Thanks to my friend Feng: totallylookslike.com
For example:
Young Albert Einstein Totally Looks Like Shia Labeouf.
Open Coat Totally Looks Like a Piranha.
“Weird Al” Yankovic Totally Looks Like Disney’s Tarzan.
Yay. What a delight.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Uh-oh
By the time the check came we were already gently in pain, full of yummy food and stuffing ourselves further with the last few mouthfuls of tiramisu. Beth had warned us that Mitch would want to pick up the tab, even though it was his birthday. In referring to my sisters and me, he uses the term 'girls' instead of 'guys' as in, "are you girls heading home now?" And he always holds the door and probably would take your coat and open the car door for you. Beth had accepted Mitch's gentlemanly behaviors a long time ago. Em and I, though, were not pleased with the idea of him paying for everything on HIS BIRTHDAY.
The waitress laid down the bill, a piece of paper, just as I was about to consume my last mouthful of the heavenly, lightly-sweetened, espresso-drenched confection. I paused. If I grabbed it now, I could easily pick up the tab. But that bite of tiramisu was hovering on my spoon, just inches from my mouth. I hesitated one second too long and Mitch took the bill and got out his wallet.
"Mitch, it's your birthday. We'll pay," I protested, reaching across the table for the check.
He held it out of my reach "No you will not."
"Come onnnn," I said. Beth laughed and pointed out that this is the argument I always use on her which never works. Not helping, Beth. I grabbed for the bill once more, caught it. But Mitch was holding too tightly. It ripped in half.
In shock, I placed my half of the bill on the table and sank into my chair a little bit. At this moment, the waitress returned. She picked up our friend's credit card and the two pieces of the check, looked at me, looked at Mitch and said, in her deep smoker's voice, "UH-oh," before disappearing off behind the bar. The four of us looked at each other for a moment and burst out laughing. It was too much. That one simple interjection: UH-oh, first syllable heavily emphasized, the clipped 'oh' pronounced at a much lower pitch. That tone, as though she KNEW what had happened, even though she hadn't witnessed it.
... or had she? UH-oh, we kept repeating under our breaths to each other, snickering, trying not to disrupt the other guests too much. UH-oh. When our server returned, the paper was taped back together. Taped together. UH-oh. We could barely contain ourselves and we stumbled out into the March evening.
UH-oh.
(I know, I know tiramisu is technically dessert, but it was a birthday, and I guess I've decided to exclude birthdays and funerals from my Lenten fast)
The waitress laid down the bill, a piece of paper, just as I was about to consume my last mouthful of the heavenly, lightly-sweetened, espresso-drenched confection. I paused. If I grabbed it now, I could easily pick up the tab. But that bite of tiramisu was hovering on my spoon, just inches from my mouth. I hesitated one second too long and Mitch took the bill and got out his wallet.
"Mitch, it's your birthday. We'll pay," I protested, reaching across the table for the check.
He held it out of my reach "No you will not."
"Come onnnn," I said. Beth laughed and pointed out that this is the argument I always use on her which never works. Not helping, Beth. I grabbed for the bill once more, caught it. But Mitch was holding too tightly. It ripped in half.
In shock, I placed my half of the bill on the table and sank into my chair a little bit. At this moment, the waitress returned. She picked up our friend's credit card and the two pieces of the check, looked at me, looked at Mitch and said, in her deep smoker's voice, "UH-oh," before disappearing off behind the bar. The four of us looked at each other for a moment and burst out laughing. It was too much. That one simple interjection: UH-oh, first syllable heavily emphasized, the clipped 'oh' pronounced at a much lower pitch. That tone, as though she KNEW what had happened, even though she hadn't witnessed it.
... or had she? UH-oh, we kept repeating under our breaths to each other, snickering, trying not to disrupt the other guests too much. UH-oh. When our server returned, the paper was taped back together. Taped together. UH-oh. We could barely contain ourselves and we stumbled out into the March evening.
UH-oh.
(I know, I know tiramisu is technically dessert, but it was a birthday, and I guess I've decided to exclude birthdays and funerals from my Lenten fast)
Monday, March 9, 2009
Trends of Life
So, I've found that my life follows this beautiful current of curiosity and discovery, where seasons colored by different themes bleed into one another, forming an eternal chain, present seasons illuminating the previous ones and informing those subsequent.
