Things I Miss Friday - King of Pop edition

Today's "Things I Miss Friday" is both easy and difficult.  Easy because the subject is almost a given, but difficult because it's a controversial given. Kendra from Pop Trash Radio put it this way: "The Michael Jackson I loved died a long time ago in my opinion.  This still makes me somewhat sad."  I believe there are a lot of people that feel that way today, and I am one of them. 

His life and significance are a bit difficult to parse, but so far I see people falling in three camps: 1) those who can only make pedophile jokes today; 2) those who only talk about his great achievements in music; and 3) those who recognize his achievements but also recognize his personal difficulties.  #1 and #2 are laypeople.  I've only seen #3 in newscasters so far.  I believe the #3 is really the only way to go.

How do we give credit to an alleged pedophile for anything he accomplished?  I have always firmly believed that people who commit such heinous crimes are genetically programmed for that sort of behavior.  However, I read something yesterday that I think is an even better description: genetics loads the gun but environment pulls the trigger.  What would have become of this boy genius had there been someone in his life with some knowledge about the special needs and concerns of child stars and the dangers of celebrity?  The abuse of Jackson's childhood is fairly well-documented and not really disputed.  That already creates a particular type of sensitive and possibly troubled child.  Put that child in a fishbowl and continue to have him work in an industry where both your employers and fans fawn over you and it's a recipe for destruction.

I'm not sure we'll see anything quite like Jackson's level of fame for a long time to come.  We are already a much more jaded society and would scrutinize someone similar so much earlier.  For all of his own personal failures and destructive problems, we must hold ourselves partly accountable.  As I stated recently with the Jon & Kate phenomenon, we love to lift people up and then watch with joy as they crumble and fall, all the while still partaking of whatever entertainment it is they provide us (for Jackson, the music).  If genetics loads the gun, then fame and the public's habit of lifting up and tearing down bought the gun, the ammunition, taught him how to shoot, and then pulled the trigger.

This level of fame will also be hard to reach again because Jackson was a rare talent; I don't believe that can be denied.  To Gen Y or the Millenials, it may be hard to believe, but MTV used to be kind of revolutionary.  They had a sort of punk rock attitude when they started and were very much giving the finger to the traditional music industry and cable programming.  They were navigating only semi-charted waters.  However, they didn't play videos by black artists.  It's such an odd feeling for me to think how in my lifetime this was even possible - how segregated the music industry still was during my childhood. However, Michael Jackson changed that.  His music was so good and so broad in its influence that MTV had no choice but to show him.  To do otherwise would have been the equivalent of making people sit in the back of the bus.  With millions of Americans of every race and background buying Jackson's albums, it only made sense that they show his videos.

And then, we can't ignore those videos.  I can't imagine what the world of music videos would look like if it weren't for Michael Jackson.  Maybe the Gen Y/Millennial folks have no idea, but he truly was a visionary.  As the footage rolled on every cable news network yesterday, my brain kept flashing with even more videos (because, of course, the news mainly showed clips of the Jackson 5 and "Thriller").  If you really want to see how amazing he was, watch those early Jackson 5 clips.  He is the standout and nearly mesmerizing to watch. But what about "Smooth Criminal", "Bad", "The Way You Make Me Feel", "Rock With You", "Beat It", "Dirty Diana", "Black or White", and a hundred more.  Who doesn't recognize the lit sidewalk in "Billie Jean"?  Who hasn't seen (and tried) the Moonwalk?  (And that was before the internet - imagine today what would have happened with that moment.)  What about "Scream", with his sister Janet - when they had to actually show some people they weren't the same person.  What about Say Say Say, with Paul McCartney?  How sad that they had that terrible falling out (I'm wondering if Sir Paul will release a statement.)  What about "Man in the Mirror" and "Leave Me Alone, which let us in to a bit of his troubles.  Do you remember "Remember the Time" with Eddie Murphy as an Egyptian king and Iman as his queen?  Because of his extreme amounts of money, he could afford the best special effects available, often before the ordinary public had any idea something like that existed.  I think videos like "Black or White" and "Remember the Time" out-do the late 90s/early 00s Star Wars films.

