....drive through a stoplight following other cars, and then wonder afterwards if the light was really green?
...drive all the way to work and then realize you don't remember anything at all about the drive?
These things happen to me all the time. Especially with regards to the latter, this is why it is advised that you take different routes to routine destinations every now and again. You become so familiar with the same routes, that you get too comfortable (and in my case, you start daydreaming about how you are a rock star, or about how the person you had a crush on in h.s. is going to think you are SO HOT at your 20-year reunion next year and will gaze at you from across the room wishing they had you and how they will rue the day they rejected you....all with the music on the radio as the backdrop to the scene), and are therefore more likely to have an accident. That is why they say accidents are more likely to happen closer to home.
And those are Karla's Words of Wisdom for the day. Or maybe Karla's Stating the Obvious.
In any case, I had to put a post above my Sick of Shit post, which has been there forever, and which I keep reading as SACK of Shit. I have not been Sick of Shit for this long, I promise. It was just a day or two, at most. Now, I am thoroughly enjoying the shit for all it's color and aroma. After all, it never really goes away; it's all in how you choose to deal with it.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
sick of shit
I am at a point, unfortunately, where I am sick of everyone's shit. Just sick of it. Whine whine whine...right? no - I don't freaking have a hard life. I have an easy life. But one more little shovel of shit and I swear....I am on the brink. I am sick of people's fucking bullshit and the pile and stink it is making on my otherwise happy life.
Something has got to change. Me. Other people. Things. Something.
Something has got to change. Me. Other people. Things. Something.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Comments on a play..
My husband and I went to see an interesting play Saturday: The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Claude Marat by the Marquis De Sade. See if you can follow this: It was supposed to be De Sade's play, that de Sade wrote to be acted out by the inmates of the asylum in which he was committed in the 18th century. But really, the play was written by a 20th century playwright; he wrote it as if it was de Sade writing it. To make matters more confusing, the play we were watching was supposed to be acted out by modern inmates in a modern asylum, but they were pretending to be the 18th century inmates. So it was a play within a play within a play.
So the whole time, I thought it was supposed to be de Sade and Marat and Charlotte Corday (Marat's murderer) actually as inmates in the asylum....but really they were just inmates pretending to be those characters. Actually, they were inmates pretending to be those inmates pretending to be those characters.
It was so weird...it was in a smaller theater where you sit very close to the stage, the seats wrapping around the stage. The whole thing was set up as if you were in a real insane asylum. As we waited in line to enter the theater, a girl walked around yelling at everyone to turn their cell phones off b/c the inmates will go nutso if they ring. Cute.
Then they only let us in one at a time. After they beckoned me, I walked up to the door, away a bit from the rest of the line, and had to wait for the door opener to get some queue that it was okay to enter...then they open the door, say you can go in, and close it behind you (the door having these loud bam! and clicking noises as if really asylum doors). Next you wait in a waiting room for a sec, and another guy sprinkles holy water or something on the wall and lets you in. Crazy!
The theater was almost full when I walked in, so I just waited for my husband by the door. All of the "inmates" were mostly naked (they had flesh colored undies on) and were lined up, stoic and expressionless, against the back walls of the theater, behind the seats.
So my husband and I ended up in the front row (I think everyone else was too chicken to take those seats, so we didn't have much of a choice. Some of the inmates were at our feet half of the time), and when the play started , all of the inmates ran up on stage and starting hastily wrapping themselves in this gauze like stuff, and then the play began.
I could go on and on, but I'll just say the play was really good...and eerie...and interesting. There was a lot of groping and sexuality about it (being it is supposed to be about de Sade, after all).
The guy who played Marat had a fantastic body. OMG. He was half-naked too... just a beautiful physique. He was also a great actor. His voice inflection reminded me of Ralph Fiennes. The guy who played de Sade was an excellent actor, as well, but not as great of a body. He was thin...which I imagine de Sade to be tall and thin. Actually, I've looked it up, and he ended up being quite obese in his older age. I'm not sure how old he was supposed to be in this play. Charlotte Corday was also very good, and and quite attractive and appealing as an actress. Most of the other actors could really look in to doing some Body for Life. :)
When the play was over, the "inmates" stripped down out of their gauze wraps, ran off the stage, and lined up against the wall again, except this time, they were facing the wall with their backs to us. That was even freakier than the beginning. It reminded me of the Blair Witch Project.
And like the end of the BWP when I saw it in the theater, the audience just sat there in the end not knowing what to do. So we all just awkwardly clapped...but the actors stayed in character and never came back to bow or any of that. It just got all quiet, everyone sat there for a couple of seconds, and then we started quietly filing out of there. Cool.
(btw...I wish I would have let my cell phone ring. No one's did. I wonder if they worked it in the play to actually go berserk if one started ringing)
So the whole time, I thought it was supposed to be de Sade and Marat and Charlotte Corday (Marat's murderer) actually as inmates in the asylum....but really they were just inmates pretending to be those characters. Actually, they were inmates pretending to be those inmates pretending to be those characters.
