So you might as well sit back and enjoy the ride.
1/4/2010, 11:46:02 PM
6/9/2010, 5:22:39 PM
3/26/2010, 5:05:42 PM
6/25/2010, 7:55:03 PM
6/8/2010, 2:21:17 PM
4/6/2010, 6:24:49 PM
6/10/2010, 3:31:38 PM
6/25/2010, 6:51:11 PM
5/5/2010, 5:29:15 PM
3/18/2010, 10:33:58 PM
9/9/2010, 1:39:07 PM
6/21/2013, 11:37:59 AM
4/14/2011, 2:29:38 PM
5/2/2010, 2:13:08 PM
5/20/2011, 12:51:59 PM
10/29/2012, 2:25:01 PM
11/2/2012, 10:49:37 PM
1/11/2013, 1:06:38 PM
5/18/2010, 5:29:23 PM
4/6/2010, 1:14:54 PM
9/30/2014, 11:03:42 AM
9/14/2009, 5:30:44 AM
11/19/2015, 10:53:43 PM
1/27/2015, 3:26:54 PM
7/5/2014, 8:48:28 PM
7/17/2011, 6:13:15 PM
7/17/2011, 6:10:32 PM
7/17/2011, 6:11:26 PM
4/26/2010, 12:55:52 PM
7/17/2011, 6:13:44 PM
As humans assert their domination over the planet, destruction inevitably follows
Typically, when we talk about human violence, we’re talking about our tendency to want to destroy each other. Syria. Yemen. Iraq. Afghanistan. North Korea. Chicago. Our propensity toward killing each other is nothing new, of course. We’ve been doing it for centuries. Misinterpret some religious texts and one can even attempt to justify their destruction of another people by claiming that their deity commanded them to wipe out everyone who does not worship as they do. We’re very good and very experienced when it comes to wiping each other off the face of the earth.
As we’ve become more advanced in our ways of killing each other, such as using drones so that we don’t have to actually face those on whom we drop bombs, we’ve also become better at destroying every non-human entity as well. Species and ecosystems that have existed for thousands of years have become targets of destruction to such a degree that many have already gone extinct with hundreds more in danger. We justify our destruction of the planet with various excuses, saying we need the energy from natural resources or the food from various species. Yet, our wanton decimation of these ecosystems could leave us with nothing but a barren wasteland of a planet that is no longer capable of sustaining our own lives, much less any other.
A new report from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) makes clear just how horribly destructive we’ve been and how threatening the dangers are. By killing everything around us, we’re dooming ourselves to destruction.
We typically associate the WWF with its broad efforts to protect animal life across the planet. They certainly do the best they can, but their efforts are no match for the determined march of corporate interests. As a result, we’re losing animal life at an unprecedented rate. The statement that’s been making headlines is this one:
Populations of vertebrate animals—such as mammals, birds, and fish—have declined by 58% between 1970 and 2012. And we’re seeing the largest drop in freshwater species: on average, there’s been a whopping 81% decline in that time period.
Stop and think about those numbers a minute. We have less than half the animals we did in 1970. It took us less than fifty years to rip through the entire animal population of the planet, completely devastating whole species who have survived natural changes in environment for hundreds of thousands of years. Many of the species we’ve eliminated existed prior to the evolution of homo sapiens and even through the first several thousand years of our existence. Yet, in less time than it takes for a single human generation to pass through history, we have destroyed all of them.
Most damning is what we’ve done to freshwater species. 81 percent of freshwater species are gone! Do you realize how fucking close to complete extermination of freshwater life we’ve come in a simple 42 years? And for what? So we can build our hydro-electric dams, strip mine coal, and place water-contaminating oil pipelines in places they’ve no right to be in the first place. Understand, prior to 1970 we still had the same power needs, but we somehow managed to not kill off EIGHTY-ONE FUCKING PERCENT of freshwater species. Hope you’re enjoying that fresh trout and other fish because they could all be completely gone within the next twenty years if we continue at our current rate.
Obviously, we didn’t commit such broad destruction across the planet by going through and killing every animal one by one. While poaching and illegal fishing are certainly part of the problem, there are many other factors that have contributed to this dramatic decline in animal species. I’ll let the folks at WWF explain:
Habitat Loss and DegradationHabitat loss and degradation is the most common threat to animals on the decline. Everything from unsustainable agriculture to residential or commercial development to energy production can damage vital areas for wildlife. WWF helps countries take stock of their natural resources and use that information to make better decisions on how to grow.
Our current food system impacts habitats to make way for agriculture, leads to the overfishing of our oceans, and contributes to pollution. WWF is pursuing new ways to provide nutritious food for all while minimizing the negative impact on the natural world. Watch the video.
As our climate changes, various animals will need to adapt to survive. Changes in temperature can mix up signals that trigger events like migration and reproduction, causing them to happen at the wrong time. The global community is taking major strides to curb climate change in the coming years.
Animals face the dangers of overexploitation, too. Sometimes that’s direct, like through poaching and unsustainable hunting and harvesting, and sometimes that’s indirect, like through unintentionally catching one type of sea creature while attempting to catch another. WWF works to stop wildlife crime and prevent illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing.
