December 12, 2010


So, I was trying to think of a name for the blog and I settled on Too Much Information for obvious reasons.  Anyone who’s ever spoken with me for longer than 30 seconds has probably thought:  “Holy Crap!  Why is he telling me this?  Stop!”  I’m the king of too much information.  I realize this, but it’s just too funny to stop.

Anyways, as I was thinking of a name, my train of thought led me to think of different texting/chatting acronyms.  I thought LOL would be a good one, because I try to be funny.  Then I started thinking about LOL.  Laugh Out Loud.  Everyone….right now, do a quick tally in your brain how many times you have typed or texted “LOL”.  Alright…now think how many times you typed LOL that you ACTUALLY LAUGHED OUT LOUD in response to whatever was so funny.  I’m going to go out on a limb and guess it isn’t very often, if ever. 

Someone types something funny, and we respond with “LOL”, apparently saying that is was so freaking funny that we couldn’t contain ourselves and broke out laughing wherever we were.  Imagine if this were true…if people actually laughed out loud every time they typed that they were laughing out loud, we would see people laughing all the time.  At their desks at work, walking down the street, in the grocery store…everyone would just be walking around laughing to themselves like crazy people. 

What people are really trying to say when they say “LOL” is that they found something to be funny.   Not necessarily, Laugh Out Loud funny, but funny nonetheless.   The problem is that we only have an acronym for something that is crazy laugh out loud funny, but we don’t have a good acronym for normal funny.   This is where we make our mark on American culture.  I think we need to come up with an acronym for normal funny.  I know sometimes people type “hahaha”.  This is useful because you can increase the number of “ha’s” depending on how funny something is.  “hahahahahahahahaha” is obviously more funny than “haha”.  (by the way, if you are chatting or texting in spanish, it’s “jajajaja”.  I’m serious.)  I think this is the best alternative to LOL.  It feels a little more juvenile, but it is more accurate, and more flexible.  Are there any better alternatives? How about “LIMHBIAAWACLOLOPWKIACAIGF”, which stands for “Laughing In My Head Because I Am At Work And Can’t Laugh Out Loud Or People Will Know I Am Chatting And I’ll Get Fired”?

Anyways, all I’m saying is I feel disingenuous when I type LOL even though I didn’t’ really laugh out loud.  There’s got to be a better way

New Blog

I started blogging not too long ago when I thought I was going to be raising triplet daughters.  The purpose of my blog was intended to share pictures and stories with my family and close friends.  It quickly became inappropriate to post pictures and stories of the babies once a DNA test revealed I was not the father of the babies.  As a result, it became a place for me to share my random opinions and observations...just like any other blog.   I may not have triplet daughters, but I still have opinions.  It's probably self indulgent, but no one is making you read it! Hopefully I can be more honest and forthright in this blog than in the previous one and hopefully this blog is never discovered by the individuals that I may discuss.  

I included the last post on my previous blog that I removed at the request of my ex-wife.  Also because I found it very creepy that the D-bag who knocked up my ex-wife with triplets was reading my blog.

Unconditional Love

Most people who read this know I've been dealing with some stuff lately. I’m trying to work through this concept, so bear with me and let me know if you have any insight...any comments are welcome.  I’m trying to figure out how love gets turned on/off, specifically concerning relatives. For whatever reason, generally speaking, you automatically love your family, even if for no other reason than they are family. Your family is your family. Even if you have nothing in common with a brother or sister or don’t even get along with them, you still love them. Now taking that to the next level, when you have children, you love them instantly. Before they are even born, you love them. The second they leave the womb, you feel a bond to those children that only a parent can really understand. Even if those children end up as murderers, you will still love them.

What is that bond? Why do you love children so much? Many will probably answer that the instant connection is partly due to the fact that they are something you helped create, they share your genetic material, and consequently, they are part of you. However, this doesn’t account for the tremendous love and bond that parents who adopt feel for their children. They feel the same connection and love for their children even though they don’t have a blood or genetic connection, so that can’t really be the cause for such tremendous love.

A more likely reason that the love between parent and child is so strong is due to the responsibility bestowed on the parent to care for, nurture, and teach the child. I think the love is a result of the dedication, sacrifice and responsibility involved with raising a child.

So, what I’m trying to wrap my head around is…let’s say you have children. You were there every step of the pregnancy, watched them be born, and experienced that instant connection with your babies. You love them unconditionally and would do anything for them. Then it turns out they aren’t your children. You have no genetic connection to them whatsoever. But you still love them just as much. Your feelings for the babies didn’t change at all. Then it turns out you have no legal, financial or any other responsibilities for the children. Now what? Your feelings still don’t change. You still love the babies just as much. Why? So it isn’t the genetic connection or the responsibility causing it. There must be something else causing this connection. Where does this come from? How do you turn it off? Should you turn it off or even want to turn it off? How can you have the unconditional love of a parent one day, and then remove it the next day? That’s the problem with unconditional love…its unconditional. It’s a crazy emotional conundrum where an unconditional emotional bond was created under false pretenses, but since the bond in unconditional, it can’t be removed, even once the conditions of that bond being developed are determined to be false. You can’t stop caring about someone it’s unhealthy to care for. It’s like emotional check-mate. What do you do with that?

