Today was a gray day. A day even Bob Ross could not paint for want of color. There was no thrashing downpour to give the day uncompromising expression. There were only wan clouds. There was no wind gusting from far-off countries to carry exotic aromas. There were no swirls of flakes to at least chill the air and give lonely men something to complain about. The suns incandescent rays swore themselves from the parched, yellow grass. There was no golden light to illuminate girls' flyaways like gleaming halos. All sound was muted somehow, like the land was holding its breath, biding its time for something to happen. But nothing did.
Because of that tempered silence, rapture took measured breaths. The clouds were august in their austerity. They draped themselves like a heavy-stitched quilt over couch cushions and kitchen chairs. And the people huddled underneath them like refugees—their own breath creating stifling humidity. Not even the slow-returning birds could muster melody. Although the pallid, naked branches were starting to bloom, their efforts made the scene look like a funerary pall rather than spring sprouting.
Today reminded me of a story from Elder Boyd K. Packer. A missionary came to him and admitted feeling discouraged and a little depressed. He said of the event, “Unless there was an unusual reason for these feelings, my answer was ‘Well, I’m glad to hear that. At least now we know that you’re normal. Enjoy the feeling—it probably won’t last. And the first sunny day will do wonders for it.’ It helps a great deal if we realize that there is a certain healthy element in getting the blues occasionally. It is quite in order to schedule a good, discouraging, depressing day every now and again just for contrast."
Today was that day.
[Keep Following.]
31 March 2014
29 March 2014
There Were Giants
So I went and saw Noah the other day. There were some things that I didn't like and other things that I absolutely loved. Overall I gave it about a 6/10. As soon as it was over, some dude stood up in the front of the theater and yelled "BLASPHEMY!" So I guess I shouldn't have been surprised today when I saw that a bunch of people on Facebook were saying it was "horrible" and that it was "the worst movie ever made" and that it "didn't follow the bible at all." So I went back and read the Noah story in the King James Version to see if that claim was true. I ended up laughing hysterically because either people don't read the Bible or they don't understand it--glossing over the parts they don't like.
Now whether or not a person will like this movie, like any other movie, is a matter of expectation. If you went into this movie looking for an exact retelling of the biblical story you might be disappointed. (Which is funny because the movie would probably be 45 minutes long if this were the case.) If you went in knowing that an atheist directed it and that he needed two hours worth of story you will probably like it. Expectations are key when walking into a movie. I have seen all of the Fast and Furious movies and I love them because I go in expecting to see ridiculous, over-the-top action, fast cars, and hammy acting performances. I don't walk in expecting to see Oscar-caliber performances and Shakespearean drama. So if you haven't seen Noah yet, change your expectations and you might also like it.
That said, I do take issue with people (especially Mormons) saying that the film "doesn't follow the bible at all." Yes it does. Noah gets instruction from God, builds an Ark, survives the flood, saves the animals, and repopulates the earth. It follows the Bible story. The things that were added or expanded upon was how exactly all that took place. Which the Bible isn't very clear on either. So I guess what people mean to say is that the movie doesn't follow the traditional understanding or interpretation of how it all took place.
It is pretty ironic that Mormons would take issue with a film "not following the Bible" since we are far from Bible literalists ourselves. Our own articles of Faith state that "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly." In my time at BYU, I took Professor Steven Walker's Bible as Literature class twice. A common practice in that class was to bring in multiple translations of the Bible to bring different flavors and interpretations into our understandings of the stories. The movie Noah did exactly this for me, except in a visual medium. There were some parts of the movie that illuminated the story for me in ways that I had never considered. In ways that, perhaps, only an atheist's interpretation of the story could accomplish. Does the film have worth as an exact, word-for-word retelling? No. Does it have worth as simply a different interpretation? Yes.
WARNING: Spoilers ahead.
Let's put this to bed right now, Genesis 6:4 says: "There were giants in the earth in those days." That part is pretty clear. Could it be that those giants really helped Noah? The Bible doesn't say that they did, but it also never says they didn't. It certainly would have made Noah's job easier if they had. End of argument. Once again, the film follows the Bible, just not how most of us have chosen to interpret it. Is it traditional? No. Is it possible? Yes.
