One of my magazines has a page where they ask people what the ultimate luxury is. I don't think of myself as the type of person who enjoys luxury on much of a regular basis. To me luxury is a hot bath and a diet coke. But one of the responses in the magazine was that a pair of converse in every conceivable color was the ultimate luxury. That is a definition of luxury I can get behind. Most days I wear a pair of beat up black chucks that I've had for a couple of years now - my pinkie toe even sticks out the side of the right shoe because they are so worn. But they are the most luxurious and indulgent thing I own.
This year converse released some Kurt Cobain shoes that I wish I had. I have a Kurt Cobain obsession and honestly, I identify my black converse chucks with Cobain - so having the ones with his writing on them would be so totally cool - and I would hardly ever wear them so I could keep them forever. Shannon will probably tell me this is morbid and creepy, but I can't help it.
It would be awesome to have converse in every day-glo color possible.
Okay - these are AWESOME. Little Red Riding Hood? Are you kidding me. I NEED these.
One of my favorite scenes from one of my favorite movies - I love that Sophia Coppola threw these in there - Marie Antoinette with a pair of powder blue converse. Perfect.
And who knew more about Luxury than Marie Antoinette?
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
SL Trib
I still read the Salt Lake Tribune sometimes - it's a hard habit to break. They are the liberal cousin of the Deseret News (and really, in any other town besides Salt Lake, they would be considered quite a conservative little paper).
Anyway I look at the tribune online a few times a month. They have a couple of contributors I like to read from time to time and usually, they cover items regarding the church. One is Peggy Fletcher Stack and the other is Robert Kirby - both are practicing mormons. With all the controversy regarding Prop 8 in California and Prop 102 here in Arizona, I thought his column provided some nice comic relief:
Not only do I not care if gays get married, it is none of my business. As a flaming heterosexual, it's a full-time job for me just to keep my thoughts clean in church. I don't have the energy to fret about somebody else's libido.
The column must have resurfaced on the Internet. I'm getting mail again telling me what a failure I am as a Mormon because I'm not solidly behind Proposition 8. As I understand it, the California ballot item would prevent the domestication of homosexuals. Or something like that.
Here are just a few of the attempts to get me to see reason.
"Are you a member or not? Do you want gays to get married in the temple? Please follow the brotheren's [sic] council [sic] on Proposition 8. This is a important gospel principal [sic]." G., e-mail.
"No unclean thing can enter the house of the Lord. Gays are unclean because of the Scriptures. You have to be hot or cold about it or the Lord will spat you out." T., e-mail.
"Were you listening in church when the letter was read from the First Presidency about supporting proposition eight?" R.Y., e-mail.
"Get with Prop 8 or your [sic] a homo." Anonymous, letter.
Hard as it is to counter such brilliant logic, my position hasn't changed. The only serious concern I have about gays getting married is that they'll register someplace pricey.
The church is serious about the sanctity of marriage. I get that. But aren't more potentially "dangerous" marriages already being performed out there?
For example, I hear in church all the time about marriage being ordained of God. But I also hear about how the glory of God is intelligence.
Shouldn't it be against the law for stupid people to get married? What's more harmful to society - two well-dressed men getting married and settling down, or two idiots tying the knot and cranking out any number of additional idiots?
You should have to pass a harder test to get married than the one we currently have. Essentially, there are but two questions: "How old are you?" and "Is that your sister?" Hell, you could pass this test just by guessing.
There are drawbacks. Most people get married when hormones and youth make them about as dumb as they'll ever be. So, even a relatively easy test would by default raise the age limit to about 40.
With an increased marriage age limit, there would be fewer births. Genealogy would become easier to do. With fewer births, there would be fewer children born gay. Hey, isn't that what Heavenly Father would want?
OK, I was just kidding about that. But if you're really serious about putting a stop to gay sex, let them get married.
