|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You see the issue is that when a dictator is taken out of power there is a power vacuum, and who knows how long THAT is going to last. Sure, life under a dictator may be harsh, but life with complete chaos and different factions trying to vie for power? I'd say that's worse, since at least with a dictator there was SOMEONE in control...
And of course, that would have to come out nekkid.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well If the person in control is a monster then sometimes chaos is preferred. (See I'm neutral not lawful!) Chaos is one of those things that never seems to be permanent eventually things seem to settle down. (at least in societal matters.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's partly tone. Musketeers was, I believe, meant to be humorous. It fell flat. It fell especially so when you look at the protagonists vs. the antagonists.
** spoiler omitted **
Monte Cristo, by contrast, is set up as deliberately showing how empty vengeance is. You see the lengths to which he goes to, and there's some catharsis for the reader, but you do get to see just how much it's cost him to hold onto the grudge for so long. It delivers. We're not meant to see Monte Cristo as a hero as we are the Musketeers, so there isn't the mental disconnect. It's not trying to be funny, so it doesn't disappoint when the jokes don't land.
And it doesn't mistake a villain protagonist for a designated hero. I was never under the impression that I was supposed to like Monte Cristo. There's a vicarious thrill in watching him pull off his schemes, but he's more a force of nature than a character...
** spoiler omitted **I think you need to view the three musketeers as more of a common man kind of thing. Sure the protagonists are flawed in their own way, but that makes them human. Milady essentially used people as her tools, made them take the blame for her.Although Aramis does that in the sequel, he eventually regrets his actions. If Porthos went around cheating rich widows of their money, there's no mention in the novels that they parted on less then friendly terms.
In Chinese we have a saying "Yi ge yan da, Yi ge yan ai" which translates to one is willing to beat someone and the other party is willing to be beaten. If those rich widows so yearn for Porthos company that they're willing to be cheated of their money, then it is their choice, no? You do pay for pimps and prostitutes too.
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
A character flaw can only excuse so much, and this seems a flimsy justification at best. If this makes them "human," then the takeaway is that humans suck. Your covering for Porthos could extend to Milady as well - if they're so...
While you're at it you could also comment about Robin Hood's flaws, sure, rob the rich and give to the poor - but did everyone he robbed come by his wealth unjustly? Or how about the mercenaries that were just hired to guard the merchants.
Porthos did not get anyone hanged - Milady did. Chinese mythology has many flawed heroes, in fact for Journey to the West, all the heroes, in their own ways, were flawed. They do stupid things now and then, but that doesn't stop it from being an enjoyable novel.
|
|
I disagree. I had Fillipino domestic helpers - they agreed that Marcos was corrupt, no doubt, but at least during his regime, there was economic progress, unlike Arroyo where nothing happened because everyone was just hesitating about doing anything.
And who would be a better judge on how the country is run but for the people in it?
** spoiler omitted **
|
|
Some countries, after losing their dictator stay in a mess for what seems forever. Iraq for one. Possibly with someone in charge there might been some kind of handover...or not also because sometimes the next ruler can be a crapshoot too.
I do wonder if ISIS started popping up because there was no one in power to keep them down.
Stalin's party would have been better off ;)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About vengeance...an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. Last time I used to believe in it, then I realized the best revenge was just letting go. That way that person no longer has a hold on you.
Bearing a grudge is like leaving a nail in your foot even though you weren't the one who put it there. Yes VE, same meaning as drinking poison and hoping the other person dies.
** spoiler omitted **
I think the problem with ISIS is the way those countries were invaded and that war was handled. You kill one enemy and make 20 more.
Well screw Stalin's party. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About vengeance...an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. Last time I used to believe in it, then I realized the best revenge was just letting go. That way that person no longer has a hold on you.
Bearing a grudge is like leaving a nail in your foot even though you weren't the one who put it there. Yes VE, same meaning as drinking poison and hoping the other person dies.
My favorite version of that is
“Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of harming another; you end up getting burned.” I think that one is attributed to Bhudda.Still it makes for good stories.