Another example is Noah's vision. I love his vision in the movie. I love how Aronofsky chose to present it to Noah. This follows how I understand that God communicates with us. His vision is a series of images that Noah needs to find the meaning of. I love Methuselah's line where he says, "You must trust that He speaks to you in a way that you can understand." I love the choice that the film makes to make it seem like Noah really did have to have more faith in what he was doing than we traditionally give him credit for.
The traditional belief is that Noah got the vision in exact instruction form, down the the very dimensions of the vessel he was supposed to build. And that he never questioned how loony it must have looked for him to do what he did. In the film, Noah must interpret God's commands (kind of like us? maybe?) and have faith that he is doing what is right. This is Noah's modus operandi through the rest of the film. It then makes sense that if Noah believed that God's intent was to destroy mankind, that also included him and his family (just not by drowning in the flood.) This also fits with the Bible. In Genesis 6:6, it states: "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart." It also then makes sense that Noah would be willing to kill his granddaughters in an Abrahamic kinda sorta way in order to fulfill God's commandments. In the Biblical account, God does not specifically tell Noah that he should continue to multiply and replenish the earth until after the waters have receded. We see the whole story, not one step at a time as Noah would have experienced it. In this light, Noah's actions, although extreme, are perfectly logical. This also explains why he later falls into a guilt-fueled drunken stupor because he feels so bad for not following through with how he interpreted God's commands. Again: Biblical? Maybe.
I love how the movie humanized Noah. I loved the part where Noah and his family are huddled in the Ark listening to the tortured screams of the drowning masses around them. Noah is visibly shaken and his children feel so bad that they want to help those around them, but Noah sticks to his guns and follows God's commands with exactness. This scene was something I had never thought of before when reading the Biblical account. It must have been an awful, traumatizing experience to be on that Ark knowing that the only things still alive on the entire earth were what you could see. This was an illuminating and perceptive insight into the story.
Glenn Beck (sigh) even chimed in on the movie and called the film (in his typical sensationalist, exaggerated, I'm-trying-to-get-listeners way) the "Babylonian Chainsaw Massacre." In this he only demonstrates his hypocrisy. Mormons should love this movie, or at least find it entertaining and somewhat enlightening. We do not hold a exactly-as-is interpretation of the Bible and this movie embodies this concept, even if it did get some things wrong. Again, it is laughable to decry this movie's approach to the Bible because we also take a similar approach. If you didn't like the acting, or some of the logical fallacies, then I can relate, but don't say it's not Biblical.
And if I were to get really controversial I would say that we believe that Genesis was dictated by Moses anyway. So at best, to us, Genesis is a list of bullet points that communicate the history and story of Noah. In this way, the film is perfectly accurate in terms of its major plot. My biggest complaint about the movie wasn't the plot. It was that it didn't know what it wanted to be. It was a kind of allegory, kind of fantasy, kind of retelling, kind of historical movie. It would have worked better if Aronofsky had simply chosen a theme and stuck with it the whole time. Anyway, this post is way too long. Just go see it already.
[Keep Following.]
Now whether or not a person will like this movie, like any other movie, is a matter of expectation. If you went into this movie looking for an exact retelling of the biblical story you might be disappointed. (Which is funny because the movie would probably be 45 minutes long if this were the case.) If you went in knowing that an atheist directed it and that he needed two hours worth of story you will probably like it. Expectations are key when walking into a movie. I have seen all of the Fast and Furious movies and I love them because I go in expecting to see ridiculous, over-the-top action, fast cars, and hammy acting performances. I don't walk in expecting to see Oscar-caliber performances and Shakespearean drama. So if you haven't seen Noah yet, change your expectations and you might also like it.
That said, I do take issue with people (especially Mormons) saying that the film "doesn't follow the bible at all." Yes it does. Noah gets instruction from God, builds an Ark, survives the flood, saves the animals, and repopulates the earth. It follows the Bible story. The things that were added or expanded upon was how exactly all that took place. Which the Bible isn't very clear on either. So I guess what people mean to say is that the movie doesn't follow the traditional understanding or interpretation of how it all took place.