But ah, the questions. How we wrestle together, those open-ended statements and I. How we tear at each other, how we cry out into the night, how we carry each other around silently, secretly. The contradictions, the paradoxes leap out at me, they yell my name. They drag me down, down, down, sometimes, but other times buoy me up and fill me with light. I cannot help the questions. They just come, forming like condensation on the edge of my awareness and dripping to a puddle at my feet. This mind, this swirling spirit is forever yearning, hopeful, sometimes terrifyingly tireless, but always, always questioning. If I try to stifle it (and I have tried at times), I hurt. If I work at things, I find myself growing and expanding. If I find someone to share in them, I am delighted, overjoyed, blessed beyond measure.
And of course there are times when nothing comes to me but I try to continue anyway. I wear myself down to a thin echo, pushing, pushing forward until my faculties are near collapse and the immensity of it all forces me to rest.
And yet recently I find a new trend entering my life, a new current. Something like a new peace I have found. The questions remain of course, constantly refining themselves, multiplying, morphing, but we - they and I - are learning to coexist. I am finally beginning to grasp in small ways the refined art of moderation. Of course, I still crave understanding, still thirst for comprehension, for what I call resonance, more than pretty much anything, but it is a more dignified feeling, a hunger tempered by patience, if only to a small degree currently. Though I want them and seek them with my entire being, I don't feel so anxious for the answers. I can sense a little earlier in the process when I am pushing too hard, I can sense the need for respite, for time to heal, to breathe, to just - as Mother Mary says - let it be.
And recently I even find myself at times possessing sufficient wisdom and love to allow it, myself, the questions, to just be.
This post is part of the Blue-Beta Blog Coordination, a continuing series of content coordinated by theme or motif with posts from Confuzzled of I Keep Wondering, Gromit of The Dancing Newt, Redoubt of Redoubt Redux, Third Mango of Funkadelic Freestylings of Another Sort, Yarjka of Sour Mayonnaise, and Xanthippe of Let’s Save Our Hallmark Moment. This week's theme: 'trends'.
But ah, the questions. How we wrestle together, those open-ended statements and I. How we tear at each other, how we cry out into the night, how we carry each other around silently, secretly. The contradictions, the paradoxes leap out at me, they yell my name. They drag me down, down, down, sometimes, but other times buoy me up and fill me with light. I cannot help the questions. They just come, forming like condensation on the edge of my awareness and dripping to a puddle at my feet. This mind, this swirling spirit is forever yearning, hopeful, sometimes terrifyingly tireless, but always, always questioning. If I try to stifle it (and I have tried at times), I hurt. If I work at things, I find myself growing and expanding. If I find someone to share in them, I am delighted, overjoyed, blessed beyond measure.
And of course there are times when nothing comes to me but I try to continue anyway. I wear myself down to a thin echo, pushing, pushing forward until my faculties are near collapse and the immensity of it all forces me to rest.
And yet recently I find a new trend entering my life, a new current. Something like a new peace I have found. The questions remain of course, constantly refining themselves, multiplying, morphing, but we - they and I - are learning to coexist. I am finally beginning to grasp in small ways the refined art of moderation. Of course, I still crave understanding, still thirst for comprehension, for what I call resonance, more than pretty much anything, but it is a more dignified feeling, a hunger tempered by patience, if only to a small degree currently. Though I want them and seek them with my entire being, I don't feel so anxious for the answers. I can sense a little earlier in the process when I am pushing too hard, I can sense the need for respite, for time to heal, to breathe, to just - as Mother Mary says - let it be.
And recently I even find myself at times possessing sufficient wisdom and love to allow it, myself, the questions, to just be.
This post is part of the Blue-Beta Blog Coordination, a continuing series of content coordinated by theme or motif with posts from Confuzzled of I Keep Wondering, Gromit of The Dancing Newt, Redoubt of Redoubt Redux, Third Mango of Funkadelic Freestylings of Another Sort, Yarjka of Sour Mayonnaise, and Xanthippe of Let’s Save Our Hallmark Moment. This week's theme: 'trends'.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Thoughts from a Dirty Liberal Mormon on Gays and Family
As a follower of a traditionally conservative faith who also happens to be quite liberal, I find myself continuously faced with reconciling a lot of conflicting ideas, really having to sort out what I believe from both cultures. Due to where I find myself in life (whatever that means) I cannot bring myself to fully deny either, and I'm learning to find peace despite - or possibly IN - the tension.
I understand and value the focus on families that my religion places. I believe that adults, when they choose to become parents, should place their children's needs among their highest priorities, that parents can have a huge effect on (and carry tremendous responsibility for) the moral and psychological development of their children. And, if I end up finding an intelligent and virtuous man whom I end up marrying, then I too would love to embark on the journey of parenthood with him, to teach the next generation about what we know pertaining to truth and love and virtuous living.
