The "Lens of Love" reapplied

A few years ago I wrote a post that was driven by a conversation we had with a friend of ours from church, one where I came to the conclusion that the core of Christianity can be summed up by one directive: Love God (and, in doing so, love your neighbor). Everything else naturally stems from it.

Since I believe that God is love and anything that is of love is of God (and vice versa!), I brought up the concept of a "lens of love" through which your actions can be filtered: do your actions pass the test of love?

At the time, I applied the post mainly to the issue of whether or not homosexuality is a sin. Recently, however, I was engaged in some debate about another part of Scripture that insists that only men can be pastors/elders in the church, and, as an offshoot, that women must submit to their husbands.

Now, either side can pick apart specific verses to make their case. One can point to the creation story of Adam and Eve as evidence of a "created order". Or one can argue that the historical context addresses false teachings (that happened to be done by women who had likewise been taught wrong) and not women themselves as a whole.

I do believe it's important to consider the historical and cultural context in which a verse in question was written. EVERYONE does this to some degree. I don't think there's anyone who really takes the Bible 100% literally, or we'd all be following a bunch of arcane rules about wearing jewelry, mixing fabrics, and dealing with women on the rag.

In this case, for instance, I'd argue that Scripture says masters should treat their slaves well, and that slaves should submit to their masters, but that doesn't mean the Bible condones slavery-- it was just addressing examples of godly living for the circumstances of the day. Circumstances that include not only slavery but a very patriarchal society, one where women had few rights and were fully dependent on their husbands. In those days, "submit to your man" was very much the norm, maybe even a downright survival mechanism for women.

But where do you draw the line? 

After all, one could argue, even applying context is just another form of human (i.e. fallible) interpretation, so when you encounter specific guidance like this, where do you draw the line between applying contextual interpretation, and taking it literally (ignoring, for the moment, that even literal interpretation involves linguistic context)?

Well, that's where the "lens of love" comes into play.

No matter how you slice and dice it, claiming that only men can be pastors and that husbands must be heads of the household says only one glaringly obvious thing: that women are inferior to men. The "best" arguments I've seen in favor of these principles are always quick to defend themselves against this charge, insisting that men and women are indeed equal beings in the eyes of the Lord, they just have different roles to play. Biologically, that may be true-- Schwarzenegger's "Junior" notwithstanding, women are the ones who bear children.

But we're more than just biological beings, aren't we? That's the whole point of having a spirit and a soul, the whole point of being created in God's image.

So if you're saying that men and women are equal in the eyes of the Lord but have different roles to play, you're basically saying that men and women are "separate but equal". Gee-- why does that sound so familiar? That didn't really fly too well during the civil rights movement, and it doesn't really fly too well today. And for good reason:

When you examine this claim, that one fellow human being is inferior to you, through the "lens of love", it is most decidedly NOT a loving claim. By any stretch of the imagination. It fails the "love" test. You cannot claim that men and women have equal worth and yet relegate them to specific roles within the church and family based solely on gender. Therefore, I reject the notion that only men can be pastors or that women should submit to their husbands. Not because I'm part of a culture that promotes feminist ideals, but because those notions are the antithesis to love.

This is also why I continue to circle back to the single, lone directive in the Bible that is completely free of cultural and historical context: Love God, love your neighbor. Everything else just follows. And in this case, loving your neighbor means treating them and valuing them as human beings of equal worth to your own, no more, no less.

N'est-ce-pas?

Friday Five: Attraction Edition

Haven't done a Friday Five in ages, and lately Blogthings has been hosting their own Friday Five, so I thought I'd draw from them. Plus it gives me a chance to take one of their quizzes-- the answers of which are usually quite obvious, but are fun little time-wasters nevertheless :-)

Today's Friday Five is about attraction:

1. How accurate are your first impressions of people?
2. In your view, what sort of vibe do you give off?
3. If you’re in a crowd of strangers, what sort of people do you gravitate towards?
4. What is more likely to attract you to someone – their voice or their scent?
5. What Type Do You Fall For? Take the quiz and share your result. Is it true?

1. I've never been known for being an accurate judge of character, especially not with first impressions. But I think I get it right more than half the time. Maybe it's because I've gotten older and have had more experience dealing with different types of people, and can more easily detect the same patterns?

2. I like to think I give off a happy, carefree, approachable vibe. I feel like I'm more successful at it now than when I was younger, and I think that's maybe because I'm already settled and have no need to try and impress anyone.