And then there's "We Are The World."  Sure, there have been other similar projects, but that one stands out - I think everyone owned a "USA for Africa" t-shirt.  I vividly remember standing on stage for one of my fifth grade school recitals and singing that song and how the audience of parents and teachers joined in at the chorus.  Who could pull together that array of celebrities and musicians today without it turning into a horrendous ego-fest AND accomplish a beautiful piece of music that also worked to bring a world problem to light?  I am at a loss to think of anyone who could achieve that today.

People will be tempted to look at him as a divided human being: in one part, an extraordinary artist who has made lasting contributions to the world of music, art, and charity.  And the other part, a troubled and possibly sick human being who allegedly molested young boys and was an all-around weirdo: a pet chimp, a home amusement park, an obsession with Peter Pan, the skin lightening, the plastic surgery.  However, I insist we must work to recognize that this is all the same human being and that this is all intertwined. Artists are often troubled people. 

One scientist found that 20% of poets commit suicide, compared to 4% of other professions, and poets have nowhere near the fame Jackson did.  He was troubled because he was great and because his greatness thrust him into a life and lifestyle that was more than he could manage.  I find it utterly disturbing that he was preparing for a huge tour when, clearly, he had to have been significantly troubled and in poor health.  Shame on his handlers. I have yet to see that side of this mentioned; I hope someone picks up on it and starts asking questions.  Anna Nicole Smith's handlers are being held accountable for their role in her death; his should be, as well.

But that brings me back to us - the video-watching, album/MP3-buying, tabloid magazine reading public.  We are complicit as well.  Nothing grabs our attention more than when a side show takes the main stage. Well now, Mr. Jackson has left the building and it's time for us to find a new show.  Let's try not to destroy the next one, but instead let's work to treasure our artists; we can lift up their work while keeping the person grounded.  We're in this together.  We are the world. I do not believe in an afterlife, but I do believe that there is peace to be had today, both for the people who were troubled by Jackson (the boys, their families, his handlers) and for Jackson himself. I think it's worth taking some time to reflect on all of this.  But I hope it's also possible to take some time to just enjoy some of Jackson's work on the YouTube Michael Jackson channel.  Remember the time.

I'm pretty sure there will be a memorial service for Jackson.  I think what they should try to do is reunite everyone from "We Are the World" and have them sing that in tribute.  It's sad to think how most of them outlived him, but it would remember the best of his life and the best of his work and would be an amazing show of support.  I can dream.

Edited to add: If you want to read similar, much more concise thoughts on this from a far better writer, check out Andrew Sullivan's post on The Daily Dish.  He's got it right.

7 Quick Tuesday Takes

1. I'm still really upset by the flippant and hate-filled responses to Jon & Kate.  Maybe it's naive, but I think you can sign up to be on a television show and not expect this sort of media treatment.  Who's following the Duggars around? Anyone?  Which paparazzi are camped outside The Little Couple's home?  Hmm?  Only some people get subjected to this level of scrutiny and, frankly, harassment.  They did not ask for this or bring it upon themselves.  Why don't we have paparazzi laws?  Why is it fair for adult men with cameras to stalk five-year-olds?  Disgusting.

2. Day two of the 5 Day Pouch Test is going well so far.  My only off-plan eating yesterday was a cup of yogurt and a 1 oz. piece of cheese.  So, okay, no off-plan eating would be optimal but I'm still proud of myself.  Hunger is not an emergency.

3. I think your child is adorable, but I don't need to see 85 photos from any family event.  Can you choose maybe 5 of them if you're sending them via email?  Or post an album on Facebook so I can skim through them.

4. I got a FB messages from my ex-work husband yesterday.  It wasn't quite perfunctory, but mainly a research assistance request with a few personal questions thrown in.  I miss my grad school friends.  I miss being around people who read literature and watch the (non-Fox) news and have the skills that go along with a liberal arts education.  I'm looking forward to my new grad classes this fall.  My previous grad classmates set a pretty high bar, though - I hope my new ones are up to snuff.

