Texting Walls

Technology is killing relationships.

Wait; that's not true. Is it really killing relationships? I really don't think that's the case.  Well, not in a sweeping generalization sort of way. Can it kill relationships? Duh. But so can many other things.

While some may hold a disdain for technology, it certainly helps maintain relationships.  Staying in touch with friends and distant family members would be much more difficult (though still doable) without the advancements in technology.  As with most things, though, it's all about moderation.

While I'd argue that technology doesn't quite kill relationships, I'd argue that you can't originate or grow a relationship through it.  Doing so isn't organic--it's robotic (see what I did there!).  I'm specifically considering technology in the form of textual communications.

Let's break it down:

For relationships, I'm talking about both friendships and intimacies (and not acquaintances), you need vulnerability.  Vulnerability is the fertilizer for any successful relationship. With vulnerability comes trust; you can't have trust without it.

Vulnerability is essential. You need real human interaction, though, for it to truly exist.  You need to have that moment of fear, or inhibition, or oh shit did I really just say that? You need to present your reality and not your ideology.

With things like text messaging, Facebook chats, and dating sites, we can't truly get to know someone. The relationships that originate from those devices can't be sustained. They don't have the vulnerability.

Sure, you can spill your guts to someone or they cant tell you their life stories, but it's a farce. We think we're breaking down walls and getting to know someone but instead we're getting thought-out calculations.  When you develop a relationship over text, you fall into the false illusion that your breaking down a wall.  Instead, you're taking out bricks and getting a small peak into the inside.

When we finally meet face-to-face, the reality of this wall's existence smacks us as we run full-force to breach the borders. While textual communications give us insights, it simultaneously almost add an additional wall, or a barrier. Suddenly, when communication is live, the barrier is gone and things get weird (and not in a good way).

Interaction must be quick, before this false sense of security takes over. If you meet someone briefly and find yourself communicating via texts, that doesn't mean it's destined to fail.  I'm merely suggesting we need more realistic conversations and interactions sooner than later.  A foundation can't be built with barriers--let the barriers come later, if they must at all.

The goal in many of our lives is to find a partner, right? Well, how can you truly find a partner if you speak from afar? Even if you fall in love with who they are through text, it sets up an even harder journey.  Breaking those walls to build your own foundation becomes much more difficult.

Just a thought.

A Brief Birthday Reflection

As a kid, of course I loved my birthday. I mean, who doesn't? You get cake, ice cream, sometimes a special dinner, and PRESENTS! Woo presents! Also, if your birthday fell within the school week, you could bring in treats for everyone, which usually led to you perusing the school for anyone willing to accept one of your treats in exchange for a nifty pencil. And that's all because you were born on that day some years in the past. Thank you, thank you. Please hold the applause!

As I got older, and get older, I find the birthdays kind of whimsical.  We get celebrated for our birthday.  We get paraded over for being born. Especially now in the age of Facebook, it's always interesting to see who will tell you "Happy Birthday" even though that person doesn't talk to you throughout the year.  You're suddenly important.

As I've gotten older, I've become someone who isn't really comfortable with unnecessary attention; it makes me feel icky. Don't get me wrong, it's great to receive birthday wishes and acknowledgement. Maybe I just have high expectations for myself, but I often think I'm just doing what I'm supposed to be doing.  I'd rather put my head down, get the job done, and move forward. So when something like a birthday comes up, I feel weird.  Like, what did I do to deserve this?

Following this thought, I've started a new-ish tradition that you may find interesting.  I like to call or text my mom, or talk to her if she calls me first, and thank her for giving birth to me.  Because, let's face it, this couldn't have happened without her.  I wouldn't be celebrating a birthday without her saying yes to me.

I could say the same to my dad, as he played an integral role in my creation and development, but I guess it seems like my mom ultimately had the final call. I may get presents or treated well on my birthday, but I feel like I should be the one treating her to something nice.  She did this.

I think stepping back and thinking about birthdays (or anniversaries of your birth day) can be a good reflection.  Sometimes, we can get so caught up in our everyday lives that we forget our roots or forget some simple details. Don't be afraid to celebrate your birthday or your life; all I'm saying it's let's not forget how we got here, and let's not take that for granted.  Thank you mothers of the world, for many cakes would not be had without your saying yes to us.

The Working World: Dreaming About Skills Over Experience

The life of a young professional: working hard and dreaming of reaching that goal. It's a struggle; it's a fight. Can I just say that I find corporate America to be incredibly frustrating? I mean, America in general can be frustrating at times; so, I guess that isn't really overreaching. I wish I had the funds to own a company, or start a company.  Maybe I just need to have the guts to do it. Yeah, maybe I need to stop complaining or wishing and start doing. I could also not be thinking plausibly. I think, though, I have a better design to have a better business (theoretically).