How long do you plan on living? If you’re under the age of forty, chances are very high you’ll live well into your 80s, and quite possibly another decade beyond that. Think of all it is gong to take to support your life over that period of time. Think of the amount of food you’ll need to consume. What is going to be the source of that food? Think about the clothes you’ll need to wear. What is going to be the source of the materials necessary to make those clothes? Think about all the energy you’ll need to consume to power a life that is increasingly dependent upon electronic devices. How are we going to source all that power?
To the extent that we continue to destroy everything and everyone with whom we come into contact, we are numbering our own days. We cannot continue to live on a planet that has been scorched by our carelessness. Realize, we have already KILLED OVER HALF OF ALL SPECIES that existed in 1970. If we continue at that rate, we might have 40 years before everything is gone. Where does that leave us?
This is why your down-ballot votes matter. Your vote for Congressperson matters as that is where funding and policy decisions are made to help stop the destruction. Your vote for state legislature matters as state policies are frequently to blame for the continued destruction for fresh waterways. Your vote for city offices matter as local policies contribute heavily to the contamination of groundwater and the destruction of local resources. These are all things that the President can’t control. While your vote for that office is important, without your vote for all the other down-ballot offices the vote for President becomes practically meaningless.
For all the talk about colonizing Mars, the fact remains that, for at least the next 75 years, we are limited to one planet; a planet we are actively bent upon destroying. Perhaps it’s time we started paying more attention to the earth around us. If we don’t, we will die; it’s just that simple.
Halloween has long been a time for adults to indulge their fantasies
I was a little surprised when I went to check what day the city would allow trick-or-treating. With Halloween falling on a Monday this year, I wouldn’t have been surprised had Saturday, or even Friday been chosen for the annual costumed candy grab. Doing the neighborhood walk thing on a Monday night isn’t really all that bad, I suppose. Sure, it keeps kids up a little past their bedtimes on a school night, but I recall doing the exact same thing when we were kids. The difference is that my brother and I were never rushed through the ritual so that our parents could get to their own party. For many kids today, Mom and Dad can’t wait to get the little ones to bed so the adults can do some partying of their own.
Halloween as an adult party time isn’t new. Since the mid-80s, it has often seemed as though October 31 is more of an adult holiday than it is for kids. Night clubs go all out with special events and costume shops have more “sexy” ideas for adults than they do cartoon characters for kids. The costumed rituals around viewings of Rocky Horror Picture Show got things started. Then, the movie Eyes Wide Shut with Tom Cruise and Nichole Kidman ignited the concept of secret erotic costume parties and adults everywhere took the idea and ran with it.
We like the idea of having one time a year where we can indulge our more erotic fantasies without necessarily revealing our identities. What better time to explore?
One of the reasons Halloween has continued to be a popular adult party is because women have increasingly taken the lead in exploring their more erotic fantasies. Let’s face it, of all the “sexy” costumes out there, most are for women. This isn’t just because women have embraced the concept, but also the fact that, sadly, too many guys think that showing off their junk is sexy. Sorry guys, it’s not and it never will be. Since too many men are clueless when it comes to erotic fantasies, women have dominated the topic and take charge of directing the conversation.
Since women’s sexuality is their focus, the folks over at lelo.com asked women to rank their sexual fantasies. Here’s where the poll current stands as I’m writing:
A couple of things about that list are worth notice. First, it is a live poll so rankings change based on the people participating. Second, there’s nothing that prohibits men from voting as well, so the rankings could be skewed in a few places. This isn’t a scientific poll so the level of trustworthiness isn’t all that high.
Still, what the poll does show us is that women’s fantasies are changing and that they are definitely something they want to explore. The best-selling book 50 Shades of Grey is likely at least partially responsible for Submission and Bondage ranking so high on the poll at the moment, but these have always been a portion of the content of women’s fantasies. Why do you think the book sold so well in the first place? Fantasies, not the presence of great literature, propelled the book to the top of sales charts. Women have some imaginative fantasies and enjoy being in charge of fulfilling them.
If we’re so big on exploring our fantasies, though, why do we wait until Halloween to do anything about them? Blame a very judgmental and sexist society. While almost everyone enjoys letting their freaky side out every once in a while, we’re fearful of being “outed” for our sexual proclivities. Women get the worst of it. Slut-shaming has long been a problem in our society; one that starts even in elementary school and gets worse from there. Anyone who publicly displays any level of sexual indulgence is ridiculed, mocked, and socially derided. Not exactly a good atmosphere for trying something new and possibly kinky.
The costumed craziness of Halloween gives us a chance to play around a bit without all the risks. If everyone is being a little freaky then one person’s indulgences aren’t as likely to stand out as much. Clever costumes can even allow one a level of denial if ever charged with behavior not typically acceptable in a public setting. The erotic charge of the holiday has become common enough that any out-of-the-ordinary behavior is easily excused. “We were just goofing off, playing around,” are words often heard on November 1.
The thing about fantasies is that we’re not always sure we’ll really like them if we try them. Halloween gives us a chance to explore without being fully committed. Yet, what happens at Halloween can develop into a lot more than just “playing around.” Indulging in our fantasies can be freeing not only on a sexual level, but in our relationships as well. What starts hidden behind a mask can ultimately help us define who we are. We have the potential to find new strengths and hidden pleasures we didn’t know existed.