It was so weird...it was in a smaller theater where you sit very close to the stage, the seats wrapping around the stage. The whole thing was set up as if you were in a real insane asylum. As we waited in line to enter the theater, a girl walked around yelling at everyone to turn their cell phones off b/c the inmates will go nutso if they ring. Cute.
Then they only let us in one at a time. After they beckoned me, I walked up to the door, away a bit from the rest of the line, and had to wait for the door opener to get some queue that it was okay to enter...then they open the door, say you can go in, and close it behind you (the door having these loud bam! and clicking noises as if really asylum doors). Next you wait in a waiting room for a sec, and another guy sprinkles holy water or something on the wall and lets you in. Crazy!
The theater was almost full when I walked in, so I just waited for my husband by the door. All of the "inmates" were mostly naked (they had flesh colored undies on) and were lined up, stoic and expressionless, against the back walls of the theater, behind the seats.
So my husband and I ended up in the front row (I think everyone else was too chicken to take those seats, so we didn't have much of a choice. Some of the inmates were at our feet half of the time), and when the play started , all of the inmates ran up on stage and starting hastily wrapping themselves in this gauze like stuff, and then the play began.
I could go on and on, but I'll just say the play was really good...and eerie...and interesting. There was a lot of groping and sexuality about it (being it is supposed to be about de Sade, after all).
The guy who played Marat had a fantastic body. OMG. He was half-naked too... just a beautiful physique. He was also a great actor. His voice inflection reminded me of Ralph Fiennes. The guy who played de Sade was an excellent actor, as well, but not as great of a body. He was thin...which I imagine de Sade to be tall and thin. Actually, I've looked it up, and he ended up being quite obese in his older age. I'm not sure how old he was supposed to be in this play. Charlotte Corday was also very good, and and quite attractive and appealing as an actress. Most of the other actors could really look in to doing some Body for Life. :)
When the play was over, the "inmates" stripped down out of their gauze wraps, ran off the stage, and lined up against the wall again, except this time, they were facing the wall with their backs to us. That was even freakier than the beginning. It reminded me of the Blair Witch Project.
And like the end of the BWP when I saw it in the theater, the audience just sat there in the end not knowing what to do. So we all just awkwardly clapped...but the actors stayed in character and never came back to bow or any of that. It just got all quiet, everyone sat there for a couple of seconds, and then we started quietly filing out of there. Cool.
(btw...I wish I would have let my cell phone ring. No one's did. I wonder if they worked it in the play to actually go berserk if one started ringing)
Thursday, April 03, 2008
I don't care what anyone says...
...but is is tough finding time to exercise properly when you have a child.
I am not talking about using the fact that you have a child as an excuse not to exercise. It can be done. I'm just saying all things being equal, it is way tougher to find time to work out if you have a child than if not. I should add in particular that I'm talking about babies really. Mine is 19 months old. I can't say yet if it is more difficult if one has older children.
I speak from experience. I was without child for more than 10 years after I got married. Without a baby, really, I had all the time in the world to do whatever I wanted. My husband was/is not an obstacle at all, as he is generally supportive of most of my endeavors. Besides, he was working 2nd shift (i.e. I was alone from 5 pm to 2 am nightly), so I had all kinds of time to myself - to exercise, sing karaoke, perform rock operas in my living room - whatever!
I am not complaining. I LOVE being a mom and having a son, and I don't miss my past life and don't want it any other way. I am only comparing my life pre-child versus post-child when it comes to working out....and as I said, all things being equal, it is way more difficult to find the time. That is, if you want to be a good mom.
I could ignore my kid and do what I want to do, but I don't want to do that. A big part of this problem is that I work 40 hours a week outside the home. So I really want to spend time with him...as much time as possible, when I am home. That, to me, is more important than getting a workout in.
I know it's important to keep my own health up, too, for the sake of my son, and I'm still doing that. But damn...if time is tight, and I have a choice of working out for an hour versus playing with my baby after not seeing him all day, you are damn right that I am playing with the baby.
In some ways, being a SAHM might be harder, but I know I'd get my workouts in if I was one, and I'd get a heck a lot more stuff down around the house, too. For one thing, my mom can watch the baby one day a week so that would buy me some time. Also, at this writing, baby sleeps for 2-4 hours in the afternoon, so I get stuff done then on weekends (if I don't crash), so I know I could do it on week days, too.
Right now, all I do is work all day then take care of my family on week days, with barely anything extra home-wise on weekends. My household management has gone to hell in a hand basket. I literally don't have the time! And I'm not even watching much TV or wasting my time in ways like that. We end up having the same Netflix movies for months due to the lack of time, in fact. I don't have much time for the computer either...I have to schedule it in if I want to indulge.