5. Email is an affliction.  Do any of us really need THAT much email?  I wish the cc option was never invented.  Little by little, I'm unsubscribing from a bunch of mailing lists.  I'd rather just get real emails from people I care to hear from.

6. Yesterday's diary of a food addict post got as many hits alone as I usually get in a day.  This makes me wonder about the interest in food addiction (which I believe is under-represented and misrepresented in the media).

7. My husband's answer to all irritants is "Can I build a flamethrower?"  Today I finally agreed, but only so I can be charred to a crisp, like a snack.  I would be a Combo - crunchy on the outside and soft cheese on the inside (because, really, with all the cheese I eat, I am probably just cheese inside).  What's better than carbs outside and cheese inside?  (Combos, raviolis, manicotti, wontons, quesadillas - I could just go on and on.)  Man, I am a carb addict.

What's your favorite carb outside/cheese inside food?

Jon & Kate plus divorce

I have to admit I'm a bit heartbroken.  I really believed in their relationship and, as stated before, the hubby and I often considered our relationship a lot like Jon & Kate's.  I do not think Kate is a power hungry mean mommy with a terrible hairdo (really, her hair does not bother me - her tanning does, though) and I do not think Jon is weak or wishy-washy.  Not everyone needs to be a bulldozer; some people can be laid back.  Some people are the yin and yang and find their own unique balance.

I believed in them; I really did.  I believed that if you were good enough, you could defeat the destruction of reality television.  I believed that if you really loved each other, you could close ranks and fight a swirling storm.  I know I can be naive sometimes, but I prefer to think of it as being optimistic.

And now I think about the children, particularly the sextuplets.  Without them, Jon & Kate could have managed - having two children is perfectly reasonable.  However, TLC expressed interest in them after two specials and Jon & Kate decided that this show would be a great way to earn enough money to provide for their family.  This show and all the implications of the fame and money led to this divorce (despite Kate insisting otherwise - of course she has to tell herself that and I don't blame her at this point; it would be a lot to live with).  So, one day, one or more of the sextuplets will put it all together and think, "They did the show because of us.  They divorced because of the show.  Therefore the divorce is our fault." Maybe there's still room for a Jon & Kate reconciliation.  Maybe?  Probably not.  But I can't not keep hoping.

They're not haters, actually - you might just not be all that.

Source: flickr.com/photos/lunchbreath

Every morning, I check the same websites: my email, LiveJournal, Wordpress, Google Reader, The Daily Beast, and Huffington Post.  I skim through, reading bits here and there, and often full articles if I have the time and inclination (I would love to read more full articles, but it's just not always possible).

Well, there was a really interesting piece posted on The Daily Beast on Sunday titled "Do Narcissists Have Better Sex?"  The thrust of the article is that we have created a generation of narcissists (we're looking at you Gen Y/Millenials) thanks to all the "Don't let anyone tell you you're wrong" "You can do anything you want" parenting and pop culture incentives that have happened over the past two decades or so.  This has lead to a whole generation of people who feel entitled to feel good about themselves at all times and who believe that anyone who tries to intimate that they might, just might, have things they might want to work on is a hater and the sort of person who likes to make other people feel terrible, just for sport.

I often read articles that I semi-agree or semi-disagree with, but every now and again I go, "Yes!  This!  Exactly this!"  This is one of those times.  I think the article's author, Hanna Seligson, has hit a very big nail right on its shiny, glaring head.  There might be a sentence or two that I take issue with, but I agree with her overall idea and postulations. I have been frustrated by this phenomenon but her article was able to put it into words in a way that I have found myself unable to do. 

