let’s pretend

Let’s pretend you’re a woman. Some of you won’t need to pretend here. Let’s pretend you’re a blonde. See second sentence above. Let’s pretend you have an in-law who only emails you to send you dumb blonde jokes. Let’s also pretend there is never a hello, how are you, or what’s going on with you included in these dumb blonde joke emails. And let’s pretend you think you generally have a really good sense of humor, but let’s also pretend that you find these emails — again, the only communication you ever receive from this person — uhm, annoying and a teeny bit offensive.

So in this completely pretend scenario, are you, the blonde woman, overreacting? Are you hyper-sensitive? Do you just need to, uhm, spark a doobie and chillax or get drunk on mulberry wine?

Because, you know, I think about these totally random scenarios that have nothing whatsoever to do with me or anyone I know.

It’s all part of my generalized mania.

Thank you for your input on this entirely hypothetical situation.

inbox

Dear Tee Tee and uncle (Beloved),

I had a great time with you. I liked watching Heidi and Bedtimes Story with you too. I also liked playing WIG OUT! with you two. I liked going to the beach and I liked doing everthing with you. THANK YOU!
love,
Piper

She typed it herself.

That kid. She just makes me blaze with love.

shopping for the sudden yurt commune

So, yes, tonight, I’m window shopping for additions to our Sudden Yurt Commune and I cannot believe what I just found. So so gorgeous.

Now, I know we’re all about yurts. I still LOVES me the yurt: I want a yurt, I need a yurt, and I even recently considered a missions trip to Mongolia — I kid you not — until I realized I was thinking more of all the beautiful yurts I would stay in than how I might, you know, serve our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. So, yeah, that didn’t work out. Jesus was none too pleased, I guess, which is weird. I mean, you’d think he’d like yurts.

So I’m here, stateside — not in Mongolia, flopped in a yurt, throwing up yak’s milk. Fine. Whatever. You adjust. You deal with disappointment. You move on. (I said you do; I myself do not.)

Oh, and you also shop for additions to your Sudden Yurt Commune and stumble upon a new type of shelter for your little piece of collective heaven. Not a replacement of the yurt, no, never, but a supplement to the bliss, an enhancement to the joy.

Oh, look. Just look.

Gorgeous, refurbished gypsy caravans.

gypsycaravan2.jpg
Morning caravans

gypsycaravan12.jpg
Moonlight caravans ….. ablaze and magical

gypsycaravan3a.jpg
Some interiors

gypsycaravan3b.jpg

gypsycaravan5a.jpg

gypsycaravan5b.jpg
(All caravans from designer Jeane Bayol.)

Can you see it? A few of these for our commune? Along with our yurts.

And our hippie motorhome.

And our flagship.

You know, actually, they seem like they could be conjugal visit caravans.

I’m sorry. I didn’t just say that. No, really, I didn’t. Go have your conjugal visits out in the woods, you naughty little beatniks.

Because these would be for reading books from our book swap! Or having tea and nibbling blueberry scones baked by Jayne, our beloved chef and slave! Or extra space for sleeping off our mulberry wine hangovers!

Or, well, whatever suggestions you might have, you shiftless vagrants.

But aren’t they fabulous?

Gypsy caravans for The Sudden Yurt Commune!!

disappointing

You know, the kind of thing that happened in the comment thread of this post is one of disappointing things — one of the down sides — of Internet community. Someone leaves a comment, gets questioned about the comment, responds defensively or cryptically or, in this case, both, and later decides he or she is being attacked and disappears into the ether — for good, one assumes.

It frustrates me. A lot. I asked said commenter no less than four times to please elaborate, please explain, I’m trying to understand you, but, no, she wouldn’t ultimately do it. I read and re-read what I said to her and asked myself if I was rude to her. I could have reworded things — I know I could have — but that’s the same ol’ saw for me, something I always beat myself up about. I guess I’m frustrated because, while on the surface of her initial comment there was kind of sympathy, sort of compassion, it seemed like it was mostly extended to those poor cows — actual cows — who can’t have babies.