It is pretty ironic that Mormons would take issue with a film "not following the Bible" since we are far from Bible literalists ourselves. Our own articles of Faith state that "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly." In my time at BYU, I took Professor Steven Walker's Bible as Literature class twice. A common practice in that class was to bring in multiple translations of the Bible to bring different flavors and interpretations into our understandings of the stories. The movie Noah did exactly this for me, except in a visual medium. There were some parts of the movie that illuminated the story for me in ways that I had never considered. In ways that, perhaps, only an atheist's interpretation of the story could accomplish. Does the film have worth as an exact, word-for-word retelling? No. Does it have worth as simply a different interpretation? Yes.
WARNING: Spoilers ahead.
Let's put this to bed right now, Genesis 6:4 says: "There were giants in the earth in those days." That part is pretty clear. Could it be that those giants really helped Noah? The Bible doesn't say that they did, but it also never says they didn't. It certainly would have made Noah's job easier if they had. End of argument. Once again, the film follows the Bible, just not how most of us have chosen to interpret it. Is it traditional? No. Is it possible? Yes.
Another example is Noah's vision. I love his vision in the movie. I love how Aronofsky chose to present it to Noah. This follows how I understand that God communicates with us. His vision is a series of images that Noah needs to find the meaning of. I love Methuselah's line where he says, "You must trust that He speaks to you in a way that you can understand." I love the choice that the film makes to make it seem like Noah really did have to have more faith in what he was doing than we traditionally give him credit for.
The traditional belief is that Noah got the vision in exact instruction form, down the the very dimensions of the vessel he was supposed to build. And that he never questioned how loony it must have looked for him to do what he did. In the film, Noah must interpret God's commands (kind of like us? maybe?) and have faith that he is doing what is right. This is Noah's modus operandi through the rest of the film. It then makes sense that if Noah believed that God's intent was to destroy mankind, that also included him and his family (just not by drowning in the flood.) This also fits with the Bible. In Genesis 6:6, it states: "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart." It also then makes sense that Noah would be willing to kill his granddaughters in an Abrahamic kinda sorta way in order to fulfill God's commandments. In the Biblical account, God does not specifically tell Noah that he should continue to multiply and replenish the earth until after the waters have receded. We see the whole story, not one step at a time as Noah would have experienced it. In this light, Noah's actions, although extreme, are perfectly logical. This also explains why he later falls into a guilt-fueled drunken stupor because he feels so bad for not following through with how he interpreted God's commands. Again: Biblical? Maybe.
I love how the movie humanized Noah. I loved the part where Noah and his family are huddled in the Ark listening to the tortured screams of the drowning masses around them. Noah is visibly shaken and his children feel so bad that they want to help those around them, but Noah sticks to his guns and follows God's commands with exactness. This scene was something I had never thought of before when reading the Biblical account. It must have been an awful, traumatizing experience to be on that Ark knowing that the only things still alive on the entire earth were what you could see. This was an illuminating and perceptive insight into the story.
Glenn Beck (sigh) even chimed in on the movie and called the film (in his typical sensationalist, exaggerated, I'm-trying-to-get-listeners way) the "Babylonian Chainsaw Massacre." In this he only demonstrates his hypocrisy. Mormons should love this movie, or at least find it entertaining and somewhat enlightening. We do not hold a exactly-as-is interpretation of the Bible and this movie embodies this concept, even if it did get some things wrong. Again, it is laughable to decry this movie's approach to the Bible because we also take a similar approach. If you didn't like the acting, or some of the logical fallacies, then I can relate, but don't say it's not Biblical.
And if I were to get really controversial I would say that we believe that Genesis was dictated by Moses anyway. So at best, to us, Genesis is a list of bullet points that communicate the history and story of Noah. In this way, the film is perfectly accurate in terms of its major plot. My biggest complaint about the movie wasn't the plot. It was that it didn't know what it wanted to be. It was a kind of allegory, kind of fantasy, kind of retelling, kind of historical movie. It would have worked better if Aronofsky had simply chosen a theme and stuck with it the whole time. Anyway, this post is way too long. Just go see it already.