Anyway I look at the tribune online a few times a month. They have a couple of contributors I like to read from time to time and usually, they cover items regarding the church. One is Peggy Fletcher Stack and the other is Robert Kirby - both are practicing mormons. With all the controversy regarding Prop 8 in California and Prop 102 here in Arizona, I thought his column provided some nice comic relief:
Kirby: I don't care if gays get married
Article Last Updated: 10/24/2008 08:17:36 PM MDT
A couple of years ago, I wrote a column in which I announced my official position on gay marriage. Basically, I don't care.
Not only do I not care if gays get married, it is none of my business. As a flaming heterosexual, it's a full-time job for me just to keep my thoughts clean in church. I don't have the energy to fret about somebody else's libido.
The column must have resurfaced on the Internet. I'm getting mail again telling me what a failure I am as a Mormon because I'm not solidly behind Proposition 8. As I understand it, the California ballot item would prevent the domestication of homosexuals. Or something like that.
Here are just a few of the attempts to get me to see reason.
"Are you a member or not? Do you want gays to get married in the temple? Please follow the brotheren's [sic] council [sic] on Proposition 8. This is a important gospel principal [sic]." G., e-mail.
"No unclean thing can enter the house of the Lord. Gays are unclean because of the Scriptures. You have to be hot or cold about it or the Lord will spat you out." T., e-mail.
"Were you listening in church when the letter was read from the First Presidency about supporting proposition eight?" R.Y., e-mail.
"Get with Prop 8 or your [sic] a homo." Anonymous, letter.
Hard as it is to counter such brilliant logic, my position hasn't changed. The only serious concern I have about gays getting married is that they'll register someplace pricey.
The church is serious about the sanctity of marriage. I get that. But aren't more potentially "dangerous" marriages already being performed out there?
For example, I hear in church all the time about marriage being ordained of God. But I also hear about how the glory of God is intelligence.
Shouldn't it be against the law for stupid people to get married? What's more harmful to society - two well-dressed men getting married and settling down, or two idiots tying the knot and cranking out any number of additional idiots?
You should have to pass a harder test to get married than the one we currently have. Essentially, there are but two questions: "How old are you?" and "Is that your sister?" Hell, you could pass this test just by guessing.
There are drawbacks. Most people get married when hormones and youth make them about as dumb as they'll ever be. So, even a relatively easy test would by default raise the age limit to about 40.
With an increased marriage age limit, there would be fewer births. Genealogy would become easier to do. With fewer births, there would be fewer children born gay. Hey, isn't that what Heavenly Father would want?
OK, I was just kidding about that. But if you're really serious about putting a stop to gay sex, let them get married.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
movies
I've always really loved going to the movies. There's something really great about sitting in a dark room for a couple of hours and getting lost in a story. I love a movie if it's really, really funny (though I find that those are rare...movies that really make me laugh anyway - though sometimes I'm okay with it if I'm even mildly amused). I love movies that make me cry. Mostly I like movies that make me think. I like to be scared (this is a complete mystery to Shannon who thinks being scared is something to be avoided and not an emotion to be desired...I find it cathartic sometimes). I like a movie if it is clever, has a new idea or is something that hasn't ever been done before. I often like foreign films. I've roughly kept track of all the new movies I've seen this year (I'm sure there are some more which were watched on tv or rented...but these are the new releases I've seen so far this year). I've given them a star rating - 5 stars means I loved it and would watch it again anytime, 4 means I really like it, 3 means it's okay and I enjoyed it but I probably wouldn't ever watch it again, 2 means I did not like it, 1 means I hated it and 0 means I see absolutely no redeeming value in the movie whatsoever.
Cloverfield ***
Jumper **
Be Kind Rewind ***
The Other Boleyn Girl ****
Horton Hears A Who ***
21 ****
Chaos Theory ***
Baby Mama ****
Iron Man ***
Indiana Jones Umpteenth **
Sex and The City ****
The Happening **
Wall-E ****
Wanted ***
Hellboy II ***
Batman The Dark Knight ****
Mamma Mia! *
Tropic Thunder ***
Burn After Reading ****
Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist *****
City of Ember ***
Rachel Getting Married ****
Surprisingly I've only seen one movie that I would honestly give 5 stars. I totally loved Nick & Norah. I'm probably way too old to love that movie to the degree that I do - but irrationally, and in spite of being a 41 year old woman, I just really, really liked that movie.
