I don't know exactly what it was that first sent up the red flag about a married couple that wanted to befriend us. Was it the inappropriate comments that were clearly bigoted? Was it the annoying screeching voice? Was it the desperate need to get together? Was it the expectation of a favor from a mutual acquaintance without the desire to reciprocate?
Or was is the blatant attitude of wanting to get waaaaay toooo cloose?
Friends, I am not a best friends kind of person. I can stand to be alone. I've had to be alone. I and myself have had some of the best conversations I have ever been a party to.
So when I am confronted with a person or persons who are clingy, I instinctively pull back. You see, I know who I am. Took me awhile to get here but I am here to stay.
So when a childish, immature person or persons wish for my undivided attention to the point that I can't make or speak of plans with other friends without the possibility of hurting said person's feelings, I get ticked off. You want to make plans with your friends in front of me, I could give a damn. It doesn't concern me, I can do something else either with my husband or by myself. I can entertain myself for hours, I've had years of practice doing it (comes from being an only child.)
So now I feel stifled and I am no good at being stifled. I don't like the prospect of looking at someone's pitiful, pouting face because I choose not to invite them along. Here's a clue, just because two people like to do the same thing, doesn't mean they have to do it together!
And it's infuriating because said person or persons want to be included not because they like what I am interested in - on more than one occasion I got very blatant comments to the contrary - but because they are soooo lonely. Well, loneliness is a part of life and a large indicator of how alone you will be has to do with your personality in a group. To put it frankly, if someone acts childish and immature then adults (unless they also are childish and immature) will not want to be your friends. It is not age appropriate to pout and throw a tantrum when you don't get your way.
But, the people I am speaking of are dense as bricks. So reasoning doesn't work, all the more irritating. So I say this to my mother, MOM I have been nice. Please don't be ashamed of me for the ugliness I am about to unleash. Look the other way, dear God, look the other way.
I hate it when I have to unleash the inner bitch, but here it goes.
YOU STUPID SOBs. LET ME MAKE THIS CRYSTAL CLEAR. I AM NOT YOUR PAL, YOUR FRIEND, YOUR CONFIDANTE, OR ANYTHING ELSE. I WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU. YOUR COMMMENTS ON "ORGY AT GINA AND JOE'S HOUSE" FOLLOWED BY "THE ONLY REASON MY HUSBAND WANTS TO GO TO LAS VEGAS IS THAT PROSTITUTION IS LEGAL" ALONG WITH MENTIONS OF YOUR HUSBAND'S NUDITY ARE INAPPROPRIATE AND CREEPY. FUCK YOU AND YOUR "EVERYBODY THINKS IT" ATTITUDE. I DON'T WANT TO FUCK YOUR HUSBAND AND MY HUSBAND WOULDN'T FUCK YOU WITH A KOALA'S DICK. IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT, GO TO A SWINGER'S SITE. I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, JUST DON'T TRY TO INCLUDE US IN IT. I THOUGHT I COULD HAVE AN ADULT CONVERSATION WITH YOU, I NOW SEE THAT IS POINTLESS. WHEN YOU WANT TO DRAG OTHER PEOPLE IN TO MAKE US BE YOUR FRIENDS, IT'S TIME TO LEAVE. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. IF WE ARE YOUR ONLY FRIENDS, THEN I GUESS YOU HAVE NONE.
John Geoghan was a defrocked priest and pedophile who was murdered in prison a couple of years ago. The bastard over three decades molested countless young boys in his parish. Because so many, due to shame, waited to report the problems, Geoghan avoided being charged. He preyed on those families that were devout, trusting, and recently had some kind of tragedy. When the mothers found out about his bedtime pats and ice cream fondlings, they did what most devout Catholics did, they turned to the higher authority of the church to punish this man.
Did the church defrock this man and turn him over to authority when they first heard of this tragedy? No. They removed him from his parish, sent him to be psychologically evaluated, obtained an all clear from a psychiatrist, then place him in another parish where little boys frequently attended mass.
