Ooooh man!! This one is even better!!! This one was an assigment in my poetry class my senior year in college. I always used to say that I couldn't write when I was assigned to, but I was so proud of this one!! Our assigment was to find a painting and write a poem about it. As I wasn't that much into art, but Ryan is quite the artist, I picked something that he drew himself. He has this amazing distorted self portrat that he made in high school...it actually looks like it's painted, but it's all colored pencils. He left the eyes completely white and people always used to tell him that he forgot to color them in. He used to get so frustarted when he had to tell them that he did it on purpose. I thought it was pretty cool and, as there's not much difference between artists and writers, I understood what he was trying to do. And I used that as the foundation for the poem. Here's what came from that:
Colorful Emptiness
A psychedelic bridge connets your empty soul
to winding paths of freedom. You look
as though you think it's all a joke. How
can you pretend to smile when I see
there is nothing worth believing behind those eyes?
Your background, so colorful, so busy.
But your emptiness gives you away. You are hiding.
Blankly, you stare, looking right through me.
See me, love me, let me know you feel something.
Tell me what could fill the void you try to conceal.
Tilting your head to one side, as if you think
I might believe you're interested. While the sky behind you
bleeds blue and violet, dripping with your lies.
You are unaware that you don't blend in. Ignorant
to the coldness you have left on the world.
You emit a red and orange glow, falsely showing passion.
Somehow your secret is still safe from the world.
You distort your face to distract me, but vacant tunnels
will eventually show what you are all about.
And sadly still, I plead for you to notice me, to love me,
to open up your soul to me.
He was so happy when he read this. I believe his words were "You got everything in here!" I think I described the painting pretty well and we were so happy with our little mini collaboration! :)
Monday, May 9, 2011
Old Poems Die Hard
Oh my Gosh! This blog stuff got me going through some of my old writing and I pulled out the binders full of my poems. Man, was I bad (at first!). I like to think they got a lot better and there's several that I'm rather proud of. Here's a particular favorite of mine. It's called "Advice" and it was written three years ago when I was working with my mom and my brother. I was working part-time, basically as an intern, but I was getting paid pretty well (more per hour than I'm getting now, actually...bummer). Every single day, someone tried to talk me into staying at this job, even though I was pretty clear that I wanted to pursue my dreams of being an editor. It literally got to the point where I was in tears over it, because I was basically being called an idiot for not taking this "great" offer. So, here's what came out of that:
Advice
Is death the only solace
To this unwarranted despair?
Is silence just too strenuous?
I want you, quietly, to care
Judgments swarm around me
The world is seen in black and white
Dreams somehow seem to vanish
I must endure the fight
Forlorn, I reconsider
Please end the persecution
The price I'd pay for ecstasy
Is nothing short of execution
Ignorance is blinding
Your callow words have numbed my soul
My momentum shortly halted
My efforts growing cold
I must quell all my emotions
And your advice must be forsaken
Your apparent words of wisdom
Have left my motivation shaken
This vision's never faded
And will not go unattempted
I said I'd never settle
And for once, I think I meant it...
It's a bummer that no one realized how much their pressure was effecting me. I was legitimately upset about it. I was essentially being told to give up on all of my dreams and take the easy road...take the job that I only got because my mother worked there. No thanks. I got my degree in English with something specific in mind to use it for and I'll be damned if I'll give up on that. I do realize this poem could use a little "tweeking" and some editing, but I have a general rule that I don't really edit my poems. I don't know why...I hate to ruin them and take away from the original meaning. I like to keep all the emotions in tact, so when I go back and read them I can still feel what I felt when I wrote it..if that makes any sense. Judging by the meticulous notes I take on all of my poems, I wrote this one in two different sittings...which is kinda obvious, but oh well. I like it. I remember writing it and I remember how I felt when I was writing it. I guess that was my point.
Advice
Is death the only solace
To this unwarranted despair?
Is silence just too strenuous?
