Here are my movies from Burning Man, one of the best - if not THE best to date - experiences of my life!
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Women who let themselves go once they are married
"We're our own worst enemies a lot of the time, but I still blame men."
- Janeane Garofalo
First of all, I wouldn't pick on single mothers. Anyone trying to do their best and raise a proper kid is fine by me. It's a tough job, and the ultimate example of the phrase "Hard work is its own reward." I have one issue with divorced mothers. I know a lot of women here want to defend themselves as a gender AT ALL COSTS and always blame the men for all marital problems, but there is one cause of divorce that no women want to talk about, much less admit might cause problems in a marriage.
What about marriages that fail because the woman has completely and entirely given up on her feminity? I understand a little baby weight that's leftover from childbirth, I understand she doesn't feel like applying make-up and earrings just to buy groceries on a Saturday morning, I understand having sex 4 or 5 times a week is too exhausting. I don't expect a working mother to dress up all day, every day like she's headed for the nightclub.
However, what about those women who, once they've become mothers, decide they want to resign their womanhood? Women who have absolutely no interest in appearing attractive to anyone. They purposely re-design their appearance to accommodate their own sense of convenience. They chop off all their hair and a get a low-maintainence boy's haircut. They stop wearing make-up, perfume and jewelry. They only wear running shoes. They buy those absoutely disgusting jeans with the elastic band on them. They don't even shave their legs. The only remaining pleasure they're willing to indulge in is food, so their waistline expands over the years without concern for blood pressure or cholesterol levels. They don't want to exercise, they want to drink coffee all day and blab on the phone with other moms over the intricacies of how-to-read videos.
She's given up on any catering to her husband. Should he be the primary focus of her life? Of course not, but she will not give any consideration to his needs. He is a chauffeur, a source of income, and her date on national holidays--that's it. I'm not talking about the 1950s-style husband either, who comes home and drinks scotch and reads the paper while she's running around cleaning everything. Those days are over. These days, both halves of most couples have to work full-time to keep the family going. Both halves of most couples also have to do house-cleaning, help with homework, and alternate duties in general. One-income families with stay-at-home moms are growing fewer and fewer in number, and women can no longer defend themselves on the grounds that they do more family work than the men do. It still happens, but not nearly as much as it used to.
Women only put effort into their appearance and their relationship when there is competition. A married woman with children figures her husband isn't going anywhere. He married me, we have children together. She's through trying to look good for him. Hey, if he's let himself go as well, then it's fair game. But a lot of times, the female sexual end of a marriage starts to evaporate before his does.
OK, you're a married mother who's still in shape. You still wear make-up and fitting clothes. Once in a while, you and your husband still pop open a bottle of wine at a downtown hotel after sending the kids to your parents' house for the night. Fine, I'm not talking to you. You are the exception to the rule. Millions of other women are on the opposite end of the spectrum. They've decided they'd rather look like a middle-aged lesbian.
Dad gets sick of this shit. Like the mom, Dad doesn't have so much time to run around with friends. His routine is pretty much composed of family life at home, which he understands and accepts. But, he still wants to have a little fun with his wife now and again. This is impossible to do for two reasons. First, she doesn't want to have any fun that doesn't involve the children. Adult pleasures were dispensed of in the delivery room. Second, he can't have fun with her even if she was willing, because she now has let herself turn into Kathy Bates.
Even Miranda -- that megalomaniacal control-freak yuppie on Sex and the City -- once properly remarked that "no one wants to fuck mean old Mommy". Once the kids come, these women completely let themselves go, they no longer see any need to look attractive or pursue any kind of romantic or sexual fun. She no longer wants to be a woman, she justs wants to be a Mom. If you take away from your husband any and all reasons to have sex with you, he will go have sex with someone else, and he will do it to the tune of any monthly alimony payment if he has to. Sooner or later, as much as he loves the kids, the joy the children bring him are nullified by his roommate, who is now someone he used to share a life with who now exsists solely as a mental manager to remind him of what he supposed to do next for everybody else in the house (along with an unwanted running commentary of everything he's doing wrong).