This is not an indictment of pedophiles. My readers, I know, have their stomachs turned as much as mine at the thought of what this man has done to these little boys. Additionally, think of how many pedophiles he may have created and how many lives he has ruined. As we know, this kind of abuse only breeds more of the same.
No, this is an indictment of organized religion and the blind faith that the members are expected to engage in no matter what the cost. First, it is not just the Catholic Church where problems of abuse exist. In every organized religion, someone, somewhere is being abused by an authority of the church. Be it priests, pastors, nuns, laymen, deacons, brothers, or sisters, someone is using their authority to make others suffer. And usually it is the least among them that bear the brunt of the abuse, the children.
Secondly, under the protection of Freedom of Religion, churches, temples, etc. refuse to turn over anyone accused within the church of illegal acts. The stand is that the church will take care of it. In reality, the person accused gets a slap on the wrist and is allowed to go back into the flock and resume his or her activities.
I understand that the church wants to have faith in their leaders. So the authorities turn a blind eye to hideous crimes perpetrated by the criminal and even say things to the trusting victims like, he raises a lot of money for the church, he’s really popular, or he studied really hard to become a church leaders. In other words, as a member, you are supposed to have blind faith.
Well, I have news for the churches that allow this kind of abuse to continue. You are abusing your members by insisting on their loyalty and silence. You owe your members a safe place to come and worship. It behooves you to, when an accusation is made, not only to investigate it but to turn the guilty party over to the police when you find proof of his guilt. Relocating him only gives him a new unsuspecting flock to abuse. People have a right to know, parents have a right to know. As their church it is your duty not only to advise them of the situation but also to properly protect them. Instead of threatening them excommunication for political beliefs, try providing them with a church to be proud of. Instead of losing members, you may gain respect. Then maybe the media will show you in a better life since PR seems the only thing you worry about.
Something has become increasingly more apparent, at least to my attention. There seems to be a lack of decorum for what are traditionally considered life-changing events. Weddings, graduations, and even funerals were once occasions demanding appropriate attire and proper manners. Now, it seems, they’ve been turned into hoedowns.
Now, before one of my loyal readers decides to read me the riot act about people being poor and not able to afford the right clothes, let me tell you about my grandparents. Both lived through the Great Depression, that dark time in American history where one out of every three men was out of work (a big deal since the men were the breadwinners of the family.) My grandmother and grandfather were both in their teens when soup lines, low stocks, and great dust storms dominated the U.S. But never, never at an important event would they have been seen in overalls, jean shorts, tank tops, or T-shirts. Each had something called their Sunday Best, what our generation refers to as court clothes. And they were living hand to mouth doing their best to help support their large families. And NEVER would they have been seen at an important occasion in their work clothes. Hell, if they had the occasion to come into town, they dressed up. It was okay to BE poor as long as you looked respectable.
Now it seems respectability has been thrown out the window even though people keep demanding their “props.” Well, I have news for you, to get proper respect one has to show a little sense and show up at life-changing events appropriately attire. Otherwise people may be led to believe you don’t give a damn about the person or people the event is centered around instead of the fact that they really don’t give a damn about themselves or what others think about them. That is, they don’t care until someone treats them differently than people that took the time to dress in a manner befitting the occasion.
I am the first to agree that judging someone’s character by what they wear is unfair. But there is an old saying, “You never get a second chance to make a first impression.” And if you don’t care what kind of impression you make on strangers you should be concerned that your impression may be important to the friends or family that the event may effect.
Take, for instance, my mother-in-law’s funeral. My brother-in-law and his family showed up in shorts and tank tops for the funeral. Might as well have walked in and said, “Fuck you all.” I mean khakis and a polo shirt would have done nicely. But no, he has to prove he was the biggest hick and bastard of the crowd. And a friend who dressed in nice, dark jeans and a sport coat was afraid HE had underdressed.
