in the true energy of Karma, my life would be heavy with the burden of wanting tangible closure to experiences only Karma can finalize. I am content knowing that I am living my life for me, and whatever happens to me-good or bad- is a result of what I have done and no one else.
It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles.
Then the victory is yours.
It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell.
Buddha
Monday, August 14, 2006
What's wrong with "no strings attached?"
When I was in college, I had only one boyfriend under my belt. I wish the world would have prepared me sooner-I would have had at least five! As soon as the first guy told me I was pretty, I automatically thought he likes me. My second thought was, he could be my boyfriend. Not the best judgement, I know. While college is only four years of your life, those fortunate [or unfortunate] enough to experience it will agree it is an accelerated course in life, sex, & relationships.
I first heard this term no strings attached in college. At the time I thought, I will never get involved with someone if I can't see him being my boyfriend. If you are in college, save yourself the turmoil! If you are out of college, save yourself the turmoil! I have come to realize that there is alot wrong with strings, and alot right with them. I will go through the pros and cons of this dichotemy, while attempting to stay objective and fair to both sides.
Women, there is nothing wrong with wanting to be involved with someone with no strings attached. It is a clearly recognized double standard with women in relation to men. Women are expected to be "marriage material" at a time when men are "being men." When I was a teenager, I thought I would be married with children by the time I was 25, and I was happy with that notion. Then I came back to reality. There is NOTHING wrong with this decision, if one so chooses to make it; but why should a women who chooses to not be married, or engaged, or with a longterm boyfriend, become part of an outcast society? No matter what age a woman is, she has the right to be whatever, and with whomever. Some think that a marriage certificate is just a piece of paper, but it absolutely has a psychogical effect. A couple can be together for 5 years, and the moment they get married, it's over within 1 year? Part of the problem is that we have succomb to the societal time line that emphasizes we be at a certain place in life at a certain age; this results in the sanctity of marriage being sacrificed in order to beat a deadline. Sounds ridiculous when written, correct? Theoretically, this is what has happened. As women, I think if one chooses to not have a relationship, it doesn't make her less appealing, or less likely to find someone if she decides to commit. As long as you are safe and put your health and feelings first, whatever relationship path you choose, it is going to be the right path for you.
Now: the cons. There is not one woman who can get involved with someone and the possibility of a future not cross their mind. It has always been my philosophy that the nature of attraction is the possibility of something greater than what you see in the present. Scientifically, I do believe women's brains are wired differently than men in terms of sex and love (with a few* exceptions). Sure, there are instances where a woman says, well, the sex is great so I will just keep him around. Ladies, do not fool yourself: sexual pleasure [more often than not] is an underlying feeling of a deeper emotion. It may start that way, but being sexually involved will lead to emotional feelings-guarranteed. I'm sure there are women who will dispute this statement, but I firmly stand by my words. I know from experience, it is hard to accept disappointment when possibilty fades, and you realize there is no future with this person. You will say anything enough times until your own feelings are validated (i.e. He was just someone to have sex with anyway...). I do not understand why being upfront about what you want "scares men off." Agreeing to see someone with no strings attached voids any possibilty of a future. Even if things become more involved; the minute you get too close, or he sleeps with another woman; no strings attached. You can be involved with the same man for years, and if you ever told him there are no strings attached, it will be embedded in his brain like knowing our ABCs. If you are a woman and are looking for more than a sexual relationship, you should not be afraid to express that; if it scares a man away, he is not the man for you. More than anything, look for honesty in a man: he should respect that same quality in you.
The idea of no strings attached for women is a complicated one because we are damned if we do and damned if we dont. I will not say the pros outweight the cons, or vice verse. I will say be wary of using the term, or agreeing to start a relationship based on the term, sexual or otherwise. Does anyone even know where the term originated? I always thought the purpose of strings were to be tied? So, I went through this whole schpeel when I could have started and ended the discussion with one sentence??! Ahh well, as is life...
I first heard this term no strings attached in college. At the time I thought, I will never get involved with someone if I can't see him being my boyfriend. If you are in college, save yourself the turmoil! If you are out of college, save yourself the turmoil! I have come to realize that there is alot wrong with strings, and alot right with them. I will go through the pros and cons of this dichotemy, while attempting to stay objective and fair to both sides.