I want you, quietly, to care
Judgments swarm around me
The world is seen in black and white
Dreams somehow seem to vanish
I must endure the fight
Forlorn, I reconsider
Please end the persecution
The price I'd pay for ecstasy
Is nothing short of execution
Ignorance is blinding
Your callow words have numbed my soul
My momentum shortly halted
My efforts growing cold
I must quell all my emotions
And your advice must be forsaken
Your apparent words of wisdom
Have left my motivation shaken
This vision's never faded
And will not go unattempted
I said I'd never settle
And for once, I think I meant it...
It's a bummer that no one realized how much their pressure was effecting me. I was legitimately upset about it. I was essentially being told to give up on all of my dreams and take the easy road...take the job that I only got because my mother worked there. No thanks. I got my degree in English with something specific in mind to use it for and I'll be damned if I'll give up on that. I do realize this poem could use a little "tweeking" and some editing, but I have a general rule that I don't really edit my poems. I don't know why...I hate to ruin them and take away from the original meaning. I like to keep all the emotions in tact, so when I go back and read them I can still feel what I felt when I wrote it..if that makes any sense. Judging by the meticulous notes I take on all of my poems, I wrote this one in two different sittings...which is kinda obvious, but oh well. I like it. I remember writing it and I remember how I felt when I was writing it. I guess that was my point.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
I Do Not Have a Clever Title For This One (read it anyway!)
Well, here we go again. I might be getting addicted to this. This time I'm going to be talking about something that's been bothering me all week. It was hashed out on my Facebook page (as most things are before they make it here) earlier in the week, and to answer all your questions, no, I can't just let things go. It's been on my mind and it's been bothering me and I never feel better until I vent about it somewhere. This time, I'm going to be talking about statutory rape laws. This article is what started it: http://www.news4jax.com/news/27702820/detail.html. I hate to post it here and make it more public then it already is, but like a good journalist (cause ya know...that's what I am), I feel the need to site my sources. The article is about a 25-year-old track coach who was having a consentual sexual relationship with one of his 16-year-old students. Now, instantly everyone thinks he's a pervert and a dirtbag, or whatever else you want to call him. I say differently. And here's why:
1) It was consentual. There's not much more explaining to do here. The girl consented to it, he did not "take advantage" of her.
2) In my eyes (and the eyes of many others) 16 years old is old enough to make the decision of who you can and cannot have sex with. I would venture to say that most people were already having sex by the time they were that age and also to say that most of them (at one point or another) were having sex with someone that was over the age of 18. Obviously, there are exceptions, but it seems like a pretty easy and safe assumption to make to assume that in high school, people generally date out of their grade. A junior is generally about 16 or 17 years old and a senior is around 17 or 18..."technically" a young junior and an older senior would not be legally allowed to have sex.
3) The girl herself is not complaining about the situation. Her parents are. I do not think it is fair or appropriate for someone to claim rape on someone else's behalf...not unless they are physically incapable of making the claim themselves.
4) If this was some random guy off the street and not this girl's track coach, we would not only have never heard about it, but her parents probably would not have even made a legal issue out of it.
Now, I am not saying that he did nothing wrong. As a teacher, and a person of authority, he should have known that this was not right and that it would not go over well. However, as a human being, I see nothing wrong with the situation. Who are we to say that these two weren't genuinely in love? I met and fell in love with my fiance at sixteen years old. It happens everyday. In fact, teachers sleeping with students also happens every day (http://badbadteacher.com/). Again, that doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make him some psycho pedophile. The age of consent has changed dramatically throughout history, at one point being as young as seven years old (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent). At this point in history, society and the law tells us that if you are over the age of 18, it is not okay to sleep with someone younger than that (or close to that). This has been drilled into our brains to such an