Not every fantasy is one that a person just jumps into by donning a costume. Just as there are things we do to protect our children while they’re out trick-or-treating, there are precautions adults should take before jumping head-first into a fantasy they’ve never tried. A little reading and a lot of communication with your partner(s) is generally a safe place to start.
Again, the folks at Lelo have some good suggestions for those just starting out.
With a little planning, Halloween can be a wonderfully expressive opportunity for you to explore and try new things. We all need an opportunity to indulge our more erotic thoughts. Decide on what you want to try, choose a creatively erotic costume, and have fun! The best treats are the ones that leave a smile on your face the next morning. Enjoy!
As the face of information gathering changes, we wonder if there is any news source left that we can trust
Well, fuck.
That just describes my morning, which started at 4:00 AM. Rain started falling while I was walking the dog. I accidentally punted a cat in the dark when we returned. I forgot to block the hallway and the damp dog decided to get in bed with Kat. I spilled my coffee. Then, immediately after clicking the link to a story that sounded interesting, a box pops up telling me this is the last of my free articles for the month. I’ve had better mornings.
The last item, the one about using my last free click for the month is happening more often. As an increasing number of newspapers have had to turn to paywalls to pay the bills, the number of reliable news sources accessible at any given time begins to shrink. A prime example is Business of Fashion, a UK-based fashion magazine that exists primarily online. Having been free since their inception, I’ve come to rely on its up-to-date information of everything going on in the fashion industry. Their news is not only timely but largely reliable. Starting this week, however, they’ve put everything behind a rather expensive paywall. Sure, it comes out to less than the price of a cup of coffee per day if I pay for the whole year in advance, but that would be quite a dent in our cash flow. So, I’ll have to deal with the five articles a month to which I am now limited.
Am I just cheap or is there a problem here?
I’ve always had an addiction of sorts to news. At one point, back when print was the only option, I subscribed to three different daily papers, four weekly magazines, and six monthlies. Our recycling bin was always overflowing and there was never any shortage of newsprint for craft projects. Mind you, at that particular point in time, I wasn’t writing a damn thing. All I did was take pictures all day. No one was interested in my opinion and I was much more careful about when and where I expressed such.
A lot has changed over the past 30 years, though. Print subscription rates have gone up, dramatically in some cases. Every major news and information source, from the New York Times to National Public Radio to your local television station has an online presence and, in most cases, when they first came online they were free. The number of news and information sources became so numerous that they gave rise to aggregators such as Huffington Post. The upside of aggregators is that they assembled all the really important stuff from a myriad of different sources. The downside was that they did so with a very marked and obvious political bias. Next came social media, which aggregated the aggregators, and as the volume of viewers grew into the millions the number of sources with blatant political motivations grew as well.
Now, we are faced with two problems. First, the original model of relying on display ads to pay the bills hasn’t worked. Over the past three years, the number of newspapers putting the majority of their content behind a paywall has tripled. They’ve had no choice. They still need to pay the bills. At the same time, however, the reliability of all news/information sources combined has declined, dramatically.
Once upon a time, there was a reliable source of global information that was available to everyone: the public library. Any time I came across a reference to a source to which I wasn’t already subscribed, I could make my way to the library’s periodical section and most usually find the source I needed. Libraries are still there, of course, but as demand for space and revenue has shifted, resources have been removed from periodical subscriptions in favor of Internet needs. Walk into the beautiful downtown branch of the Indianapolis Public Library and the periodicals section is not only significantly smaller, it’s also hidden, relegated to a corner of the second floor.
While the shift away from print subscriptions seems to make sense on the surface, it hasn’t resulted in more online subscriptions. While libraries have invested thousands of dollars in computers with Internet access, those services don’t necessarily include online periodical subscriptions. Why? The majority of public computer use is not for reading periodicals. Job searches and educational programming dominate, right after checking one’s Facebook status. So, if the library doesn’t subscribe to the print edition of a periodical, access is still just as limited as it would be if one had just stayed home.
At the same time, as biased and unreliable sources of information increases, many sources we’ve long considered reliable are either downsizing or going away altogether. Titles that were once mainstays, such as Newsweek and US News And World Report are barely recognizable in their online forms. Reliable, honest information is quickly going the way of the Dodo bird.
An informed electorate is necessary for a democracy to work. The entire system dissolves when the people doing the voting are no longer getting reliable, trustworthy information from which they can make intelligent decisions.
Look at us. Look at this election cycle. Consider the absolute nonsense one hears being spouted at political rallies. This is not an informed electorate. In fact, I would be willing to go out on a limb and guess that, at the very least, 70 percent of those who are voting in the upcoming election are making their decision based in part on incorrect and unfounded information. Whether it has come from Fox News or CNN or MSNBC is irrelevant. None of them are reliable. None of them can be trusted. Yet, those are the sources from which an overwhelming number of Americans get their news.
We need new sources of news. We need to know that the articles we’re reading have been vetted, that sources have been confirmed, and that the people and organizations doing the reporting are being held responsible for what they report. Americans, and citizens around the world, need to once again be able to trust the news and information they receive.
At the same time, I am of the opinion that there needs to be a greater distinction between actual news, that information that directly impacts our lives, and more casual forms of information. I may go to the newspaper for the box score of last night’s Cubs/Indians game, but if I want to know the ridiculous pre-game superstitions of the starting lineup I should have to find a different source. Our propensity for finding everything in one place is severely diminishing the value of everything we consume and news is at the very top of that list.
