Weaknesses. We all have them. And very often, we don't want the world to see them. So we try - sometimes in vain - to hide them. We are scared to show those weaknesses. What sweet irony that is. That fear often becomes our greatest weakness and more, it's a weakness we don't hide as well as like to think we do.
One weakness that seems to register high on the "fear of showing" category is the notion of regret. It's a pep talk run amok. As children, that fear of failure is present especially when pitted against our peers. So our teachers and elders show us how to accept setbacks and short-comings and learn from them and move on.
As we grow, we often retain those mantras taught to us as children. We tell ourselves that this is learning experience and the next time we find ourselves in a similar position, we will have the mistakes of our past and the lessons learned to guide us. That does not mean, however, that anyone should be fearful of regret. It does not mean that we need to live without it in order to move on.
As adults, it is our responsibility to define the world we are in. It is also our responsibility to understand what certain words and ideas mean. It is our responsibility to know what "regret" is. It is also probably our responsibility to teach our children exactly what "regret" means. They have a book to serve that purpose. The real mantra we should retain is, "look it up".
The fact is that regret is a big part of moving on, something many of people fail to understand or acknowledge. To regret is to feel sorry, to feel remorse. Regret is knowing you did something wrong. Regret is understanding the gravity of your actions and knowing that you don't want to repeat those same mistakes.
Without regret, it means if given the chance, you'd do all those things all over again. You'd say the same things you often wished you could take back. You'd hurt the same people. You'd take yourself, your loved ones and your experiences for granted. Without regret, you cannot and have not learned.
Regret is normal and healthy and nothing to fear. We regret daily. We regret on small scales and on larger ones. Anytime we do something for which we feel bad about, we regret. Anytime we look at what we've done and say, "I shouldn't have done that.", we regret. You can move on and still have regrets. In fact, regret is the first part of moving on and it is the most important part of learning from your mistakes.
We all have regrets. I have many. It's another way of saying, "I'm sorry."
Aren't you sorry? For something? Anything? That, my friend, is exactly what regret is.
16.4.10
10.4.10
today's lesson: knowing what you're talking about
Do I talk smack? Of course I do. But let's come right back down to earth. So. Do. You.
We all do. And we all have our reasons. We all have trends that suggest what we are most likely to talk about. Personally, the one thing that tends to push my buttons and yank me right into loose-lip territory is the tendency of others to be opinionated and judgmental. Left alone, I tend to be a "let it be" kind of person. Start spewing your strong and baseless opinions in a loud manner in some open forum, especially when it's about a person or group of people, I throw all of that right out the window. Two wrongs don't make a right, I know this. But if you're not going to care, neither am I.
Aside from the internet and the loud-mouths who use it as their playground - self included - one of the most open forums for such opinions is a good old-fashioned newspaper. Alleged un-biased news aside (I'm looking at you Marianas Variety, heavy with irony), the newspaper also relates editorials and opinions written by the lay-person or free-lance writer. I have, on occasion, contributed to such columns.
And that brings me to one particular writer who is seen in the Pacific Daily News every Sunday. This writer has shared short articles containing gems of wisdom such as her belief that women don't belong in the military, pregnant women should be ashamed of their growing bellies and appropriately cover it up with the tent-like shirts she bragged about donning fashionably when she was pregnant very many years ago and that, on the other end of the spectrum, women who have a slimmer figure who don't have people incubating inside of them should not wear clothes that hide their figures. Yeah, I don't know either.
Her latest was a passive-aggressive address of a person whose comments about our island have gone viral. (Yes, I know I'm being passive-aggressive, as well.) Specifically, she called in question this person's claims that his comments were a metaphor. She did this by recollecting her childhood under a mother who was, for all intents and purposes, a grammar nazi. She used this as a resume of sorts, to cite her credentials before she decided to school the readers about what a metaphor is and isn't.
Funny thing is, for all those years being corrected by her mother and the years she's spent since seemingly considering herself well-schooled in proper speech, she was absolutely, undeniably and verifiably wrong.
The gist of her claim was that in order for a metaphor to be properly executed, its context should be obvious and instant. The reader should know what is being compared to what.
Sorry, professor. You're talking about the most basic form of metaphor, one used to hammer in what a simple metaphor is when teaching children. You probably should have learned that there are different types of metaphors. One of those types is allegory. Allegory is an extended metaphor and while what is actually said is rather obvious, what it's being compared to isn't always so. Whether it's a good allegory or not is up to the reader.
A classic example of an allegory is the poem "she being brand new" by e.e. cummings. The words may describe something of an automotive nature. What cummings was really talking about, however, was the act of sex. And while counting lines is difficult in any cummings work, rest assured it's longer than a mere sentence that compares two things without use of the words 'like', 'as', etc.