Labels:
movies
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Politics of Yesterday...
Some people have noted my recent silence in the political arena here on my blog. Partly this is due to the prior incident with 'anonymous' and partly it is just a desire to talk about the color of my couch more than blue and red states.
I've certainly had many thoughts on the subject and being the political junky I am I find myself obsessively checking huffingtonpost, realclearpolitics, cnn, and foxnews on the internet on a regular rotating basis through-out the day (the fox news might surprise you but I think it's important to hear all sides) - if the tv is on it's on rotation between MSNBC, CNN & Fox News (though frankly, I am not much of a tv watcher during the day). So yeah, there are thoughts. But for now, I think I'll continue to keep them to myself . I had a great idea for a blog yesterday, but decided it was too "controversial". In a way it's sort of almost annoying - it's my blog, why shouldn't I say what I want? I often already feel marginalized in my community in ways that prevent me from saying what I really think in order to 'get along and play nice'. So shouldn't this be one place where I COULD say what I like?
I don't honestly know the answer to that. There were 20 or so comments regarding that infamous post, discussion elsewhere on the internet regarding it, and at least 6 private email discussions. Even just yesterday someone brought it up - someone who I did not know even knew my blog existed, let alone read it. So it has tentacles - the things I say here, they have reach and consequence in my real world and not just here on the blogosphere.
And I guess ultimately I care what people think. And I think it's easy to be misunderstood in this format and I really want people to know me as someone who would never say something if I thought it was going to somehow be offensive or make someone uncomfortable. At least I think that's who I am most of the time.
Once though I got in a fight with a girl at school about politics. I was in 4th grade. We were eating lunch in the classroom and someone brought up the election going on. A girl named Charlotte said "Celeste - I heard your parents are voting for CARTER!" and Celeste admitted this was true. Celeste's parents had a lot of money, they were local potato farmers with a huge operation and in Idaho - you don't get any richer than a big potato farmer, your dad might be a lawyer or a doctor but that potato farmer has got you beat in the wealth department. I was surprised too. I spoke up "Really Celeste? That seems weird! My mom says anybody who votes for Carter wants us to go to war - the democrats always get us in a war - why would your mom and dad want that?" Celeste indicated she thought that was patently ridiculous and that perhaps, I had no idea what I was talking about. I insisted that I thought I did. The end result of this circular argument was my tuna fish sandwich being thrown at Celeste and her bologna sandwich being thrown at me.
I'd like to think I learned something back there in the fourth grade about how to avoid these type of fights - though perhaps the lessons of the past couple of months teach us that I'm still not above throwing my tuna once in a while, and I'm not always so good at dodging bologna.
Labels:
politics
Monday, October 20, 2008
Color Inspiration
tonight I was looking at interesting color combinations and rooms of color that I really like. i am still trying to figure out what to do with that couch. i like the light blue idea as well as the green idea but still can't decide. i found several rooms that I like a lot
And then I found this on a website called squint limited. How AWESOME are these? And I am seriously wondering if my upholstery guy could do something like this? Seriously. I know - it might be way over the top and way too much considering my piano and the paint cans and all the color - but a part of me seriously loves the idea.
Am I being completely mental?
Friday, October 17, 2008
Funny Bone Friday
I don't know why, but this really struck me as funny this morning. Seemed like a good way to start Friday with a laugh...(By the way, sorry the music player plays over it - you have to scroll down to the music entry, tell the music to hush and then you can watch it hassle free)...Don't you love Fridays? I adore them.
By the way - I removed the video as it was acting loud and being obnoxious - but you can go see it if you want at hulu.com, it's the SNL commercial "morgan stanley"
By the way - I removed the video as it was acting loud and being obnoxious - but you can go see it if you want at hulu.com, it's the SNL commercial "morgan stanley"
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
A World Full of Cupcakes...