A new research report from the Pew Research Center states that “More than one-third of social media users are worn out by the amount of political content they encounter.” I have to wonder if any part of that fatigue comes from the fact that, not only has this election cycle gone on far too long, we know all too well that the information being distributed through social media is either horribly slanted or an outright lie. We’re exhausted from trying to parse out what is true (very little) with what isn’t (far too much).
Something in my gut tells me that if the good folks at the Pew Center were to ask, they’d find that a large number of people are equally exhausted with all the social media content they encounter, with the possible exception of kitten videos. In an effort to make themselves more attractive to the masses, news sources have too often become little more than slightly modified versions of what People magazine once was, while sources such as People have become more like The National Enquirer. When we sit down to read what we presume to be a legitimate news article, we shouldn’t have to wonder whether the content and its sources are legitimate!
I understand the need for publications to resort to paywalls. The ad model just doesn’t work for them in an online environment. However, the more distance we put between the American populace and legitimate news sources, the few that remain, the more our democracy continues to erode. Uninformed people make stupid decisions in the voting booth. As bad as this election cycle has been, it can, and will, get worse. We need news sources that are reliable, honest, and accessible. Short of that, there is no hope for democracy to return to our country.
Photography education is just like everything else: you get what you pay for
Hey ya’ll! My name is Mortimier Chunkendunck but ya’ll can call me Mort. I’m a good friend, well, actually more of a distant acquaintance, of ol’ Chuck Letbetter and he’s done gone and given me permission to teach ya’ll a little bit about photography. I’ve known ol’ Chuck since he was still wet behind the ears. I’ll tell ya’, that boy couldn’t tell the difference between a lens cap and a shutter button when he first started. That’s a story for a different time with lots of alcohol, though. He’s only giving me one page to do all this learnin’ for ya’ll here.
You see, how this all got started was that an ad from something called Shutter magazine. Not Shutterbug, mind you, which is something totally different about a lot of the same stuff. This here Shutter magazine has been promoting these ads on your Facebook sayin’ they’ll give ya’ a free photography lesson, or somethin’ like that. There’s a pretty picture on the ad and I’m guessing that’s what gets most people’s attention. Click on that there ad, though, and you find out there ain’t nothing much free. You get this page here that says ya’ gotta subscribe to that there magazine to get anything. And ya’ gotta get what they be callin’ an “Elite+” membership to be gettin’ any lessons about anything. Now, I don’t know what neck of the woods you grew up in, but ’round here that’s not what we call free.
So, ol’ Chuck calls me up—well,actually, I been houndin’ him a fair deal on Facebook to let me write somethin’ for him—but anyway, he says to me, he says, “Why don’t you go write a one-page photography course since you already know everythin’ ’bout everythin’?” An’ I says back at him, “Why, I’d be right honored to do that fer ya’>” So strap in an try to pay attention ‘cuz this here is some high-level information I be givin’ ya’ll here.
If you can’t find the camera in this picture, you probably shouldn’t be a photographer
I know, that pretty young woman in that picture is a bit distractin’ for some of ya’ll. Let me just tell ya’ right now ya’ll probably ain’t got the smarts to keep up with that young lady there. Ya’ might as well just keep your mind on the topic here, which is cameras, and that’s exactly what she’s holding in her hands: a camera. You’re gonna need one of those things if ya’ll plan on being a photographer. No, dangit, your phone does not count. Takin’ a phone to a photo shoot is like showin’ up at church without a Bible, ’bout all ya’ can do is watch.
Now, I know a lot of people make a big freakin’ deal ’bout the kind of camera they be usin’. Let me tell ya’ right here and now that it don’t make one damn bit of difference one way or the other when you’re just startin’ out. Yeah, I know those really pricey ones got all the gizmos and gadgets that are fun and look good in the store, but if’n ya’ll don’t have the first clue’ bout takin’ a picture all the gizmos and gadgets on the planet ain’t gonna help ya’ none. Get yourself somethin’ simple so you can find that there ISO setting without having to turn the dang camera upside down and sideways. Ya’ don’t need 250 on-board filters if’n ya’ keep choppin’ everybody’s head off in the pictures. Like my momma told my pappy, “Keep it simple, Stupid.” She told him that ’bout a lot of things. That’s why I have 11 brothers and sisters.
Jus’ git yo’self a decent little camera there. Get one that feels good in your hands. If’n ya’ have tiny little dainty hands, like that there Republican feller that Chuck doesn’t like, then you’ll be wantin’ one of those smaller little boxes ya’ll can pick up for cheap. If’n ya’ have big ol’ farmer’s hands, though, you’re gonna be wantin’ something heavy enough ya’ don’t break it jus’ tryin’ to put the lens on the front. Try ’em out like ya’ would a good pair of work gloves. Git a feel for ’em.