[Keep Following.]
23 February 2014
A Girl's Guide To Tinder (Tips & Tricks)
Let's be honest. You're on Tinder™. If you aren't actively using Tinder™, you know someone who has tried it. Chances are, by the time you are done reading this blog post, ten people have died while using Tinder. My name is DJ, and I'm addicted to Tinder.
Just in case you have been living in North Korea for the last year or two, Tinder is a social dating app that uses your geographic location to match you with other Tinder users (hereafter known as Tinds). But you aren't matched using any sort of "Personality Profile" or "Dot-matrix Love Algorithm" or even similar interests, eg. Farmer's Only, or Black People Meet.
No. Tinder is a different animal. The only "matching criterion" used is location. So, this means that you sign up, write a very short blurb, and choose some selfies out of your selfie library. And then you will start seeing selfie after selfie of the opposite sex. (Or not, I get an astonishing number of dudes that have "mislabeled" themselves as girls. Or they did it on purpose. Which, hey, I totally get because gender is a fluid concept now. No judgement.) But either way, when you see a person's selfie you can either swipe left if you don't think they are attractive, or swipe right if you do. Or you can tap on their selfie to read their blurb and see a couple of different selfies. And if that other random Tind happens to also swipe right on your selfie, you are officially MATCHED. Which, I was about to say sounds like a Young Adult Paranormal Romance Novel, and then I looked it up and it totally is.
The nice thing about this is that you know that the other person thinks you are attractive so it is really easy to talk to them. Wrong. No one ever communicates afterward. Which is telling, because you'd think that once the superficial barrier has been overcome, it would be easier to be yourself and talk to someone. But not so. I think Tinder must be leading to many existential crises when Tinds are faced with the mirror of their own crappy personalities. Some people may have become so accustomed to their good looks filling in all the initial blanks when dealing with the opposite sex, that when it comes down to it, they realize the only thing they have left to offer is idle chit chat about the weather, and the latest episode of the Kardashians.
Now before you get all indignant and say, "BUT DJ THAT IS SO LIEK SUPERFICIAL OMG!!!!!1! I WANT PEOPLE TO GET 2 NO ME B4 THEY JUDGE MY LOOKS!" And in response, let me tell you that Tinder is honest. It is probably the first dating service, or app, that isn't wrapped in a ball of pretension and lies. Oh, eHarmony might try to sell you on some magic formula that they have figured out to marry you off to your soul-mate in 10 minutes, or Jdate may try to lure you in with all it's rabbinic promises of geschnitten schmekels, but at the end of the day, you aren't going to date anyone you aren't attracted to. And if you do use one of these miracle services, you might even end up with a fertummelte shlimazl. No amount of chemistry can overcome the brick wall of repulsion. Plain and simple. There is very little pretense with Tinder. I've used that word... there is no... deceptive veneer of "compatibility factor."
Tinder is awkward. It's infuriating. It's hilarious. Sometimes it's sad. And it is always a blast. Everyone starts using Tinder as a joke, but everyone is half serious. You can tell by the fact that every other profile here in Utah Valley says that they are doing this "as a joke" in their About Me section. Which brings me to the focus of this blog post.
Here are some tips for the ladies on using Tinder:
TEXT TIPS
1. Don't put "I'm doing this as a joke! :):):):):):)" in your About Me section. It's not funny, it's not a joke, and... no you're not. You're vain and shallow like the rest of us and you are dying to know who finds you attractive. Things ABOUT YOU go in the ABOUT ME section. I understand that it is hard to sum up all of your wonderful personality traits in one tiny little blurb. If you can't think of anything, just give us raw data. Many men will like that. Or better yet, leave it blank. Go for mysterious. Let us find out the details later.