I have to admit, however, that I was immensely hurt and frustrated when I learned of the role of the LDS church in defeating Proposition 8 in California. It shook me to the core that my religious leaders would encourage the members to monetarily support such legislation, that funds from sacred religious offerings were being used (albeit indirectly) in the media campaign against a proposition which I did not and would never support. Like many other liberal-minded folk, I was baffled at how people's value of children and family life could be at odds with the legal status of homosexuals to marry. Utterly flabbergasted. The two could not have been more unrelated in my mind. All of this "protect the family" logic seemed totally out of left field (or RIGHT field? har har har). I have thought about this deeply and for a long time and I think I understand the direction from which they approach the issue. Bear with me, this might be a little bit wordy.
Okay, as background, it seems there has been a philosophical shift regarding marriage in the past half century or so. In previous times, marriage was almost inextricably connected with child-raising. Sure, unofficial hetero- and homo- sexual unions occured, but traditional heterosexual marriage was created to guarantee paternity of the children, and to create a pretty stable environment for them in which to be raised.
Until recently there didn't seem to be a reason for homosexuals to want to be married, as marriage was pretty much ONLY for creating the next generation of humans.
The feminist movement and modern contraceptive measures, most notably the birth control pill, seem to have shifted the focus of heterosexual marriage in our culture away from propagation of the species toward sexual and emotional fulfillment of the two parties, since pregnancy was no longer the automatic effect of heterosexual intercourse. However, I would guess that a large proportion of hetero couples still find the child production/raising to be an important part of the union (just not the PRIMARY purpose).
Regardless, once marriage became refocused in our culture on the emotional fulfillment of the adult parties, it makes sense that couples would get married for that reason alone, and it makes additional sense that couples who were previously excluded from this category would want to join it.
The issue that religious folks have seems to be that they oppose this shift itself, not necessarily the gay movement. They believe that marriage should be first and foremost for the production and raising of children. They see this shift as a negative one, a selfish one, and one which will lead to the breakdown of our society. It is true that self-centered parents and unstable home situations can and usually do have a negative impact on the children involved. So I agree that in many ways the shift is a negative one, as the emphasis goes from the children's emotional needs to those of the parents (I am not certain that emphasis on parents' emotional needs is a bad thing, but I also do not think it should occur at the expense of the children). Anyway, in terms of the religious right --- including the majority of mainstream LDS --- who perceive this as an overall negative societal shift, "the legalization of gay marriage" is something that is easier to "fight" than something like "parents who are not dedicated to their children" or "parents who are not dedicated to each other" or "lack of societal support for working parents." These issues are more complicated and are difficult to package into a bite-sized idea, whereas the gay marriage issue is a tangible, discrete battle with quantifiable results. Are we not all guilty of this type of reasoning at one time or another?
Anyway, hopefully I am not being offensive here. What I am trying to get to is that somehow, for me, understanding the greater issue at stake here, for which gay marriage is primarily a simplified proxy, helps me to understand better where my fellow churchgoers are coming from. When I look at it this way, even though I feel the efforts are misdirected, I can surely appreciate the motivations. It helps me to feel less anxious and troubled, helps me to feel a greater peace with events that have transpired.
In other words, there is a great deal of common ground between the two sides, and that is what keeps my thoughts and opinions at least somewhat consistent as I daily try to balance myself between these oft-seeming opposing forces my identity. I guess what it boils down to is that I truly believe that strengthening ALL families is the direction we must head as a culture and as a nation.
There is a lot I haven't mentioned here: homosexuals who desire to raise children of their own, through adoption or artificial insemination, the LDS doctrine of eternal gender identity (which still has never been sufficiently explained to me, but which is often used in the argument against gay marriage), etc. I never intended this to be a thorough treatise on the subject, however. I am greatly interested in your opinions and comments, but please be kind and respectful.
I understand and value the focus on families that my religion places. I believe that adults, when they choose to become parents, should place their children's needs among their highest priorities, that parents can have a huge effect on (and carry tremendous responsibility for) the moral and psychological development of their children. And, if I end up finding an intelligent and virtuous man whom I end up marrying, then I too would love to embark on the journey of parenthood with him, to teach the next generation about what we know pertaining to truth and love and virtuous living.
I have to admit, however, that I was immensely hurt and frustrated when I learned of the role of the LDS church in defeating Proposition 8 in California. It shook me to the core that my religious leaders would encourage the members to monetarily support such legislation, that funds from sacred religious offerings were being used (albeit indirectly) in the media campaign against a proposition which I did not and would never support. Like many other liberal-minded folk, I was baffled at how people's value of children and family life could be at odds with the legal status of homosexuals to marry. Utterly flabbergasted. The two could not have been more unrelated in my mind. All of this "protect the family" logic seemed totally out of left field (or RIGHT field? har har har). I have thought about this deeply and for a long time and I think I understand the direction from which they approach the issue. Bear with me, this might be a little bit wordy.