3. I would gravitate towards people giving off the same vibe: happy, carefree, sociable and friendly. Maybe also the wallflowers, just because that what I usually was in social situations-- hanging back, feeling shy and timid, nervous about approaching other people. Sometimes it's a real relief to  have someone approach you and strike up a conversation. I'm still mindful of what it was like to be in their shoes, so I sympathize.

4. Ooooh, that's a tough one! A deep, beautiful voice (think Josh Turner) can make any girl swoon, and I'm no exception. But I think scents would do it more for me. In particular, I like a clean, fresh, crisp scent-- like a guy has just showered, put on freshly laundered clothes (I LOVE the smell of clothes laundered in Tide!), and applied just a little dab of aftershave. No cologne necessary-- in fact, I'd wager to say that most colognes would be too overpowering, even in small doses. A natural, fresh, clean scent is more to my liking. There is, after all, something to be said for the phenomenon of pheromones ;-)

5. Well, here are the results of my quiz:

You Fall for the Guy or Girl Next Door Type

You think that people make love too complicated, and what you want in a partner happens to be pretty simple. You're content with someone who's nice, attractive, honest, and normal. So how come that's so hard to find? You are fairly traditional, and you value security in relationships more than most people. It's important for you to find someone loyal. When you find the right person, you don't expect much from him or her. You're just happy to be together.

What Type Do You Fall For?

Blogthings: Take a Quiz. Annoy Your Friends.

I think it's pretty accurate. I've never been one for the dark, mysterious, bad-boy type. Or the dashingly handsome muscle dude that EVERY girl wants. This is pretty much evidenced by my "top 5" list that I blogged some years ago, and that hasn't really changed much (except to add Silas Weir Mitchell to the list-- whom, as you can see, also fits neither the "bad boy" or the "gorgeous hunk" type).

How about you?

Faking Jealousy?

Remember how I asserted that one of the "cons" of husbands is that they are constantly consternating? Well, one of the ways Allan in particular manifests this is that he will intentionally say and do things that get an irritated, annoyed "WTF is wrong with you!?" rise out of me. Sometimes this is physical-- maybe he tries to tickle or poke me, or makes weird faces at me. More often, though, it's verbal, and he'll intentionally say something mocking or provocative just to elicit a consternated, confounded response :-P

There is, however, one technique that would typically work on most women, but doesn't work on me. And that is evoking the green-eyed monster.

Neither of us really gets jealous of the other. We're confident enough in our relationship that we don't worry about that kind of stuff. We understand that it's perfectly natural for us to admire other people besides each other. My take on it is: how can my husband really appreciate me if he's unable to appreciate (the beauty of) other women? It's like admiring and appreciating a beautiful painting in a museum without feeling the slightest impulse to take it home.

So, we don't get jealous when the other spouse talks (or even flirts a little) with someone of the opposite sex. In fact, I actually think it's kinda neat if another woman tries to flirt with Allan-- shows that he's still got it, even in his 40's ;-)

So if jealousy doesn't get a rise out of me, what does? Well, all those other tactics I mentioned above. And these days, with Allan trying those other tactics to intentionally get a rise out of me, I think I may have to resort to faking a jealous response the next time a girl talks to him. Maybe that way, thinking he's fulfilled his "annoy Helly" quota for the day, he'll lay off the actions that TRULY consternate me ;-P

What do you think? Do you think it would work? ;-)

The Pros and Cons of Husbands

"Husbands: can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em!" -- such is a popular refrain punctuating the end of a conversation, argument, or blog post. At least, it is in my household and my realm ;-)

For today's blog post, I decided to try to map out the pros and cons of husbands. An exercise in futility, you say. We all know the cons outweigh the pros. Perhaps, but maybe keeping mindful of the pros will help put the cons into perspective, or at the very least, keep us from strangling our husbands. After all, last time I checked, murder was still a capital offense in this country :-P

First up, the pros:

1. Husbands make good heaters. On cold, chilly days like the ones we've been having lately, nothing is more efficient at warming you up than snuggling with a nice, warm husband under the covers.

2. They make good jar openers. Or tackle any other thing where physical strength is needed (assuming that he happens to be stronger than you).

3. They serve as stepladder substitutes. Much more convenient to have him fetch that item from the top shelf for you! Again, assuming he is taller than you.

What of the cons, then?

1. Snoring. I know women are just as guilty of this, but there is something about most men's snoring that no woman can compete with. It's not just loud, it's deep and rumbling so that even earplugs are useless. My own son doesn't want to sleep in the same room as Daddy because the snoring keeps him up!