Many married moms, 10 times out of 10, would rather have a marathon cookie-baking section rather than do something spontaneous or fun with just her husband. OK, 8 out of 10 times is fine, 9 out of 10 times is understandable, but 10 times out of 10 for the kids? Nothing for just you and your husband, or even just for yourself? There are women who are that slavish in their devotion to making sure their children are entertained at all times. But don't they realize that it will create side effects and eventually repercussions to their marriage?
No, they don't realize it, and even if they did, they lie to themselves about it. Women repeatedly try to fool and outright lie to themselves with the aid of self-help books, magazine articles and daytime television into believing that sex is not really an important marriage component to their husbands. Generally speaking, a woman will never hesitate lying to herself to maintain the belief that she's on top of it all. They honestly think (subliminally or consciously) that they can hold a man's sex life hostage. If a couple has been married more than a decade and she has let herself go as previously described, he has definitely compromised his wedding vows for a little strange (if he's unattractive, he just goes to a massage parlor or a prostitute -- but they all do it).
"Not my husband!" Yes, your husband too.
Once he's cheated, he's done so because he considers this a cheap alternative to divorce. He will do his best to make sure she never finds out, either out of love, or out of fear of adultery being brought into the divorce proceedings. The most disciplined of men, those who are planning their escape from sexual Alcatraz while his wife is orchestrating another backyard sleepover, knows why, when and how he is going to bail from his marriage. He waits until the lawyers are done before sending himself into new female company. Women continually fall for this crap, thinking they can get away with having a husband who's satisfied with a dormant sex life. They've been hearing the schemes of men since high school ("I promise I'll pull out"), and yet they cling on to false hope, believing that their man is different and is going to put up with all her bullshit for the sake of the children. There are a lot of good family men out there, but they all have their limits.
And when these good men break and leave, her defense of her own negligence is that "you don't understand how I really feel". As if to imply that if he did understand how she really feels, that he'd rightly throw his own feelings out the window (which is what she'd really like him to do), because Mom is so beleaguered and overwhelmed with all this parenting that she insisted she do all by herself. Women do this to themselves, then they muster up the temerity to blame all their marital problems on their husband. "...and that, my friends, is the end of the story."
- Janeane Garofalo
First of all, I wouldn't pick on single mothers. Anyone trying to do their best and raise a proper kid is fine by me. It's a tough job, and the ultimate example of the phrase "Hard work is its own reward." I have one issue with divorced mothers. I know a lot of women here want to defend themselves as a gender AT ALL COSTS and always blame the men for all marital problems, but there is one cause of divorce that no women want to talk about, much less admit might cause problems in a marriage.
What about marriages that fail because the woman has completely and entirely given up on her feminity? I understand a little baby weight that's leftover from childbirth, I understand she doesn't feel like applying make-up and earrings just to buy groceries on a Saturday morning, I understand having sex 4 or 5 times a week is too exhausting. I don't expect a working mother to dress up all day, every day like she's headed for the nightclub.
However, what about those women who, once they've become mothers, decide they want to resign their womanhood? Women who have absolutely no interest in appearing attractive to anyone. They purposely re-design their appearance to accommodate their own sense of convenience. They chop off all their hair and a get a low-maintainence boy's haircut. They stop wearing make-up, perfume and jewelry. They only wear running shoes. They buy those absoutely disgusting jeans with the elastic band on them. They don't even shave their legs. The only remaining pleasure they're willing to indulge in is food, so their waistline expands over the years without concern for blood pressure or cholesterol levels. They don't want to exercise, they want to drink coffee all day and blab on the phone with other moms over the intricacies of how-to-read videos.