It started back in 2003 when I was planning my sister's bridal shower and had an unpleasant run-in with one of the bridesmaids, a particularly bitchy and narcissistic blonde who accused me of overcharging them for the room rental so that I could make a profit on the shower (meanwhile, I had easily covered $1000 worth of expenses that they didn't contribute to).  What proceeded was a particularly nasty back-and-forth over email, during which I wrote things that I never believed I could actually say, especially to someone directly, and have since promised myself I would never say/write to someone again.  I insulted her commitment to her friendship with my sister and her overall intelligence... a few times over.  I don't remember most of what she said, but I clearly remember that she gave me the "People like you just like to take people like me down" line.

That line stands out in my memory because it was one of my first encounters with this sort of thinking.  First, I was put off by the binary.  People like me = older, fat, (then) dateless, loser.  People like her = naturally thin, blonde, super pretty, popular, mean because she can be.  It was simply crazy to me that someone "like me" was trying to take down someone "like her".  It was a total reverse of the standard power structure and so crazy that I couldn't understand where it was coming from. Now I know, though.  It was all that namby-pamby, give everyone a trophy for showing up stuff that's been going on for a while now and is a huge support system to the current reality show production system.  I watch some reality television, but I have very little patience for and tend not to watch the shows where when someone gets voted off, they go into the standard, "They made a mistake/they just don't 'get' me/you haven't seen the last of me/everyone will know my name/I'll be famous anyway" rant.  I'm sorry, snowflake, but odds are you won't be famous anyway unless you sell out that attitude and become a ridiculous farce of yourself. I'm so glad someone was able to put this into words. 

I hope more people take notice and there is an effort to work at reversing this trend.  Let's get back to trying to raise citizens that feel a responsibility to their communities and fellow people.

Jon, Kate, Eight, and Us

The commercial for the season premiere of Jon & Kate Plus 8 makes me really sad (disclosure: okay, I've shed a few tears over it), but even more so when it's shown in conjunction with the past episode marathons that have been on recently.  It's painful to watch the progression of Jon & Kate as people, as a couple, as parents, and as celebrities. 

It's particularly worrisome to me because the hubby and I have always considered ourselves to be a lot like Jon and Kate and now it feels like if they could fail and possibly divorce, so could we. I know, they're a television couple.  But they're not fictional.  They had a real meeting, not unlike ours.  When asked when their relationship became serious, their answer is, "After the first date" which is also what we say.  They had a real engagement and a wedding that now makes me cry as I watch them promise things to each other that they seem to no longer be following through on.

I stood up for Kate long after people started bashing her parenting and attitude toward John.  The hubby and I have always found their relationship to be really amusing and, truth be told, the way they interact was extremely helpful for me in developing an understanding of how the hubby and I interact AND understanding that it's okay - that it won't all fall apart if you snipe at each other sometimes, even in front of the kids, or - gasp - in public.  And if they could handle eight, we could certainly handle one or two, seriously!

That said, it was apparent to me in the last (fourth) season that things had shifted.  Their bickering seemed less amicable and there was less apparent romance between them.  In addition, their life seemed increasingly less real.  They went on all these spectacular trips and no longer seemed to have any monetary concerns.  Part of the charm of the show was how they budgeted and managed on Jon's salary and how Jon balanced his job with his family life.  All of a sudden, though, that all disappeared - as well as any extraneous friends and family members who had been on the show, reportedly due to several falling outs.

The hubby thinks more has been made of Jon & Kate's problems than there really are, but I can't agree with him.  I think they have some serious problems right now and I hope they are able to reconcile their difficulties.  People scoff when one becomes concerned about a television or celebrity couple, but there's something about Jon & Kate that's always seemed extraordinarily real.  They made for great television because they weren't hiding anything, but it seems to me that they got caught up in their own celebrity and have been hiding behind those personas.  But now, as it crumbles all around them, I hope they find themselves again and the marriage I always admired so much.

In my next life...

Serena and Blair... err... I mean Blake and Leighton...

I will be able to wear short shorts without my thighs hanging out like extra groceries or suffering the hobble-inducing effects of chub rub.

I will have the hair of a goddess (or the team of people it takes to create it).