Models make wonderful subjects, except when they don’t
Now, if’n ya’ gonna be a photographer, ya’ gotta decide what kinda subject you’re gonna shoot. No, De-Wayne, put down that shotgun, that ain’t the kinda shootin’ we be talkin’ ’bout. Ya’ need to decide what kinda pictures you’re gonna take. If’n ya’ take pictures of pretty people, like the young lass in this picture, then us normal folk will like yo’ work. If’n ya’ take pictures of ugly people in black and white, then all them high falutin’ artsy dodgers gonna like yo’ work. HowEVER, though, there’s only one way yo’re gonna make your grandma happy and that’s if’n ya take pictures of old barns and that ol’ oak tree back there by the crik when it turns all them colors and the Grand Canyon and stuff. Ya’ probably don’t want to go makin’ Grandma mad now, I hear she’s been updatin’ her will just in case the good Lord takes her away. Jus’ between you and me, I wish he’d get on with it ‘cuz Grandma’s done past her expiration date an’ is startin’ to smell a bit, if’n ya’ know what I mean. But don’t be tellin’ her I said that.
ANYway, takin’ picture of blank walls isn’t gonna get ya’ very far. Ya’ gotta have a subject and ya’ kinda want to keep takin’ pictures of the same kinda subject so that folks’ll know what to be expectin’ from ya’. Ya’ don’t need no tree photographer takin’ pictures at Darla Mae’s weddin’ next month, for example. That boy she’s gittin’ hitched to is dumb as a bag of rocks an’ twice as ugly. She’s gonna need one very talented photographer to make those pictures come out decent ‘nuf to hang on a wall. Pick yo’self somethin’ an’ stick wit’ it.
Without light, all you have is a picture of the dark and no one finds that interesting
Eyes down here, folks. I don’t know why ya’ll keep gettin’ so distracted by the pictures. Ya’ll know dang good and well yo’momma would tan’ yo’ hide if’n she caught you takin’ pictures like that. Ol’ Chuck’s diff’rent. He’s too old for it to matter. The rest of ya’ll, tho’, be needin’ to keep yo’ eyes in yo’ head. Ya’ gotta learns to be proFESSional and not be distracted by boobs an’ such.
Back to the subject at hand, light is the most important part of photography. Ya’ can’t take pictures of nothin’ in the dark. That’d just be silly now, wouldn’t it. Besides, I done know half ya’ll city slickers be ‘fraid of the dark in the first place. Ya’ll wouldn’t know what to do if ya’ got a picture of the boogey man now, would ya’? So, ya’ gotta have some light turned on some place or else the picture just ain’t gonna turn out the way ya’ want. Git that through that li’l pea brain of yo’rs. Ya’ gotta turn a light on somewhere.
Now, ol’ Chuck likes whatcha call that there “natural light.” That is, he shoots where the sun be shinin’. He don’t even use no flash or nuthin’ most the time. Me, I prefer crankin’ up the generator and usin’ some big ol’ strobe lights so that everything is all lit up nice an’ pretty like Chris’mas. Either way’ll work if’n ya’ be careful. Just don’t go draggin’ no ‘lectrical cord through a mud puddle, though. That’ll give ya’ quite a shock there an’ ain’t none of yo’r kin gonna want to be yo’r assistant no mo’.
Knowing how to pose your subject makes the difference between a great shot and a stupid one
If’n yo’ takin’ pictures of peoples, then gittin’ ’em to stand the right way is the other most important part of photography. This is called posin’. No, DeWayne, it ain’t got nuthin’ to do with those folks walkin’ ’round with their britches saggin’ below their drawers. We be callin’ those folks “urBane” now, or somethin’ like that. Posin’ has to do with how yo’ subject be standin’ or sittin’ or whatever. Ya’ gotta be payin’ attention to this stuff or else the pictures be turnin’ out lookin’ like the stuff ya’ be shovlin’ out of Merle’s dairy barn.
Now, posin’ standin’ ain’t exactly like how ya’ll might be normal standin’. Ya’ gotta make it interestin’. Like, standin’ with one leg lookin’ like it done got stepped on by Pete’s bull. No, DeWayne, that does NOT mean ya’ll can go around stompin’ on people’s feet. Didn’t yo’ momma teach ya’ll no better’n that? Whatcha gotta do is go lookin’ at them there fashiony magazines an’ seein’ how them pretty ladies in them magazines be posin’. Pauline’s gotta stack of ’em down there in her hair Say-lon. She don’t mind ya’ lookin’ at ’em as long as ya’ keep the stack neat’n tidy.
Ol’ Chuck says ya’ can hire some help who done knows how to pose folk. They be called “art di-rectors” or somethin’ like that. I suppose they be walkin’ ’round with paint brushes in their pocket or somethin’. I ain’t never met one so I can’t rightly say.
Without editing, a photo is just a picture you took of something
Now, once ya’ done takin’ the pictures, ya’ gotta do this thing called editing before ya’ can show them to anyone. Take this here picture of ol’ Chuck, for instance. We both know dang good and well that there’s no way anyone’s gonna git Chuck up on no space ship. He done gone an’ used PHOTOshop to make it look like he was out in Jedi-land, where ever that is. Ya’ see, that PHOTOshop thing is mighty powerful stuff an’ ifn’ ya’ gots them computer smarts ya’ can do just ’bout anything with a picture that ya’ want.
Once upon a time, back when Chuck ‘n me were jus’ pups, folks used to have to do this editin’ stuff the hard way in what was called a dark room. It weren’t actually really dark in there, of course, we wouldn’t be able to see what we was doin’. There was a red light bulb in there and ya’ had to dip the picture in all these strange chem’cals an’ hang it up to dry like June’s laundry out there on the line. Took forever, it did.