2. They're smelly! Sure, wives are no beds of roses themselves, but husbands outshine them in that regard as well. It would take me hours of activity to work up as much sweat as my husband can accumulate in 30 minutes. And when it comes to passing gas? Which we're comfortable doing in front of each other because, well, we're married? Again, there is no comparison. Mr. Stinkbomb wins, hands-down!

3. When you have kids, they could pass along a Y chromosome, resulting in a son who... *drumroll*... is just like his Daddy. 'nuff said.

4. The pièce de résistance: Husbands are constant sources of consternation! My own husband personifies this a thousandfold by cracking lame jokes. By mocking me when he can think of nothing else to say. By purposefully doing things that annoy me (like attempt to tickle me). He picks on me and then "wins" arguments with the unbeatable "well, look who you married" line.

So really... as soon as the little man is grown and out of the house, and as soon as I get my own electric blanket, electric jar opener, and a small, convenient stepladder, hubby had better watch out! ;-)

What's in a Name? Part 3

When you have a pretty unique first AND last name, like I do, you're bound to get tons of misspellings, mispronunciations, and odd nicknames. I talked about some of the more common mistakes in a previous blog post: http://heckledtrio.blogspot.com/2008/02/whats-in-name.html

And while I've come to take the inevitable misspellings and mispronunciations in stride (hey-- what can you do? People don't do well with the unfamiliar!), there is one mistake that irritates me more than any other. And that's when people assume that my last name is the same as my husband's. Although it IS pretty funny when people directly address a 6'8" tall, obviously white guy as "Mr. Kwee" ;-)

While I acknowledge that the majority of married women in American society today still adopt their husband's last name upon marriage, it's quite obviously a growing trend for women not to, especially in areas where women are still in the minority, such as academia or the tech/engineering industry. And I've noticed that businesses that deal with a large variety of the population tend to not make that assumption: they usually ask me if I have the same name as Allan, when I'm giving out both of names (e.g. at the doctor's office).

I've never understood this remnant of a patriarchal society. In many cultures, the notion of adopting a spouse's name is unheard of. And yet we're supposed to be the progressive society? My boss is quite adamant against the practice; as she puts it: you lose part of your own identity when you take your spouse's name. And you're always tied to them in some manner. Plus, if you get divorced (which, hey-- there's a 50% chance of that happening in this society!) you either have to undergo the hassle of changing it again, or remain stuck with the name of your ex.

I'll admit that when I was making the decision about whether or not to change my name, I didn't think of it in quite the terms of social progress. I was merely thinking of convenience-- it's a headache to have to make all those changes and get brand new IDs and whatnot! Also, at the time I was considering going into academia, where it's already hard enough to get ahead as a woman, especially in an engineering field. Why make it that much harder by publishing under one name, and then later on, publishing under another?

But hey-- to each her own, and it is as much one woman's prerogative to change her name as it is my right to keep mine. And I did acknowledge that it is still more common for American women to take their husband's names, than for them to keep their maiden names. So calling me "Knight" is actually a fair assumption for most people to make. And I don't really get offended when they do.

However.

What I take issue with is when I politely *correct* said assumptions, and people STILL insist on using the wrong name.

The biggest culprit? Our son's school. It's pretty conservative. I've noticed that, in subtle ways, they really don't treat women as equals to men. They assume that the moms don't work during the day. When talking to both parents, they make more eye contact with the husband than with the wife. And let's not get started on the "wrong name" deal. Despite filling out forms, signing documents, and using an email address all containing my correct name, I still come out as "Helly Knight" or "Mrs. Knight", or worse yet,  "Mr. and Mrs. Allan Knight" in correspondence, sign-up rosters, and plain old being addressed, even in person.

It's all very reminiscent of the blatantly sexist treatment I got at the hands of a real estate agent when I visited an open house with a male friend of mine: http://heckledtrio.blogspot.com/2010/07/shopping-and-sexism.html

It amazes me that an organization consisting of mostly women (teachers and office staff) would take part in such patriarchal, sexist behavior. At the same time, it's also a conservative Christian organization, so I guess that shouldn't surprise me much. But you wouldn't continue misspelling/mispronouncing someone's name after they've corrected you, right? So why insist on calling me by my husband's name when I've clearly corrected you? I find that downright disrespectful!

Un bon repas au Stella Mare's

One of my favorite Pixar movies is "Ratatouille". Just as I love reading about a good meal, I enjoy a good film about good food, and that movie really had me hankering for some French cuisine.