Let me lay this thought out for you. First, per usual, allow me to qualify.  I encourage you, before you start judging me, to hear me out.  This desire to change the landscape may sound like a "Millennial" mindset. You may be thinking, "Here's a kid who wants the world given to him without having to work hard for it. It's a shame that he has the audacity to believe he's qualified or even entitled to gains that others earned though years of hard work."  See, that's thinking with a narrow mind and generalizing.  I get that eventually those who have the skill, pay their dues, and work hard get to where they want to go, but it doesn't always work like that and it shouldn't always have to work like that.  Why can't those with the work ethic and skill advance? (<--tooting my own horn, eh?)

My frustration stems from being a young professional who is stuck in my current situation because of lack of experience (in years).  I have plenty of quality experience, but since I'm a fresh college grad, my quantitative experience just doesn't stack up.  I can't get certain positions because I don't have four years doing such and such task.  I may be able to do such and such task as well as someone with the four years experience, but that doesn't matter.

To give you an example, I applied for a job that I felt pretty confident I could get.  Heck, I knew the team I'd be working with and I had direct experience working within the confines of the job's description.  I had subbed for the position and filled it seamlessly.  Sounds like things would go in my favor, right? Wrong. I never even got passed HR as they filtered me out because my resume didn't reflect the four years experience minimally required for the position. It didn't matter that people in the department knew I could do the job because my years of experience dictated otherwise.  I digress...

I wonder what would happen if we let skills weigh more than experience.  I understand the value of experience, but just because someone has years on you doesn't necessarily mean they can do a better job. I will note: I get there could be some frustration here coming from someone who has experience because I know with poor economic times came cuts of many experienced folks. I'm just wondering, why wouldn't a company want the BEST people to do the BEST work?  For real, some people have better skill sets than others.  Some people are kept on for loyalty or the years they put in.  I'm not suggesting that someone should get fired so I can get a better position and take his or her place; I'm merely wondering why someone of my age who shows the aptitude for more can't move up without gaining a few years under my belt.

Why can't we give people the opportunity to do jobs and see if they succeed? A resume can be so misleading and such a joke. You can't necessarily know what a person can or cannot do based off of a resume. Why can't we put people in positions that will allow not only them to reach their potential but the company to reach the potential? Like, I keep envisioning a place where you have some sort of aptitude test (maybe not that because I've always sucked at standardized testing) or some sort of situational test. Based on how people perform, you position them accordingly.  If they exceedingly kick butt at the position, and you can tell it's not a fluke, why not increase the role? If it doesn't work, move them back.  People may dislike this thought process because it could be limiting for some.  Just off the top of my head, I could see people being upset because under this school of thought you could have a ton of experience, but if you aren't necessarily superiorly skilled you'd be stuck in a position and thus stuck in a pay scale, which could make things difficult.  My thought, though, would be the more successful a company is, the more money you'd have to increase wages.

This is the problem and this is why I'd need to run this ideal business. Money. Theoretically, it could work because I'm not someone who is money driven.  I mean, yes, I want money and desire the ability to live comfortably.  But I've never considered myself someone who would have (for instance) millions of dollars and do everything in my power to squeeze out millions more.  I just want to live without worry, not luxuriously.  Thus, I'd have no problem paying for production.  Each person is, or at least should be, valuable in a companies success or failure.  If people are positioned to do what's best for the company, to maximize profit, they should get rewarded accordingly.  If this was properly done, being stuck in a certain spot theoretically shouldn't be a problem.

Blah.

I'm still not sure where my road will take me, and I understand my dream isn't a reality.  I'm still going to work hard and keep on trucking until my opportunity comes. I'm just saying it'd be nice if when people recognize you for doing good work (legitimately not just a hey keep it up buddy) it meant something more than simply wait until you hit the quantitative level and your time will come. Keep on dreaming. Keep on working.

The life...

Don't become the monster; Don't stare at me like a monster

Ugh. Parents just don't seem to ever understand. They CAN'T understand me because they don't know what it's like to be a kid/teen.

Doesn't that seem to be the anthem of the youth? I was thinking about how funny that whole notion is--how innately complex it is. Let's think about it for a second; let's think about the duplexity.

One one side, we say parents just don't understand, but the reality is they understand all too well. Sure, times are different, technology has changed, etc., but at the end of the day, parents were once kids, teens, young adults too.  They understand that you'll face trials and tribulations, honest.

Following that vein, isn't it odd how that's perpetually the cry of teens? Like, as a teen you sit there and say your parents just don't understand.  Then you grow up and you become the parent who doesn't understand. It's quite odd, really.  It has Nietzsche written all over it; don't stare at the monster too long or the monster will become you.

Hmm...It's really weird how that works. Don't you think?  Is it that as we get older we forget? Or do we just learn? Maybe a combination of both.