2. And another thing. Don't write, "I'm hilarious" in your About Me blurb. No, you're not. By writing that, you've automatically labeled yourself as the most unfunny person in the universe. I can at least give a little nod to the ones who try too hard to be funny and it just falls flat. But don't do that either. Honestly the funniest one I ever came across was this nice-looking, classy, dressed up girl and all it said was "butt." I died. But then again, I'm the lowest common denominator, so don't do that either.
3. "I like laughing, traveling, and eating!" Yeah. So does everyone. LEFT SWIPED. You may as well just tell me you have a face. If you told me you hated all those things, I would still swipe left, but at least you would have listed unique things about you. Show, don't tell in your writing.
4. Don't pander to your audience. Examples: "I love (fill in the name of sports team)"; "I'm just one of the guys!"; "If you don't like sports, we won't get along!"; "I love hunting and fishing and camping and riding motorcycles and making sandwiches and cleaning and action movies..." Oh, and what do you do for a living? "I'm a model." One of these things is not like the other. Sesame Street. I call your bluff. If you like boy stuff, tell me you have a Star Wars toy collection and Anderson Silva is your favorite UFC fighter. That's how you show it. Otherwise I think you are making stuff up. Oh and PS- You don't like guns if some bro let you shoot his AR-15 one time a few years back, even if you have photos to prove it. Which brings me to:
PHOTO TIPS
1. If all six of your pictures are group photos, you must not understand what is happening here. Let me break it down. Nevermind. See paragraph three. Listen, I'm not a high-functioning sociopath with a talent for deduction. I don't want to have to "figure out" which one you are. I'm John Watson. Just tell me. Can we just do away with the whole trail of breadcrumbs thing going on here? If I encounter this I'm just going to assume you are the one with the mustache in all the photos. And then swipe left.
2. You're not fooling anyone if all of your pictures are ultra close-ups of your face. I'm going to tread lightly here because I know it's a sensitive issue. If you are a plus-size girl, you are not doing anyone any favors by being so deceptive. Own it. Be the app. You are you, just post normal photos of you from all different angles. And hey, you know what? If someone doesn't like you, you'll never even know! If they do match with you, great! Then you already know that your size isn't an issue. After all of that, if you are still self-conscious, just delete the app. No one will ever know and you'll probably feel relieved. I hope that was tactful. Honestly. As a side note, I'm pretty impressed with how many professional selfie photographers are out there. Girls have this technique perfected where they can make themselves look like a set of ten different people using lighting, make-up, backdrops, costumes, CGI, and filters. It's astounding.
3. Don't post six goofy pictures of yourself. Or six professional photo shoot pictures either. Or six blurry smudges. Or six of the same duck face in different outfits. Or six car selfies. Or six weird, avant-garde shots of your toe and random items strewn around your room. Keep it simple. Smile. Use variation.
4. Alcoholic binge pictures. Now I don't drink, so I need some help on this one. Is this attractive to men who do drink? If one of your pictures is you chugging a bottle of Jack Daniels, is that attractive? I honestly don't know. I guess some dudes want to date Ke$ha, but no thanks. Also, cool it with the cleavage. We get it.
And please, for the love of Gary, be yourself. Unless you are just on Tinder "as a joke" then by all means, be someone else. Because you irritate me.
*DJ bows and and gracefully descends from his soapbox*
[Keep Following.]
Just in case you have been living in North Korea for the last year or two, Tinder is a social dating app that uses your geographic location to match you with other Tinder users (hereafter known as Tinds). But you aren't matched using any sort of "Personality Profile" or "Dot-matrix Love Algorithm" or even similar interests, eg. Farmer's Only, or Black People Meet.
No. Tinder is a different animal. The only "matching criterion" used is location. So, this means that you sign up, write a very short blurb, and choose some selfies out of your selfie library. And then you will start seeing selfie after selfie of the opposite sex. (Or not, I get an astonishing number of dudes that have "mislabeled" themselves as girls. Or they did it on purpose. Which, hey, I totally get because gender is a fluid concept now. No judgement.) But either way, when you see a person's selfie you can either swipe left if you don't think they are attractive, or swipe right if you do. Or you can tap on their selfie to read their blurb and see a couple of different selfies. And if that other random Tind happens to also swipe right on your selfie, you are officially MATCHED. Which, I was about to say sounds like a Young Adult Paranormal Romance Novel, and then I looked it up and it totally is.