The desire for justice or vengeance is one of my character flaws for sure. If I get slighted I definitely feel the need to get them back. I recognize it as a negative thing but Its not an easy way of thinking to break for me.
|
|
I believe true change has to come from within. That is, initiated by the nation themselves. That's because it's a sign they are ready for change. And also the people of the nation have a part to play rather then having all that resentment when a foreign power comes to take over their country. At the end of the day, if they screw up the process, they only have themselves to blame, rather then having a foreign power interfere and make the choice for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I blame the Service industry. it really makes you hate people.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a lot of reading Kjeldorn.
Eh.
It just me musing about how the bulwark of democracy (ie the allies) seemed to act more on the concept of self-preservation, then on any form of principled defense of values.
My little list (and it wasn't exhaustive really) was mostly about showing there were enough of 'bad guys' to choose from in the 30s and 40s.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's a lot of reading Kjeldorn.Eh.
It just me musing about how the bulwark of democracy (ie the allies) seemed to act more on the concept of self-preservation, then on any form of principled defense of values.
My little list (and it wasn't exhaustive really) was mostly about showing there were enough of 'bad guys' to choose from in the 30s and 40s.
Yeah which kind of reminds me Maslow's hierarchy of needs. You can't really concern yourself with higher thoughts while your life is on the line.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like this is really more philosophy (of politics rather then pure politics.) At least that's how I'm looking at it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like to think of Carl jungs theory of a collective unconsciousness when I get into a deeply philosophical mood.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never had a bachelor party, thankfully.I did! Like... two years after my wedding!
(My best man grabbed his brother and a few others and we all went out to P.F. Chang's, which is pretty big doin's 'round here.) :D
I rest my case on Vegas and Chinese food. :-P
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's (almost) never gaming groups. It's (almost always) family. Especially older, more conservative family with strong views of gender roles and gender separation.Wait, what?
As a member of an arch-conservative family, I have never experienced this. Weeeeiiiirrrrd.
(There have been “girl things” and “guy things” but never - NEVER! - have major family events had anything resembling planned exclusion. )
So... I'm not talking explicit gender exclusion...
...think about Thanksgiving. At your house, do all the women end up in the kitchen chatting and worrying about dinner, and the men in the living room talking sports and politics? And if a woman dares come forth from the kitchen, she is given odd looks and considered "unladylike"?I still remember the Thanksgiving at GothBard's grandparents' house in Idaho. We'd offered to prepare dinner. GothBard cut herself fairly badly and had to be taken to the emergency room for stitches. The entire Idaho side of the family simply assumed that dinner was ruined, because a man could not possibly cook Thanksgiving dinner.
Their astonishment that I somehow managed to muddle through and make dinner in spite of my gender was appalling.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Im our case, my family likes to brag about all the places they'd take the nephews that were Crookshanks' age but they never reached out to us, and if I called them out they'd say "I didn't think she'd like that sort of thing" even now in their text they said "(and Crookshanks to)" as if she's an afterthought to Tiny T-Rex.
This. A thousand times this.
It's not, "Women aren't welcome." It's, "Oh, we just assumed she wouldn't have wanted to come."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty sure a bachelor/ette party is going to be nonexistent or an absolute joke in my case, seeing as the friend circle overlap is pretty 1:1 except for my work friends, and I find myself leaning more and more toward option "Oh yeah we went to the courthouse last week, did we forget to say something?"We went to the Winchester Mystery House and then out for crappy margaritas because I didn't want a standard hen night. I used the obligation of agreeing to a bachelorette to get taken to a thing that was on my list.