I remember trying escargot the first time I ever dined in Paris, but beyond that, don't really recall much of the food, mostly because I was more interested in touring the sights than savoring the food, at the time.

I've always wanted to try a nice French restaurant here in Santa Barbara, but the few here were pretty expensive. But since we've been dropping a good C-note on fare at our favorite German restaurant, Brummi's, for our anniversary the last couple of years, we decided that this year's anniversary was a good excuse to splurge on some fine French food.

So, tonight, I took advantage of the last of the unseasonably warm weather, dressed up in one of my new dresses, and trooped out with the boys to Stella Mare's in Montecito.

(photo taken with our DSLR camera)

When we got there, we were a bit skeptical of the location, given that it was right next to the freeway and railroad tracks. But once we stepped inside, we were taken by the charm of this 150-year old renovated house. We chose seats in the large greenhouse/sunroom attached to the house. When our server asked if we were here for any special occasion, we informed her it was for our anniversary, and she immediately brought out complimentary glasses of champagne. A toast!

(photo taken with HTC One S)

Dinner was fabulous! We got there in time for happy hour, which allowed us to indulge in some cocktails (Allan had a Cosmopolitan while I tried a Lemon Drop-- both delicious!) and multiple appetizers: frog legs and escargot. I'd never tried frog legs before (I had a chance to in Indonesia, but after seeing how they treated their animals, I just couldn't stomach it), and decided that people were right-- it tasted like chicken. Dry chicken, mind you, but the tomato/garlic dressing made up for it. The snails with parsley butter were as delightful as I remembered in Paris, if a bit on the plainer side.

After dinner, we ordered dessert, but before ours arrived, we were treated to a complimentary dessert in honor of our anniversary: flourless chocolate torte. Normally I'm very wary of anything "flourless", but this was delicious!

(photo taken with Samsung Galaxy Relay)

The desserts were equally delightful-- chocolate-filled profiteroles, a chocolate cake filled with chocolate mousse, and an assortment of 4 chocolates. Can you say family of chocaholics? Hey, when it comes to European fine chocolates, one MUST partake!

Yes, we came home very sated. And glad that we finally got a chance to try out a great French restaurant with delicious food and superb service. A bit too pricey to go very often, but for special occasions? Tonight was a real treat!

Things You Do When You've Been Married Too Long

Tonight we had a small group of friends over and got a chance to introduce them to the game of "Things".  It's one of those games that can go downhill real fast, and how much fun it is depends on how much in the gutter your friends' minds can go. The deeper the better :-)

Basically, during each round, one person reads off a topic card, for example "Things you shouldn't say to your grandmother", everyone submits an anonymous answer, and then everyone goes around, taking turns trying to guess who answered what. As you can imagine, responses can run the gamut from the very tame to the downright obscene, and hilarity always ensues.

One other phenomenon that occasionally occurs is when more than one person submits the exact same answer. It really brings to mind the old "Great minds think alike... and so do ours!" adage.

Well, tonight proved that when you've been together as long as Allan and I have (and really, 9.5 years isn't really that long, compared to other people!) you start thinking alike.

There were a couple of rounds where we both gave somewhat similar answers. But then! Then came a round towards the end, where the topic was: "Things you've paid too much for".

Our answers? See for yourself:

No... our answers weren't similar. They were downright IDENTICAL.

This really does prove that we've been married too long. Not only did we give the exact same answer, but we both apparently felt that we'd paid some exorbitantly high prices in order to be married to each other ;-)

Things We Wish We Could Tweet/FB

Warning: not for the faint of heart!

About a year ago, I started jotting down some of the funny, irreverent, and downright dirty things that came up in conversation with Allan. Things that you'd love to Tweet or post on Facebook, but deemed rather inappropriate. So I thought I'd start saving them up privately, and before long, I'd amassed quite a collection. Now's the perfect time to blog it, I figured, so here you are. I'll leave it to your imagination to figure out who said what (aside from the obvious, of course).

MARRIAGE:

•  Mutual suspicion-- it's what makes a good marriage work
•  The day we stop cussing each other out is the day we know our marriage is in trouble
•  Our marriage is successful because it's the product of a failed divorce.

