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 24, 2010
April 16, 2010
Evolution
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.
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
Charity
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)