I have a solution, I think; okay, it's more of a suggestion.  I propose if you aren't yet a parent, you should write a letter to yourself from yourself as a reminder.  Remind yourself how you felt when your parents didn't understand.  Remind yourself you'll be more understanding. Remind yourself to trust.

I think doing so may solve some problems.  For one, when you are a parent you can show it to your kids as proof that you actually felt what they felt--that you didn't just one day come out as an adult.  Secondly, I think it could potentially help the transformation from kid to adult and the learning/forgetting that coincides with it.  I do think as people become parents they learn that maybe their parents weren't so bad after all, and that they had a lot of good intentions; however, I also think some forgetting occurs.  As a parent, so it seems, you get this extra sense of responsibility (usually) because now you have someone else's life besides your own to worry for.  You can't be as reckless as you once were. Problematically, you somewhat forget how you once felt.  See, one can worry all they want, but they can't control everything. I can not trust my child and try to control what he or she does, but ultimately natural law and my child's decision making will play huge roles in the outcome. We need to maintain empathy and trust.  Learn about why some rules are great, but don't rule with iron clad fists.

There seems to be a fine line in parenthood, unfortunately.  Crossing too far one way or another is dangerous.  If we write a letter to ourselves to remind ourselves about distant memories, it may help us say closer to that line.  It's easy to forget.  At the same time, we as kids or other kids need to remember that parents are doing things from experience.  If we maintain an open dialogue without getting so moody, maybe we can learn more about each other's situation.  I know, kids are moody and many times egocentric, but I know there are real solutions to the real problems we face. We just need to keep trying.

Can you dig it?

We All Love Lists But They're Dumb (The 5 Reasons Why)

You know what seems to be all the rage lately (and by lately I mean for some time now)? Lists. People love to read lists.  Like seriously, it's ridiculous how much people enjoy lists. Five signs you know you're in love, seven strangers you should meet, eight best travel spots, etc.

So, screw it, I'm making my own list.  Here it is:

The 5 Reasons Why Lists are Dumb

1. They're limiting: I'd assume, mostly, that lists are made as teasers.  It's like, "hey, look at me and how much knowledge I have. I'm going to solve your problems or paint your problems in six steps or less!" It's this innate desire for simplification, but it's oversimplification.  I'm sorry, but you didn't cover every reason why I'm anxious all of the time.  Oh, so you're saying she really does like me if I can check off each item? No. Lies. Stop it.

2. They're extreme: Do you ever notice how many lists use superlatives? They try to make you believe that this list is the best.  My list is the MOST IMPORTANT LIST around. It's as if the creators of said lists were able to gather the consensus of humanity in compiling these incredibly insightful and inspiring lists. You really mean to tell me these are absolutely, positively the BEST ways to fall in love? That's weird muchacho, it doesn't seem to be working for you.

3. They're redundant: How many times can we say the same thing over and over and over and over and over and ov...er again.  I really wonder sometimes if people think they're clever and they're pulling a fast one on others or maybe they actually believe their ideas are original.  You can only write about how awesome Harry Potter is so many times. Well, one would think. It just seems the people are constantly regurgitating what other people are already saying for the sake of making another list.

4. They're subjective: Yes, yes, I'm sure there are objective lists out there; however, for the most part, most list are subjective.  You can't really speak for everyone (kind of following the lines of point 3). These lists are just your opinions. And people love to eat that stuff up.  We read these lists as if they're scripture or blasphemy.  I love reading a list and seeing comments that say, "You're an idiot. Number 4 is totally wrong."  (Robert's note: Many people online don't type sentences or words out that completely . Sigh). Why are we so fascinated with the opinions or fabrications of others? Are we that incapable of thinking our own thoughts? Or maybe we just need others to justify how we feel.

5. They're pointless: Okay, so you've read a list. Cool. Great. Now what? Where do you go from here? I just don't see lists as doing anything substantial for our lives.  Hey, sweet list. It changes nothing, though. Besides that relatively useless comments or shares the lists get, they don't inspire meaningful action.  A person is going to act if they want to act or think differently if they want to.  Your list isn't going to change that.

Here's the problem: Lists are just so freaking addicting and we can't seem to get enough.  Well, this was pointless...

The TV (or Media) is Not Society: Time to Take Back Control

Today on Facebook, someone posted a link (note: the link may be momentarily down but hopefully it's back up soon) that talked about a new campaign for plus-sized models. Basically, the article pointed out how incredibly erroneous the campaign was as they are promoting what's normally perceived as an "average" female and calling her a plus-sized model.  The article had a screen cap with a plethora of comments from Facebook users.  Mainly, people said things along the lines of "How dare you," "This is an outrage," and "Society is messed up."

Now, before I go any further, I want to state that I don't know the answer to my questions.  I just think these questions need to be asked.  Or, these are questions that arose from me seeing the article.