The nice thing about this is that you know that the other person thinks you are attractive so it is really easy to talk to them. Wrong. No one ever communicates afterward. Which is telling, because you'd think that once the superficial barrier has been overcome, it would be easier to be yourself and talk to someone. But not so. I think Tinder must be leading to many existential crises when Tinds are faced with the mirror of their own crappy personalities. Some people may have become so accustomed to their good looks filling in all the initial blanks when dealing with the opposite sex, that when it comes down to it, they realize the only thing they have left to offer is idle chit chat about the weather, and the latest episode of the Kardashians.
Now before you get all indignant and say, "BUT DJ THAT IS SO LIEK SUPERFICIAL OMG!!!!!1! I WANT PEOPLE TO GET 2 NO ME B4 THEY JUDGE MY LOOKS!" And in response, let me tell you that Tinder is honest. It is probably the first dating service, or app, that isn't wrapped in a ball of pretension and lies. Oh, eHarmony might try to sell you on some magic formula that they have figured out to marry you off to your soul-mate in 10 minutes, or Jdate may try to lure you in with all it's rabbinic promises of geschnitten schmekels, but at the end of the day, you aren't going to date anyone you aren't attracted to. And if you do use one of these miracle services, you might even end up with a fertummelte shlimazl. No amount of chemistry can overcome the brick wall of repulsion. Plain and simple. There is very little pretense with Tinder. I've used that word... there is no... deceptive veneer of "compatibility factor."
Tinder is awkward. It's infuriating. It's hilarious. Sometimes it's sad. And it is always a blast. Everyone starts using Tinder as a joke, but everyone is half serious. You can tell by the fact that every other profile here in Utah Valley says that they are doing this "as a joke" in their About Me section. Which brings me to the focus of this blog post.
Here are some tips for the ladies on using Tinder:
TEXT TIPS
1. Don't put "I'm doing this as a joke! :):):):):):)" in your About Me section. It's not funny, it's not a joke, and... no you're not. You're vain and shallow like the rest of us and you are dying to know who finds you attractive. Things ABOUT YOU go in the ABOUT ME section. I understand that it is hard to sum up all of your wonderful personality traits in one tiny little blurb. If you can't think of anything, just give us raw data. Many men will like that. Or better yet, leave it blank. Go for mysterious. Let us find out the details later.
2. And another thing. Don't write, "I'm hilarious" in your About Me blurb. No, you're not. By writing that, you've automatically labeled yourself as the most unfunny person in the universe. I can at least give a little nod to the ones who try too hard to be funny and it just falls flat. But don't do that either. Honestly the funniest one I ever came across was this nice-looking, classy, dressed up girl and all it said was "butt." I died. But then again, I'm the lowest common denominator, so don't do that either.
3. "I like laughing, traveling, and eating!" Yeah. So does everyone. LEFT SWIPED. You may as well just tell me you have a face. If you told me you hated all those things, I would still swipe left, but at least you would have listed unique things about you. Show, don't tell in your writing.
4. Don't pander to your audience. Examples: "I love (fill in the name of sports team)"; "I'm just one of the guys!"; "If you don't like sports, we won't get along!"; "I love hunting and fishing and camping and riding motorcycles and making sandwiches and cleaning and action movies..." Oh, and what do you do for a living? "I'm a model." One of these things is not like the other. Sesame Street. I call your bluff. If you like boy stuff, tell me you have a Star Wars toy collection and Anderson Silva is your favorite UFC fighter. That's how you show it. Otherwise I think you are making stuff up. Oh and PS- You don't like guns if some bro let you shoot his AR-15 one time a few years back, even if you have photos to prove it. Which brings me to:
PHOTO TIPS
1. If all six of your pictures are group photos, you must not understand what is happening here. Let me break it down. Nevermind. See paragraph three. Listen, I'm not a high-functioning sociopath with a talent for deduction. I don't want to have to "figure out" which one you are. I'm John Watson. Just tell me. Can we just do away with the whole trail of breadcrumbs thing going on here? If I encounter this I'm just going to assume you are the one with the mustache in all the photos. And then swipe left.