December 5, 2010

Dancing - Visual Noise

On Friday night, I was sick of sitting at home alone feeling sorry for myself, so I drove around and ended up going to a dueling piano bar not too far from my house. I just sat in the corner by myself, drinking some water and listened to the music. A couple observations from that evening:

Observation 1:
Dancing is weird. I’m not just talking about specific dances like the lawn mower or roger rabbit or running man or worm or sprinkler – all of which were on display at the piano bar – I’m talking about the concept of dancing in general. I realize I’m the minority and that most humans enjoy dancing in some form or another, but I really just don’t get it. I’m perfectly content to keep my arms tucked nicely by my side and can’t imagine a scenario where I feel like I would want to express myself by flailing my arms over my head.

This is the thing…I understand and appreciate dance as an art. I enjoy watching professionals dance in dance concerts or ballet or whatever, and can appreciate the immense athleticism, talent, and dedication it takes to become a good dancer and perfect the art. That’s not what I’m talking about. You see, I was a music major in college and I feel there are lots of parallels between becoming a good musician and a good dancer (sans the athleticism). Both require natural talent coupled with years of practice and study to develop the skills. What I’m talking about are people who go out on dance floor in public and start moving their bodies in crazy, awkward and silly ways that is just plain weird. Does that really make people happy? How is that enjoyable? I think I’m just missing that gene, because I swear and don’t ever remember a time where I enjoyed dancing. Heck, I don’t remember a time where I danced without being forced to in order to conform to social norms. I’ve certainly never been in a situation where I was in a room full of people, listening to music, and thought to myself, “You know what? This music is great and all, and there is a nice beat, but I feel like the experience just isn’t quite complete….maybe if I start gyrating and throwing my arms in the air and spinning around it’ll fill the void I feel right now…shoot, maybe it would be even better if I did it in close proximity to other people…”

Clearly, this only worsens after people have started drinking and lose their inhibitions, which clearly God gave to us on purpose to prevent us from acting like uncoordinated monkeys in front of other people. Inhibitions are good. They keep us from doing stupid things.

If you go back to the similarities between dancing and music, watching a professional dance concert or recital is like listening to a professional musician. It’s great, inspirational, and beautiful. Going to a club, or dance, or party….it’s basically like having grown adults walk up to a piano in the room and just start banging on it like a 3 year old kid. It’s not enjoyable. Imagine you are at a club, hanging out, and there is a piano in the room. You’ve never taken a piano lesson and don’t know how to play, but you walk up to it anyways and just start banging on it, with a huge smile on your face, having the time of your life while everyone else laughs. THAT’S WHAT DANCING IS! VISUAL NOISE! Then, while you are banging on the piano, you make contact with a girl or guy and they walk over to you and sit next to you and start banging on it next to you…a terrible duet. That’s what I felt like watching these drunk people dance together at the club.

Observation 2: As clearly evidenced by the rant on dancing above, I’m a boring person. It’s just the way I am. I won’t dance, I’ll never sing karaoke, and I’m just not the type of person to sit a table of friends a laugh and have a good time. That isn’t to say I don’t enjoy myself and am not happy, I just don’t demonstrate it like most the world seems to. I wish I weren’t so boring, but it doesn’t seem likely to change. So, if I’ve ever been in a social setting with you in the past and was totally boring, I’m sorry. I’m just missing that gene I guess.

September 3, 2010

The Glass is Half Empty

I know I haven’t written a lot lately, and I feel badly about that. It isn’t so much that I haven’t had any ideas on what to write about, but it is more that some things are best not documented. Anyways, I have made a couple observations lately that I feel are worth sharing, and by that I mean I feel they are preposterous enough to perpetuate the perception that I’m weird. (My high school AP English teacher would be proud of my use of alliteration).

First of all, let’s tackle the phrase “I could care less”. I could care less that people don’t correctly use the phrase “I couldn’t care less”. See what I did there? I combined the incorrect usage with the correct usage. If you COULD CARE LESS that implies you DO care! Clearly, if you “could care less”, you must care at least enough that there is some room where you could decrease your amount of caring to be less that it currently is. The point is that you are saying you DO care when you are trying to imply that you DON’T care. If you are trying to communicate the sentiment that you don’t care about something, why would you say something that implies you care? It just doesn’t make sense. This is a perfect example of how people regurgitate things they hear without thinking about what they are saying at all.