I will be able to wear heels without wanting to cut my feet off at the ankles to stop the pain.

I will have boobs that stand at attention without the help of surgery.

I will not cover up my hotness with a long sleeved blazer in summer (or maybe ever).

I will have sultry eyes and a knowing smile.

But mostly, I will have those legs.  God, what I wouldn't give...  I'd wear hotpants to the supermarket.

Disclaimer: Yes, I know better than this.  I know to be happy with what I have.  I know that what I have is not inherently wrong just because the media says the picture above is the only correct way to look.  I am very well aware of that, but it doesn't stop me from wishing for all those things just like I wish for more money, a new puppy, and a diet Slurpee.

Shhhhhh

Okay, so yesterday I did not follow my own advice.  I did not alter my own behavior, instead trying to aggravate the hubby into altering his.  So, yeah, that didn't work.  I slept on it and apologized this morning, but I still wanted to do something nice for the hubby.  I thought about buying him flowers, to be a little cheesy, but that didn't quite fit what I wanted  to do.  I couldn't think of anything before I came home from work so I just gave up on the idea. Then I went to my parents' house to do laundry and he went to work.  Since tomorrow is going to be 75 degrees, I'm going to be wearing flip-flops and so I needed a pedicure.  On my way back to my parents' house, the radio station was giving away tickets to a concert for Road Recovery, a group of professional musicians that helps other musicians overcome addiction:

They were giving away tickets to caller number nine so I figured, "What the hell" and broke the law, making the call while driving through town. 

Call 1: busy. 

Call 2: busy.

Call 3: ring, ring, "Hello, 101.9." Me:  "Oh, uh, hi - I'm calling for the tickets?" 101.9: "What's your name?" Me: *trying not to drive into something* "Candice" 101.9: "Okay, Candice, can you make some kind of exclamation letting us know you're happy about winning two tickets to the Road Recovery concert?" Me: "No way!!  WOO HOO!!!!"  *finally pulls over to give DJ mailing info*

So, yeah - ta friggin' da!!  Best make-up-to-hubby gift ever.  Oh, and I have brownie pudding baking in the oven.  I'm hoping it turns out yummy; so far the batter tasted super yummy. But he doesn't know any of this because he's not home from work yet... so shhhhhhhh!  :-D

Can we stop making Anne Hathaway say she's fat?

This past weekend I watched Rachel Getting Married, the movie that Anne Hathaway was nominated for an Oscar for.  The hubby was working and I was enjoying a rare night at home alone with nothing to do so I borrowed this from the school library (free!) and settled in for the evening. 

(Side note: I'm so used to having a hundred things to do that I actually couldn't sit and watch the movie straight through.  I got up, cleaned the bathtub, baked cookies, cleaned the kitchen, and a few other small things, all while going back and watching a few moments of the movie, then pausing it to do something else.  I really need to learn how to just SIT and do one thing at a time, but that's not the main point today.)

In the film, Hathaway's character is fresh out of rehab and makes a point of saying several times how she's fat because rehab makes you fat.  Considering she's probably a size 6 (4?), this was annoying and aggravating.  Similarly, in The Devil Wears Prada, she is made fun of for being the "fat, ugly" girl because she's a size 6 (not 0/2) and doesn't wear designer labels daily.  Yes, this is a commentary on that particular realm and how a size 6 is nightmarishly fat for fashionistas like that, but it's still disconcerting and aggravating. 

Later in the film, she beams with pride as she informs Stanley Tucci's character that she's now a size 4.  In Bride Wars, Kate Hudson (!!) is the fat (!!) one.  *sigh* For the filming of The Devil Wears Prada, Hathaway said, "I was thin for my height. I basically stuck with fruit, vegetables and fish. I wouldn’t recommend that. Emily Blunt and I would clutch at each other and cry because we were so hungry."  That's pathetic - utterly sad and pathetic.  But she's also said, "I've had directors say to me, 'You're the best actress for the role, but you've put on weight recently.' If people can't understand you've put on five pounds, I don't want to deal with them." 