Ya’ll be lucky now, tho, all ya’ll gots them computers an’ yo’ wifi an’ I’m tellin’ ya, there’s magic in them there boxes. Ya’ll can edit jus’ bout anything into anywhere if’n ya’ know what yo’ doin’. DeWayne, ya’ might as well go ahead and find yo’self a tudor or somethin’ to help ya’ figger it all out. Not all ya’ll the brightest bunch of bulbs in the box.
Facebook is where everything happens so you should always put all your pictures there
Once ya’ll got all them there pictures edited, then ya’ gotta post ’em all to Facebook. This is a re-QUIRE-ment ‘cuz there ain’t no way folks are ever gonna see none of those pictures if’n ya’ jus’ leave ’em sittin’ on yo’r computer there. Now, ol’ Chuck is sittin’ over here shakin’ his head for some reason. I’m not sure he’s feelin’ all that well. But trust me on this, no one is gonna know that yo’r bein’ a photographer now if’n ya’ don’t be postin’ yo’r pictures on the Facebook.
Now, I know some folks be postin’ all their stuff to this other thing called the Instagram. I sup’ose that might be okay if’n ya’ want to be lookin’ like one of them there spoiled li’l brats out in HolLYwood. I myself ain’t found much use for the thing. It keeps tryin’ to make all my pictures square and look funny. B’sides that, most people who be usin’ the Instagram be takin’ pictures of themselves, ya’ know, what they be callin’ selfies. Vanity is what it is, ya’ know, takin’ all them pictures of yo’r own face. Ain’t nobody need to see that many pictures of yo’r own face. Vanity is what it is. Heard the preacher say so jus’ the other Sunday.
This here concludes my photography lesson. I was gonna give ya’ll a test but Chuck is sayin’ we ain’t got time for that. So, I’m jus’ gonna go ‘head and DEclare ya’ll gradjuates of the Mortimier Chunkendunck Skool of Photography. Ya’ll is now o-fish-ally photographers. Good luck to ya’. Jus’ don’t be tryin’ to steal an of my customers.
We want our children to have wonderful lives, but not every child is so lucky
I came across an article this morning from Darragh MacIntyre of the BBC program, Panorama. I’m going to quote him rather heavily, starting with this:
I’d been told that child labour was endemic in Turkey. But I wasn’t prepared for the reality of it. Or the scale of it. One basement workshop was almost entirely staffed with children, many of whom couldn’t have been more than seven or eight years old, the very picture of Dickensian misery.
We’ve talked about this before here and here, both just months ago. While fast fashion retailer H&M got a bit riled that we dare to mention them in an article, no one else really seemed to care. Neither article received many reads, no shares, hardly even a shrug. If I didn’t know better, I might get the impression that those of you reading don’t give a damn about the plight of children.
And maybe you don’t care. At least, not about those children. After all, we are too often talking about refugee children. In this particular case, the focus is on Syrian refugee children. We’ve already, as a country, fumbled the political football on that situation. As millions of families, many with very small children, continue to flee cities such as Aleppo, will we similarly fail them as they rush headlong into economic situations where child labor is their only hope for survival?
Look at the pictures of that previous baby above. She’s six-years-old now and enjoying first grade. She’s lucky. She’s white. She’s American. She’s well cared for. But not every child is so fortunate.
From the BBC:
It was just before 08:00. A group of people had gathered on a street corner on the outskirts of Istanbul, all desperate for a day’s work. …
We filmed through the blacked-out windows of our van a dozen yards away as a middleman picked this day’s workforce, selecting them one by one. Those who were chosen boarded a bus to take them to a factory.
We know now that up to seven of the workers on board were Syrian refugees. One was just fifteen. Another, we’ll call him Omar, was our source.
Later that evening, Omar met up with me. He showed me the labels from the clothes he’d been working on, that day. I recognised them instantly. So would you. The brand could hardly be better-known in the UK.
Americans are very good at looking at such stories and responding curtly with, “That’s not my problem.” Unless it is happening quite literally in our own backyard, we distance ourselves from any problems or issues that anyone else in the world might be having. We are, as a society, extremely well versed in this sort of denial.
So whose problem is this? If it is not ours, since we’re the one buying the clothes and demanding that there be more and more of them every time we shop, then where does the blame lie? Do we fault Syria for having a horrendous leader with no qualms about killing his own people? Should we blame Turkey, whose recent crackdown has made it even more difficult for refugees to find work there? Or do we blame the fashion labels whose names appear on the collars for the clothing being sewn together by these young children?
Certainly, there is plenty enough blame to go around for everyone to take a share. What’s missing is anything resembling responsibility.
As we discovered with our articles earlier this year, if one names a brand and calls them out for contracting suppliers that use child/slave labor, they get quite upset. They’ll tell you about their inspections and how rigidly they monitor the companies who sew their clothes. However, consider what Mr. MacIntyre discovered:
All the brands I contacted about this programme say they regularly inspect the factories making their clothes to guarantee standards. Some of these audits are unannounced. But the Syrian boys explained how the factories got round this problem.
When the auditors arrive, they are hidden out of sight. And when the auditors leave, they go back to work. As simple as that. Some of the brands acknowledge the inherent failings in the auditing process and are now trying to tie up with trade unions and NGOs to combat abuses.