Really, what people are trying to say is that they COULDN’T care less. Let’s say there is a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 means you care a lot and 0 means you don’t care at all. If you could care less, you would care anywhere from 1 through 10 because there is room to decrease your caring. If you COULDN’T care less, you care 0. You can’t go lower than 0. Therefore, if you don’t care about something, which is really what people are trying to say 99.999% of the time when they use this phrase, then you need to say you COULDN’T CARE LESS. Have I made myself clear? We all understand? Good. You will hear this incorrectly used every day for the rest of your lives and it will now begin to drive you crazy.

Second of all, let stalk about the glass being half full. There is a glass. The glass is filled to the midway point. The common reference is that an optimist sees this glass as being half full while the pessimist sees the glass as being half empty. I have several problems with this. There are simply far too many assumptions. The assumption everyone makes is #1 that I am thirsty and #2 that I want to drink whatever is in the glass. What if I am thirsty and I come across a glass that is half way full but it is full of pee. I have no choice but to drink this glass. I believe in this situation, the glass being half full would be a pessimistic view. I would much rather the glass be half empty. What if I’m not thirsty? Again, if I don’t want to drink the glass, then an optimistic view would be that the glass is half empty. I could go on all day. I’m just saying that whether a glass being half full or half empty can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on the circumstances, but no one ever bothers to clarify what the circumstances are. Going forward, people should provide context. If I’m stranded in the desert and I cross a magical lemonade stand with a half filled glass of lemonade, then the glass being half full is a very optimistic perspective. If I am in the middle of the gallon challenge and just puked for the 10th time but still have to chug the remaining half of the milk jug, then the perception that the jug is half empty is the optimistic perspective. I’m just saying. I’m an optimist. I always see the glass as half empty but I’m never thirsty. I ain’t drinking that cool-aid.

July 10, 2010

Analogy for Applause

What I’m about to share is one of my favorite anaolgies. I hope everyone applies it to their lives. This analogy was born several years ago while I was at BYU. I was a music major and consequently attended lots of concerts. Let’s be honest – some concerts are better than others. Some concerts are amazing and inspiring; others are boring and a good chance to catch up on sleep. Same goes with theater. Some plays are great and some are terrible. One thing that became apparent to me after attending several events is that no matter what, there are always people in the audience who give standing ovations. This is where my analogy comes in.

Attending a concert/play is like going on a first date. The performers are your date. How you respond at the end of the performance is how you say goodnight to your date. Similar to concerts, not all dates are equally good. You like some dates better than others. Some make you laugh, some you connect with, and some are boring. On most dates, even if they are not good dates, you always give the girl/guy a hug at the end. This is just out of respect. They spent the last few hours with you and its just good manners to give them a hug at the end. This is a normal applause at the end of a performance. Just a gentle, respectful applause thanking the performers for trying. If the date is really bad it is sometimes appropriate to leave without a hug. Similarly, it is sometimes okay to not clap at the end of a performance if it was offensive or really terrible.

If the date went well, sometimes a kiss on the cheek is appropriate. Similarly, sometimes a more vigorous and appreciative applause is in order if you really enjoyed a performance for whatever reason. On especially good first dates, you may end with a kiss on the lips. Now, I don’t recommend kissing on first dates, but I suppose there are situations where the date was so good a full kiss is appropriate. This is a loud, extended applause with yelling or whistling! Really good concerts or plays will sometimes get exclamations of “Bravo!” and “Encore”. This is only appropriate for excellent performances just like ending a first date with a kiss should also be more of an exception than a rule. Finally, every once in a while….and I mean this is really an exception, a date is so out-of-this-world fantastic that you decide to sleep with them after the first date. (This is not a Mormon approved analogy nor do I approve of ever sleeping with a first date unless for some crazy reason you are married to your first date, which would only really happen if it was an arranged marriage and that’s probably not very typical. At BYU or in Vegas, it probably isn’t that unusual to get married after a first date, so for those of you offended by this analogy, you can repeat it by using marriage in Vegas instead of sleeping with someone). Giving standing ovations is like sleeping with someone on your first date. Obviously, if you sleep with EVERYONE after the first date, you are a slut. You don’t want to be a slut do you?

All these people who are going crazy with their applause and standing ovations for every performance are clap sluts. It’s like they are making out and/or sleeping with everyone on the first date. If you do this repeatedly, it diminishes the meaning of your applause (kisses). As a performer, I’d like to feel like the standing ovation I just got meant something. I thought there was a real connection. If you gave a high school production of The Music Man a standing ovation a weekend before, it’s like you just slept with some pimply face nerd. Thanks, but you’ll sleep with anyone! That doesn’t make me feel appreciated! If you want your applause to mean something, save it for someone special! No performer wants pity sex…I mean applause. I’m getting my analogy mixed up. But I think you get my point. Seriously, every time I’m in a mediocre concert and I see standing ovations I shake my head and think to myself…”sluts”. Next time you are at a performance of any kind, before you clap, think about your dating philosophy. If you are the type of person to kiss everyone goodnight on the first date…go ahead…whoop and holler all you want.