Of all the occasions demanding some somber decorum, a traditional funeral is it. To attend so horribly underdressed shows disrespect not only to the deceased but also to the mourners. Only if the deceased specifically desires everyone to dress casual should shorts be worn. So if it is your wishes, write it down. Otherwise, everyone will show up in bikinis. Well, some men might not mind.
I have got to stop watching daytime TV. Today on A&E, Inside Polygamy is being shown. Very informative and if you have any questions about both sides of the issue, I highly recommend it.
Being in a monogamist relationship, the thought of such a union is not one I consider prudent. First, what man in his right mind wants more than one mother-in-law? I’m not trying to be funny here, I’m serious. One seems like enough. Especially when you consider, in our society, mothers tend to gravitate toward their daughters as they grow older. There is a saying that a son’s a son until he takes a wife, a daughter’s a daughter her entire life. Now imagine not one but at least three mother-in-laws coming to live with their daughters when their husbands pass.
Secondly, the looks on the wives faces, while they are denying any strife or abuse in the marriage, speak a louder story. The story is that of someone who fears they have made a terrible mistake but is afraid to admit it. Perhaps they are more worried about punishment in the hereafter rather than happiness here. A lot of religions worldwide preach that happiness on this temporal plane is insignificant when compared to everlasting eternal happiness. I don’t follow that belief but I know it is not limited to any particular creed.
Third, while in reality it may not be a dude’s paradise, it can certainly seem that way to the outside world. The man is being serviced by at least three women – as mandated by Scripture whereas the Koran limits a man to four – living in the same house, he is a preacher within the church and given the right to perform his own baptisms and marriages, and his accountability is really only rewarded within the confines of his church.
Now, lets talk about the church for a few minutes. While I don’t for a minute say that all instances of polygamy are cultist, just the ones where members are expected to give up property and wages to the church for that church to dole out on a needs or position based system. Add in that the head of the church ARRANGES the marriages, taking out freedom of choice and love. These are the markings of a cult. To give up essential freedoms and means of escape are the foundation of any cult.
This is what bothers me. I advocate parents raising their children to have respect for the family’s beliefs. However, what if a sixteen-year-old girl doesn’t want to be the fifth wife of her father’s best friend? Why should she be forced into it? Because service to her father and husband is service to God? If it feels wrong, chances are it is wrong.
There are also all the women whose husbands say God told them to become polygamists. Well, what if the wife doesn’t hear the same thing? Men have abandoned their wives and families to participate in this practice. That has to be wrong on some level and I don’t mean us gentiles in the outside world. I mean within the confines of the Scriptures. I know the Bible says a woman is to be subservient to her husband. But the same Scripture says that a man is to love his wife as he loves himself. I don’t see where a man can love his wife while having sex with a second or third in the next room. One woman recounted the story of her sister who was taken as a second wife to a polygamist. The first went on the honeymoon with them and watched them have sex to diffuse her jealousy. If I watch my husband have sex with another woman, it is considered a sexual deviancy. Yet, under the guise of religious freedom, forcing the wife to watch her husband copulate with another woman regardless of her feelings is not sexual or emotional abuse. It is considered God’s will.
Again, I say if consenting adults decide to engage in this activity, it isn’t my business. But the state takes kids away from a woman or man that practices this kind of free love under the heading of being harmful to the children. So, how is it less harmful if it is found within the confines of religion? I would think this is psychologically more harmful as a nice layer of hellfire and brimstone has been added to skew the real issue. The real issue is simply sex and our attitudes toward it.
Puritanical nonsense has caused more harm than good in our society. What a consenting adult does with his or her body is their own business. It is when the age barrier is breached and children become involved or when non-consenting persons are forced to participate that the state should intervene. First amendment rights be damned in those cases. The person being subjugated has those rights as well. And Christian polygamy (as well as other polygamy) groups trample those rights by teaching the next generation to subjugate women and making sure to marry their daughters off young so that they cannot escape. This is cultist activity. Just because they tout out the Bible and Jesus doesn’t make them any less of a cult than Hari Krishnas or Moonies. Remember David Koresh? He believed that God was telling him to have sex with all those women and girls and to stockpile weapons.