I hope she expands this idea to no longer taking rolls that force her to say she's fat, even if the film is trying to make a point (because I don't think either Rachel or Prada accurately make the point that she's NOT fat). Can we please recognize that actresses who are thinner than one of my thighs are NOT fat?  Can we please write films for them that don't ask them to state that they are?  Can we please write films that don't explain fat as a state that comes about from eating too much chocolate or going off of drugs?  Can it not be an automatic personal failure?

By the way, as I type this and have Hathaway's IMDB page open, there is a Slim Fast ad running down it's side proclaiming that you, too, can kick your cupcake habit if you join the Slim Fast plan.  Oh, yes, of course - why didn't I think of that?  A small shake in a can would be SO much more fulfilling than a hearty salad or bowl of soup or light sandwich for lunch.  That must be why I'm fat.  Or maybe it's the drugs I quit taking or all the chocolate I eat. I don't mind commentary about what is/is not fat in films.  In fact, I welcome it.  However, what I object to is clearly thin actresses having to play the fat role because they're a size 6 instead of a 2.  I know we're not used to looking at normal sized women on screen, but how about we use a size 10 as the normal woman, even though size 14 is the norm?  Or wait, I know - how about we properly represent the full range of sizes and shapes women come in?  If I lined up all the women I see regularly, you would see a full range of heights, weights, and fitness.  You'd see thin and out of shape and you'd see plus-sized and in shape.  You'd see tall, short, thin, heavy, average, pudgy, slouchy, insecure, bold, casual, dressy, stylish, and style-challenged women.  And I hate when people say things like this and then close with, "But they're all beautiful" - but guess what?  They are.  They are beautiful on the inside AND the outside.  They are all loved and treasured by the people who know them.  They do wonderful things for people.  They work hard at their jobs.  They raise precious, loving children.  They are fierce competitors.  They're nerds and geeks, shopaholics and spendthrifts, great cooks and kitchen disasters.  What they are not are women who need to be continually told that a size 6 is fat.  They ARE beautiful, so there.

Being blonde is not the same as being fat

So there's this recent dust-up between Meghan McCain, Ann Coulter, and Laura Ingraham.  Meghan doesn't like Ann so Laura came to Ann's defense and called Meghan "plus sized" (among other things) which is as PC as you can get right now for calling someone fat, still a viable insult in the U.S.  Meghan McCain, by the way, is a size eight and admits that she went up to a size ten during the campaign.  Most women I know would be remarkably happy to be a size eight and I'm glad that Meghan McCain has said she is fine with how she looks.

Ingraham continued:

The left's indignation in this instance is manufactured and totally phony. If any off-the-cuff remark about a woman's size was condemnable, then where was the outrage when President Obama made a passing reference to Jessica Simpson's "weight battle" during his Super Bowl interview with Matt Lauer? And of course they look the other way when obvious personal attacks are levied against conservatives. Remember when Al Franken was the toast of all media for his book "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot"? Last month The View's Joy Behar called him a "fat guy"; and when I was a guest on The View a few years back she ridiculed Ann Coulter and me as "peroxide" blondes on Fox.

1. When Obama made that remark, he was commenting on the gossip magazines making a big issue out of how Simpson's high-waisted jeans looked on her, NOT on her alleged weight gain itself.  It's called metacommentary, sweetie; you might want to know that.

2. Rush Limbaugh IS FAT.  He IS.  Whether or not he's an idiot, each of you can believe what you wish, but you can't deny he's fat.  You also can't deny that it's entirely different for a woman to be fat in this country than it is for a man to be fat.  Did you see any women of Limbaugh's size speaking at CPAC recently?  No.  Is it a coincidence that both Coulter and Ingraham are very thin, blonde women?  I don't think so.  The double standard is alive and well (I won't even get into the comments and coverage of Hilary Clinton; it's too early to boil my blood).