Other factories may never be visited by auditors because as far as the brands are concerned, they don’t make their clothes. They’re part of the chain of sub-contractors who make up much of the garment industry in Turkey.
They take orders from so-called first-tier factories – official suppliers to the brands – but often without the knowledge of the brands themselves.
This is where you’ll find the worst abuses of Syrian refugees and children. We decided to follow delivery vans from one of the first-tier factories hoping they would lead us down their supply chain.
Our plan was successful but also darkly disappointing. We filmed outside one of the sub-contractors as a small boy carried and dragged bags of material as big as himself to one of the vans. He couldn’t have been more than 12.
Twelve-years-old. Are you good with that? Does it bother you in the least that the very garment you are wearing right now was very likely pieced together by a child who should have been in middle school? Sure, there are laws, and there are inspections so that labels and retailers have plenty of excuses for saying that their clothes are not part of the problem. But as the BBC investigation discovers, at least some of those inspections are practically meaningless. They might disrupt a plant’s production for a few minutes, but they don’t prevent children from being continuously employed when they should be in school.
As Americans, we find it far too easy to sit back in our comfortable chairs, in our nice, warm homes, wearing our comfortable clothes, and think that we are immune. Certainly, nothing like what we see in Turkey could ever happen here. Our kids are safe. There are laws.
Funny, there are laws against child labor in Turkey, too. There were similar laws in Syria. When the people in charge of a country don’t care about those laws, however, they are easily ignored. When profit is given a higher regard than humanity, this is the result. For all the talk about how wonderful a “free market” is and how that government should stay the hell out of business concerns, Turkey shows us what happens when a “free market” is not sufficiently regulated.
Stop and think about all the rhetoric you’ve heard during this election cycle, not only from the Republican candidate but just as fervently from the Libertarian candidate. Both are quite sure that we need less government oversight, that regulation is strangling our ability to compete internationally. Why? Because American companies are punished, severely, if they employ twelve-year-olds. American companies are fined and sometimes forced to close if they do not pay their employees a minimum wage that is already well below a livable level. Both teh Republican and Libertarian candidates would happily remove any and all restrictions from American manufacturers so that they could “better compete in an international market.”
So yes, the very thing that we see happening in Turkey could happen here. There are far too many people who would support that kind of “free market” thinking.
One final quote from the article:
Our evidence confirms that big fashion brands are profiting from refugees and their children. All the brands involved say they are completely opposed to child labour and any exploitation of Syrian refugees.
But our investigation shows they sometimes don’t know how or where their clothes are being made. And until the brands know exactly who is making their clothes, then this type of exploitation is almost certain to continue.
Fashion brands hold a lot of the moral obligation for making sure their clothes are being assembled under the proper conditions, that employees are being paid a just and livable wage and that children are in school where they belong. If the inspections are not working, and they’re obviously not, then different means need to be found or different providers need to be contracted to ensure that no child/slave labor is involved in assembling any piece of clothing, anywhere, ever.
At the same time, though, we have a moral obligation as consumers to help put an end to this nonsense. We have to pay attention to where our clothes are being made. It doesn’t matter if you’re paying $2500 for a dress or $25 for its knockoff, both are just as likely to have been assembled in a sweatshop. There is no reason to tolerate this situation, and the more than we do the more pressure we put on legitimate and honest manufacturers to cheat as well. When domestic companies are not able to compete with ridiculously low wages, they place political pressure on our leaders to remove the restrictions that keep them from doing exactly the same.
We have been extremely fortunate over the past hundred years or so that our children don’t have to worry about being enslaved by a manufacturer. That situation could change in a heartbeat with your vote. If we elect a President and a Congress that is committed to removing government regulations, or ignoring the ones already in place, we end up with employers who are exactly like those in Turkey.
Your children, your grandchildren, could become slaves.
I don’t know how to put it any more blunt than that. The situation is right there in front of your face. Americans hold a responsibility not only to our children but to children around the world. We cannot allow this continue, whether in Turkey or Bangladesh, and we certainly cannot allow it to begin, again, in the US.
The solution starts with your vote. Vote carefully.
When someone says “I love you” and you don’t exactly feel the same way, how are you supposed to respond?
Saying “I love you” is a traumatic and critical portion of every relationship. I still remember how I felt when Kat and I exchanged that phrase for the first time. It was important because, prior to that point in our lives, we had both questioned whether there even was such a thing as love. When one starts talking about love we invoke a powerful set of emotions that are not always within our ability to control. Good things often happen when people say those words, but our responses are not always predictable.
The hashtag game #BadResponsesToILoveU is trending this morning and I can’t say that I’m too terribly surprised. Almost everyone I know has been on one side or the other of saying “I love you” to someone and not getting the response you were expecting. Silence, of course, is probably the worst of all responses. When the person to whom you just said, “I love you” doesn’t say or do anything, you’re not sure for yourself exactly how to proceed. Do you apologize? Do you explain? Do you blow it off as though nothing happened? Getting a bad response to “I love you” is devastating.
However, when it’s not happening directly to us, bad responses can be hilarious. This is one of the places where the Internet shines because people can think of thousands of ways to be hilariously cruel. So, I thought we’d take some time to be thankful we’re not the one putting the “I love you” out there.