extreme that should a situation arise, clearly, we immediately jump to the girl's defense (or whoever the younger party is...usually female). The male (again, or whoever the older party is) is always accused of "taking advantage." How do we know that she's not taking advantage of him? Sixteen-year-old girls aren't capable of manipulating an older man into bed with her so that she can get him fired from his job? That's really so hard to believe? Now, I'm not saying that's the case here, but I would guarantee, without a doubt, it has happened at least once in recent history. What if the legal age of consent was fourteen? This relationship would be 100% legal and again, we would have never heard about it. Because the law says so, this man's life is ruined. Even if the charges are dropped or he is aquitted, his life is forever ruined. The news is out there and everyone knows what he did. It doesn't matter that it was a consentual relationship. It doesn't matter that this girl wanted it as much as he did. None of that matters, because the LAW says it's not okay. Who are they to tell us who we can and can't have sex with? How many of the people judging this man have gotten into a car after a night of drinking, knowing they shouldn't drive home? You claim you're fine and you drive home anyway. Just because you didn't get caught, or no one got hurt doesn't mean it's not illegal. But, in some cases, it's not so bad, right? Because you're not that drunk. It's still illegal and if you ask me, you should be charged with attempted murder, because that is far more dangerous that sleeping with a minor...because you're endangering every single person on the road that night, including yourself. But, people charged with a DUI sometimes only get a slap on the wrist, maybe community service...if a repeat offender, you might get a weekend in jail or mandatory rehab. The time doesn't match the crime on that one. But, this guy, who had sex with his girlfriend (who happened to be underage) is probably going to go to jail for several years, just because her parents didn't approve. Here's a perfect example: Bo Derek (we all know her, right?) met her husband when she was just starting out. She was 16...he was 46. Disgusting, right? They moved to Germany to avoid him being charged with statutory rape and after her 18th birthday, they moved back to the US to be married. They were married for 22 years, until he died. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Derek) What's funny is that no one really knows about that. I certainly didn't. Since they were happily married for so long, no one questioned their relationship did they? They were smart (and rich) enough to move to a country where their relationship was legal, and because of that they got away with it and lived happily ever after. We don't all have that luxury, and unforunately we pay for the consequences. Personally, I would be a hell of a lot more concerned about a 16-year-old fleeing the country with a man 30 years older than her, than I would be worried about a 16-year-old having a month-long relationship with her track coach. People are so quick to judge based on what the law and the media tells us we're supposed to think. Try looking at it from outside the situation.
I will reiterate that I do not think it is right for a teacher, or authority figure to date a student, and on that fact alone, he made a very poor choice. He should have been fired from his job, stripped of his teaching certificate and carried on with his life. Personally, I feel sorry for both of them. I hope both parties can find a way to bounce back from this and carry on with their lives.
1) It was consentual. There's not much more explaining to do here. The girl consented to it, he did not "take advantage" of her.
2) In my eyes (and the eyes of many others) 16 years old is old enough to make the decision of who you can and cannot have sex with. I would venture to say that most people were already having sex by the time they were that age and also to say that most of them (at one point or another) were having sex with someone that was over the age of 18. Obviously, there are exceptions, but it seems like a pretty easy and safe assumption to make to assume that in high school, people generally date out of their grade. A junior is generally about 16 or 17 years old and a senior is around 17 or 18..."technically" a young junior and an older senior would not be legally allowed to have sex.
3) The girl herself is not complaining about the situation. Her parents are. I do not think it is fair or appropriate for someone to claim rape on someone else's behalf...not unless they are physically incapable of making the claim themselves.
4) If this was some random guy off the street and not this girl's track coach, we would not only have never heard about it, but her parents probably would not have even made a legal issue out of it.