Some people may argue that the applause should reflect the talent level. If you go to a High School concert, you don’t expect the NY Philharmonic. That’s fine, but then they don’t get the standing O! You probably wouldn’t kiss someone just because they were less “physically talented”. They have to seriously exceed expectations to deserve that. It’s like going out with that awkward and unattractive guy/girl that was sweet but there isn’t much there. Give them their courtesy applause and thank them for their time. These kids need something to aspire to and work towards. I still aspire to someday being a good enough oboe player to play in front of a large crowd and getting a standing ovation. I’m not there. I’ve received standing ovations before…but I felt bad getting them and wish I could have turned it down. Unfortunately, you can’t say to people clapping for you “Thanks, but no thanks…I don’t want your STD’s of appreciation.” It’s uncomfortable getting one when you don’t deserve it…unless you are a slut too.

At the end of the day, I believe in meritocracy. We are motivated by consequences and rewards. If you do well enough, you’ll get the appropriate appreciation. It’s like tipping waiters. I’ll save my tipping philosophy for another blog.

July 5, 2010

Worst Sunday School Teacher EVER

A couple weeks ago in church the lesson in Sunday School related to Saul. This brought back fond memories of when I had to give that same lesson in a Sunday School for the singles ward about 5 years ago. (For those of you who may be reading this and are not Mormon, a singles ward is a congregation that consists of only single people with the hopes that you’ll fall in love long enough to eventually settle with one of the other singles. After about 6 months in one of these wards, eternity with anyone seems like a better option than going to one more singles dance. It’s a highly effective way to get people married off). I remember giving this lesson specifically because I was immediately fired after the lesson…and it isn’t easy to get fired in church. I didn’t read the lesson beforehand so I had the class start reading 1 Samuel Chapter 9 out loud. When we got to 1 Samuel 9:3, I decided to “apply the scripture unto myself” and made a brilliant analogy on how that scripture refers to the purpose of the singles ward and refers to the task the church had assigned to us at that point in our lives. I even elaborated on how that verse highlights the importance of wingmen (in that you should never seek asses alone). They never let me teach another Sunday school lesson.

To save you time, 1 Samuel 9: 1-3 is as follows:
1Now there was a man of Benjamin, whose name was Kish, the son of Abiel, the son of Zeror, the son of Bechorath, the son of Aphiah, a Benjamite, a mighty man of power.
2And he had a son, whose name was Saul, a choice young man, and a goodly: and there was not among the children of Israel a goodlier person than he: from his shoulders and upward he was higher than any of the people.
3And the asses of Kish Saul's father were lost. And Kish said to Saul his son, Take now one of the servants with thee, and arise, go seek the asses.

July 3, 2010

Air Conditioning

Anyone who knows me knows that I hate the cold and love summer. June is the best month of the year in Denver– the weather turns hot but everything is still green from the spring and afternoon storms. However, I have noticed a major problem with summer in Colorado. Coloradoans can’t take the heat. They have grown so used to the cold weather that they actually enjoy it. As soon as it gets over 80 degrees they start complaining about the blistering heat and how you can’t go outside. (Very similar to my attitude when the temperature dips below 60 degrees and it’s too cold to go outside). Consequently, Coloradoans deal with the “suffocating” heat of 80 degrees by cranking up the air conditioner so they can continue their miserable and freezing lives in sub 60 degree temperatures. As a result, I’m generally colder on average in summer than I am in the winter! What is wrong with these people? I only get 3 months a year of good warm summertime weather…don’t deprive me of that! It’s bad enough I have to spend the entire day in an office while I look out the window to a beautiful sunny 80 degree day only to leave work at 6 just in time for the temperature to drop down to 70 and rob me of my joy. Now I have to spend all day looking out the window at a beautiful sunny 80 degree day while I’m wearing a sweater in a freezing office trying to restore the feeling to my frozen fingers. I mean, we only get 3-4 months of good weather here! Lots of people praise Colorado for having 4 seasons, but lets not fool ourselves. For me, Winter is anytime there is the threat of snowfall. If it can snow, it’s winter. IT always snows in October and the last snow is always in May. That’s 8 fricken months of Winter. There are no 4 seasons here. There is winter and not winter. Sure, there are 3 weeks when the leaves change and it’s a slightly less miserable winter and there are a few weeks in April or May when it gets warm enough just to get your hopes up before 2 feet of snow gets dropped on your house again, but this is all still winter – just to a slightly less miserable disagree. So all I’m saying is: don’t ruin my 3 months of summer with your air conditioner. Thanks.

