well, some would say so...
I head back to school Friday. No, our school isn't starting monday; I simply have JOB TRAINING! woo! We have to be enthusiastic about it--it's in our contract. The staff at school has nearly every hour for the next three weeks of my life scheduled out to properly train me to be a resident advisor. That's right, for one whole year I will be responsible for the safety and well being of some 63 students all going through the same struggles, tribulations, and confusing path-choices that I am, I will be largely responsible for helping them--guiding them through these decisions this year. God help us all.
Still, I am very excited to be getting back to LA (never thought I'd say that in my life..), this has been a trying and confusing summer and at this point I think the only thing that will help bring clarity is being able to get out of everything--lift my head above the smog as it were. I miss my friends in LA, hell I miss hanging out with people my own age. I think it's funny just how far apart people can be in thinking even if they're the same age or just a couple years apart. I suppose it's just part of growing up, everyone goes down different paths to get there.
My books and DVD's are packed, my new kitchen stuff is organized and sorted. Friday I'm LA or bust.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Monday, August 07, 2006
Who are you?
Some say that we are defined by the friends we make. Others say that we grow as people because of the environment we put ourselves in--by the friends we take into our lives. But at what point do we grow because of our friends, and at what point is our growth hindered by them?
Everyone is familiar with the tired old addage "be yourself." While i'm not disputing it's validity, I wonder how sincerely we keep to such a rigid rule. How does one "be themselves" anyway? I suppose it would start with knowing who you, as a person, really are. This takes us back to the beginning: we are what our friends make of us. Is this absolutely true? Absolutely not. But I believe that we would be fooling ourselves to say that we do not (at times) bend ourselves to fit the image of what our friends want us to be. There are times we do not make a snide remark out of politeness because it may offend one of our friends, even if we find it hysterical. We forgive our friends for saying something inappropriate because "that's just how they are."
Everytime we let something go, everytime we don't say what's on our minds, or on our hearts we placate ourselves to the image we want to maintain in our friends eyes. We are all guilty of allowing ourselves to fold the will of others, simply because being true to ourselves every waking moment of every day is just too tiresome. For those of you who are currently shaking their heads I do not say that it is done intentionally, or even consciously; but I'll bet that once or twice in your life you've really wanted to do something and thought better of it because of what others might say.
So, we cut our stones against that of our friends, in order to help shape who we are. Doing so is neccessary to make us well-rounded individuals. So when do we decide when to chip and when to be chipped? Friendship, relationships, life, everything is about give and take. It is a dance between Person A and World B and I suppose the real trick is not letting your partner step on your toes.
If none of this made any sense, then I only hope you don't feel like you wasted your time here. But if this sounds familiar, then please tell me. If you feel that sometimes it just feels like you've bent over backwards so that world can push you a little further, then talk to me--reach out and let me know. Perhaps we can found a support group, and maybe between the two of us we can find a way to put a stop to it.
Everyone is familiar with the tired old addage "be yourself." While i'm not disputing it's validity, I wonder how sincerely we keep to such a rigid rule. How does one "be themselves" anyway? I suppose it would start with knowing who you, as a person, really are. This takes us back to the beginning: we are what our friends make of us. Is this absolutely true? Absolutely not. But I believe that we would be fooling ourselves to say that we do not (at times) bend ourselves to fit the image of what our friends want us to be. There are times we do not make a snide remark out of politeness because it may offend one of our friends, even if we find it hysterical. We forgive our friends for saying something inappropriate because "that's just how they are."
Everytime we let something go, everytime we don't say what's on our minds, or on our hearts we placate ourselves to the image we want to maintain in our friends eyes. We are all guilty of allowing ourselves to fold the will of others, simply because being true to ourselves every waking moment of every day is just too tiresome. For those of you who are currently shaking their heads I do not say that it is done intentionally, or even consciously; but I'll bet that once or twice in your life you've really wanted to do something and thought better of it because of what others might say.
So, we cut our stones against that of our friends, in order to help shape who we are. Doing so is neccessary to make us well-rounded individuals. So when do we decide when to chip and when to be chipped? Friendship, relationships, life, everything is about give and take. It is a dance between Person A and World B and I suppose the real trick is not letting your partner step on your toes.
If none of this made any sense, then I only hope you don't feel like you wasted your time here. But if this sounds familiar, then please tell me. If you feel that sometimes it just feels like you've bent over backwards so that world can push you a little further, then talk to me--reach out and let me know. Perhaps we can found a support group, and maybe between the two of us we can find a way to put a stop to it.
Saturday, August 05, 2006
Troublesome
I was sitting in my living room last week with three other people, watching a very good movie. "An Unfinished life" starring Robert Redford and Morgan Freeman--two ranchers who've lived together on their farm in Wyoming almost their whole lives and who probably love each other but would never admit to anything so propesterous. The movie is touching and heartwarming (in a roughneck sort of way) and is an all around good movie about reaching out and finding a connection with someone.
Yet at the end of the movie, as the credits began to role, the lulling sense of a good movie was brutally interuppted by the loud voice of the person sitting beside me "well that was a chick flic!" Said the booming bass. The other two people heartily agreed. I protested that it was not a chick flic because it showed emotions. The reluctantly downgraded the movie to a "date movie."
I have noticed a pattern (mostly with males) that any movie that displays a person's emotions candidly and vividly is written of quickly as a "chick flic." That is to say, any movie that breaks through this shell people put around them and expose the naked and vulnerable side of who we really are cannot be enjoyed by guys--emotions are for chicks. Such a mentality leaves a taste in my mouth not unlike old milk. What are we so afraid of that we cannot openly look at the relationship between two people without the need for some sexual controversy to justify this foray into their feelings? More importantly why is it automatically assumed that because a movie is dramatic, it cannot be enjoyed outside the context of romantic involvement?
Yet at the end of the movie, as the credits began to role, the lulling sense of a good movie was brutally interuppted by the loud voice of the person sitting beside me "well that was a chick flic!" Said the booming bass. The other two people heartily agreed. I protested that it was not a chick flic because it showed emotions. The reluctantly downgraded the movie to a "date movie."
I have noticed a pattern (mostly with males) that any movie that displays a person's emotions candidly and vividly is written of quickly as a "chick flic." That is to say, any movie that breaks through this shell people put around them and expose the naked and vulnerable side of who we really are cannot be enjoyed by guys--emotions are for chicks. Such a mentality leaves a taste in my mouth not unlike old milk. What are we so afraid of that we cannot openly look at the relationship between two people without the need for some sexual controversy to justify this foray into their feelings? More importantly why is it automatically assumed that because a movie is dramatic, it cannot be enjoyed outside the context of romantic involvement?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