SEX:

•  Mental note: zerberts on the penis are good
•  (corollary to above) I just gave my husband a blowjob... literally! And he enjoyed it!
•  While making out with my husband, I heard a very clear and loud "boink!" (the IM chime on his phone)
•  Helly just got shocked by Allan's balls! (static)
•  She won't fake an orgasm, but she'll fake a tickle
•  Uh-oh, she's closing the blinds. She's either gonna fuck me or kill me.
•  (pouty-faced) I thought I was supposed to cum!
•  It's not GoToFuck! (on Allan staying in Portland while I'm in SB, and keeping in touch via chat/webcam, plus toys hooked up to each "other")
•  (in a resigned tone after finding nothing in the adult store) *sigh* I guess I'll have to buy a double-headed dildo online
•  "Ooh, baby! Do me 'till I dangle a participle!" (on sex while blogging-- and yes, for the record, this really works!)
•  Note to self: the apricot face scrub is NOT lube!
•  They're not speed bags, dammit, they're my testicles!

PERVERSION:

•  Allan: "I didn't marry a prude!" Helly: "No. *I* did!"
•  My wife's definition of "decorum" is saying "boob sex" instead of "titty fuck". Sigh.
•  What are you talking about!? You have your own built-in strapon! (Helly responding to Allan's assertion that she has more experience with strapons than he does)
•  Is a JB (possibly acronym for Jitter Buffer) a reverse blowjob? If so, does it mean the woman tries to spit cum back into the man's penis until it goes flaccid?

MISCELLANY:

•  You know... fuck being Asian! (on the practice of lugging around tons of souvenirs to bring home when traveling)
•  Is word leprosy an STD? (see this post for more on "word leprosy": http://heckledtrio.blogspot.com/2010/01/word-leprosy.html)
•  Humans: can't live with 'em... fuck 'em!

Marriage: A Partnership

It is Day 1 of the November NaBloPoMo, and, as is the case each year, it always kicks off with our anniversary. Today the husband and I celebrate 8 years of marriage. EIGHT years! Where does the time go! That's 4 times longer than our previous relationship records. And we're still going strong. Of course, in the grand scheme of things, 8 years isn't really that long. I'm sure there are those more experienced out there who are thinking: yeah right, just wait till you hit 15 years, 20 years, 30 years... and that's a valid point. If I'm still blogging 7 years from now, I'll try to remember to revisit this and see how things are going at 15 years. The question is... who of my readers will still be reading and remind me? ;-)

I got to thinking about what makes a marriage work. You can glean nuggets of wisdom from both the experts and from people who have lived long, satisfying marriages. Of course, you get different opinions on what the key ingredient to a successful marriage is. I think the only single thing that is universally true is that it's all different! That, really, is my main take-away from all those articles and interviews that showcase marriage/relationship longevity: you gotta figure out what works for you!

For me and Allan, it's a couple of key factors.

1. We work together, not against each other. And I mean that literally. Everything is an equal partnership, from household chores (he usually cooks, I usually clean, and on weekends we divide up the weekly house cleaning) to raising the boy (he gets him ready in the morning and off to school, I pick him up and get him ready for bed at night) to discussing major household decisions. At the same time, we know we can count on each other to fill in when we're unable to take fulfill our "main" responsibilities.

2. There has to be some give and take. The greatest example is sex. By and large, men have a bigger sex drive than women, so for the most part, the man is gonna want it more frequently than the woman. That's just the way nature rolls, and there's honestly nothing wrong with that. We've found that bartering works remarkably well-- trade sex for doing the dishes ;-) Kidding! Actually, only half-kidding. We don't make a regular practice of "bartering" for sex, but once in a while it actually does work. Allan gets his nookie and I get out of doing a mundane chore for a night. It's win-win all around! ;-)

On a more serious note, though, there really is nothing wrong with a bit of compromise. I'm sure Allan would like it more often than we do it, and I could get by less often than we do it (especially when Todd is in town, keeping us busy and wearing us out), so how often we DO do it is our compromise. And yes, there are times when I don't really feel like it, but go ahead with it anyway. More often than not, I wind up having fun and saying "I'm glad you started that", but if not-- no big deal. It's not an affront to Allan, and he doesn't take it as such.

Sex is an integral part of marriage, but it's not the end-all-be-all. It's fun, but shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Which brings me to my last point:

3) We don't take each other, or any issues that crop up, too seriously. That's not to say that we treat serious issues cavalierly. We deal with what comes up, and don't let it consume our lives. Equally important is feeling that there isn't anything you can't discuss. After all, what's a spouse if not your best friend, the person with whom you're free to confide everything in?

The corollary to that is being able to be lighthearted about anything. Even serious topics like divorce. I've known people who thought that the mere mention of it spelled doom for their marriage. Nonsense. If you can't freely talk about it, how can you address issues that might be serious enough to make you contemplate divorce? Not only do Allan and I freely discuss it when relevant, but we also feel free to joke about it. And there's nothing wrong with that, so long as joking is not the only way you ever discuss divorce. It lends a bit of levity to an otherwise depressing topic.