April 24, 2010


Some random thoughts. It had been raining a lot here lately. It doesn’t bother me as much as it used to because now I have a lawn I have to worry about and rain means I don’t have to water as much and it saves me money. I love Denver, but am not crazy about the weather. I actually like it here way more than I anticipated and plan on staying here as long as I can. However, Coloradoans LOVE Colorado and always try to convince people the weather isn't as bad as thye may think. They always say things that crack me up.

One thing they always say is “if you don’t like the weather, wait until tomorrow”. This always cracks me up because I travel a lot and EVERYONE says that everywhere. Go to Florida and they tell you the same. Go to Chicago and they will say the same. The fact of the matter is, weather is unpredictable in lots of places. This isn't a charaterisitic of Colorado, it's a characterisitic of weather in general, and everywhere has weather, so stop bragging about it! Plus, how the heck is that a positive? People act like this crazy weather is fun and exciting. No it isn’t. One day it is freezing and snowing and miserable and the next day it’s 60 degrees. How is that a good thing? A good thing would be TWO 60 degree days, not one crappy day and one nice day. I liken it to a crazy girlfriend. It’s like talking to your friends and saying, “Well, yesterday my girlfriend got mad and drove my car into a light pole, but today she said she loved me and bought me a video game! My girlfriend is crazy one day, but if you wait a little, she’s fine later!” That’s not acceptable, right? So if your crazy girlfriend screams and yells at you half the time, it would be okay as long as every once in a while she was super sweet and nice? How would that be considered a good thing?! And the more rapid the mood swings, the bigger hte problem, right? That’s called bipolar and you need to get the heck out of that relationship! So why is it okay that I’m emotionally abused by the weather in Denver and people think it’s great because the weather is nice some of the time? I really need more stability - like a nice sane and consistent California.  In this scenario, California is the best girlfriend ever, and Colorado is a very crappy girlfriend. I’m just saying. And in Colorado, you never know how to dress. It’s cold, then warm, then cold again. That’s not a good thing. The state motto here is “dress in layers” (I may have made that up). I don’t want to dress in layers. I want to wear shorts and flip flops and I want to still be as comfortable at 8:00 pm as I was at noon.  I don’t want to have to carry extra clothes with me everywhere I go. That isn’t a positive. That’s just annoying! I still love my crazy girlfriend of Colorado and will probably never leave her, but let’s not pretend the weather thing is one of her endearing qualities.

The other thing that gets me is that they call Colorado the “sunshine state” and claim to have 390 days of sunshine a year or something like that. First of all, I think Coloradoans are the only ones who think Colorado is the sunshine state. I’m pretty sure California and Florida got dibs on that. Second of all, who the heck cares that the sun is out if it’s -10 degrees outside? Third of all, what constitutes a sunny day? Who’s counting? All summer long it’s 85 degrees and beautiful outside while I’m in work and every single day I get off work around 5:30pm – 6:00 pm and the temperature has dipped to the low 70’s and the clouds roll in and it starts to rain. This doesn’t help me at all. I’m sure that goes into the weather log as a sunny day, but I didn’t benefit from it. I want a stat telling me about the amount of days with nice weather between the hours of 5:00 pm and 9:00 pm when I can actually enjoy it. Also, I haven’t really noticed it being all that sunny. If it rains all day and the sun comes out for 30 minutes later in the afternoon, does that still count as a sunny day? Someone needs to figure this out.

April 16, 2010


Before I get to more pictures, I’ll share some of my thoughts. Staring at newborn babies can make people reevaluate life. I’ve had some deep and interesting thoughts over the last day and a half as well. I'm looking at my 3 girls and taking inventory - 10 fingers, 10 toes, nose, ears, mouth, eyes...all good news. Then I start thinking, this doesn't seem fair. I basically just invested in 3 brand new 2010 model humans. Lots of my friends have had kids for many years now and have "older models". Shouldn't my new kids have more features than their kids? My kids are newer! Their kids were made years ago! If I buy a 2010 car, it's got ipod connectivity, navigation systems, bluetooth etc. while cars from 10 years ago have crappy cassette players. What if my 2010 babies had hdmi cables so I could plug them into my HD TV and see/hear what they were thinking? I think that would be an incredibly helpful feature our Creator could have included in newer models. I could go on, but I think you all got the point. I am pretty sure there is a terrible movie premise in there somewhere.

I mean, when you think about it, us humans have had the same basic features for thousands of years now. We may be a little taller these days, but I don't think those few extra inches would really be the difference maker between life and death when attacked by a grizzly bear. And that begs the question, if we human's haven't evolved to incorporate any new and useful features over the course of the last 6 to 7 thousand years, what's the use of evolution? Given our evolution rate, we have no chance of producing off-spring with gills if Al Gore is right and the polar icecaps melt. This is all starting to make me think that Kevin Costner is full of crap. That Waterworld movie is so unrealistic! So there you go....a little insight into what goes through my head as I’m watching my precious babies lie in incubators during their first day in this world. Please don't call child services.