And before dear readers, all three of you, get up in arms about religious freedoms and tolerance remember, polygamy is outlawed in the United States for a reason that largely relates to the tax codes. But still it is illegal. Maybe I’m too modern of a woman but to me polygamy constitutes spousal abuse whether dressed up in religion or not. In fact, couldn’t it also be considered religious abuse. I don’t know. Lets call up God and ask her.
I must be getting older; Ballroom dance lessons are starting to look appealing. There existed a time, somewhere in my high school and college years, that standing in the corner and banging my head was the only form of two-step I wanted to know. Gyrating on the dance floor had long since left the area of respectful expression. Not that I’m some sort of old fogie nowadays, but I am beginning to appreciate higher forms of art. Or at least people that put forth the effort. So the times do change.
I blame my recent interest in old movies as the culprit. It started with Carey Grant and Hitchcock and has worked its way around to Hepburn, Hepburn, and Bogart. I think I’m becoming a junkie. TMC and AMC (pre-commercials) became my favorite channels for a while. Now that some of the old classics have found their way onto DVD, I’m in heaven. I’ve already worn out a copy of Arsenic and Old Lace because of my devotion to Carey Grant.
Carey Grant. Has there been any finer specimen of masculinity, I ask you? Tall, dark hair, dark eyes, great smile, and exquisitely handsome, what more could a woman ask for? Well a great sense of humor and wouldn’t you know he had that too.
But, before I go off on a soppy tangent: Ballroom dancing. When I asked my husband about it, he said of course he was interested. He is such an angel. I should buy him the wings and halo to match.
It sounds fun now. Back in the day, however, it would have seemed a deplorable waste of time. I guess there is some truth in the saying as you age your tastes change.
Shakespeare said, kill all the lawyers. I’m going to go a step further and say add doctors to that sentiment.
Now before anyone starts touting the nobility of the profession and how it is only a handful of doctors and HMOs that make the whole system look bad I will remind you that the same is true of lawyers. It’s just that we have degraded into a society that would rather 10 innocent men be incarcerated rather than let a guilty one go free instead of vice versa. Additionally, political cartoonists don’t get the laughs portraying slimy doctors the way they do slimy lawyers because, face it, you don’t want to piss off an individual that might be operating on you at some point. Being sued is fine.
But that’s a different rant all together.
This concerns the ineptness of a particular doctor and how his inaction and lack of care for his work has led to my grandmother being hospitalized with a lot of pain. Apparently the doctor in question not only failed to do his job properly with my grandmother, he had lost enough interest in his work to have his distracted mind affect OTHER PATIENTS. Since he had been a doctor for so long, the group he was attached to let him retire rather than fire him. This means that they not only back what he has done by refusing to discipline him more harshly but they undermine their patients feelings by allowing him to retire as if nothing happened.
Suing him will do very little good if any since he has retired. The best one could hope for was the publicity would ruin him and, as his only concerns now are his golf swing and fishing cast, it would be a moot point to take to the civil courts. Forget criminal charges. He did his job, just not well. Neglect is hard enough to prove without experts getting on the stand and debating just how far up a woman’s vagina a proper sample should be taken. The police have more important things to do.
So I am left only this blog and my meager number of readers to bitch to. I can handle that, eventually, my grandparents, husband, and parents are going to die. I came to terms with that when I was 19 and lost my maternal grandmother and best friend in the world. Why I cannot abide is losing a loved one due to the neglect of others. This was preventable so the outcome is unforgivable. The damn doctor should be prosecuted and his punishment should be based on the number of patients affected by his inaction. He has broken his oath to DO NO HARM or, rather, DO NO FURTHER HARM. Shouldn’t something be done besides giving him a chance to run away from his responsibility?
Please keep my grandma in your thoughts. Thank you.