Here is a post that probably belongs on my weight loss blog instead - I try to limit my food ponderings and musings to that space so as to not alienate my readers here with too much talk of diets and and eating (or as is more frequently the case, not eating). But today I feel like talking about cupcakes here.
I recently cleared 90 pounds lost which you can read about on the other blog if you're interested - but my point is that cupcakes have not been a part of my life much in the past 6 months. But even though they have not been a part of my life, cupcakes, by their very existence on the planet, make me very happy. A cupcake is like a little bit sized morsel of joy. So to celebrate them I share some photos of some amazingly great looking cupcakes, just to cheer your day. Even though I can't eat them right now - just knowing there are cupcakes in the world, and knowing that other people are eating them, baking them, smelling them, enjoying them - that makes me happy.
These cupcakes are from a Utah company started in a mormon woman's kitchen - her company is called The Sweet Tooth Fairy:
I know. How great are those? While I was on my break from the diet I indulged myself in a cupcake from Sprinkles one day. It was super delicious. It was a red velvet cupcake. Yum. Sprinkles cupcakes have these really fresh and fabulous ingredients and then this rather minimalist aesthetic that is very appealing.
A local cupcake favorite is Tammie Coe, what would we do without the sheer happiness Tammie Coe cupcakes, cakes and cookies bring to Phoenix?
(I know technically these are sugar cookies, and not cupcakes... but these are the 'cakiest' cookies I've ever had and melt in your mouth to die for)
These guys at the Magnolia Bakery sort of started this whole cupcake trend. I've never had a Magnolia cupcake, but I love that they are ooey-gooey looking and sort of the anti-sprinkles. The aesthics here tend towards indulgence and excess, which is perfectly okay when we're talking about cupcakes right?
Do you have a favorite cupcake?
I recently cleared 90 pounds lost which you can read about on the other blog if you're interested - but my point is that cupcakes have not been a part of my life much in the past 6 months. But even though they have not been a part of my life, cupcakes, by their very existence on the planet, make me very happy. A cupcake is like a little bit sized morsel of joy. So to celebrate them I share some photos of some amazingly great looking cupcakes, just to cheer your day. Even though I can't eat them right now - just knowing there are cupcakes in the world, and knowing that other people are eating them, baking them, smelling them, enjoying them - that makes me happy.
These cupcakes are from a Utah company started in a mormon woman's kitchen - her company is called The Sweet Tooth Fairy:
I know. How great are those? While I was on my break from the diet I indulged myself in a cupcake from Sprinkles one day. It was super delicious. It was a red velvet cupcake. Yum. Sprinkles cupcakes have these really fresh and fabulous ingredients and then this rather minimalist aesthetic that is very appealing.
A local cupcake favorite is Tammie Coe, what would we do without the sheer happiness Tammie Coe cupcakes, cakes and cookies bring to Phoenix?
(I know technically these are sugar cookies, and not cupcakes... but these are the 'cakiest' cookies I've ever had and melt in your mouth to die for)
These guys at the Magnolia Bakery sort of started this whole cupcake trend. I've never had a Magnolia cupcake, but I love that they are ooey-gooey looking and sort of the anti-sprinkles. The aesthics here tend towards indulgence and excess, which is perfectly okay when we're talking about cupcakes right?
Do you have a favorite cupcake?
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Nerdy Hipster Genius
Chuck Klosterman is a nerdy hipster genius writer that I've enjoyed ever since I read "Sex Drugs and Cocoa Puffs" a few years ago. His long long explanations about the minutiae of the cultural phenomenon of things like saved by the bell, the sims, and MTVs real world had me completely enthralled. I often read Esquire just to read the Chuck Klosterman column in that particular issue (though as an aside - why is that Men's magazines like GQ and Esquire have far far superior writing and articles than their female counterparts? I really want to know. The only notable women's magazine of exception to that rule is BUST, which I adore, but end up trying to hide the cover of, because often, people assume BUST is a lesbian magazine...which it isn't, but I diverge from my original topic...which is nothing new for me...)
Where was I?
Oh yeah, Chuck Klosterman.