April 13, 2010


In my company, everyone is all about giving back to the community and service projects and all that jazz. In the local Denver office, we have developed a community service committee in charge of organizing community events. That's all fine and good, but everyone in my office knows where I stand when it comes to helping out charities... good luck, God speed, but count me out.

One of the reason I don't like giving money to charities is because I don't know where it goes. I don’t' know how much of the money actually ends up helping anyone and how much is wasted. Before I give to a charity, I want to see their financial statements and I want to determine how much is going to overhead and how much is helping people. I've been a business consultant for 6 years now, and I've seen how companies operate and there are very few companies I would trust to efficiently use my money. I don't think a charity organization would be much better. I try to be as generous as I can with offering I make through my church. I trust them. I have complete confidence that those donations are doing good somewhere and are not being wasted. I really don't trust any other organization. Why would I donate anywhere else? I doubt there are too many more charities more efficient than my church, so in my mind, giving to any other charity is just plain wasteful.

For example, how much has been spent on pink ribbons? I don't understand the pink ribbon thing. Maybe someone can leave a comment on here and enlighten me. How exactly are pink ribbons helping cure cancer? I know that when I bough my wife a pink Kitchen Aid, supposedly part of the proceeds went to help cancer. Of course, I don't know where that "cancer curing donation" was supposed to go or if it ever made it to its intended destination, but I have no choice but to pretend I believe that a publically held corporation whose main goal is to create wealth for its owners is genuinely interested in curing cancer and utilized that tiny amount of money in an efficient manner to assist with the search for a cure for cancer. The rest of the proceeds probably went towards the Christmas bonus of some executive who used that bonus to buy his 15 year old daughter a Mercedes Benz, but some of it may have helped cure cancer. Really, the most important thing is that my wife has a pink Kitchen Aid with which to make me a cake.

I assume then that when you see pink ribbons on cars and backpacks and buildings that the money spent on buying those ribbons supposedly go to cure cancer. Even if most of the proceeds do go towards curing cancer, that still doesn't explain the pink ribbon. I don’t' know how much it costs to make pink ribbons, but I’m guessing they aren't free. Especially those huge ribbons you see on the sides of buildings - those have to cost something. Who makes the pink ribbons anyways? Maybe instead of walking for a cure, we should stand in a pink-ribbon-making-assembly-line for a cure. That would at least make them cheaper so more of the money could go towards actual cancer instead of ribbon making. Or, we could eliminate the pink ribbons all together and have ALL the money go towards cancer. But then, how will everyone who drives past me know that I care about curing cancer?

(By the way, I'm not as dumb as I sound and I understand that livestrong bracelets and pink ribbons are en affective way to motivate people to donate to cancer because it makes them feel like they are getting something back for their money and also contributing to worthy cause as well as serving the additional benefit of letting everyone know you are a good person, just like "I voted" stickers. I really don't blame the charity - they are just being smart.)

But I haven't gotten to the main reason I don’t' like giving to charities. Some of them are just dumb. I just don’t believe some of them are causes worthy of my time and money in some situations. Just because you call it charity, doesn’t mean I have to believe in the cause. It seems all you have to do these days is call something a charity and people make you feel like a jerk if you don’t help. Sorry, I’m not going to play mud volleyball to raise money for a program to encourage kids to ride bikes more. That’s not a real charity.

This brings me to the catalyst for this entry and my least favorite charity ever...Junior Achievement. My company participates is JA for a Day, where local professionals go to an elementary school in bad neighborhoods and "teach" them for a day. When I say "teach", I mean, stand in front of them and talk while they throw things around the room and their real teachers tell them to criss-cross their apple sauce or something like that. Teachers will know what I'm talking about.

Today I got an email saying JA for a day has an "URGENT NEED" for volunteers. Urgent need? Really? I responded by saying "And by “urgent need”, you mean if someone doesn’t volunteer, these poor children will be taught by their regular certified and educated teacher instead of a internal audit consultant with no experience in teaching at all. This could be disastrous to their ability to identify firemen as people who work in their community." I suppose it would also be terrible because the real teacher wouldn't get a paid day off.

I just have a hard time getting behind a charity like this. If anyone has ever heard of someone who turned their life around due to the influence of a professional who spoke to their class on the topic of “people who work in your community” when they were 7 years old, please let me know. How is that a good charity? How is me teaching 2nd graders anything under any circumstances a good idea? We are calling that charity now? A bunch of people spending 6 hours of our time on that? Extreme Home Makeover could build a house in the time it would take me to explain to a 9 year old that we don’t’ refer to police as “po pos” Also, if they let me teach, then clearly they aren't screening volunteers very well. And on top of everything else, you want me to pay $100 to go bowling and call that charity? I call it robbery. I'd just as soon buy a $100 pink ribbon.