2. You're not fooling anyone if all of your pictures are ultra close-ups of your face. I'm going to tread lightly here because I know it's a sensitive issue. If you are a plus-size girl, you are not doing anyone any favors by being so deceptive. Own it. Be the app. You are you, just post normal photos of you from all different angles. And hey, you know what? If someone doesn't like you, you'll never even know! If they do match with you, great! Then you already know that your size isn't an issue. After all of that, if you are still self-conscious, just delete the app. No one will ever know and you'll probably feel relieved. I hope that was tactful. Honestly. As a side note, I'm pretty impressed with how many professional selfie photographers are out there. Girls have this technique perfected where they can make themselves look like a set of ten different people using lighting, make-up, backdrops, costumes, CGI, and filters. It's astounding.
3. Don't post six goofy pictures of yourself. Or six professional photo shoot pictures either. Or six blurry smudges. Or six of the same duck face in different outfits. Or six car selfies. Or six weird, avant-garde shots of your toe and random items strewn around your room. Keep it simple. Smile. Use variation.
4. Alcoholic binge pictures. Now I don't drink, so I need some help on this one. Is this attractive to men who do drink? If one of your pictures is you chugging a bottle of Jack Daniels, is that attractive? I honestly don't know. I guess some dudes want to date Ke$ha, but no thanks. Also, cool it with the cleavage. We get it.
And please, for the love of Gary, be yourself. Unless you are just on Tinder "as a joke" then by all means, be someone else. Because you irritate me.
*DJ bows and and gracefully descends from his soapbox*
[Keep Following.]
14 February 2014
Don't Give Me Fire
I wrote a post a few years ago called “What I'm Looking For,”
and I've decided that my list needs amending. I feel this necessary because I
recently re-read it, and it contains almost nothing of what I am truly looking
for in a significant other anymore. I guess a divorce can have that effect, but
I am far from being bitter about what I learned and how I have changed. In
fact, I have accepted it and count all that happened as a tremendous blessing.
I am responding to myself here. So... without further ado:
Give me water.
To borrow Bruce Lee's words: “If you put water into a cup,
it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You
put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Water can flow, or it can crash.” Water
adapts to its obstacles rather than trying to burn and pillage its way through
the middle of them. No matter how hot the lava, it stops dead when it
encounters water. The hotter the fire, the faster it burns out.
Despite all that happened I am grateful for fire. I have
shaken off the ashen dust, and been forged anew.
Still, give me water. Give me assured steps. I am looking
for a fullness. Give me the good and the bad. I want your messiness, your
hidden fears and hopes. Let me help you carry them. All I ask is for the same
in return. I want to face the devastations and heartbreaks of life hand in hand
with you—even when one of us is the cause. Fyodor Dostoevsky said that, “To be
in love is not the same as loving. You can be in love with a woman and still
hate her.” When the storms rage upon that vast and mighty sea—as they surely
will—I want an anchor, not a bonfire. When moments such as these arise, I want to
feel your hand tighten around mine. I want someone to remind me that beyond those dark, swelling clouds there is beaming, furious sunlight, and that a still more glorious dawn awaits. And in exchange I will shelter
you from the shrieking wind and hold you if you weep. I will be that rock that can lend you strength and guide you home. This is what I want
because this is something I know I can give.
I now yearn for wholeness. Carl Jung said, “Wholeness is not achieved by cutting off a portion of one's being, but by integration of the contraries.” I do not want one-dimensional dependence or blind, burning romance alone. I also long for sure and steady—a romance that has its passion defined by fierce devotion and loyalty. Contrary to popular belief, this isn't boring. A relationship such as this needn't lack spontaneity or fun. It retains both, while never losing sight of eternal progress. I want my romance to dance around the fire of passion while staying focused on the North Star, never mesmerized by a waning moon—though often brighter.