Women, there is nothing wrong with wanting to be involved with someone with no strings attached. It is a clearly recognized double standard with women in relation to men. Women are expected to be "marriage material" at a time when men are "being men." When I was a teenager, I thought I would be married with children by the time I was 25, and I was happy with that notion. Then I came back to reality. There is NOTHING wrong with this decision, if one so chooses to make it; but why should a women who chooses to not be married, or engaged, or with a longterm boyfriend, become part of an outcast society? No matter what age a woman is, she has the right to be whatever, and with whomever. Some think that a marriage certificate is just a piece of paper, but it absolutely has a psychogical effect. A couple can be together for 5 years, and the moment they get married, it's over within 1 year? Part of the problem is that we have succomb to the societal time line that emphasizes we be at a certain place in life at a certain age; this results in the sanctity of marriage being sacrificed in order to beat a deadline. Sounds ridiculous when written, correct? Theoretically, this is what has happened. As women, I think if one chooses to not have a relationship, it doesn't make her less appealing, or less likely to find someone if she decides to commit. As long as you are safe and put your health and feelings first, whatever relationship path you choose, it is going to be the right path for you.
Now: the cons. There is not one woman who can get involved with someone and the possibility of a future not cross their mind. It has always been my philosophy that the nature of attraction is the possibility of something greater than what you see in the present. Scientifically, I do believe women's brains are wired differently than men in terms of sex and love (with a few* exceptions). Sure, there are instances where a woman says, well, the sex is great so I will just keep him around. Ladies, do not fool yourself: sexual pleasure [more often than not] is an underlying feeling of a deeper emotion. It may start that way, but being sexually involved will lead to emotional feelings-guarranteed. I'm sure there are women who will dispute this statement, but I firmly stand by my words. I know from experience, it is hard to accept disappointment when possibilty fades, and you realize there is no future with this person. You will say anything enough times until your own feelings are validated (i.e. He was just someone to have sex with anyway...). I do not understand why being upfront about what you want "scares men off." Agreeing to see someone with no strings attached voids any possibilty of a future. Even if things become more involved; the minute you get too close, or he sleeps with another woman; no strings attached. You can be involved with the same man for years, and if you ever told him there are no strings attached, it will be embedded in his brain like knowing our ABCs. If you are a woman and are looking for more than a sexual relationship, you should not be afraid to express that; if it scares a man away, he is not the man for you. More than anything, look for honesty in a man: he should respect that same quality in you.
The idea of no strings attached for women is a complicated one because we are damned if we do and damned if we dont. I will not say the pros outweight the cons, or vice verse. I will say be wary of using the term, or agreeing to start a relationship based on the term, sexual or otherwise. Does anyone even know where the term originated? I always thought the purpose of strings were to be tied? So, I went through this whole schpeel when I could have started and ended the discussion with one sentence??! Ahh well, as is life...
Temporary Technical Difficulties
Hi again,
Can you believe it, two posts in less than 24 hours, I'm on a roll!! Seriously, ladies & gentleman, due to coding issues with my new blog layout (isn't it absolutely FAB?!), my comment section has been deleted and I will need assistance re-inserting it. You will not be able to leave a comment, but please take this time to participate in my online poll. I will contemplate creating a new email specifically for feedback if I get enough interest. Thanks you for your patience.
Can you believe it, two posts in less than 24 hours, I'm on a roll!! Seriously, ladies & gentleman, due to coding issues with my new blog layout (isn't it absolutely FAB?!), my comment section has been deleted and I will need assistance re-inserting it. You will not be able to leave a comment, but please take this time to participate in my online poll. I will contemplate creating a new email specifically for feedback if I get enough interest. Thanks you for your patience.
I Feel Like A Woman
As I get more inspiration from the world around me, and engage in the never-ending discussion of Women are from Venus: Men are from Mars (i.e. Why is it so hard to trust a man?), I decided to share my philosophy on this phenomenon. Disclaimer: I am NOT a feminist; however, I am a woman. Therefore, I can only speak on this issue from a woman's perspective. So men, do not feel as if you are excluded from the discussion. Please voice your opinion if you agree or disagree on any future interpretations of my seeking truth about men...
Enduring yet another circumstance of being mistreated by a man, I was surfing the net to plan my much needed revenge. I came across a website entitled, dontdatehimgirl.com (check out the link). It is a revenge seeker's heaven, and lying/cheating man's demise. Think of it as a world directory for any woman doing a background check, so to speak, of the man they (or their friends) are dating. It is a profile written by experienced women who know, were involved with, or married to, the alleged womanizer. There are thousands upon thousands of entries: it is quite remarkable actually. Men, do not get bent out of shape, you are able to defend yourself (if you know you are on display). Although, I think this section was put on the site for legality reasons. I cannot foresee why any woman would tell the man she seeks revenge on that he is on this site; that would ruin the surprise of unsuspecting dirty looks he will get by women in his hometown. I was so impressed with the site, I wanted to do my part and thank the site creator. Not expecting any response, I sent an email satisfied that I at least let her know she inspired me. Within one day, I got a response from the creator herself! I was beyond words.