And when it comes to laughter-- what better way to diffuse an argument than with a bit of funny? I can certainly attest to how well that works: http://heckledtrio.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-to-diffuse-argument.html

I guess the nutshell version of this isn't all that different from the generic advice you get from others: teamwork, compromise and humor.

What works for you?

The Meme where we reveal our secrets

Throughout my years of blogging, I've done several Q&A type quizzes, memes and posts dealing with the more private aspects of myself: from deeper ruminations about life to lighthearted trivia about my own quirks and foibles. Today Tabitha posted her response to a meme that's currently going around: revealing some of your secrets on video. Here is my version.



Some of you may already be familiar with some of the tidbits on there. Some of it will be new to you. Either way, I had fun making this video, and was surprised by 1) how easily the ideas started flowing once I started (and I had some serious writer's block when I began!) and 2) how personal it got.

How about you? What are some of your deeper secrets?

(The accompanying song in the video is called "Gently" and is from http://www.danosongs.com)

Better to have loved and lost, or...?

There's the age-old adage: "Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all". Some people agree with it, some people disagree with it. I personally think it all depends on the context.

First, there are a number of ways this "loss of love" could have occurred. Perhaps one partner died. And even then, perhaps he/she died of old age after many years of being together. Or perhaps the surviving spouse is left a young widow(er). Perhaps one was unceremoniously dumped. Perhaps they just grew up, grew apart, and went amicably on their separate ways.

And whether or not I agree with that statement really depends on those factors, on the circumstances of the separation.

Death? Perhaps I would agree. Especially in old age. At some point it is inevitable, and even if it happened unexpectedly at a younger age, it's one of those things that just happens in life (or end of life, as the case may be) that you can't really predict, and that you have to be prepared for. Just as you have to be prepared for the ups and downs that make up a normal marriage. So, as heartbreaking as a partner's death may be, this adage does paint a picture of the brighter times together and the love shared in life.

A bad breakup? I would probably disagree. It sounds so cliche, and if those words were offered to me as comfort, I doubt I'd find much solace in them. I mean, I just got dumped, I really don't need pithy philosophical sayings to heal the hurt. And maybe, just maybe, a bad breakup is indicative of the fact that I'm just better off without him, in which case the adage is false-- it's better to be rid of him, and not having known him at all might have spared me this heartache.

Then there are relationships that dissolve amicably. I'm a pretty firm believer that only in rare cases can a pair of exes remain friends. Unless the breakup was 100% mutual and due largely to *both* partners growing up/apart mutually, one party is always going to have more emotional baggage than the other, and that isn't conduce to a healthy friendship. Maybe one secretly wants more (usually the dumped one) than friendship. Or maybe there's underlying feelings of hostility over the breakup that always linger. In any event, since this separation is less emotionally-charged, the adage becomes something of a practical viewpoint: what have I gained in that relationship? What have I learned, and how have I grown? And if the answer is "nothing", then it evidently made no difference at all if I even knew the other person or not. And if it's something positive, then yes, maybe it was better to have loved and "lost", though I don't really think you could call it a "lost" love, could you?

So yeah. That old saying is one of those that I generally don't agree with, except in certain circumstances. But maybe that's because I'm not an overly emotional person myself, and so I don't really get the whole emotional scene that accompanies relationships and their inevitable roller coasters, or the fallout when they end.

Of course, given how often I try to sell my husband, who knows what tune I'd be singing once I found a serious buyer and the transaction was finalized ;-)

Does This Make Me Look Fat?

That is one of those trick "female" questions that never fails to confound men... or me.

Three things come to mind:

1. If you are asking this question honestly, then expect an honest answer. If you're just trying to fish for compliments, the you've got bigger issues than your dress size or perceived weight issues. And if you're just seeking some reassurance (as we're all wont to do sometimes), then make that clear, don't put your man on the spot with a loaded question!

2. Just because your man says "yes" to the question, does NOT mean that he's calling you a fat whale and telling you to lose weight (unless he says so explicitly, in which case, again, you've got bigger issues at hand). He's simply saying that this PARTICULAR outfit is not exactly flattering to you. The same can go for a variety of factors-- for example, just because the color of a sweater is wrong for your complexion, doesn't mean you're pale or sallow, it just means that you should wear a different color! Stop reading things into a very specific question about a specific outfit.