Remind me to tell you about our corporate retreat to Winchester Mystery House next time we get together. It was... hilarious, and involved the European group going off-path, hiding in cabinets, and popping out at strangers. I loved our European group...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remind me to tell you about our corporate retreat to Winchester Mystery House next time we get together. It was... hilarious, and involved the European group going off-path, hiding in cabinets, and popping out at strangers. I loved our European group...I'm pretty sure a bachelor/ette party is going to be nonexistent or an absolute joke in my case, seeing as the friend circle overlap is pretty 1:1 except for my work friends, and I find myself leaning more and more toward option "Oh yeah we went to the courthouse last week, did we forget to say something?"We went to the Winchester Mystery House and then out for crappy margaritas because I didn't want a standard hen night. I used the obligation of agreeing to a bachelorette to get taken to a thing that was on my list.
Because *that's* going to happen soon. :(
(Hi is threatening to visit on his way to the east coast in April/May though! Hope he really does.)But how have I never heard this story before?!?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's (almost) never gaming groups. It's (almost always) family. Especially older, more conservative family with strong views of gender roles and gender separation.Wait, what?
As a member of an arch-conservative family, I have never experienced this. Weeeeiiiirrrrd.
(There have been “girl things” and “guy things” but never - NEVER! - have major family events had anything resembling planned exclusion. )
So... I'm not talking explicit gender exclusion...
...think about Thanksgiving. At your house, do all the women end up in the kitchen chatting and worrying about dinner, and the men in the living room talking sports and politics? And if a woman dares come forth from the kitchen, she is given odd looks and considered "unladylike"?
This definitely happened with mine, though with the addition of a third group of mixed genders that wants to get the he'll away from the sports and politics talk and usually ends up in a back bedroom or outside talking about movies or video games. However, this hasn't really been the case since we moved away from Texas and the big centralized area full of people on my mom's huge side of the family. (Mom's mom was one of SIXTEEN KIDS. Half my hometown growing up was some variant of first, second, or third cousin, with different factors of removal.)
Now my family, bizarrely, may be slightly more progressive on this note than some, hyper conservative as they may be in every other facet of their lives. As the women in my family are just as gung ho about football and politics, and we have enough male cooks in the family - me included - that no one beats an eye at that.
Sadly at this year's thanksgiving I was the only member of that third group. It's bigger when Kamon and Ebon are around, and presumably would also be if Scint was, but none of them were in town this year. So it ended up just being me on my phone while everyone else watched football and complained about Democrats in the upcoming midterms and Robert Muller.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
and presumably would also be if Scint was
I love the smell of conversational napalm in the morning.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
and presumably would also be if Scint wasI love the smell of conversational napalm in the morning.
Smells like burned bridges and shunning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's partly tone. Musketeers was, I believe, meant to be humorous. It fell flat. It fell especially so when you look at the protagonists vs. the antagonists.
** spoiler omitted **
Monte Cristo, by contrast, is set up as deliberately showing how empty vengeance is. You see the lengths to which he goes to, and there's some catharsis for the reader, but you do get to see just how much it's cost him to hold onto the grudge for so long. It delivers. We're not meant to see Monte Cristo as a hero as we are the Musketeers, so there isn't the mental disconnect. It's not trying to be funny, so it doesn't disappoint when the jokes don't land.
And it doesn't mistake a villain protagonist for a designated hero. I was never under the impression that I was supposed to like Monte Cristo. There's a vicarious thrill in watching him pull off his schemes, but he's more a force of nature than a character...
** spoiler omitted **I think you need to view the three musketeers as more of a common man kind of thing. Sure the protagonists are flawed in their own way, but that makes them human. Milady essentially used people as her tools, made them take the blame for her.Although Aramis does that in the sequel, he eventually regrets his actions. If Porthos went around cheating rich widows of their money, there's no mention in the novels that they parted on less then friendly terms.
In Chinese we have a saying "Yi ge yan da, Yi ge yan ai" which translates to one is willing to beat someone and the other party is willing to be beaten. If those rich widows so yearn for Porthos company that they're willing to be cheated of their money, then it is their choice, no? You do pay for pimps and prostitutes too.
interesting perspective.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's partly tone. Musketeers was, I believe, meant to be humorous. It fell flat. It fell especially so when you look at the protagonists vs. the antagonists.