On a side note, last year my company promised a a raffle ticket to whoever donated to a certain charity. The goal was for 100% participation and the office would all get a free dinner. I didn’t want to ruin it for the rest of the office so I donated $1. I won the raffle and got a $10 gift card. That's a 1,000% return on my money for giving to charity. That must be God's way of blessing me for being so charitable!

By the way, I'm positive there are hundreds of awesome charities out there that do amazing things and change lives. Knock yourselves out and donate to them if you feel like it, just make sure you get a ribbon or bracelet or something else out of it.  Otherwise, what's the point?

April 11, 2010

Pain Tolerance

Before I get into this post, I would like to add a disclaimer that I’m not trying to take away from what women have to go through during pregnancy and child birth. After watching what my poor wife has been put through the last 3 weeks, I have never been more pleased with my body’s lack of a uterus. And my wife hasn’t even had to give birth yet – just 3 weeks worth of painful contractions and even more painful drugs to stop the contractions. My wife is handling everything extremely well and is a very brave woman and I’ll love her forever for what she is going through.

That being said, what I do not appreciate are all the smug comments that nurses make towards me such as “you guys will never understand” and “guys could never go through this”. Alright, let’s talk about that for a second. First of all, it’s very easy to be smug with comments like “guys don’t understand” because everyone knows guys will never have babies. Thanks for pointing out the obvious. But then again, no one ever can really understand what any other person is ever going through because no one ever goes through the exact same things in the exact same ways, so theoretically I could say – you have no idea how stressful it is for me to try to pee into the toilet every day and not make a mess. If all mankind decided together and decided to claim that it was the most stressful thing in the world, no woman could ever dispute it. Then every time we peed we could say, “Darn, that was rough! I’m so stressed right now…you’ll never understand how hard that was!” Another example is getting kicked in the nuts. For all we know, getting kicked in the nuts is just as painful as labor, but we’ll never know because women never get kicked in the nuts and men never go through labor. There is no way to compare the two. Again, I’m not saying they are equally as painful, I’m trying to make a very bad and ill-thought out point.

Also, how do you know men couldn’t handle labor? Why make the assumption that women are stronger than men because they are “able” to go through labor while men apparently “can’t”. The reason we can’t go through labor has everything to do with us not having female organs and nothing to do with our pain tolerance. I hear all the time that women have higher pain tolerances than men. What does that mean? Granted labor appears t to be miserable and painful on all accounts, but why assume a man couldn’t do it? It isn’t like the majority of women are dealing with this ordeal with a dignity and grace that is unfathomable from a man. Woman scream and cuss through it and a man probably would too. But I don’t think women go through the whole thing saying…”this doesn’t hurt…bring it on! I have tremendous tolerance to pain and this doesn’t bother me!” They complain just like a man would. I mean, once labor starts, a woman’s options are pretty limited at that point anyways. I’m guessing they can’t get halfway through labor and say…”hold on, time out. This sucks. Let’s not do this. This hurts way too much and I’d rather stop and not be in labor anymore.” I’m sure if they had that option, a percentage of women greater than 0% would take it. I would too. But the ship has sailed at that point and they do what they have to do. I’m convinced I would do the same…I wouldn’t have a choice, right?

How do people know woman have a higher tolerance to pain than men anyways? Where are the studies? I would like to see them. What does “tolerance” mean in this context? Does it mean withstanding pain without complaining? If that is the meaning, than I don’t think women have much of a case. Does it mean being able to handle pain without passing-out or dying? I think that must be what it means, but how did they figure that out? Did they torture men and women with equal torture tactics and see who died first? I just don’t understand what they are trying to say and I don’t buy it.

I wish I could get pregnant just to prove my point. I don’t doubt it would suck and probably be the worst thing I ever had to go through, but I bet I wouldn’t die. Again, I appreciate women and what mother’s go through. I appreciate the sacrifices and pain and everything mothers go through in pregnancy and child birth. I also understand you can’t make generalizations about men and women as all women are different and all men are different and everyone deals with things differently. But then again, I’m not the one who started with the generalizations – it’s those darn nurses.

I knew there was a reason I didn’t have a blog before. Maybe not documenting my thoughts was a good thing. Before anyone gets too mad at me, remember...I’m fighting cancer!

April 10, 2010

Cancer Survivor

Since the blog is new, I'm still catching up on some old news. As of two weeks ago, I am proud to announce I am a cancer survivor! Over the last couple weeks, I have reevaluated the meaning of life, learned to live every moment as if it were my last, and have dug down deep to summon an inner strength I didn't know I had to overcome obstacles against all odds. Okay, that is a little exaggerated - I always knew I had tremendous inner strength.