3. Calling you a peroxide blonde is barely an insult.  If anything, I'm insulted that Behar couldn't come up with something cleverer.  Women dye their hair blonde because being blonde is still considered enviable and desirable.  At what point in recent history has being fat been considered enviable and desirable in our society?  Oh, that's right, IT HASN'T.  Being fat is still considered one of the worst things a woman could be.  In nearly any women's magazine survey I've read since I was ten years old, at least 60% of readers would rather [fill in the blank with terrible event like losing life savings or a limb] than gain TEN POUNDS.  That's right, TEN POUNDS is usually the standard bearer for horror.  Ten pounds?  I gain that when I PMS, please.

I am, by far, no expert on the fat acceptance movement.  In fact, I struggle with the idea a great deal.  I can't shake the feeling that my life would be significantly better and I would feel significantly better if I could lose 40-50 pounds.  The thing is, the reason I feel this way is because my life DID feel better and I DID feel better when I was that weight.  So maybe the truth of it is that you really do have to do what feels right for you, within reason.  Maybe someone else would be overjoyed to be my current size.  That's great and I would have absolutely no judgement for them.  I know for a fact that many women would be horrified to be the size that I wish I could be - that, even if they gained the weight while pregnant, they would feel like horrible failures of womanhood because they weighed so much, even though it was all in the service of creating and sustaining life.  Okay, for them I have a little bit of judgment.

But I don't want to concern myself with judging others and their weight battles or issues or concerns.  I don't want to, but I do - it's an endless source of fascination and thought for me, which is probably what happens when you are obese most of your life.

I know what it's like to be the grossly overweight person who gets stared at, pointed at, and called names by strangers.  I know what it's like to be the "acceptably" overweight (but still obese) person who is basically invisible to strangers.  I also know what it's like to be the newly "thin" (i.e. acceptable weight) person who suddenly has doors held open for her and strangers smiling at her and saying hello.  The funny thing is that none of these scenarios is comfortable.  Negative attention, lack of attention, or positive attention that has a painfully clear cause - it's all uncomfortable.  What have we done to women in our society so that they can't just rest in their bodies, no matter what size they are?

My $.02 on Jason and Molly

Who are Jason and Molly?

Jason is ABC's most recent "Bachelor" and Molly is the woman he chose... although not without some controversy.  Admittedly, I did not watch this season (or the last several seasons, but I have watched a few) but I got sucked in yesterday after catching the end of the final episode and the beginning of the "After the Final Rose Part 1" special.  Long story short: Jason dumped Molly and chose Melissa.  Soon thereafter he realized he made a mistake.  Six weeks after the finale, he dumped Melissa and asked Molly to take him back.  Six weeks after that, they filmed "After the Final Rose Part 2", which aired last night.

Well, you'd think that Jason revealed a hidden swaztika tattoo and asked Melissa if he could set her on fire.  People are seriously outraged (like... outraged!?$!1!).  Seriously, people?

1. Have you never been in love with two people at the same time?  If not, then judge not.  It is not a fun situation and it is difficult to manage an ideal ending where everyone ends up happy.  (It is possible, though, but usually only because someone involved really wasn't in love.)  Jason was clearly in love with two women at once and had an arbitrary TV deadline for making a choice.  Should he have asked for more time?  Sure, but no one's perfect.

2. To all the "Oh poor Melissa" people.  Melissa went on TV to find true love.  That in itself says this is all in the clear.  She signed a contract saying this could (and had to) all be aired.  Additionally, she was not ambushed.  She knew it was coming.  She also talks about herself in the third person, but I suppose I can't technically hold that against her (maybe).

3.  Regarding the rumors that this was all contrived.  I suppose it's possible but, again, it's also possible to be in love with two people at once.  Add a very weepy, emotional male and TV cameras to that already incendiary situation and what do you expect?