She's given up on any catering to her husband. Should he be the primary focus of her life? Of course not, but she will not give any consideration to his needs. He is a chauffeur, a source of income, and her date on national holidays--that's it. I'm not talking about the 1950s-style husband either, who comes home and drinks scotch and reads the paper while she's running around cleaning everything. Those days are over. These days, both halves of most couples have to work full-time to keep the family going. Both halves of most couples also have to do house-cleaning, help with homework, and alternate duties in general. One-income families with stay-at-home moms are growing fewer and fewer in number, and women can no longer defend themselves on the grounds that they do more family work than the men do. It still happens, but not nearly as much as it used to.
Women only put effort into their appearance and their relationship when there is competition. A married woman with children figures her husband isn't going anywhere. He married me, we have children together. She's through trying to look good for him. Hey, if he's let himself go as well, then it's fair game. But a lot of times, the female sexual end of a marriage starts to evaporate before his does.
OK, you're a married mother who's still in shape. You still wear make-up and fitting clothes. Once in a while, you and your husband still pop open a bottle of wine at a downtown hotel after sending the kids to your parents' house for the night. Fine, I'm not talking to you. You are the exception to the rule. Millions of other women are on the opposite end of the spectrum. They've decided they'd rather look like a middle-aged lesbian.
Dad gets sick of this shit. Like the mom, Dad doesn't have so much time to run around with friends. His routine is pretty much composed of family life at home, which he understands and accepts. But, he still wants to have a little fun with his wife now and again. This is impossible to do for two reasons. First, she doesn't want to have any fun that doesn't involve the children. Adult pleasures were dispensed of in the delivery room. Second, he can't have fun with her even if she was willing, because she now has let herself turn into Kathy Bates.
Even Miranda -- that megalomaniacal control-freak yuppie on Sex and the City -- once properly remarked that "no one wants to fuck mean old Mommy". Once the kids come, these women completely let themselves go, they no longer see any need to look attractive or pursue any kind of romantic or sexual fun. She no longer wants to be a woman, she justs wants to be a Mom. If you take away from your husband any and all reasons to have sex with you, he will go have sex with someone else, and he will do it to the tune of any monthly alimony payment if he has to. Sooner or later, as much as he loves the kids, the joy the children bring him are nullified by his roommate, who is now someone he used to share a life with who now exsists solely as a mental manager to remind him of what he supposed to do next for everybody else in the house (along with an unwanted running commentary of everything he's doing wrong).
Many married moms, 10 times out of 10, would rather have a marathon cookie-baking section rather than do something spontaneous or fun with just her husband. OK, 8 out of 10 times is fine, 9 out of 10 times is understandable, but 10 times out of 10 for the kids? Nothing for just you and your husband, or even just for yourself? There are women who are that slavish in their devotion to making sure their children are entertained at all times. But don't they realize that it will create side effects and eventually repercussions to their marriage?
No, they don't realize it, and even if they did, they lie to themselves about it. Women repeatedly try to fool and outright lie to themselves with the aid of self-help books, magazine articles and daytime television into believing that sex is not really an important marriage component to their husbands. Generally speaking, a woman will never hesitate lying to herself to maintain the belief that she's on top of it all. They honestly think (subliminally or consciously) that they can hold a man's sex life hostage. If a couple has been married more than a decade and she has let herself go as previously described, he has definitely compromised his wedding vows for a little strange (if he's unattractive, he just goes to a massage parlor or a prostitute -- but they all do it).
"Not my husband!" Yes, your husband too.
Once he's cheated, he's done so because he considers this a cheap alternative to divorce. He will do his best to make sure she never finds out, either out of love, or out of fear of adultery being brought into the divorce proceedings. The most disciplined of men, those who are planning their escape from sexual Alcatraz while his wife is orchestrating another backyard sleepover, knows why, when and how he is going to bail from his marriage. He waits until the lawyers are done before sending himself into new female company. Women continually fall for this crap, thinking they can get away with having a husband who's satisfied with a dormant sex life. They've been hearing the schemes of men since high school ("I promise I'll pull out"), and yet they cling on to false hope, believing that their man is different and is going to put up with all her bullshit for the sake of the children. There are a lot of good family men out there, but they all have their limits.