My wanting to spend time with baby has nothing to do with my husband helping or not helping either. He helps. I am just really attached to the little guy (baby, not husband. He's not little. So he likes to think), and I want to keep it that way.
This is one of those things that I was wrong about pre-motherhood. I thought moms were just making all kinds of excuses and were lame. But now I understand (and the list of things I "understand" now goes on and on...you really CANNOT judge ANYONE unless you've lived their lives...it's true. And since you will never live someone else's life directly, you can never judge.).
That said...I am still getting my workouts in (although it may not be absolute perfection like I aspired to pre-baby), and having children is still not a good excuse for not exercising at all. I'm just saying, it is a lot harder than it was when it was just me I had to think about.
And I just have one child. I can't imagine 5, or having 3 below the age of 5, or anything like that. I would think it would be damn near impossible if that were the case, whether you are a SAHM or not.
Now, as my son gets older and becomes not so dependent on me for his every need (and in fact wants me to get out of his face which will be duly noted by the "KEEP OUT" sign on his bedroom door) , I would imagine it'll get easier to get my time in. Unless of course I'm spending all my spare time running around to soccer games and practice.
In conclusion, I don't care what anyone says, it is way harder to find any kind of me time, let alone to work out, for an hour if you have a 19-month old son versus having no kids at all. It can be done, but it takes a lot more planning and energy and resources. Everyone should respect that fact.
I am not talking about using the fact that you have a child as an excuse not to exercise. It can be done. I'm just saying all things being equal, it is way tougher to find time to work out if you have a child than if not. I should add in particular that I'm talking about babies really. Mine is 19 months old. I can't say yet if it is more difficult if one has older children.
I speak from experience. I was without child for more than 10 years after I got married. Without a baby, really, I had all the time in the world to do whatever I wanted. My husband was/is not an obstacle at all, as he is generally supportive of most of my endeavors. Besides, he was working 2nd shift (i.e. I was alone from 5 pm to 2 am nightly), so I had all kinds of time to myself - to exercise, sing karaoke, perform rock operas in my living room - whatever!
I am not complaining. I LOVE being a mom and having a son, and I don't miss my past life and don't want it any other way. I am only comparing my life pre-child versus post-child when it comes to working out....and as I said, all things being equal, it is way more difficult to find the time. That is, if you want to be a good mom.
I could ignore my kid and do what I want to do, but I don't want to do that. A big part of this problem is that I work 40 hours a week outside the home. So I really want to spend time with him...as much time as possible, when I am home. That, to me, is more important than getting a workout in.
I know it's important to keep my own health up, too, for the sake of my son, and I'm still doing that. But damn...if time is tight, and I have a choice of working out for an hour versus playing with my baby after not seeing him all day, you are damn right that I am playing with the baby.
In some ways, being a SAHM might be harder, but I know I'd get my workouts in if I was one, and I'd get a heck a lot more stuff down around the house, too. For one thing, my mom can watch the baby one day a week so that would buy me some time. Also, at this writing, baby sleeps for 2-4 hours in the afternoon, so I get stuff done then on weekends (if I don't crash), so I know I could do it on week days, too.
Right now, all I do is work all day then take care of my family on week days, with barely anything extra home-wise on weekends. My household management has gone to hell in a hand basket. I literally don't have the time! And I'm not even watching much TV or wasting my time in ways like that. We end up having the same Netflix movies for months due to the lack of time, in fact. I don't have much time for the computer either...I have to schedule it in if I want to indulge.
My wanting to spend time with baby has nothing to do with my husband helping or not helping either. He helps. I am just really attached to the little guy (baby, not husband. He's not little. So he likes to think), and I want to keep it that way.
This is one of those things that I was wrong about pre-motherhood. I thought moms were just making all kinds of excuses and were lame. But now I understand (and the list of things I "understand" now goes on and on...you really CANNOT judge ANYONE unless you've lived their lives...it's true. And since you will never live someone else's life directly, you can never judge.).
That said...I am still getting my workouts in (although it may not be absolute perfection like I aspired to pre-baby), and having children is still not a good excuse for not exercising at all. I'm just saying, it is a lot harder than it was when it was just me I had to think about.
And I just have one child. I can't imagine 5, or having 3 below the age of 5, or anything like that. I would think it would be damn near impossible if that were the case, whether you are a SAHM or not.
Now, as my son gets older and becomes not so dependent on me for his every need (and in fact wants me to get out of his face which will be duly noted by the "KEEP OUT" sign on his bedroom door) , I would imagine it'll get easier to get my time in. Unless of course I'm spending all my spare time running around to soccer games and practice.
In conclusion, I don't care what anyone says, it is way harder to find any kind of me time, let alone to work out, for an hour if you have a 19-month old son versus having no kids at all. It can be done, but it takes a lot more planning and energy and resources. Everyone should respect that fact.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)