4.  Stop hating on Molly.  She loves Jason and when he dumped her, she told him he was making a huge mistake.  Okay, so every dumb girl on a TV dating show says that when they get dumped, but there was something actually sincere about it when she said it - and she was right!  (At least as far as we can know right now.)  Sometimes people do choose the wrong mate initially.  At least Jason had the integrity to change the situation as soon as he knew for sure and at least Molly had the good sense to swallow her pride and forgive him, but only after grilling him (at least that's what she says).

5. I hate the "Jason is a tool for doing this on camera; he should have done this privately" comments.  What part of "contractually obligated" do people not understand?  Do you know how much ABC could have sued him for if he dumped Melissa privately?  Say what you will, but this was a requirement.  Besides, they had had many email and phone conversations about the state of their relationship and weren't due to film the "After the Rose" special until twelve weeks had passed, not six.  You don't think Melissa had ANY inkling of what was coming?  If she didn't, well, her Happy Meal is short a few fries.

I hope Jason and Molly have a wonderfully successful relationship, not just to prove the naysayers wrong, but because they've both gone through so much to get to this point and I believe they both deserve some happiness.

The long and tart of it

Well, the tart turned out to be edible, yay!  I would change a few things for next time, though.  I think I need a higher quality lemon and to grind the sugar longer so the tart filling is less granular and smoother instead.  It wasn't the sort of thing you make where after one bite you're like, "MMmmm, oh this is GOOD!" (which is my favorite reaction).  It was good, maybe fair, but definitely not great - needs some work.  My dad and hubby ate up their slices, though, so at least it was good enough to eat.

I found the Oscars to be really enjoyable, but then I even enjoy the so-called "boring" ones.  I don't understand the reviews today saying that the show was even worse than ever.  I don't know what people expect; it's an awards show - it's a bunch of grossly overpaid people congratulating each other on one of the cushiest jobs one can have in our country.  How exciting is that going to be?  (But, ooh, I love the fashion and all the gossip-y-ness of the whole thing.)

My second job begins today.  I teach at a community college and their semester starts late, i.e. today.  I'm always nervous on the first day of any semester, but the first day is so easy - introductions, syllabus review, blah blah blah.  It's the first "real" lesson that's always the scariest... the first day where you ask your best, well-prepared discussion question... and all you hear is silence.  That's the scary moment yet to come.

I love teaching evening students, though - I find them to be so uniquely motivated and driven (not all, of course, but more so than the majority of traditional age, day students I know).  I'm excited to meet the new group I'll be spending four hours a week with until May.

I <3 NYC

Today I had to go into Manhattan for a meeting for work.  This made me deliriously happy?  Why's that?

1. I love NYC.

2. I love commuting into NYC.

3. I love being in NYC.

4. I had a half day and was home by 1:15pm.

I used to work in NYC and commuted via train every day.  I wish I still did that now.  The train was the best place to read, write, think, and relax.  (Today I took the bus, which I don't enjoy as much, but still enjoy.)  I really hope that eventually I get to commute into NYC again.  The only concern I can think of is when we have kids, it's a lot of traveling and not as easy to get home quickly if need be.  But even then, it's not terrible.  I used to walk out the door at 7:30am and would be at my desk at 8:30am.  I think that's a very reasonable commute considering it involved walking and two trains.  I really miss it a lot, and the amount of reading I used to get done.  I almost read a whole book today!

The meeting in NYC went fine.  The NYC office is waaaay nicer than either of the two locations I work in, so I was quite jealous.  The meeting was cool, very low-key.  Then we went out for lunch - I had a super yummy tomato basil tortellini soup and then saw Chelsea Clinton on the walk back towards the office.  Oh yeah, working in NYC allows you to see some famous people, which is always cool.  I used to see Isaac Mizrahi, Colin Cowie, and John Stewart fairly regularly.  I also saw Lindsey Lohan, Kate Hudson, the cast of Law & Order, and Chris Noth (Mr. Big swoon).

So, yeah, maybe I can work in NYC again one day.  I look for job listings all the time, but it's not really a great time for jobs (as we are all painfully aware).  But I keep hoping... now back to that book I almost finished today.