Yes, in that case the context was rather obvious. Take a gander at it some time. There is no missing what cummings was referring to. But in his case, we're talking about a well-crafted allegory. A good metaphor. Sometimes people miss the boat with allegory. Sometimes it's just not well done.
So while the original speaker in question might not have made a good metaphor/allegory, he did in fact make one.
I won't be taking that test, thanks. Not when the instructor clearly knows less than those she is trying to instruct.
We all do. And we all have our reasons. We all have trends that suggest what we are most likely to talk about. Personally, the one thing that tends to push my buttons and yank me right into loose-lip territory is the tendency of others to be opinionated and judgmental. Left alone, I tend to be a "let it be" kind of person. Start spewing your strong and baseless opinions in a loud manner in some open forum, especially when it's about a person or group of people, I throw all of that right out the window. Two wrongs don't make a right, I know this. But if you're not going to care, neither am I.
Aside from the internet and the loud-mouths who use it as their playground - self included - one of the most open forums for such opinions is a good old-fashioned newspaper. Alleged un-biased news aside (I'm looking at you Marianas Variety, heavy with irony), the newspaper also relates editorials and opinions written by the lay-person or free-lance writer. I have, on occasion, contributed to such columns.
And that brings me to one particular writer who is seen in the Pacific Daily News every Sunday. This writer has shared short articles containing gems of wisdom such as her belief that women don't belong in the military, pregnant women should be ashamed of their growing bellies and appropriately cover it up with the tent-like shirts she bragged about donning fashionably when she was pregnant very many years ago and that, on the other end of the spectrum, women who have a slimmer figure who don't have people incubating inside of them should not wear clothes that hide their figures. Yeah, I don't know either.
Her latest was a passive-aggressive address of a person whose comments about our island have gone viral. (Yes, I know I'm being passive-aggressive, as well.) Specifically, she called in question this person's claims that his comments were a metaphor. She did this by recollecting her childhood under a mother who was, for all intents and purposes, a grammar nazi. She used this as a resume of sorts, to cite her credentials before she decided to school the readers about what a metaphor is and isn't.
Funny thing is, for all those years being corrected by her mother and the years she's spent since seemingly considering herself well-schooled in proper speech, she was absolutely, undeniably and verifiably wrong.
The gist of her claim was that in order for a metaphor to be properly executed, its context should be obvious and instant. The reader should know what is being compared to what.
Sorry, professor. You're talking about the most basic form of metaphor, one used to hammer in what a simple metaphor is when teaching children. You probably should have learned that there are different types of metaphors. One of those types is allegory. Allegory is an extended metaphor and while what is actually said is rather obvious, what it's being compared to isn't always so. Whether it's a good allegory or not is up to the reader.
A classic example of an allegory is the poem "she being brand new" by e.e. cummings. The words may describe something of an automotive nature. What cummings was really talking about, however, was the act of sex. And while counting lines is difficult in any cummings work, rest assured it's longer than a mere sentence that compares two things without use of the words 'like', 'as', etc.
Yes, in that case the context was rather obvious. Take a gander at it some time. There is no missing what cummings was referring to. But in his case, we're talking about a well-crafted allegory. A good metaphor. Sometimes people miss the boat with allegory. Sometimes it's just not well done.
So while the original speaker in question might not have made a good metaphor/allegory, he did in fact make one.
I won't be taking that test, thanks. Not when the instructor clearly knows less than those she is trying to instruct.
4.4.10
the fine line between pride and ludicrous hyper-sensitivity
Ai adai, my fellow Guamaniacs. We are a proud race. A proud race and, it has to be said, a very sensitive one at that.
We are. You all know it. And it's perfectly understandable, too. Think about the different ethnicities in this world and the regions in which they live. Consider minority relations and the laws that govern their lands. By now, we all know that the rules don't apply on Guam. Thanks to the signing of a document many years ago that sold us out, we are not a territory of sovereign people who have the ability to decide how our own home is built or how it functions. While many we know take their rights and liberties for granted, we are stuck stewing on an island wondering what kind of liberties we've been given.
But enough about that. The point is that there is a reason for our sensitivity. But sometimes we take it too far and in doing so, we don't think about what we're saying and who we're saying it to. We don't consider the weight of our words and what they truly mean. We don't care that we are being hypocritical and silly.
The reality is that it is, in fact, silly to think that people who know little to nothing about Guam are ignorant and uneducated.
Ask yourself: If you weren't from Guam, if you didn't know anyone from here, what would YOU know about Guam?