Now, I am not saying that he did nothing wrong. As a teacher, and a person of authority, he should have known that this was not right and that it would not go over well. However, as a human being, I see nothing wrong with the situation. Who are we to say that these two weren't genuinely in love? I met and fell in love with my fiance at sixteen years old. It happens everyday. In fact, teachers sleeping with students also happens every day (http://badbadteacher.com/). Again, that doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make him some psycho pedophile. The age of consent has changed dramatically throughout history, at one point being as young as seven years old (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent). At this point in history, society and the law tells us that if you are over the age of 18, it is not okay to sleep with someone younger than that (or close to that). This has been drilled into our brains to such an extreme that should a situation arise, clearly, we immediately jump to the girl's defense (or whoever the younger party is...usually female). The male (again, or whoever the older party is) is always accused of "taking advantage." How do we know that she's not taking advantage of him? Sixteen-year-old girls aren't capable of manipulating an older man into bed with her so that she can get him fired from his job? That's really so hard to believe? Now, I'm not saying that's the case here, but I would guarantee, without a doubt, it has happened at least once in recent history. What if the legal age of consent was fourteen? This relationship would be 100% legal and again, we would have never heard about it. Because the law says so, this man's life is ruined. Even if the charges are dropped or he is aquitted, his life is forever ruined. The news is out there and everyone knows what he did. It doesn't matter that it was a consentual relationship. It doesn't matter that this girl wanted it as much as he did. None of that matters, because the LAW says it's not okay. Who are they to tell us who we can and can't have sex with? How many of the people judging this man have gotten into a car after a night of drinking, knowing they shouldn't drive home? You claim you're fine and you drive home anyway. Just because you didn't get caught, or no one got hurt doesn't mean it's not illegal. But, in some cases, it's not so bad, right? Because you're not that drunk. It's still illegal and if you ask me, you should be charged with attempted murder, because that is far more dangerous that sleeping with a minor...because you're endangering every single person on the road that night, including yourself. But, people charged with a DUI sometimes only get a slap on the wrist, maybe community service...if a repeat offender, you might get a weekend in jail or mandatory rehab. The time doesn't match the crime on that one. But, this guy, who had sex with his girlfriend (who happened to be underage) is probably going to go to jail for several years, just because her parents didn't approve. Here's a perfect example: Bo Derek (we all know her, right?) met her husband when she was just starting out. She was 16...he was 46. Disgusting, right? They moved to Germany to avoid him being charged with statutory rape and after her 18th birthday, they moved back to the US to be married. They were married for 22 years, until he died. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Derek) What's funny is that no one really knows about that. I certainly didn't. Since they were happily married for so long, no one questioned their relationship did they? They were smart (and rich) enough to move to a country where their relationship was legal, and because of that they got away with it and lived happily ever after. We don't all have that luxury, and unforunately we pay for the consequences. Personally, I would be a hell of a lot more concerned about a 16-year-old fleeing the country with a man 30 years older than her, than I would be worried about a 16-year-old having a month-long relationship with her track coach. People are so quick to judge based on what the law and the media tells us we're supposed to think. Try looking at it from outside the situation.
I will reiterate that I do not think it is right for a teacher, or authority figure to date a student, and on that fact alone, he made a very poor choice. He should have been fired from his job, stripped of his teaching certificate and carried on with his life. Personally, I feel sorry for both of them. I hope both parties can find a way to bounce back from this and carry on with their lives.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
The Proof is in the Pudding (or the frogs...)
I'm not really feeling this as much as I'd like to be tonight, so forgive me if it's poorly written. I've got a lot on my mind (getting married in five weeks...YIKES!!!) and I'm just not feeling great. I know that I shouldn't be, but everyday I'm surprised at people. I'm just kind of tired of hearing people constantly doubting our government (and everything else). I've said before I'm not a "take my word for it" kind of girl, but to request to see pictures of someone's death is extremely morbid and really over the top...and also, who takes pictures of that???? It's just wrong and weird on so many levels. I needed to get that little rant out, in light of recent happenings.
But, I've got to get back to my original intent, which is to share my findings during my reading of the Bible. I've got a ton of questions, but I'll admit, most of my learning has come from other people. As soon as you tell people you're reading the Bible, they want to talk about it (or maybe that's just the people I hang out with). Everyone wants to know my views and my opinions, and for the most part, people have been really helpful in trying to get me to understand what I'm reading.