** spoiler omitted **
Monte Cristo, by contrast, is set up as deliberately showing how empty vengeance is. You see the lengths to which he goes to, and there's some catharsis for the reader, but you do get to see just how much it's cost him to hold onto the grudge for so long. It delivers. We're not meant to see Monte Cristo as a hero as we are the Musketeers, so there isn't the mental disconnect. It's not trying to be funny, so it doesn't disappoint when the jokes don't land.
And it doesn't mistake a villain protagonist for a designated hero. I was never under the impression that I was supposed to like Monte Cristo. There's a vicarious thrill in watching him pull off his schemes, but he's more a force of nature than a character...
** spoiler omitted **I think you need to view the three musketeers as more of a common man kind of thing. Sure the protagonists are flawed in their own way, but that makes them human. Milady essentially used people as her tools, made them take the blame for her.Although Aramis does that in the sequel, he eventually regrets his actions. If Porthos went around cheating rich widows of their money, there's no mention in the novels that they parted on less then friendly terms.
In Chinese we have a saying "Yi ge yan da, Yi ge yan ai" which translates to one is willing to beat someone and the other party is willing to be beaten. If those rich widows so yearn for Porthos company that they're willing to be cheated of their money, then it is their choice, no? You do pay for pimps and prostitutes too.
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
A character flaw can only excuse so much, and this seems a flimsy justification at best. If this makes them "human," then the takeaway is that humans suck. Your covering for Porthos could extend to Milady as well - if they're so...
and a very rigid perspective here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Smells like burned bridges and shunning.and presumably would also be if Scint wasI love the smell of conversational napalm in the morning.
I don't burn bridges. I either neglect them into ruin or call in a tactical nuke.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And even with the literature, the two best revenge stories I can think of (Monte Cristo and Hamlet) focus more heavily on the flaws of revenge and the cost thereofPah. Vengeance is its own reward.It really isn't. It never feels as good as your wronging felt bad. It never makes the pain go away.
I could give my gf a pair of pliers, a blowtorch, a knife, some salt, a car battery, and four days with her ex-husband tied up for her to torture, but it wouldn't make the PTSD from his abuse of her go away. She'd still wake up in the night crying with flashbacks and nightmares.
...and no amount of "but you got him back for it" would make the memories go away.
that doesn't sound like vengeance. That more sounds like justice.
Then again, I have been told I am vengeful person whose sense of justice is warped.
As my pastor used to say (and I think he was quoting someone else):
Holding onto anger is like drinking poison and hoping the other person will die.
Forgiving someone else isn't for them; it's for you. It's to help you get over your own anger and pain and hatred. They're toxic emotions. Studies have even shown people who hold onto those feelings start to develop negative physical associations with them.
Vengeance doesn't do anyone any good, except perhaps someone enjoying a good piece of literature about it.
I would argue these are meant to be morality plays with respect to vengeance. There are works that show vengeance in a better light.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and a very rigid perspective here.
Well, lawful. =)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...It's partly tone. Musketeers was, I believe, meant to be humorous. It fell flat. It fell especially so when you look at the protagonists vs. the antagonists.
** spoiler omitted **
Monte Cristo, by contrast, is set up as deliberately showing how empty vengeance is. You see the lengths to which he goes to, and there's some catharsis for the reader, but you do get to see just how much it's cost him to hold onto the grudge for so long. It delivers. We're not meant to see Monte Cristo as a hero as we are the Musketeers, so there isn't the mental disconnect. It's not trying to be funny, so it doesn't disappoint when the jokes don't land.
And it doesn't mistake a villain protagonist for a designated hero. I was never under the impression that I was supposed to like Monte Cristo. There's a vicarious thrill in watching him pull off his schemes, but he's more a force of nature than a character...
** spoiler omitted **I think you need to view the three musketeers as more of a common man kind of thing. Sure the protagonists are flawed in their own way, but that makes them human. Milady essentially used people as her tools, made them take the blame for her.Although Aramis does that in the sequel, he eventually regrets his actions. If Porthos went around cheating rich widows of their money, there's no mention in the novels that they parted on less then friendly terms.