Take away your prejudices and really think about this island, objectively, without your attachment to it. Think about its size, population and location. Ask yourself what kind of place Guam has on a global scale in a world that has roughly 200 countries and a population of six-billion people.
Perhaps we should have a lot more of a presence in certain circles and topics. Guam should be known for its role in WWII. Americans should know that the US does not just include its 50 states but its territories, as well. People in the US armed forces should probably know about Guam more than the civilian. But let's be realistic. We had the same textbooks as the ones they had in the mainland. Do you remember what kind of mention there was in our books? It was a small one. Is there really any wonder that Americans don't know much about us? Where are they supposed to learn? Do we expect them to wake up one day inspired with the need to look us up and figure out all there is to know about us? Do we expect them to observe a mention of us in a movie or viral video about some stupid senator and immediately want to know exactly what this Guam place is all about?
Now, there's no crime in wanting Guam to be noticed. It's natural to want people to know about us, what we have to offer and what kind of affect we have on this world. Because we do have many, many things to offer. And we absolutely have an affect.
But, really now, is calling anyone stupid going to change that? This attitude that people who don't know about Guam are all ignorant, is that helping our cause at all? Why don't we take a step back and actually tell people what we're all about?
For those who insist that people are stupid for not knowing much - or anything - about our beautiful island, I'd like to know what can you tell me about Ceuta. Is it a country? An island? A sovereign nation? Where is it located? To what country do Ceuta's inhabitants pay their allegiance to?
Don't know? Well, ask yourself this: Does that make you an idiot?
I didn't think so.
We are. You all know it. And it's perfectly understandable, too. Think about the different ethnicities in this world and the regions in which they live. Consider minority relations and the laws that govern their lands. By now, we all know that the rules don't apply on Guam. Thanks to the signing of a document many years ago that sold us out, we are not a territory of sovereign people who have the ability to decide how our own home is built or how it functions. While many we know take their rights and liberties for granted, we are stuck stewing on an island wondering what kind of liberties we've been given.
But enough about that. The point is that there is a reason for our sensitivity. But sometimes we take it too far and in doing so, we don't think about what we're saying and who we're saying it to. We don't consider the weight of our words and what they truly mean. We don't care that we are being hypocritical and silly.
The reality is that it is, in fact, silly to think that people who know little to nothing about Guam are ignorant and uneducated.
Ask yourself: If you weren't from Guam, if you didn't know anyone from here, what would YOU know about Guam?
Take away your prejudices and really think about this island, objectively, without your attachment to it. Think about its size, population and location. Ask yourself what kind of place Guam has on a global scale in a world that has roughly 200 countries and a population of six-billion people.
Perhaps we should have a lot more of a presence in certain circles and topics. Guam should be known for its role in WWII. Americans should know that the US does not just include its 50 states but its territories, as well. People in the US armed forces should probably know about Guam more than the civilian. But let's be realistic. We had the same textbooks as the ones they had in the mainland. Do you remember what kind of mention there was in our books? It was a small one. Is there really any wonder that Americans don't know much about us? Where are they supposed to learn? Do we expect them to wake up one day inspired with the need to look us up and figure out all there is to know about us? Do we expect them to observe a mention of us in a movie or viral video about some stupid senator and immediately want to know exactly what this Guam place is all about?
Now, there's no crime in wanting Guam to be noticed. It's natural to want people to know about us, what we have to offer and what kind of affect we have on this world. Because we do have many, many things to offer. And we absolutely have an affect.
But, really now, is calling anyone stupid going to change that? This attitude that people who don't know about Guam are all ignorant, is that helping our cause at all? Why don't we take a step back and actually tell people what we're all about?
For those who insist that people are stupid for not knowing much - or anything - about our beautiful island, I'd like to know what can you tell me about Ceuta. Is it a country? An island? A sovereign nation? Where is it located? To what country do Ceuta's inhabitants pay their allegiance to?
Don't know? Well, ask yourself this: Does that make you an idiot?
I didn't think so.
the long exhale: a prelude
And what a long, sweet exhale it (usually) is.
No. You don't understand. It really does feel that good. You may think we're all crazy. And we are. You may think it's disgusting. And it really, really is. But there's a reason we all do it. And there's a reason it's so damn hard to stop.
Let me describe it to you.
First is the trigger. The stressor, if you will. There are so many of them, too. A long day, a heated argument, a satisfying meal, a tangle in bed or just the sight of someone else doing it: All of these create a desperate urge. Your fingers rub together. You lick your lips. And before you even get it between your lips you are breathing a bit harder. Whether it's the act of sucking or blowing pretend smoke or the anticipation of labored breathing associated with lungs full of smoke, there is a bit more than the effortless breath of a person who does not smoke.