When I saw that campaign, admittedly the first thing I thought was, "Well, she's sure pretty."  That's the point of someone being a model, right? Then, I looked at her and could see why she was labeled as plus-sized.  It wasn't because she's actually what one might considered plus-sized (which I'd argue is subjectively defined anyways), but more so based on what many consider a model.  The model was what you'd call, I guess, average.

People often see ads like that and bring up the fact that so many people, females in particular, have body image issues. They also say how it's no wonder so many do as it's paraded to us that those a overly skinny minnie's are what's beautiful--because, again, that's what a model is right?

Now, I'm not a girl so it'd be difficult for you to give any credence to my claims if I said I knew the answers. Nor could I corroborate states with personal experience.  However, I wonder why we listen to such advertisements? You have all of these people claiming how false, inaccurate, and innately evil they are, yet we consume them anyways.  I get it from the sense that they might be selling fashionable material, but why buy the model behind the material as well? Is it because the TV says they're beautiful? My question: WHO THE FUCK IS THE TV (or media) AND WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY KNOW?! We feed these people by buying their products, by buying their images.

It doesn't just end with body image. It's other things too.  We earnestly listen to the TV for what is deemed as success.  One of my favorite things that I've gradually tried to get away from is religiously listening to "experts" about sports.  They're just a bunch of everyday people who claim to have more knowledge than you and I, but at the end of the day are usually talking out of their arses.

Here's what I really want to know, though.  Going back to the model story and the comments.  People are insinuating through their comments that they find those models wrong--especially in terms of their projection of "average or normal." That would lead me to think that they share that view with others, no? So, if people around us have a different perception than that of the TV, why do we have so many issues?  Why is what our peers tell us not good enough? Why does it mean nothing when a friend calls you beautiful because the TV says you aren't? Why are we so incapable of carrying only about the opinions of those that matter most?

I get the whole consumerism and its appeal.  And how as a byproduct of our consumerism the subliminal and somewhat subversive messages break through our walls. I just wish I understood why.  I know some people will take those projections and project them negatively onto others, but are those the people you'd really want to surround yourself with anyways? Like, you're best friend thinks your good enough but that's not enough? We're so into being "perfect" but why are we allowing others to define perfection? If we're constantly allowing ourselves to get pulled by various "experts" and their opinions, how is perfection even possible? It's not. Instead, we're setting ourselves up for failure and sadness. We must find a way to dismiss their abject notions.

It's just particularly odd to me that people will comment about "society" when we are society. The television isn't society.  They seem to control it, but we need to take the control back.  I challenge you to consciously fight the poisonous notions projected towards you on the television and instead accept the person you are for the way you and your friends see you.  It's not to say that some of use may need improvements--we could all improve in certain areas--but find that confidence with doing you and not doing them.  People, especially those close to you, aren't going to lie to you just for the sake of doing so. They're your friends for a reason.

You're good enough, you're smart enough, and gosh darn it people like you. Like yourself and take back the control.

Cynicism or Maybe Reality? Questioning Originality and It's Validity in Modernity

Creativity. Innovation. Novelty. Invention. Originality.

These are words that drive people everyday.  These are words the drive our "evolution." We want to present the world a newness never seen before--something that nobody's ever thought of.  But I wonder, is what we seek even possible? Is novelty or originality even possible anymore?

I was initially driven to this question and reflection when trying to concoct an idea for a novel.  Numerous ideas have arisen, but I've yet to decide on one. The problem is that they all seem redundant.   After think through each "new" idea, I find myself wondering, "hasn't this already been written?" Sure, you can present an idea, notion, theme in various ways, but does that make it original? At the core the idea is the same. Is it not? Plus, with so many people living in the world and so many people who have previously lived, what's the likelihood of even your groundbreaking, original idea being original? Chances are it's a thought that's already been thought.

We have a lot of innovations in terms of technologies, sure. I tend to wonder, though, if they are truly original ideas.  Or, could they possible be better ideas or solutions to what we had before? Take phones for instance.  We used to only have landlines to communicate with people, but then it wasn't convenient enough.  So, we someone "invented" car phones, or cell phones. They built on what already existed. The idea of communication wasn't original; it was just a better way to simplify communication.

Problematically, I think my drive to be original can somewhat hamper me.  I'm so focused on the nonexistent that I let the existent pass me by.  I tend to think we should worry more about what's in front of us, what we can improve on, rather tan being original.  Fix the problems we know instead of the problems we hypothetically conceive.

I could be wrong. Shit, I'm probably wrong. Maybe this is just a load of cynicism in the form of a poorly laid out, brief blog post.  I guess the point I'm trying to make is sometimes the dream impedes the reality.  So what you're not original; you can improve the original. We all can, if we'd focus our energies to positively improve on the what is instead of the what could be.