In Chinese we have a saying "Yi ge yan da, Yi ge yan ai" which translates to one is willing to beat someone and the other party is willing to be beaten. If those rich widows so yearn for Porthos company that they're willing to be cheated of their money, then it is their choice, no? You do pay for pimps and prostitutes too.
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
A character flaw can only excuse so much, and this seems a flimsy justification at best. If this makes them "human," then the takeaway is that humans suck. Your covering for Porthos could extend to
Call it whatever you want.
The fact of the matter is that I did not enjoy the novel, and it's largely because Dumas failed to make me care one whit about what happened to anyone. No amount of re-examining my perspective is going to change that initial reaction.
I've done the whole re-examine books to find something good, therefore another chance thing before. Jane Eyre, for instance. Hated it when I read it for high school. I have a much better understanding of that era now and can give Jane a much fairer shake. Rochester...still not great, but he can be upgraded to "meh" from "the literal worst." This won't work for Musketeers. I already had the context of "it was a different time, so different behaviors" when I read it the first time. It didn't help.
To underscore how bad it was to me, I found more likable characters in Twilight than in Musketeers, and I loathed Twilight. The cop and the doctor. Whatever their names were. Charlie?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As of this point my count as 4 votes for 1, 2 for 2, 1 for 3, and 5 for 4. =)
Feedback appreciated, and more welcome. I'll make the final decision tomorrow sometime probably then get to work.
Overnight update gives us a total of:
1 - 6 votes
2 - 6 votes
3 - 4 votes
4 - 5 votes
5 - 1 vote (sorry Mort!)
As 2 is the one I've done the most previous work on, that's the one I'll do first, followed by 1 or 4.
Thanks for your assistance everyone, and I hope you enjoy the stories. I'll post a link once it's up.
What would be the proper forum for this, anyway?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, I don't begrudge anyone their enjoyment of the book. I'm just trying to put into words why it didn't work for me as a reader. Since I like to write, it helps for me to organize these thoughts so I can hopefully avoid the same pitfalls.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't burn bridges. I either neglect them into ruin or call in a tactical nuke.Smells like burned bridges and shunning.and presumably would also be if Scint wasI love the smell of conversational napalm in the morning.
I carefully take mine apart and build something better with the pieces, like a merry go round, with lasers, and jetpacks.
Er, grand opening TBD.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pah. Vengeance is its own reward.It really isn't. It never feels as good as your wronging felt bad. It never makes the pain go away.
I could give my gf a pair of pliers, a blowtorch, a knife, some salt, a car battery, and four days with her ex-husband tied up for her to torture, but it wouldn't make the PTSD from his abuse of her go away. She'd still wake up in the night crying with flashbacks and nightmares.
...and no amount of "but you got him back for it" would make the memories go away.
that doesn't sound like vengeance. That more sounds like justice.
Then again, I have been told I am vengeful person whose sense of justice is warped.
As my pastor used to say (and I think he was quoting someone else):
Holding onto anger is like drinking poison and hoping the other person will die.
Forgiving someone else isn't for them; it's for you. It's to help you get over your own anger and pain and hatred. They're toxic emotions. Studies have even shown people who hold onto those feelings start to develop negative physical associations with them.
Vengeance doesn't do anyone any good, except perhaps someone enjoying a good piece of literature about it.
this has always seemed more akin to lulling someone into passivity with respect to whatever happened to them to me. I never bought into it. But it is fine if you and others do, mind. It is just not for me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would argue these are meant to be morality plays with respect to vengeance. There are works that show vengeance in a better light.
While I don't doubt this to be true, it's kind of underscoring my point - I don't know them offhand like I do the ones I mentioned. So I either found them completely unmemorable to the point I don't remember reading them, have never heard of them to begin with, or completely missed the point of them being about vengeance...which is probably not a good sign.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
My thoughts about women's place being in the kitchen:
Everyone's place is in the kitchen!