I have had a spot next to my left eye for the last 4 years or so and my brother has the same thing. My brother called me up a few weeks ago and told me he finally had it checked out and it was basal cell cancer and had to have it removed. Obviously, I figured that since I had a very similar spot in the exact same place I probably had cancer as well and figured I would have it checked out as well.

Now, having cancer is not a surprise. I grew up in California and Florida and actually enjoy being sunburned. I had a sever sunburn at least 4-5 times a year for as long as I can remember. I always knew I'd end up with skin cancer, I was just hoping I'd be a little bit older when I got it. It turns out the spot next to my eye is "pre-cancer" but I had a spot on my sternum that was basal cell cancer. I had that removed last week.

In hind-sight, I don't know why I had it removed. I think cancer is a huge conspiracy. I had this spot on my chest for years and never thought twice about it. It never hurt, didn’t' bother me, and I am not in good enough shape to go anywhere with my shirt off anymore anyways. Having cancer was painless and comfortable. On the other hand, having the cancer removed sucks. They basically numbed my chest by giving me around 10 shots of something, and then cut out a large chunk where the cancer was. I was able to look and it was kinda creepy seeing a hole in your chest but not feeling anything. The only part that hurt was the shots to numb me and about 5 hours after the surgery when it felt like I had been stabbed. The way the cut was made, the doctor told me to be very careful for the next 3-6 months and not do anything that stretches my chest, since the wound could stretch and open up. Coincidently, he cut a "y" shape in my chest and said if I do anything to open up the scar; it will just look like the star trek insignia. I've never been the coolest guy around, but I can't imagine having the star trek symbol cut in the middle of my chest would be a good thing. Anyways, back to the conspiracy. I'm convinced that there was no need whatsoever to remove that cancer from my chest. How do I even know it was cancer? They just told me it was cancer and told me I had to have it removed. Of course they want me to have it removed - that's how they make money! For all know, it was just a mole they cut off and made it look worse to scare me. All I know is I was fine for years, and all of a sudden my chest hurts, I have a large scar, and can't bench press. Something doesn't seem right.

I think the doctor was a little annoyed at how pleased I was to have cancer. I can't lie...a small part of me was feeling pretty smug about making my prediction of having skin cancer someday come true. I asked the doctor if I could participate in "walk for the cure" and he informed me that was breast cancer. He told me I could by a "livestrong" bracelet though and start riding a bike if it made me feel better! Of course that would make me feel better! I now proudly sport my bright yellow livestrong bracelet as I tell my inspiring tale of how I looked cancer in the eyes and said "NO!..I won't succumb to you! I won't allow you to create an unsightly spot on my chest that otherwise causes me no pain or discomfort and has no discernable negative effects whatsoever! I will defeat you and have you removed to prevent the miniscule chance that someday it might grow into a slightly larger unsightly spot on my chest that causes no harm...and also apparently to boost the local economy and help this dermatologist buy a bmw!"

I tried telling my wife that now I have a scar on my chest and she'll have a scar from the C-section - so we are even! I probably don't have to explain how strongly she disagrees.  On another side note...I have a check-up with my dermatologist next week and think it would be hilarious to get a really bad sunburn before my appointment just to see his face.

Princess Crap

I have been doing a lot of thinking lately about my parenting philosophy. So far I only have one rule. No princess crap. As I began spending more time in the baby and girls section of stores, I quickly became aware of what appears to be an unhealthy obsession with princesses in our society. So much princess paraphernalia! It's not just Disney princesses either - random pink pillows with crowns on them, posters saying "I'm a princess", fake thrones, it goes on and on. I find this more disturbing than Barbie dolls. I suspect there are actually very few princesses in the world. I believe a princess by definition, is a direct descendent of a King or a Queen, of which there are very few of thee days. At the very least there can't be enough actual princesses running around Denver to justify the enormous amounts of princess gear that is being sold. And if you really were a princess, would you feel the need to advertise it to the world by wearing pink pants with a crown and the word "princess" on your butt?

Meanwhile, I have yet to see a single thing for sale for a boy claiming he is a prince. Why the unequailty? Why aren't boys raised with the same focus? Why don't we demand special treatment based on nothing other than our apparently royal nature? Fine, I'll open the car door for the little "princess" I am dating, but I expect her to bow to me every time I enter the room. Seems fair. I think this underlines a deep rooted problem in male and female relationships. Girls grow up thinking they are princesses. This implies a sense of entitlement. "Look at me, I am special just by being born"..."I am a princess therefore you are obligated to do what i say"..."I am a princess so give me what I want (demand)"..."being served on is my birthright"...I could go on. Little boys don’t' get this. We are given garbage trucks, toy cars, fake tools, and toy guns. So while girls are being groomed to be selfish and demanding, boys are being groomed to work and fight. And we wonder why we have problems?

Clearly, I don't believe everything I just wrote 100%, but enough for this to be made rule #1. No princess crap.