Many of the accused had myspace profiles also. I am sure most, if not ALL of the world is familiar with myspace.com thanks to Dateline (don't you agree they are getting a little Maury Povich-ish with the weekly undercover online chat operations?). I have found myspace to be relatively engaging, if not slightly addictive. There is a section for blogs on myspace, but I am aware that not everyone is a fan, and some just love to hate the current "guilty pleasure." It is so amazing that in this day and age, revenge can be achieved without leaving your home or picking up a phone, and have it reach around the world. If chivalry is truly dead, it has been reincarnated as new-age revenge.
This blog has pulled me in so many different directions, and I still want to be able to write about ANYTHING that peaks my interest, whether it's world politics, or why I don't like coffee (and never understood why the world has fallen victim to Starbucks!?). But, I feel I owe it to the women in my life to discuss us. So, I will introduce issues I feel are important to women in truly understanding who we are and our purpose on this earth-it can be related to health, love, sex, money, etc. If you have any issues you want addressed, please post a comment! Until next time...
Enduring yet another circumstance of being mistreated by a man, I was surfing the net to plan my much needed revenge. I came across a website entitled, dontdatehimgirl.com (check out the link). It is a revenge seeker's heaven, and lying/cheating man's demise. Think of it as a world directory for any woman doing a background check, so to speak, of the man they (or their friends) are dating. It is a profile written by experienced women who know, were involved with, or married to, the alleged womanizer. There are thousands upon thousands of entries: it is quite remarkable actually. Men, do not get bent out of shape, you are able to defend yourself (if you know you are on display). Although, I think this section was put on the site for legality reasons. I cannot foresee why any woman would tell the man she seeks revenge on that he is on this site; that would ruin the surprise of unsuspecting dirty looks he will get by women in his hometown. I was so impressed with the site, I wanted to do my part and thank the site creator. Not expecting any response, I sent an email satisfied that I at least let her know she inspired me. Within one day, I got a response from the creator herself! I was beyond words.
Many of the accused had myspace profiles also. I am sure most, if not ALL of the world is familiar with myspace.com thanks to Dateline (don't you agree they are getting a little Maury Povich-ish with the weekly undercover online chat operations?). I have found myspace to be relatively engaging, if not slightly addictive. There is a section for blogs on myspace, but I am aware that not everyone is a fan, and some just love to hate the current "guilty pleasure." It is so amazing that in this day and age, revenge can be achieved without leaving your home or picking up a phone, and have it reach around the world. If chivalry is truly dead, it has been reincarnated as new-age revenge.
This blog has pulled me in so many different directions, and I still want to be able to write about ANYTHING that peaks my interest, whether it's world politics, or why I don't like coffee (and never understood why the world has fallen victim to Starbucks!?). But, I feel I owe it to the women in my life to discuss us. So, I will introduce issues I feel are important to women in truly understanding who we are and our purpose on this earth-it can be related to health, love, sex, money, etc. If you have any issues you want addressed, please post a comment! Until next time...
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Dr. Harville Hendrix' Imago Theory
As many women in America and the world, I am a fan of Oprah Winfrey. I must admit that I do not agree with everything she says, although her audience will never give up that poker face of "anything you say Oprah, you are Queen." Don't get confused by the side remark, this is not a piece on the Oprah Rebellion; I will be sitting on her leather chair one day at Harpo Studios, so I dare not burn my bridge before I hammer in the first nail. I digress...
I actually had an "A HA!" moment while watching one of her shows with Dr. Harville Hendrix, a psychologist and relationship expert. For those of you who may not know, I am the LAST person to need relationship advice since I am not in one, haven't been in one for quite some time, and don't see one in my foreseeable future. But I have come to the conclusion that theories are just that, and once enmeshed with reality, they take on a whole new meaning. The Imago theory is based on the belief that, in relationships, we are attracted to those who force us to confront our past experiences. As soon as the words left his lips it was as if I had flashbacks of every person I've ever met, not just boyfriends (or in my case, boyNOTfriends). If you are in a relationship, whether you are on cloud 9 or in the dumps, this theory will help you see why the person you love so dearly (or hate) was brought into your life. Now its up to you to confront what you couldn't in your youth.