3. Related to the "honesty" thing above: lets say that you are indeed wearing an outfit that looks unflattering on you. Maybe the color is wrong for you. Maybe it has a plunging neckline and you don't have the cleavage to support it. Maybe it accentuates the bit of tummy roll from you last baby, instead of hiding it. Maybe you've done up your hair in a way that makes you look like a freak. Maybe your makeup is a little too strong or colorful. Would you rather have your man lie to you to spare your oh-so-fragile ego, and allow you to go out in PUBLIC, dressed like a fool? I don't know about you, but I'd much rather have my husband give my clothes (and combinations of them) a truthfully critical eye, thereby saving me the embarrassment of going outside wearing things that look blatantly awful on me!

I don't understand why this has to be such a contentious issue. While I concede that there are tactful ways to answer "yes" to the "does it make me look fat?" question, the bottom line is that if you ask the question, expect an honest answer. And if you don't want to hear the truth, don't ask the question! Simple as that.

Boy, am I glad I don't have to put up with women, at least not in the sense of long-term relationships :-P

Sleeping separately

I read an interesting article on CNN today, called "We're married, sleeping separately". Here's the link-- have a gander:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/09/12/lw.sleep.alone.when.married/index.html

The article piqued my interest because that's the exact arrangement Allan and I have now. It inadvertently started when Todd began living with us full time, and the lack of space forced Todd to share the queen-sized bed with Allan while I slept on the futon in the living room. It's the primary reason that we selected a memory foam mattress for our futon-- it gets more use as a bed than as a sofa.

When Todd returned to LA at the beginning of the summer, we realized that sleeping together was tougher than we anticipated, for a myriad of reasons:

1. (the paramount reason) I'm a sensitive sleeper. I wouldn't say I'm a light sleeper, exactly, but I am more sensitive to movements, light and noise that are more likely to awaken me than your average person.

2. Allan moves around fairly violently in his sleep, shaking the bed enough to wake me sometimes.

3. Allan doesn't snore often, but when he does, it's LOUD. Again, see #1.

4. Allan tends to be an earlier riser than me. Not because he goes to bed earlier-- we usually conk out at the same time, but because he gets by on less sleep than I do. Now combine all the elements I described in #1 (light, movement, noise) and you'll see they're all prevalent when he gets up before I do.

Sleeping in separate beds solved all of the above. AND it allowed us to set our own sleep schedules.

So I can definitely relate to all the couples interviewed in that article. I disagree with what one psychologist says, about warning that sleeping separately spells trouble in a marriage: "My feeling is that sleeping together is a very, very important part of being integrated with each other." Not necessarily. Couples do many things together and a few things on their own. So long as the latter doesn't outnumber the former, then sleeping can be one of those "separate" things-- as long as most everything else is done together. And even then, a little "alone" time now and then is healthy, and, I believe, vital.

Look at it: eating, talking, watching TV, going out-- I'm sorry, but those activities are far more likely to bring you closer together and "integrated" with each other, because you're actively involved. Sleeping? As one guy in the article pointed out, when you're asleep, you don't know there's anyone there, anyway!!

I'm reminded of an episode of "King of Queens", where Doug and Carrie have to sleep in separate twin beds while their larger bed is being repaired. Enthralled with their newfound "freedom", they start doing everything separately, to the point of planning out separate vacations. Now THAT is going too far. But that also has nothing to do with sleeping together-- what's the use of sharing the same bed if Doug is going to Ohio while Carrie goes to Florida, for summer vacation? In that case, the sleep arrangements are just one more symptom of a deeper underlying problem.

For us, sleeping separately has far more benefits than disadvantages, we're happy with the arrangement, and do practically everything else as a couple. So poo-poo to those who think there's something wrong with it. It works for us, and we couldn't be happier... or healthier!

Another test

A little time-killer. This one was reminiscent of the "Everything Test" we all took last week.
And the results of this one should surprise no one. How I got a PG-13 on the Everything Test while getting these scores on this test, is beyond me:

..> ..>

The eXtreme Relationship/Sexuality Test

Your overall dating experience is 36%.     Your sexual experience is 57%, higher than 71% of other test-takers.     Your sex-drive level is 78%, higher than 89% of others.     Your morality index is 4 out of 10, where lower is less inhibited.     The average scores are 33% dating and 42% sexual experience.

Find out how you compare! Take the test!     brought to you by thatsurveysite

My Profile Song (Männer sind Schweine)

Got a question about my current profile song, and I thought I'd entertain it here on my blog. The song is called "Männer sind Schweine", which means "Men are Pigs" in German, and it's by a punk rock band called Die Ärzte (The Doctors). It's very tongue-in-cheek, made even funnier by the fact that it is sung by an entirely all-male band. The song was a big hit in Germany several years ago, and you have to admit-- the tune is kinda catchy!