There is also, of course, the fact that the desire doesn't need to come from outside. That is what an addiction is, after all. It's a need that comes from inside.
So then it's time to spark. The cigarette is in your mouth and if you smoke menthol, the sensation is immediate. Before you even light it, there's the cooling, mint sensation. And even if you aren't smoking a menthol cigarette, there is a slight taste, the slight aroma like that of a subtle, sweet, minty herb. There is the CHHHK of the lighter and sizzle of the flame kissing the other end of the cigarette. As you inhale, the cherry glows with a bright orange that Crayola has yet to duplicate and it fades as you pull your lips apart. Naturally, you inhale again, sucking the smoke further into your body from your mouth to your lungs.
At this point it still doesn't sound that appealing. You are essentially breathing in smoke, something you were probably taught not to do as a child. It goes against nature to breathe in something so foul. But although a smoker develops a taste for such an act, it's the last part that feels the best.
You may want to hold it in for a while, you may expel it immediately. Either way, the expulsion is what creates the desire. This is where it becomes natural. This is when you push the offending smoke from your lungs with a deep, full breath out. It's the release of a full stomach, unpleasant encounter, stressful experience in one breath.
Imagine that, alone. Imagine the ability to physically gather all that is bothering in you into your body through your mouth, hold it in for a moment and exhale. Whhhhhhhhhhhheeeewwwww. All of it gone.
But not quite.
So you inhale. Exhale. Clearer. Inhale. Exhale. Even more. Inhale. Exhale. It's almost gone. Inhale. Exhale. And there it goes.
Were it not so bad for you, so nauseous. Had it a better smell and taste, we'd all be doing it. Don't kid yourself. If the act were far more pleasant and easy in the beginning, far more people would be hooked.
But it is nauseous. It is putrid and disgusting and any reasonable person, smoker or not, understands completely how bad it is. This is the reason I don't fully understand or believe the claim of our forefathers, those who told us about how, "Back in the day, we just didn't know." Oh, they knew alright. Probably not to the extent we are all now educated about. I'm sure they didn't realize, once upon a time, that many people would be suffering and dying horrible deaths from several different diseases associate with tobacco products. But again, if the act of inhaling smoke is unnatural, well, we shouldn't have ever done it in the first place, no matter how good people say it feels once the addiction grabs a hold of us and slowly robs us of our lives.
Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Just as we all know about the many reasons we shouldn't smoke, we also know the many reasons why we do. All that's left is the decision: Do we continue to do this or do we find a way to stop?
And this is where I find myself. After growing up in a cloud of smoke - sorry, fam, you should have seen this coming - and, for whatever reason, deciding that smoking just fits who I am, I am addicted to a stick that costs me my money and my health. It costs me my ability to smell and to breathe well. It has stained my teeth and made food unappetizing at times. And hell, I stink. Smoke is not a nice smell no matter which way you look at it. Even as a smoker, I don't like the smell of it on me or others. More, I've made decisions that have taken away my independence and I am no longer in a position of complete self-service. What I do to myself affects others. Thus, it's not as simple as claiming a victimless act.
I am not too proud to admit that being selfless was not enough to make me quit. The bottom line is that I just don't have the funds to support the habit anymore. Truthfully, I never really did. But whatever.
I'm turning in my notice to the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and Philip Morris companies and thanking them for their assistance during some rather stressful times, hoping that I have not done irreparable damage to a body that needs to live some years to make sure the offspring are doing alright and looking forward to the extra dough I'll have as I drop what is roughly a $4-a-day habit.
There is less than a pack of Marlboro Mediums left between me and the man. And then it's smoke-free for us. Yes, my partner-in-crime plans to take this journey with me but there's a good chance we'll both falter. I guess we'll see who does so first if we don't manage to stick to it till the end. We should put some money on it. Or make some kind of wager. I function better if it's a competition.
It's not going to be fun or pleasant for me or any of the people around me. I'm a pretty moody person, naturally. I don't have a low-maintenance life and I have more than enough on my plate to send me to the brink of insanity even with my release-in-a-stick. I might have to stop talking to people altogether until the twitching ends, the cold sweats stop and I no longer feel in danger of becoming She-Hulk.
Because I really, really do like my cigarettes. I'm going to miss them so.
T-minus-17 cigarettes and counting.
No. You don't understand. It really does feel that good. You may think we're all crazy. And we are. You may think it's disgusting. And it really, really is. But there's a reason we all do it. And there's a reason it's so damn hard to stop.
Let me describe it to you.