Okay, as background, it seems there has been a philosophical shift regarding marriage in the past half century or so. In previous times, marriage was almost inextricably connected with child-raising. Sure, unofficial hetero- and homo- sexual unions occured, but traditional heterosexual marriage was created to guarantee paternity of the children, and to create a pretty stable environment for them in which to be raised.
Until recently there didn't seem to be a reason for homosexuals to want to be married, as marriage was pretty much ONLY for creating the next generation of humans.
The feminist movement and modern contraceptive measures, most notably the birth control pill, seem to have shifted the focus of heterosexual marriage in our culture away from propagation of the species toward sexual and emotional fulfillment of the two parties, since pregnancy was no longer the automatic effect of heterosexual intercourse. However, I would guess that a large proportion of hetero couples still find the child production/raising to be an important part of the union (just not the PRIMARY purpose).
Regardless, once marriage became refocused in our culture on the emotional fulfillment of the adult parties, it makes sense that couples would get married for that reason alone, and it makes additional sense that couples who were previously excluded from this category would want to join it.
The issue that religious folks have seems to be that they oppose this shift itself, not necessarily the gay movement. They believe that marriage should be first and foremost for the production and raising of children. They see this shift as a negative one, a selfish one, and one which will lead to the breakdown of our society. It is true that self-centered parents and unstable home situations can and usually do have a negative impact on the children involved. So I agree that in many ways the shift is a negative one, as the emphasis goes from the children's emotional needs to those of the parents (I am not certain that emphasis on parents' emotional needs is a bad thing, but I also do not think it should occur at the expense of the children). Anyway, in terms of the religious right --- including the majority of mainstream LDS --- who perceive this as an overall negative societal shift, "the legalization of gay marriage" is something that is easier to "fight" than something like "parents who are not dedicated to their children" or "parents who are not dedicated to each other" or "lack of societal support for working parents." These issues are more complicated and are difficult to package into a bite-sized idea, whereas the gay marriage issue is a tangible, discrete battle with quantifiable results. Are we not all guilty of this type of reasoning at one time or another?
Anyway, hopefully I am not being offensive here. What I am trying to get to is that somehow, for me, understanding the greater issue at stake here, for which gay marriage is primarily a simplified proxy, helps me to understand better where my fellow churchgoers are coming from. When I look at it this way, even though I feel the efforts are misdirected, I can surely appreciate the motivations. It helps me to feel less anxious and troubled, helps me to feel a greater peace with events that have transpired.
In other words, there is a great deal of common ground between the two sides, and that is what keeps my thoughts and opinions at least somewhat consistent as I daily try to balance myself between these oft-seeming opposing forces my identity. I guess what it boils down to is that I truly believe that strengthening ALL families is the direction we must head as a culture and as a nation.
There is a lot I haven't mentioned here: homosexuals who desire to raise children of their own, through adoption or artificial insemination, the LDS doctrine of eternal gender identity (which still has never been sufficiently explained to me, but which is often used in the argument against gay marriage), etc. I never intended this to be a thorough treatise on the subject, however. I am greatly interested in your opinions and comments, but please be kind and respectful.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Fierce
At the end of my lunchtime walk, I came upon this old guy, stopped on my side of the path with an old plastic file box at his feet. Reveling in the darkened beauty of the still damp tree limbs, awakened by the cool March air, the dribble of melting snow, and the grey-white sky intensifying every shade around me - in the midst of all of this I barely gave the man a second thought. In the course of stepping around him, I suddenly noticed what had caught his attention.
A hawk was perched in the bare tree, sandy brown with its powerful wings folded at rest. It was tearing at the branch with its beak a little. I am not sure to which end. Other people paused to gaze upward and admire the fierce and wild creature. It dropped a strand of tree bark, which floated down and landed on the eight-inch lens of a young photographer's camera.
A hawk in the middle of the Common. And it could care less what any of us thought or did.
A hawk was perched in the bare tree, sandy brown with its powerful wings folded at rest. It was tearing at the branch with its beak a little. I am not sure to which end. Other people paused to gaze upward and admire the fierce and wild creature. It dropped a strand of tree bark, which floated down and landed on the eight-inch lens of a young photographer's camera.A hawk in the middle of the Common. And it could care less what any of us thought or did.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Laundry
I should probably do it, since I believe it has been THREE WEEKS and I legitimately have NO clean underwear or socks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)