Here are the lyrics, with my best attempt at an English translation. Don't mind the boring sound of the English verse, you know how it goes-- things always get lost in translation :-D The player is attached here, so you can just click the play button and listen along while you read the lyrics :-)






..> ..>

Hallo mein Schatz, ich liebe Dich Du bist die Einzige für mich Die anderen find' ich alle doof deswegen mach ich Dir den Hof		Hello my dear, I love you You are the only one for me I find all the others dumb therefore I want to go out with you
Du bist so anders, ganz speziell Ich merke so was immer schnell Jetzt zieh' Dich aus und leg' Dich hin Weil ich so verliebt in Dich bin		You are so different, so very special I always notice such things quickly Now take your clothes off and lie down Because I'm so in love with you
Gleich wird es dunkel, bald ist es Nacht Da ist ein Wort der Warnung angebracht:		It's getting dark, it will soon be night So here's a word of warning to heed:
Männer sind Schweine Traue ihnen nicht, mein Kind Sie wollen alle das Eine weil Männer nun mal so sind		Men are pigs Do not ever trust them, my child They all want only one thing Because that's how men are
Ein Mann fühlt sich erst dann als Mann wenn er es Dir besorgen kann Er lügt, dass sich die Balken biegen Nur um Dich ins Bett zu kriegen		A man feels very manly only when he can give it to you He'll lie and promise you the moon Just to get you in the sack
Und dann, am nächsten Morgen weiss er nicht einmal mehr, wie Du heisst Rücksichtslos und ungehemmt Gefühle sind ihm völlig fremd		And then, the next morning He won't even remember your name Inconsiderate and unrestrained, He's a complete stranger to emotions
Für ihn ist Liebe gleich Samenverlust Mädchen sei Dir dessen stets bewusst:		He equates love with giving you his seed So girls, always be aware:
Männer sind Schweine Frage nicht nach Sonnenschein Ausnahmen gibt's leider keine in jedem Mann steckt auch immer ein Schwein		Men are pigs Don't expect eternal sunshine Unfortunately there are no exceptions Because every man has an inner pig
Männer sind Säue Glaube ihnen nicht ein Wort sie schwören dir ewige Treue und dann am nächsten Morgen sind sie fort		Men are sows Don't believe a word they say They will swear everlasting faithfulness and then disappear the very next morning
(Spoken) "Männer!? Diese schrecklichen haarigen Biester! Die einen immer antatschen müssen! U-u-und dabei wollen sie alle nur das selbe von einem Mädchen!"		(Spoken) Men!? Those awful, hairy beasts! They have to feel up everything! A-a-and they all want the same thing from a girl!
Und falls Du doch den Fehler machts und Dir 'nen Ehemann anlachst mutiert Dein Rosenkavalier bald nach der Hochzeit auch zum Tier		And if you still make the mistake of letting yourself get hitched your knight in shining armor will turn into an animal shortly after the wedding
Da zeigt er dann sein wahres Ich ganz unrasiert und widerlich trinkt Bier, sieht fern und wird schnell fett und rülpst und furzt im Ehebett		Then he'll finally reveal his true self Unshaven and disgusting drinks beer, watches TV and gets fat quick and burps and farts in your bed
Dann hast du King Kong zum Ehemann darum sag' ich Dir, denk bitte stets daran:		Then you'll have King Kong for a husband Therefore I say to you, always remember:
Männer sind Schweine Traue ihnen nicht mein Kind sie wollen alle nur das Eine für wahre Liebe sind sie blind		Men are pigs Do not ever trust them, my child They all want only one thing They are blind to what true love really is
Männer sind Ratten Begegne ihnen nur mit List Sie wollen alles begatten was nicht bei drei auf den Bäumen ist		Men are rats Approach them with great caution They want to fuck everything That has a pulse
Männer sind Schweine Frage nicht nach Sonnenschein Ausnahmen gibt's leider keine in jedem Mann steckt auch immer ein Schwein		Men are pigs Don't expect eternal sunshine Unfortunately there are no exceptions Because every man has an inner pig
Männer sind Autos nur ohne Reserverad Yeah, yeah, yeaaahhh...		Men are cars that lack a spare tire Yeah, yeah, yeaaahhh...

(originally posted at: http://www.myspace.com/hellykwee/blog/273642286)