I've just started reading "Exodus," the second book of the Old Testament. I'm only ten pages into it, but I have some pretty major questions already. I'm sure most people know (or maybe they don't, 'cause I didn't) that Exodus is about Moses. I somehow lost track of what happened and why the Pharoah is holding all of the Egyptians hostage, but I don't think that's as important as the rest of what's going on. Moses was sent to the Pharaoh by God, to convince him to let the people go. I found it really interesting that even Moses questioned why the people should believe that what he said was coming from God. Even back then, God's existence was doubted. So, God tells Moses that he'll "prove" his existence by doing, what can only be described as magic tricks. The Pharoah even calls out his own magicians to match the "tricks" that God is doing, which include, so far; turning their rods to serpents (sounds dirty, but it's not...); turning all of the water to blood; a hailstorm of frogs (weird); a fly infestation; killing all of the cattle and an actual hailstorm resulting in ruined crops and dead trees and animals. I'll start with my smaller question before I get to the biggest one. Why, if God is trying to prove his existence to just the Pharaoh, is he bestowing all these wraths on everyone? It's not the people of Egypt that are questioning Him, it's the Pharaoh. Why is it okay for God to punish all of these people, (essentially killing them all, because you can't drink water when it's made of blood, and they can't eat when all their crops and cattle are dead) because one person doesn't believe? That kinda scares me for the rest of the world. That question can kind of answer itself, I guess, because I've spoken to enough religious people to know what kind of answers to expect: "God works in mysterious ways;" "God punishes us through those that are important to us;" etc. So, fine, I guess I'll go with one of those answers. But, here's my major issue: Why hasn't any of this stuff happened to me?? God's going through all this trouble to prove that he exists and that what Moses says is actually coming from him...so far, he's rewarded many that have trusted his word and done what he's told them to and he's punished even more for going against his word. Well, I don't believe in Him...never really did...and yet, nothing weird or unexplainable has ever happened to me. Sure, I've lost loved ones (lots of them actually...in the same year...), but I've never seen an inanimate object suddenly come to life, I've never been infested with reptiles or rodents or insects...you get the picture. Even as I'm writing this...why isn't anything weird happening? Why isn't God proving to me that He really does exist?? In fact, why isn't He doing it to everyone? There are people that follow God and trust in Him and live their lives according to what He "supposedly" says...and yet, in my experience those are the ones that have the most misfortune. I doubt His existence every single day and my life is pretty damn good. I've got great parents, a great family, got a good education, landed a great job, owned a house before my 24th birthday and am marrying my high school sweetheart. Never strayed from that path. Now, am I supposed to be thanking God for all that? Okay, my parents believe in Him (well, my mom and dad do...my step-dad is a different story), but they're divorced...isn't that against God? Shouldn't someone have been punished somewhere??? Maybe it's because I live a good, clean life? I've never been drunk, high or pregnant (true story about not being drunk...); I've barely done anything questionable in my life. Is that why God won't prove himself to me? Because, I'm unintentionally living the way he would want me to? But I'm shacking up with a guy I'm not married to...that's against His word, right? (Someone, I forget his name was already killed in the Bible for sleeping with a girl, whose name I also forget, he wasn't married to) That's kind of another thing...so far, it's been implied that having sex with someone makes them your wife. It's just been worded in a way that was "and he knew her and she became his wife." Then, this one girl has sex with a guy, and for some reason, doesn't become his wife and when he goes to ask for her hand in marriage, he's killed by her brothers. When did the rules change??
I think this is the part I usually start offending people...my over-use of the question mark, I think makes people think I'm shouting or pointedly asking questions. I'm genuinely trying to understand what is going on and also kind of trying to get people to realize that a book that was supposedly written over 2,000 years ago has no basis in the current world. Someone told me that the New Testament was written after it was decided that the Old Testament didn't really have much basis in reality anymore...isn't that sort of admitting that these are just stories made up as the times change? So, isn't it time to write a new book of "guidelines" for modern times? To be honest, I'm not really seeing anything in here that's worth living your life by, anyway. I get how it's very clearly instilling the fear of God in people, but it's also implying that it's okay to kill someone for having sex with someone they're not married to...it's okay to marry more than one person (which is a matter of opinion, if you ask me), it's okay to procreate with someone you're related to in order to keep the bloodline going. I just honestly can't understand it all. There's no consequences for these people. Maybe I just haven't gotten to that part yet...
But, I've got to get back to my original intent, which is to share my findings during my reading of the Bible. I've got a ton of questions, but I'll admit, most of my learning has come from other people. As soon as you tell people you're reading the Bible, they want to talk about it (or maybe that's just the people I hang out with). Everyone wants to know my views and my opinions, and for the most part, people have been really helpful in trying to get me to understand what I'm reading.