And when these good men break and leave, her defense of her own negligence is that "you don't understand how I really feel". As if to imply that if he did understand how she really feels, that he'd rightly throw his own feelings out the window (which is what she'd really like him to do), because Mom is so beleaguered and overwhelmed with all this parenting that she insisted she do all by herself. Women do this to themselves, then they muster up the temerity to blame all their marital problems on their husband. "...and that, my friends, is the end of the story."
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Opt-out of paying your taxes
If you hire a joiner to do some work for you and he does a shit job, you don't pay him until he rectifies it.
If you hire a plumber to do a job and he floods your house, you don't pay him.
Why then, are we forced to pay our taxes to a Government who is metaphorically flooding our house on a daily basis?
Our Governments bailed out our failing inept banks who I say are partly to blame for the current credit crisis, and today we learn that London employees of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and Dresdner Kleinwort have been told to expect bumper year-end payouts from a "bonus pool" of £6.4bn. These people gambled with our money and didn't give a shit about the outcome cos they knew they'd be bailed out. When they made profits they kept them and we saw no bonuses. When they lost money they shrugged and just went cap in hand to the Government.
Decent working people who have paid their mortgages on time for decades, are being reposessed if they struggle to meet a couple of payments. Meanwhile, a single mum with 5 kids is housed in a Chelsea mansion with the council paying a 4-figure sum of weekly rent, and then benefits on top of that. All over the country the Benefit Culture is getting bigger and bigger as families realise that the more kids they have, the bigger house and the more benefits they will get, and they won't even have to get a job.
Local councils are in crisis, Education standards are plummeting, landfills are bulging with waste and "the little people" are fined if we don't recycle enough, while the supermarkets and manufacturers who oeverpackage everything and anything, escape without a fine.
MPs exploit loopholes to claim huge expenses cheques on top of their huge salaries. And men are sent to fight an illegal war that should never have been started.
All of this is made possible through OUR money. OUR taxes. Our Government are doing a shit job and they should NOT be paid until they can pull their fingers out and stop pissing OUR money into their pockets or down the toilet.
If they were subject to some sort of performance review by "we the people", who they essentially work for, then they would bloody well sort their act out, especially if we had the option of stopping our taxes if we were displeased with the service.
I got a measly £50/month pay rise this year. No doubt my Council tax will go up to devour most of that, plus energy bills and car tax bills. However if I felt my Government were doing the best they could for me, then I'd not mind paying my taxes. Yet when I see billion-pound tax bail-outs going towards Christmas bonuses for banking Hooray-Henrys who freely gamble our savings down the pan, I just want to stop all my direct debits and face the courts and jail, rather than give those bastards a penny.
If you hire a plumber to do a job and he floods your house, you don't pay him.
Why then, are we forced to pay our taxes to a Government who is metaphorically flooding our house on a daily basis?
Our Governments bailed out our failing inept banks who I say are partly to blame for the current credit crisis, and today we learn that London employees of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and Dresdner Kleinwort have been told to expect bumper year-end payouts from a "bonus pool" of £6.4bn. These people gambled with our money and didn't give a shit about the outcome cos they knew they'd be bailed out. When they made profits they kept them and we saw no bonuses. When they lost money they shrugged and just went cap in hand to the Government.
Decent working people who have paid their mortgages on time for decades, are being reposessed if they struggle to meet a couple of payments. Meanwhile, a single mum with 5 kids is housed in a Chelsea mansion with the council paying a 4-figure sum of weekly rent, and then benefits on top of that. All over the country the Benefit Culture is getting bigger and bigger as families realise that the more kids they have, the bigger house and the more benefits they will get, and they won't even have to get a job.
Local councils are in crisis, Education standards are plummeting, landfills are bulging with waste and "the little people" are fined if we don't recycle enough, while the supermarkets and manufacturers who oeverpackage everything and anything, escape without a fine.