I myself do not have compassion for childless cows. My compassion on this issue is reserved for humans only, creatures who can feel and understand loss. But maybe that’s just me. I’m heartless that way.

Interlaced into her comment, though, was a kind of creeping prejudice towards the childless-by-choice contingent. Not as blatant, perhaps, as Dennis Rainey’s, but nascent, cut from the same cloth, and it was that which I felt I should question.

I’m not trying to throw this particular commenter under the bus; it’s just the most recent example of commenters who don’t check their tone or who say careless things they’re ultimately not willing to apologize for or defend, as the case may be. I realize it’s hard. It’s hard always to know how we come across because it’s nearly impossible to be objective about ourselves. But perhaps a good clue is if you’re told repeatedly that your comments come across as negative or snarky or gloomy — or whatever — you might want to edit yourself, double-check a comment before you click submit. And if you’re asked, by more than one person, to clarify what you said, perhaps you weren’t clear to begin with or perhaps there’s an idea you left unfinished, something more to explore.

But don’t go running off. I realize it’s the Internet and nothing is easier than running off in a huff or tail between your legs, but that’s unfortunate. To be completely honest, I don’t respect that because behind all the words and comments you see on a blog are REAL flesh-and-blood people. People who, yes, do get hurt and frustrated by words on the screen. People who are left hanging if someone hurls accusations and then disappears. Life is hard enough, isn’t it, without recreating high school in the Internet? Let’s be the adults that we are. Answer questions. Be courteous. Follow through. Engage in civil debate/discussion.

A personal rule of thumb I try to follow: If I wouldn’t say it to a person’s face, I don’t say it on the Internet. It’s a simple rule, but, still, the invisibility and anonymity of the Internet make baser interpersonal instincts so much easier to indulge. We have to fight it and I include myself in that. Obviously.

On another note: If you ever feel offended by something in the comments, something someone else says, honestly, I feel it’s their responsibility to manage that. Fortunately, that very rarely happens. Nonetheless, I don’t take ownership of comments I didn’t make. I have enough problems with my own mouth to worry about monitoring others, so please don’t expect me to apologize for that which I did not say. If comments ever get too ugly — that hasn’t happened so far, to the best of my knowledge — I’ll step in or shut them down or something, but we’re all adults here so I leave self-discipline to the individual selves who participate in this blog.

Life’s hard. Even harder right now for so many.

So let’s be kind. Practice it ourselves and encourage and applaud it when we see it in others.

Luckily, I’ve just fallen off my soapbox. Ahem.

the strikes against: strike five

I’ve gotten off the track here, what with taking care of The Banshees and a visit from Piper.

But here’s another strike from our Trip to the Resort Up North. I think I can manage to keep with my “no-commentary” policy on this one. Even though I’ve previously blown it, I will try to be strong here.

(The first four are here, here, here, and here.)

So we asked Resort Dude what would our hours be, what the work day would look like, what our days off would be, blahdie blahdie blah — the basics, you know?

He said, “Oh. Uhm. Well. It’s certainly not a traditional work week.”

We said, “Meaning?”

“Well. Okay. Uhm. Well, it’s basically seven days a week.”

“Oh.”

“Weekends are very busy.”

“Oh.”

“But the beginning of the week is slow.”

“Oh.

“So you get a little bit of time to breathe.”

“Oh,” we said. “And are there set hours?”

“Uhm. Well. It’s like maybe 10 or 12 hours a day.”

“Oh.”

“Sometimes more.”

“Oh.”

“But in the winter, it’s really slow. You’d have, like, a month off.”

“Oh.”

new favorite

I can’t remember now how I stumbled upon Advanced Style, but, I’m telling you, pippa: I am so glad I did and you simply must check it out. It’s a blog devoted to the sartorial splendor of the senior citizen. (How’s that for alliteration?? Yamahama. I scare myself.) It’s not poking fun at the elderly. It’s a blog that genuinely celebrates stylish and chic old folks.