Anyway before I left for vacation I picked up his latest book. This book is a fictional novel and most of his other work is non-fiction. But I am loving this book. Anything that makes me burst out loud laughing while reading is instant awesome. So for your reading pleasure I submit a little tid-bit which describes a small town high school football coach to a T.
~~~~"Okay," Laidlaw began. "This is the situation. The situation is this: We will not waste any light tonight, because we have a beautiful evening with not many mosquitoes and a first-class opportunity to start implementing some of the offense. I realize this is only the fourth practice, but we're already way behind on everything. It's obvious that most of you didn't put five damn minutes into thinking about football all damn summer, so no we're ALL behind. And I don't like being behind. I've never been a follower. I'm not that kind of person. Maybe you are, but I am not. Classes start in two weeks. Our first game is in three weeks. We need to have the entire offense ready by the day we begin classes, and we need to have all of the defensive sets memorized before we begin classes. And right now I I must be honest: I don't even know who the hell is going to play for us. So this is the situation. The situation is this: Right now, everybody here is equally useless. This is going to be an important, crucial, important, critical, important two weeks for everyone here, and it's going to be a real kick in the face to any of you who still want to be home watching "The Price is Right". And I know there's going to be a lot of people in this town talking about a lot of bull crap that doesn't have anything to do with football, and you're going to hear about certain things that happened or didn't happen or that supposedly happened or that supposedly allegedly didn't happen to somebody that probably doesn't even exist. These are what we call DISTRACTIONS. The distractions will come from all the people who don't want you to think about Owl Lobo football. So if I hear anyone on this team perpetuating those kinds of bullcrap stories, everyone is going to pay for those distractions. EVERYONE. Because we are here to think about Owl Lobo football. And if you are not thinking exclusively EXCLUSIVELY about Owl Lobo football, go home and turn on "The Price Is Right". Try to win yourself a washing machine."
It remains unclear why John Laidlaw carried such a specific, all-encompassing hatred for viewers of "The Price Is Right". No one will ever know why this was. Almost as confusing was the explanation as to why Owl High School was nicknamed the Lobos, particularly since they had been the Owl Owls up until 1964. During the summer of '64, the citizens of Owl suddenly concluded that being called the Owl Owls was somewhat embarrassing, urging the school board to change the nickname to something "less repetitive". This proposal was deeply polarizing to much of the community. The motion didn't pass until the third vote. And because most of the existing Owl High School athletic gear still featured it's long-standing logo of a feathered wing, it was decided that the new nickname should remain ornithological. As such, the program was known as the Owl Eagles for all of the 1964-1965 school year. Contrary to community hopes, this change dramatically increased the degree to which its sports teams were mocked by opposing schools. During the especially oppressive summer of 1969 they decided to change the nickname again, this time becoming the Owl High Screaming Satans (new uniforms were purchased immediately). Two games into the '69 football season, the local Lutheran and Methodist churches jointly petitioned the school board, arguing that the nickname "Satan" glorified the occult and needed to be changed on religious grounds; oddly (or perhaps predictably), the local Catholic church responded by aggressively supporting the new moniker, thereby initiating a bitter feud among the various congregations. When the Lutheran minister ultimately decreed that all Protestant athletes would have to quit all extracurricular activities if the name "Satan" remained in place, the school was forced to change nicknames mid-season. Nobody knew how to handle this unprecedented turn of events. Eventually one of the cheerleaders noticed that the existing satanic log actually resembled an angry humanoid wolf, a realization, the seemed brilliant at the time. The Screaming Satans subsequently became the Screaming Lobos, a name that was edited down to Lobos upon the recognition that wolves do not scream. This nickname still causes mild confusion, as strangers sometimes assume the existence of a mythological creature called the "Owl Lobo" which would (indeed) be a terrifying (and potentially winged) carnivore hailing from western Mexico. But nonetheless, and more importantly - there has not been any major community controversy since the late sixties. Things have been perfect ever since, if by "perfect" you mean "exactly the same."
~~~~
Aren't you glad I shared?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)