MPs exploit loopholes to claim huge expenses cheques on top of their huge salaries. And men are sent to fight an illegal war that should never have been started.
All of this is made possible through OUR money. OUR taxes. Our Government are doing a shit job and they should NOT be paid until they can pull their fingers out and stop pissing OUR money into their pockets or down the toilet.
If they were subject to some sort of performance review by "we the people", who they essentially work for, then they would bloody well sort their act out, especially if we had the option of stopping our taxes if we were displeased with the service.
I got a measly £50/month pay rise this year. No doubt my Council tax will go up to devour most of that, plus energy bills and car tax bills. However if I felt my Government were doing the best they could for me, then I'd not mind paying my taxes. Yet when I see billion-pound tax bail-outs going towards Christmas bonuses for banking Hooray-Henrys who freely gamble our savings down the pan, I just want to stop all my direct debits and face the courts and jail, rather than give those bastards a penny.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Stop blaming heavy metal FFS
A heavy metal band due to perform in Britain has been blamed for an horrific school killing.
Slipknot, who play the Reading and Leeds festivals this weekend and are expected to announce a UK tour, are said to have inspired a teenager to stab a fellow pupil to death with a samurai sword.
The unnamed boy walked into his school in Krugersdorp, west of Johannesburg, South Africa, yesterday morning and fatally knifed the 16-year-old in the neck. He then stabbed another boy and two gardeners.
Witnesses claim the attacker was high on drugs and wearing a face mask similar to that sported by Joey Jordison, Slipknot’s drummer. Pierre Eksteen, who is in charge of the school’s support network, said: ‘We know the wrong kind of music and drugs have bad effects. Young people need to be informed of the effects of bad satanic music.’
====================
What a crock of crap. "the wrong kind of music and drugs have bad effects"??? Bullshit!!!! Drugs can have bad effects yes, but how on earth can listening to music make you suddenly want to get up and kill someone? There has to first be a deeper issue in your head, in your psyche, in your character. This could be caused by any number of things.....crap parenting, medical or genetic reasons, neglect or abuse by family or friends/peers. It is NOT the fault of the music!!!
Marilyn Manson got it in the neck after Columbine, and now Slipknot. Of course, if any of the Columbine parents had bothered to meet with Manson and talk to him they would have been surprised to find an incredibly intellingent and well-read man, who has no desire to turn kids into killers. He'd also probably turn round and tell them to examine their own parenting before pointing the finger at him........
Slipknot, who play the Reading and Leeds festivals this weekend and are expected to announce a UK tour, are said to have inspired a teenager to stab a fellow pupil to death with a samurai sword.
The unnamed boy walked into his school in Krugersdorp, west of Johannesburg, South Africa, yesterday morning and fatally knifed the 16-year-old in the neck. He then stabbed another boy and two gardeners.
Witnesses claim the attacker was high on drugs and wearing a face mask similar to that sported by Joey Jordison, Slipknot’s drummer. Pierre Eksteen, who is in charge of the school’s support network, said: ‘We know the wrong kind of music and drugs have bad effects. Young people need to be informed of the effects of bad satanic music.’
====================
What a crock of crap. "the wrong kind of music and drugs have bad effects"??? Bullshit!!!! Drugs can have bad effects yes, but how on earth can listening to music make you suddenly want to get up and kill someone? There has to first be a deeper issue in your head, in your psyche, in your character. This could be caused by any number of things.....crap parenting, medical or genetic reasons, neglect or abuse by family or friends/peers. It is NOT the fault of the music!!!
Marilyn Manson got it in the neck after Columbine, and now Slipknot. Of course, if any of the Columbine parents had bothered to meet with Manson and talk to him they would have been surprised to find an incredibly intellingent and well-read man, who has no desire to turn kids into killers. He'd also probably turn round and tell them to examine their own parenting before pointing the finger at him........