First is the trigger. The stressor, if you will. There are so many of them, too. A long day, a heated argument, a satisfying meal, a tangle in bed or just the sight of someone else doing it: All of these create a desperate urge. Your fingers rub together. You lick your lips. And before you even get it between your lips you are breathing a bit harder. Whether it's the act of sucking or blowing pretend smoke or the anticipation of labored breathing associated with lungs full of smoke, there is a bit more than the effortless breath of a person who does not smoke.
There is also, of course, the fact that the desire doesn't need to come from outside. That is what an addiction is, after all. It's a need that comes from inside.
So then it's time to spark. The cigarette is in your mouth and if you smoke menthol, the sensation is immediate. Before you even light it, there's the cooling, mint sensation. And even if you aren't smoking a menthol cigarette, there is a slight taste, the slight aroma like that of a subtle, sweet, minty herb. There is the CHHHK of the lighter and sizzle of the flame kissing the other end of the cigarette. As you inhale, the cherry glows with a bright orange that Crayola has yet to duplicate and it fades as you pull your lips apart. Naturally, you inhale again, sucking the smoke further into your body from your mouth to your lungs.
At this point it still doesn't sound that appealing. You are essentially breathing in smoke, something you were probably taught not to do as a child. It goes against nature to breathe in something so foul. But although a smoker develops a taste for such an act, it's the last part that feels the best.
You may want to hold it in for a while, you may expel it immediately. Either way, the expulsion is what creates the desire. This is where it becomes natural. This is when you push the offending smoke from your lungs with a deep, full breath out. It's the release of a full stomach, unpleasant encounter, stressful experience in one breath.
Imagine that, alone. Imagine the ability to physically gather all that is bothering in you into your body through your mouth, hold it in for a moment and exhale. Whhhhhhhhhhhheeeewwwww. All of it gone.
But not quite.
So you inhale. Exhale. Clearer. Inhale. Exhale. Even more. Inhale. Exhale. It's almost gone. Inhale. Exhale. And there it goes.
Were it not so bad for you, so nauseous. Had it a better smell and taste, we'd all be doing it. Don't kid yourself. If the act were far more pleasant and easy in the beginning, far more people would be hooked.
But it is nauseous. It is putrid and disgusting and any reasonable person, smoker or not, understands completely how bad it is. This is the reason I don't fully understand or believe the claim of our forefathers, those who told us about how, "Back in the day, we just didn't know." Oh, they knew alright. Probably not to the extent we are all now educated about. I'm sure they didn't realize, once upon a time, that many people would be suffering and dying horrible deaths from several different diseases associate with tobacco products. But again, if the act of inhaling smoke is unnatural, well, we shouldn't have ever done it in the first place, no matter how good people say it feels once the addiction grabs a hold of us and slowly robs us of our lives.
Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Just as we all know about the many reasons we shouldn't smoke, we also know the many reasons why we do. All that's left is the decision: Do we continue to do this or do we find a way to stop?
And this is where I find myself. After growing up in a cloud of smoke - sorry, fam, you should have seen this coming - and, for whatever reason, deciding that smoking just fits who I am, I am addicted to a stick that costs me my money and my health. It costs me my ability to smell and to breathe well. It has stained my teeth and made food unappetizing at times. And hell, I stink. Smoke is not a nice smell no matter which way you look at it. Even as a smoker, I don't like the smell of it on me or others. More, I've made decisions that have taken away my independence and I am no longer in a position of complete self-service. What I do to myself affects others. Thus, it's not as simple as claiming a victimless act.
I am not too proud to admit that being selfless was not enough to make me quit. The bottom line is that I just don't have the funds to support the habit anymore. Truthfully, I never really did. But whatever.
I'm turning in my notice to the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and Philip Morris companies and thanking them for their assistance during some rather stressful times, hoping that I have not done irreparable damage to a body that needs to live some years to make sure the offspring are doing alright and looking forward to the extra dough I'll have as I drop what is roughly a $4-a-day habit.
There is less than a pack of Marlboro Mediums left between me and the man. And then it's smoke-free for us. Yes, my partner-in-crime plans to take this journey with me but there's a good chance we'll both falter. I guess we'll see who does so first if we don't manage to stick to it till the end. We should put some money on it. Or make some kind of wager. I function better if it's a competition.
It's not going to be fun or pleasant for me or any of the people around me. I'm a pretty moody person, naturally. I don't have a low-maintenance life and I have more than enough on my plate to send me to the brink of insanity even with my release-in-a-stick. I might have to stop talking to people altogether until the twitching ends, the cold sweats stop and I no longer feel in danger of becoming She-Hulk.
Because I really, really do like my cigarettes. I'm going to miss them so.
T-minus-17 cigarettes and counting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