Nothing else matters. All of the lists of similarities, qualities, and compatibilities are shivering, shallow caveats that often smack of insecurity. I want someone who truly understands that “the world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.” And if a mountain arises that threatens to stop all that we hold dear, I want someone willing to laugh with me and wait, knowing that, given time, water can cut granite.
You can keep your fire; I prefer the constancy of water.
 |
| One of the most romantic scenes I have ever seen in a movie. [Source: "The Best Years of Our Lives"] |
PS - “Those who love you are not fooled by mistakes you have made or dark images you hold about yourself. They remember your beauty when you feel ugly; your wholeness when you are broken; your innocence when you feel guilty; and your purpose when you are confused.”- Alan Cohen
[Keep Following.]
What I'm Looking For
This will be my most fruitless attempt to arrive somewhere.
I'm looking for comfortable silence. For someone who gets the same at-home-sleepy feeling when they hear the hollow sound of church bells; and knows where to find them. I'm looking for a perfect balance of hard-grit tenacity and quirkiness. Someone who isn't defeated by the challenges of unbridled wilderness or the hard-nosed socially prodding questions of Aunty Lucille. Someone with poise. Someone with shameless goofiness.
Someone who can fall like Belgian rain and shine like an Alpen lake.
I'm looking for someone who knows when to hold my hand and when to rub my back. Someone who knows that in imperfection lays beauty. I'm looking for someone who feels like laughing at the most inappropriate times -- like me. Someone who carries Shakespeare and Dumb and Dumber simultaneously on their tongue.
Who sees books as sages. Who has a favorite dish at The Bombay House. Who knows that they don't speak Swedish in Switzerland. Who wants desperately to return to Celestial glory. Who has their own opinion. Who will disagree with me. Who will tell me when I'm being ridiculous.
I'm looking for someone who is willing to walk through fields of gold. Someone who makes the sun jealous in his sky. Someone who knows what those things mean.
Someone whose footsteps are as equally ruled by whim as they are obedience. Someone who can handle my brother. Who knows that the real romance languages are unspoken. Someone who can talk my ear off. Someone who will show everyone in the room who they are. Who is excited by the idea of smells and tastes unknown. Someone who is OK with the idea of taking a spontaneous weekend trip to Vegas, or would even suggest it. Someone who knows where they are going but is not quite sure how they will get there.
I'm looking for someone I can trust with my heart because I know they can break it.
In short, I'm looking for fire.
[Keep following, but before you comment, I know it's too much to ask.]
I'm looking for comfortable silence. For someone who gets the same at-home-sleepy feeling when they hear the hollow sound of church bells; and knows where to find them. I'm looking for a perfect balance of hard-grit tenacity and quirkiness. Someone who isn't defeated by the challenges of unbridled wilderness or the hard-nosed socially prodding questions of Aunty Lucille. Someone with poise. Someone with shameless goofiness.
Someone who can fall like Belgian rain and shine like an Alpen lake.
I'm looking for someone who knows when to hold my hand and when to rub my back. Someone who knows that in imperfection lays beauty. I'm looking for someone who feels like laughing at the most inappropriate times -- like me. Someone who carries Shakespeare and Dumb and Dumber simultaneously on their tongue.
Who sees books as sages. Who has a favorite dish at The Bombay House. Who knows that they don't speak Swedish in Switzerland. Who wants desperately to return to Celestial glory. Who has their own opinion. Who will disagree with me. Who will tell me when I'm being ridiculous.
I'm looking for someone who is willing to walk through fields of gold. Someone who makes the sun jealous in his sky. Someone who knows what those things mean.
Someone whose footsteps are as equally ruled by whim as they are obedience. Someone who can handle my brother. Who knows that the real romance languages are unspoken. Someone who can talk my ear off. Someone who will show everyone in the room who they are. Who is excited by the idea of smells and tastes unknown. Someone who is OK with the idea of taking a spontaneous weekend trip to Vegas, or would even suggest it. Someone who knows where they are going but is not quite sure how they will get there.
I'm looking for someone I can trust with my heart because I know they can break it.
In short, I'm looking for fire.
[Keep following, but before you comment, I know it's too much to ask.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)