I've just started reading "Exodus," the second book of the Old Testament. I'm only ten pages into it, but I have some pretty major questions already. I'm sure most people know (or maybe they don't, 'cause I didn't) that Exodus is about Moses. I somehow lost track of what happened and why the Pharoah is holding all of the Egyptians hostage, but I don't think that's as important as the rest of what's going on. Moses was sent to the Pharaoh by God, to convince him to let the people go. I found it really interesting that even Moses questioned why the people should believe that what he said was coming from God. Even back then, God's existence was doubted. So, God tells Moses that he'll "prove" his existence by doing, what can only be described as magic tricks. The Pharoah even calls out his own magicians to match the "tricks" that God is doing, which include, so far; turning their rods to serpents (sounds dirty, but it's not...); turning all of the water to blood; a hailstorm of frogs (weird); a fly infestation; killing all of the cattle and an actual hailstorm resulting in ruined crops and dead trees and animals. I'll start with my smaller question before I get to the biggest one. Why, if God is trying to prove his existence to just the Pharaoh, is he bestowing all these wraths on everyone? It's not the people of Egypt that are questioning Him, it's the Pharaoh. Why is it okay for God to punish all of these people, (essentially killing them all, because you can't drink water when it's made of blood, and they can't eat when all their crops and cattle are dead) because one person doesn't believe? That kinda scares me for the rest of the world. That question can kind of answer itself, I guess, because I've spoken to enough religious people to know what kind of answers to expect: "God works in mysterious ways;" "God punishes us through those that are important to us;" etc. So, fine, I guess I'll go with one of those answers. But, here's my major issue: Why hasn't any of this stuff happened to me?? God's going through all this trouble to prove that he exists and that what Moses says is actually coming from him...so far, he's rewarded many that have trusted his word and done what he's told them to and he's punished even more for going against his word. Well, I don't believe in Him...never really did...and yet, nothing weird or unexplainable has ever happened to me. Sure, I've lost loved ones (lots of them actually...in the same year...), but I've never seen an inanimate object suddenly come to life, I've never been infested with reptiles or rodents or insects...you get the picture. Even as I'm writing this...why isn't anything weird happening? Why isn't God proving to me that He really does exist?? In fact, why isn't He doing it to everyone? There are people that follow God and trust in Him and live their lives according to what He "supposedly" says...and yet, in my experience those are the ones that have the most misfortune. I doubt His existence every single day and my life is pretty damn good. I've got great parents, a great family, got a good education, landed a great job, owned a house before my 24th birthday and am marrying my high school sweetheart. Never strayed from that path. Now, am I supposed to be thanking God for all that? Okay, my parents believe in Him (well, my mom and dad do...my step-dad is a different story), but they're divorced...isn't that against God? Shouldn't someone have been punished somewhere??? Maybe it's because I live a good, clean life? I've never been drunk, high or pregnant (true story about not being drunk...); I've barely done anything questionable in my life. Is that why God won't prove himself to me? Because, I'm unintentionally living the way he would want me to? But I'm shacking up with a guy I'm not married to...that's against His word, right? (Someone, I forget his name was already killed in the Bible for sleeping with a girl, whose name I also forget, he wasn't married to) That's kind of another thing...so far, it's been implied that having sex with someone makes them your wife. It's just been worded in a way that was "and he knew her and she became his wife." Then, this one girl has sex with a guy, and for some reason, doesn't become his wife and when he goes to ask for her hand in marriage, he's killed by her brothers. When did the rules change??
I think this is the part I usually start offending people...my over-use of the question mark, I think makes people think I'm shouting or pointedly asking questions. I'm genuinely trying to understand what is going on and also kind of trying to get people to realize that a book that was supposedly written over 2,000 years ago has no basis in the current world. Someone told me that the New Testament was written after it was decided that the Old Testament didn't really have much basis in reality anymore...isn't that sort of admitting that these are just stories made up as the times change? So, isn't it time to write a new book of "guidelines" for modern times? To be honest, I'm not really seeing anything in here that's worth living your life by, anyway. I get how it's very clearly instilling the fear of God in people, but it's also implying that it's okay to kill someone for having sex with someone they're not married to...it's okay to marry more than one person (which is a matter of opinion, if you ask me), it's okay to procreate with someone you're related to in order to keep the bloodline going. I just honestly can't understand it all. There's no consequences for these people. Maybe I just haven't gotten to that part yet...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)