For example, this gentleman, who makes me swoon:

p1220424-1.JPG

I love old people, honestly, I do, so this site is a new favorite of mine. I want to go to lunch with every single man and woman on that blog. I want to listen to all their stories because they all look like they must surely have them. Basically, I want to be best friends with every last one of them. The photos are fabulous. The way some of them preen and pose for the camera is priceless.

I am in LOVE with this blog. The elderly aren’t marginalized — they’re celebrated!

LOVE it.

where i answer googlers’ questions

People Google extremely random topics that end up bringing them here. Sometimes, they ask Google questions and their questions bring them here. When that happens, I feel an obligation to answer, to try to help as best I can. You know, to give the appearance of being a caring compassionate person and whatnot.

So here are a few from this past week:

~ Did Michael Jackson belong to a witch cult?

Googler, wasn’t there enough that was weird and sad and unsettling about Michael Jackson without wondering about this? But okay. Uhm, yes. Yes, Googler, he did. And he’ll get you, my pretty, and your little dog, too. What a world, what a world, etc.

And scene.

~ My frog is pale — is that okay?

Well, Peaches, I see you found my live blog of “Frogs.” If that didn’t answer your question, there literally IS no answer to this question. Although, may I ask: Was your frog recently put in boiling water?

~ Where is the nearest commune?

This one touches me. This Googler clearly wants to get the H outta Dodge and I find it all rather endearing. I so relate to that. Someone please tell me WHERE can I go to get away from THIS. And, to answer you, Googler, well, the nearest commune is right here, on this blog. Here, as a matter of fact. All are welcome. (Well, unless/until I decide you’re not. It’s one of them-there tyrannical communes. Don’t be scared, Googler. Your life of toil and misery and indentured servitude to moi will last only until I tire of you, and the good thing here is I’m very fickle.)

There. Answers to seekers’ questions. Hope that helps.

I know that I, for one, feel all aglow with compassion and self-satisfaction.

response to “big on children”

A lovely reader of this blog sent me an email telling me she’d sent a note to Dennis Rainey based on the radio spot discussed here. She included the note she’d sent him and I’ve asked and received her permission to post it on the blog anonymously.

Two things strike me about it: First, it’s the measured, reasonable, gracious response I would have had if I were a — well, you know — measured, reasonable, gracious person. Basically, after reading it, I thought to myself, “Wow. Hm. I wish I’d written THAT instead.”

Second, that this lovely reader — a woman with many children herself — actually took the time to write this on behalf of childless couples everywhere. I teared up, I was so touched by that. So, to her, again, I say thank you — and thank you for letting me post this.

Here’s her letter:

Mr. Rainey,

Some topics are too wide, too deep, too important to be used
in a 90 second radio spot. This was one of them. Since when has it been right for anyone to comment on the number of children, the lack of children, the spacing of children, etc. in casual social environments? Sometimes, it is right to speak of such things…with close friends or when seeking counsel regarding a decision. Bringing it up to an anonymous radio with the obvious attempt to CONVICT people of some sin in their attitudes/thoughts/actions regarding children was inappropriate. I feel strongly about this, even though I am one who has been given a very full quiver. My convictions before God do not give me the right to try and convict everyone to believe the same way. Even in salvation, I can only share my beliefs and ask God to convict. Why can’t we extend the same grace of letting God do the convicting in areas of Christian liberty while we love and cherish, rejoice with, cry with, uphold each other in prayer? In short, the church needs to practice the “one anothers” and let the Holy Spirit do the convicting of actual SIN. God is more “big” on whether or not we are conformed to the image of His son, in whatever our circumstances, than than He is “big” on kids. I think you owe your listening audience an apology.

Yes. I still think that too.

A great letter. I’m just so touched.

this face

piperpat.jpg

Is coming for a weekend visit in one hour. (The face in the front that is; the one in the back is here on a permanent basis.)