Now, let's apply this same theory to anyone we meet, not just a boyfriend or girlfriend, but your best friend, your pal, your neighbor, the stranger you encountered and thought, what the *%&^ just happened? I have always believed that people we meet are not by sheer coincidence. We all possess an invisible energy, and people are drawn to it for whatever reason, whether to love you or hate you. This is why the theory is so important. There is so much we can find out about ourselves by looking at the people surrounding us. If this theory could ever be proven scientifically true, I suspect no one will ever truly know their full self until the final hour: only then have you experienced the ultimate imago theory that will allow you to look at your past, even if it was yesterday, to see your true existence.
Thought: I wonder if I named my own theory years ago would I have been on Oprah's stage instead of Dr. Hendrix?
I actually had an "A HA!" moment while watching one of her shows with Dr. Harville Hendrix, a psychologist and relationship expert. For those of you who may not know, I am the LAST person to need relationship advice since I am not in one, haven't been in one for quite some time, and don't see one in my foreseeable future. But I have come to the conclusion that theories are just that, and once enmeshed with reality, they take on a whole new meaning. The Imago theory is based on the belief that, in relationships, we are attracted to those who force us to confront our past experiences. As soon as the words left his lips it was as if I had flashbacks of every person I've ever met, not just boyfriends (or in my case, boyNOTfriends). If you are in a relationship, whether you are on cloud 9 or in the dumps, this theory will help you see why the person you love so dearly (or hate) was brought into your life. Now its up to you to confront what you couldn't in your youth.
Now, let's apply this same theory to anyone we meet, not just a boyfriend or girlfriend, but your best friend, your pal, your neighbor, the stranger you encountered and thought, what the *%&^ just happened? I have always believed that people we meet are not by sheer coincidence. We all possess an invisible energy, and people are drawn to it for whatever reason, whether to love you or hate you. This is why the theory is so important. There is so much we can find out about ourselves by looking at the people surrounding us. If this theory could ever be proven scientifically true, I suspect no one will ever truly know their full self until the final hour: only then have you experienced the ultimate imago theory that will allow you to look at your past, even if it was yesterday, to see your true existence.
Thought: I wonder if I named my own theory years ago would I have been on Oprah's stage instead of Dr. Hendrix?
Friday, April 28, 2006
Back For the First Time
I officially know what it feels like to have writer's block.
How can someone so passionate about the art of expression through words, not have one piece of inspiration, not one inkling of worthy thoughts to share? I knew I hit rock bottom when my dear friend (whom I reccommended this site to) became the best movie critic to have ever written, not to mention, updating her blog as if she really cares (Plug: visit my friend and fellow journalistic genius Mizzlane at uknowucare.blogspot.com).
When I first discovered blogger.com, I knew in a year's time, I would have book worthy entries, a worldwide fanbase, comments galore, but alas.....nothing. I have been away so long that even the blogs I made almost two years go have become leaves in the wind, never to resurface again. But, dont fret my pretties, Karma has a bigger plan. Only leaves who truly believe in their reincarnation of something greater will live to see another spring.
So much has happened in the world since I was last on this site, I dont know where to begin without bringing up the past b/c you cant change it, and you definitely can't dwell on it-excluding paragraph 1 of this piece. I want to talk about so many things, and when something comes to mind, I will make a conscious effort to come here instead of filling my friends email box with my philosophy on life and all that happens to it.
Please feel free to contact me and let me know what is on YOUR mind, no matter how significant or trivial. I want to talk about things that people will want to read and discuss at the water cooler whether to blast me or praise me. This site will be our own little think tank. So, here's to being back for the first time...
How can someone so passionate about the art of expression through words, not have one piece of inspiration, not one inkling of worthy thoughts to share? I knew I hit rock bottom when my dear friend (whom I reccommended this site to) became the best movie critic to have ever written, not to mention, updating her blog as if she really cares (Plug: visit my friend and fellow journalistic genius Mizzlane at uknowucare.blogspot.com).
When I first discovered blogger.com, I knew in a year's time, I would have book worthy entries, a worldwide fanbase, comments galore, but alas.....nothing. I have been away so long that even the blogs I made almost two years go have become leaves in the wind, never to resurface again. But, dont fret my pretties, Karma has a bigger plan. Only leaves who truly believe in their reincarnation of something greater will live to see another spring.
So much has happened in the world since I was last on this site, I dont know where to begin without bringing up the past b/c you cant change it, and you definitely can't dwell on it-excluding paragraph 1 of this piece. I want to talk about so many things, and when something comes to mind, I will make a conscious effort to come here instead of filling my friends email box with my philosophy on life and all that happens to it.
Please feel free to contact me and let me know what is on YOUR mind, no matter how significant or trivial. I want to talk about things that people will want to read and discuss at the water cooler whether to blast me or praise me. This site will be our own little think tank. So, here's to being back for the first time...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)