There is food in the kitchen!
*om-nom-nom*
I would argue these are meant to be morality plays with respect to vengeance. There are works that show vengeance in a better light.While I don't doubt this to be true, it's kind of underscoring my point - I don't know them offhand like I do the ones I mentioned. So I either found them completely unmemorable to the point I don't remember reading them, have never heard of them to begin with, or completely missed the point of them being about vengeance...which is probably not a good sign.
considering the breadth of the written word and your comparative youth, the second is far more likely.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...It's partly tone. Musketeers was, I believe, meant to be humorous. It fell flat. It fell especially so when you look at the protagonists vs. the antagonists.
** spoiler omitted **
Monte Cristo, by contrast, is set up as deliberately showing how empty vengeance is. You see the lengths to which he goes to, and there's some catharsis for the reader, but you do get to see just how much it's cost him to hold onto the grudge for so long. It delivers. We're not meant to see Monte Cristo as a hero as we are the Musketeers, so there isn't the mental disconnect. It's not trying to be funny, so it doesn't disappoint when the jokes don't land.
And it doesn't mistake a villain protagonist for a designated hero. I was never under the impression that I was supposed to like Monte Cristo. There's a vicarious thrill in watching him pull off his schemes, but he's more a force of nature than a character...
** spoiler omitted **I think you need to view the three musketeers as more of a common man kind of thing. Sure the protagonists are flawed in their own way, but that makes them human. Milady essentially used people as her tools, made them take the blame for her.Although Aramis does that in the sequel, he eventually regrets his actions. If Porthos went around cheating rich widows of their money, there's no mention in the novels that they parted on less then friendly terms.
In Chinese we have a saying "Yi ge yan da, Yi ge yan ai" which translates to one is willing to beat someone and the other party is willing to be beaten. If those rich widows so yearn for Porthos company that they're willing to be cheated of their money, then it is their choice, no? You do pay for pimps and prostitutes too.
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
A character flaw can only excuse so much, and this seems a flimsy justification at best. If this makes them "human," then the takeaway is that humans suck. Your covering
yup. Rigid.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had the weirdest, best experience with parent-teacher conferences yesterday. It was one of those "wow, you really had better look at your cultural assumptions and quit judging people" moments.
You know my student with all the issues? The one who glued the hand-therapy plasticine in his hair and crapped in the bathroom sink and had the petit mal during naptime?
His dad came in for conferences yesterday. His dad is a tall, burly Mexican-American... looks like a cross between Javier Bardem and Alfred Molina, longish hair in his eyes. He drives the biggest pickup truck I've ever seen.
So, yeah, I assumed he was a tough, macho guy who was a little embarrassed about his son's issues, and that's why he does everything for him at home and why the boy screams if you ask him to do anything for himself. (Put on his shoes, change his clothes, open his lunchbox)
And he starts talking about how worried he is that anxiety disorders are genetic, because he and his brothers were badly physically abused by their dad and they all ended up with severe anxiety disorders (his youngest brother the most), and with different types of treatment/medication, and he sees similarities in his son with himself as a child, and overhelps because of his fear.
Holy crap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's (almost) never gaming groups. It's (almost always) family. Especially older, more conservative family with strong views of gender roles and gender separation.Wait, what?
As a member of an arch-conservative family, I have never experienced this. Weeeeiiiirrrrd.
(There have been “girl things” and “guy things” but never - NEVER! - have major family events had anything resembling planned exclusion. )
So... I'm not talking explicit gender exclusion...
...think about Thanksgiving. At your house, do all the women end up in the kitchen chatting and worrying about dinner, and the men in the living room talking sports and politics? And if a woman dares come forth from the kitchen, she is given odd looks and considered "unladylike"?This definitely happened with mine, though with the addition of a third group of mixed genders that wants to get the he'll away from the sports and politics talk and usually ends up in a back bedroom or outside talking about movies or video games. However, this hasn't really been the case since we moved away from Texas and the big centralized area full of people on my mom's huge side of the family. (Mom's mom was one of SIXTEEN KIDS. Half my hometown growing up was some variant of first, second, or third cousin, with different factors of removal.)