And okay. She has all her front teeth now. Which kind of bums me out.

Still, Piper will be smushed to death all weekend.

And I cannot WAIT.

“big on children”

The following is a transcript of a spot I heard on the radio the other day, not a Christian radio station, but, yes, a more conservative radio station that has basically one talk show that I can tolerate, that isn’t too shrill or positional or self-righteous.

This was during the commercial break, a moment called “Family Life Today” or something, hosted by self-satisfied Christian author, Dennis Rainey. Hm. How to describe him? I mean, beyond “self-satisfied”? Okay. Well, if you know who James Dobson is, this guy is a James Dobson Lite or James Dobson wannabe. I’m not a fan, although I probably have a Bible study or book of his lying around the house simply because someone else gave it to me.

Still, I listened to this spot and could not believe what I was hearing. I was so enraged by the whole thing, I sent Mr. Rainey an email, which I’ve included at the bottom here. Yes, I dashed it off impulsively and probably should have calmed down some before I sent it, but, well, I just didn’t. Honestly, I think the man needs to be taken to task for this. Just not okay, in my opinion. And I really don’t care who you are in the “Christian community” or how impressed I’m supposed to be by your credentials, gracelessness is gracelessness.

Here’s the transcript — my email follows:

Dennis Rainey: You know, we hear a lot of negative things about children today. But are they really so bad?

Guest: When my wife and I first married, we had decided we wanted one child. That was it. No more. And as we pressed into God and came alive to Him, we realized He wanted more children for us, and that was a HUGE step of faith for us…to move forward on having more children. And we did, and it’s been great!

Dennis Rainey: A few years back, the Dallas Morning News ran an essay contest on “Why You Have Chosen To Have Kids.” It ran a separate contest for those who had chosen not to have kids. The winning couple, with five children, was awarded a night out at one of Dallas’s finest restaurants. They even gave them a babysitter. I’m sure they had one of the best evenings of their lives.

Then there was the couple who had chosen not to have kids. The Dallas Morning News had a picture of them …with their cats! They felt like cats were easier to raise than children. Know what their prize was? It was an evening out … at a family restaurant! Talk about justice!

One final thought. Did you know that God is all about children? He loves children. In fact, the question is, how many children does He want you to have?

I’m Dennis Rainey and I’m big on children, too.

*********

Mr. Rainey,

I heard this on the radio today and had to come look at the transcript because I simply could not believe my ears. My husband and I do not have children — no, we’ve suffered through years of infertility instead — and have encountered almost nothing but this kind of prejudice from within the church.

The Church.

Christ’s hands on earth.

The same hands that have ostracized and judged us, just as you have judged couples who have chosen not to have kids. Yes, there are couples childless by choice and couples childless not by choice and those circumstances are certainly different, but the love and acceptance extended from the church to both kinds of couples should be no different. Who are we to know why, precisely, a couple has chosen not to have children? Who are we to judge that particular choice? It’s not immoral. It’s not “wrong.” It’s not a sin.

But this, this takes the cake:

/Know what their prize was? It was an evening out … at a family restaurant! Talk about justice!/

Justice? What does justice have to do with it, Mr. Rainey? Have these couples committed some wrong that needs to be redressed? Tell me, what crime are they guilty of? Isn’t “justice” something set aside for wrongdoers? I am gobsmacked at the judgment in this one short spot — and in the obvious relish taken in rendering it.

/Did you know that God is all about children?/

Really? That’s interesting. The God I know is all about grace. If he’s “all about children,” does that mean I can kiss heaven goodbye?

/The question is, how many children does He want you to have?/

No, Mr. Rainey. Based on this spot, I think the question is: How many childless couples’ hearts do you want to break and judge in one 90-second spot?

Oh, God. Save us from your people.

Mr. Rainey, this is one of the most profound moments of “ungrace” I have ever encountered in the body of Christ, and, believe me, as a childless Christian woman, I have encountered plenty.

You brought me to tears. And not in a good way.