Monday, August 04, 2008
Muffin-top mums and advert hypocrisy
Two adverts have stood out to me of late - the first is a Special K advert, which shows a young woman in her red swimsuit, looking horrified and embarrassed each time a photo is taken of her - she hides behind anything that will disguise her "fat belly" - which in reality, looks perfectly un-fat and quite normal. The girl in the advert IMO has a perfect figure. Yet she's portrayed as being overweight.
Cut to said girl simpering and eating Special K, then cut to her again in her red cossie on the beach, being photographed without any horror of her fat belly. Only she looks exactly the same as before. WTF? It would have been more realistic and honest if the advert had shown an 18 stone woman heaving and sweating her way around Mallorca while eating chips, and being horrified at having her photo taken . However, it would take a more severe diet than 2 bowls of Special K to help her lose weight.
The second advert is the hideous one involving 3 kiddies who try to count how many "Snap, Crackle and Pop" are in a bowl of Rice Krispies. They are seen in the kitchen with mum, who herself eats a bowl of Krispies and simpers at them as they attempt to count the silly cereal.. If you observe you will see that mum is pear-shaped with the beginnings of a nice little muffin-top. Why wasn't THIS woman used for the Special K advert?
So this says to me that Rice Krispies are trying to curry favour with mums by portraying a mum "realistically" - ie - slightly overweight - which a good percentage of them are. Yet the Special K advert is portraying a woman with a perfect figure as fat. I am assuming that the Special K woman is presumed to be single and childfree. Come to think of it, ALL the Special K women have very nice and non-muffin-top figures. Why??
Why are advertisers so afraid to use PROPER overweight woman in diet adverts? Even ads like Weight Watchers only use a fast glimpse of a black and white photo of a fat woman, before showing her in all her slim glory pulling out the waistband of her old size 18 jeans.....
The reality of society today is that we are surrounded by overweight people, yet advertisers still seem to be in denial or are afraid of reprisals by showing overweight people. Unless you're a "mommy" and then it's OK to be portrayed as muffin-topped.
What's most bizairre is that both cereals are owned by KELLOGGS. Yet they seem to not know the difference between a normal size woman and an overweight one.
Dove soaps trumpet that they use "real women" in their adverts, whoc have realistic figures and realistic curves, and good on them for using non-airbrushed stick insects....so why do food and diet companies insist on NOT using "realistic" overweight women for THEIR adverts?
Cut to said girl simpering and eating Special K, then cut to her again in her red cossie on the beach, being photographed without any horror of her fat belly. Only she looks exactly the same as before. WTF? It would have been more realistic and honest if the advert had shown an 18 stone woman heaving and sweating her way around Mallorca while eating chips, and being horrified at having her photo taken . However, it would take a more severe diet than 2 bowls of Special K to help her lose weight.
The second advert is the hideous one involving 3 kiddies who try to count how many "Snap, Crackle and Pop" are in a bowl of Rice Krispies. They are seen in the kitchen with mum, who herself eats a bowl of Krispies and simpers at them as they attempt to count the silly cereal.. If you observe you will see that mum is pear-shaped with the beginnings of a nice little muffin-top. Why wasn't THIS woman used for the Special K advert?
So this says to me that Rice Krispies are trying to curry favour with mums by portraying a mum "realistically" - ie - slightly overweight - which a good percentage of them are. Yet the Special K advert is portraying a woman with a perfect figure as fat. I am assuming that the Special K woman is presumed to be single and childfree. Come to think of it, ALL the Special K women have very nice and non-muffin-top figures. Why??
Why are advertisers so afraid to use PROPER overweight woman in diet adverts? Even ads like Weight Watchers only use a fast glimpse of a black and white photo of a fat woman, before showing her in all her slim glory pulling out the waistband of her old size 18 jeans.....
The reality of society today is that we are surrounded by overweight people, yet advertisers still seem to be in denial or are afraid of reprisals by showing overweight people. Unless you're a "mommy" and then it's OK to be portrayed as muffin-topped.