Now my family, bizarrely, may be slightly more progressive on this note than some, hyper conservative as they may be in every other facet of their lives. As the women in my family are just as gung ho about football and politics, and we have enough male cooks in the family - me included - that no one beats an eye at that.
Sadly at this year's thanksgiving I was the only member of that third group. It's bigger when Kamon and Ebon are around, and presumably would also be if Scint was, but none of them were in town this year. So it ended up just being me on my phone while everyone else watched football and complained about...
you have got to invite me to one of these dinners.
You will be entertained, orthos.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I had the weirdest, best experience with parent-teacher conferences yesterday. It was one of those "wow, you really had better look at your cultural assumptions and quit judging people" moments.
You know my student with all the issues? The one who glued the hand-therapy plasticine in his hair and crapped in the bathroom sink and had the petit mal during naptime?
His dad came in for conferences yesterday. His dad is a tall, burly Mexican-American... looks like a cross between Javier Bardem and Alfred Molina, longish hair in his eyes. He drives the biggest pickup truck I've ever seen.
So, yeah, I assumed he was a tough, macho guy who was a little embarrassed about his son's issues, and that's why he does everything for him at home and why the boy screams if you ask him to do anything for himself. (Put on his shoes, change his clothes, open his lunchbox)
And he starts talking about how worried he is that anxiety disorders are genetic, because he and his brothers were badly physically abused by their dad and they all ended up with severe anxiety disorders (his youngest brother the most), and with different types of treatment/medication, and he sees similarities in his son with himself as a child, and overhelps because of his fear.
Holy crap.
please tell me you spoke to him about it, lisamarlene. It sounds like he really needs to talk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My thoughts about women's place being in the kitchen:
** spoiler omitted **
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
It's (almost) never gaming groups. It's (almost always) family. Especially older, more conservative family with strong views of gender roles and gender separation.Wait, what?
As a member of an arch-conservative family, I have never experienced this. Weeeeiiiirrrrd.
(There have been “girl things” and “guy things” but never - NEVER! - have major family events had anything resembling planned exclusion. )
So... I'm not talking explicit gender exclusion...
...think about Thanksgiving. At your house, do all the women end up in the kitchen chatting and worrying about dinner, and the men in the living room talking sports and politics? And if a woman dares come forth from the kitchen, she is given odd looks and considered "unladylike"?This definitely happened with mine, though with the addition of a third group of mixed genders that wants to get the he'll away from the sports and politics talk and usually ends up in a back bedroom or outside talking about movies or video games. However, this hasn't really been the case since we moved away from Texas and the big centralized area full of people on my mom's huge side of the family. (Mom's mom was one of SIXTEEN KIDS. Half my hometown growing up was some variant of first, second, or third cousin, with different factors of removal.)
Now my family, bizarrely, may be slightly more progressive on this note than some, hyper conservative as they may be in every other facet of their lives. As the women in my family are just as gung ho about football and politics, and we have enough male cooks in the family - me included - that no one beats an eye at that.
Sadly at this year's thanksgiving I was the only member of that third group. It's bigger when Kamon and Ebon are around, and presumably would also be if Scint was, but none of them were in town this year. So it ended up just being me on my phone while everyone else watched football and
I want to reduce the number of arguments and debates at family gatherings, not intensify them...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
considering the breadth of the written word and your comparative youth, the second is far more likely.I would argue these are meant to be morality plays with respect to vengeance. There are works that show vengeance in a better light.While I don't doubt this to be true, it's kind of underscoring my point - I don't know them offhand like I do the ones I mentioned. So I either found them completely unmemorable to the point I don't remember reading them, have never heard of them to begin with, or completely missed the point of them being about vengeance...which is probably not a good sign.