What's most bizairre is that both cereals are owned by KELLOGGS. Yet they seem to not know the difference between a normal size woman and an overweight one.
Dove soaps trumpet that they use "real women" in their adverts, whoc have realistic figures and realistic curves, and good on them for using non-airbrushed stick insects....so why do food and diet companies insist on NOT using "realistic" overweight women for THEIR adverts?
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
True Wife Confessions website
While uttelry bored at work (again) I stumbled upon the True Wife Confessions website. And this particular caught my eye:
"Confession #2630
I am so disappointed in myself. And so jealous of her. We are the same age. We both graduated from high school the same year, went to college and both have a bachelor's degree. She makes $50,000 a year and I make $14.00 an hour. I feel like a failure. That should be me. I'm just as smart, just as capable as her. The difference? I have 2 kids. The position she was given over me requires her to travel 75% of the time. I am not in a position to do that because of my children. I cannot be away from home for extended periods of time and overnight.
I love my children so much...so why do I resent them and feel like they are holding me back from a promotion? When I see her in the office (she has an office with a door and I work FOR her from a cubicle), I feel insufficient. I doubt myself. She is going on to get her master's. I can barely afford $200 a week in daycare, I can't even consider going back to school. She immediately got a job in her field of study after college and has 7+ years experience. Me? I worked at a zoo, then for a graphics company, then I had a baby and another baby. Now that I actually have a job relevant to my degree I have zero experience. If I hadn't married young, if I hadn't started a family so soon, if I had chosen a career path and stuck to it - I could be where she is. My husband has a good job, but does not even have a college education and he makes $20 an hour. My self esteem is in the toilet. I know I can't compare the joy of having two beautiful, healthy children to having a career, but I will be fully honest and say I wish I was where she is instead of where I am. And I get even more depressed about feeling that way. "
Shit I'm glad I've never had kids or never intend to.....I'm sure she does love hers to death but how many regrets are trapped inside her now? How many "what ifs" and "if onlys"?
Yet she made the choice to have kids...didn't it occur to her back then that she'd be giving up so much, and was it worth it? Only now she is looking back and having regrets. Her life is no longer her own. Kids are a life sentence. And I never intend to enter prison!
"Confession #2630
I am so disappointed in myself. And so jealous of her. We are the same age. We both graduated from high school the same year, went to college and both have a bachelor's degree. She makes $50,000 a year and I make $14.00 an hour. I feel like a failure. That should be me. I'm just as smart, just as capable as her. The difference? I have 2 kids. The position she was given over me requires her to travel 75% of the time. I am not in a position to do that because of my children. I cannot be away from home for extended periods of time and overnight.
I love my children so much...so why do I resent them and feel like they are holding me back from a promotion? When I see her in the office (she has an office with a door and I work FOR her from a cubicle), I feel insufficient. I doubt myself. She is going on to get her master's. I can barely afford $200 a week in daycare, I can't even consider going back to school. She immediately got a job in her field of study after college and has 7+ years experience. Me? I worked at a zoo, then for a graphics company, then I had a baby and another baby. Now that I actually have a job relevant to my degree I have zero experience. If I hadn't married young, if I hadn't started a family so soon, if I had chosen a career path and stuck to it - I could be where she is. My husband has a good job, but does not even have a college education and he makes $20 an hour. My self esteem is in the toilet. I know I can't compare the joy of having two beautiful, healthy children to having a career, but I will be fully honest and say I wish I was where she is instead of where I am. And I get even more depressed about feeling that way. "
Shit I'm glad I've never had kids or never intend to.....I'm sure she does love hers to death but how many regrets are trapped inside her now? How many "what ifs" and "if onlys"?
Yet she made the choice to have kids...didn't it occur to her back then that she'd be giving up so much, and was it worth it? Only now she is looking back and having regrets. Her life is no longer her own. Kids are a life sentence. And I never intend to enter prison!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)