I don’t have time to cull through the thousands of tweets this hashtag has generated, but here are a few that I really enjoyed.
That’s so weird, your going to be like the 5th person today that’s said that to me. #BadResponsesToILoveU
— Right Hand Arm, Man (@shaolinmonk_808) October 23, 2016
#BadResponsesToILoveU You still have to pay the taxi fare mate.
— Paul Stevens (@PaulieStevens) October 23, 2016
#BadResponsesToILoveU But God loves you more….
— Astor Igwe George (@GrandPabbyChuck) October 23, 2016
#BadResponsesToILoveU I love you too, Denise-Diane? Debbie. Wait, I know this. Donna?
— Kevin P. Sheridan (@kps67) October 23, 2016
#BadResponsesToILoveU: Now why would you wanna do a fools thing like dat fer?😳
— ADELLA GARNER (@Crazy8ADELLA) October 23, 2016
#BadResponsesToILoveU How did you get in my house?
— Bobby A. Worley (@charger731965) October 23, 2016
#BadResponsesToILoveU mom, stop it, I’m 48.
— LVEric eerily (@LVGambler123) October 23, 2016
There are thousands more, if you are looking for an entertaining way to waste time.
I laughed when I saw this game because, having been on both sides, I really enjoy a good burn of a response. Of course, I’m probably, almost certainly too nice to actually every use these on anyone, but here are a few I have in my back pocket, just in case the need arises.
Why is it I always seem to attract crazy people?
You know, your roommate said the same thing last night.
This wouldn’t have happened had you not had that last shot of tequila
Yeah, this is why I keep considering a life of celibacy
Sigh. Too bad. There’s no cure for addictions like yours. It’s a brain disease.
I’m going to let you down easy: I’d rather be kissed by a cobra
I blame the Republican Party for making you feel that way
Right, you know I volunteered to help colonize Mars, don’t you?
Have you ever considered shock therapy?
Sure, but will you still feel that way when I’m crowned Emperor of the Underworld [strike a pose]?
You know, I’ve been looking for a way to not say that same thing to you.
You stole my M&Ms, didn’t you?
Okay, now try saying the same thing while naked and see if that makes me feel any different
Don’t worry, we all have our little pet annoyances
That’s funny (laughing). For a second there, I thought you said you love me
{Putting finger in one ear and wiggling it) Hold on, my hearing aid isn’t working. I thought you said you love me.
Sorry, I’m fresh out of sperm. I gave your sister the last batch.
And the guys on Gamma 9 tried telling me there’s no intelligent life on this planet
Dammit, that ball gag just keeps falling out of your mouth
I know, I’m having entirely too much fun with this game. And again, I would never actually use these on anyone.
Probably.
Except in the event of an emergency wedding.
Photographers love most of our clients, but the nightmares come when unreasonable requests are made
We like you. We really, really like you. Photographers love their clients, especially repeat clients who keep coming back for portraits or other special imagery. We love clients who understand the value of what we do, who don’t keep needling us when it takes longer than expected to finish their pictures, and especially the ones who tell their friends that they need to use us as well. These are the people for whom we might consider bending the rules every once in a while, and for whom we’ll at least consider their more outrageous requests.
Then, there are the nightmares. These are the clients who are never satisfied with their pictures, the ones who question your quality, whether you even know what you’re doing, and claim that their four-year-old could do better. We stay up at night fearing the client who trashes us to their friends, but then comes back again and has the audacity to ask for a discount or special service that you don’t normally offer. These are not nice people.
Yet, as professionals, we are supposed to take the nightmares with a grain of salt, keep a smile on our face, and attempt to say no to their requests while re-directing them back to our stated policies. I was amused earlier this week when a sponsored article popped up in my Facebook newsfeed offering a chart with answers to the most common objections photographers face. The chart was created by Joy Vertz, a portrait photographer based in Mequon, Wisconsin. The advice she gives is solid. However …
Ms. Vertz is one of those lovely, positive, go-get-’em people who doesn’t take no for an answer. She smiles, redirects, restates, and closes the sale. She’s successful both in terms of her own photography business and also with helping other photographers who are struggling. I’ve never met her, but I’m sure she’s a wonderfully nice person who could sell a block of ice to a resident of the South Pole. Some people just have that right attitude for selling.
The rest of us, however, struggle with closing sales. Not all of us are natural-born salespeople. In fact, the more creative we are, the more difficult it can be for us to function in a business capacity. We work best when someone else handles all the sales closing stuff, leaving us to take the pictures and be creative and occasionally do some really amazing work. Dealing with anyone who is the slightest bit contrarian isn’t our strong point.
As I was reading through Ms. Vertz’s list of objections, I couldn’t help thinking, “Yes, that’s what you should say, but that’s not what I would be thinking.” I’m one of those people who does better when Kat closes the sale. She’s friendly, cheerful, and can keep a smile on her face even when talking to a complete idiot. I can’t. Stupid people make me want to throw things. So, I thought it might be fun, since it’s Saturday and if you’re reading this after 8:00 AM you’re probably not out shooting today, to consider what we would actually like to say to clients who cause us nightmares. The objections come from Ms. Vertz’s list. I don’t have time to address them all, but this should be enough to make my point.
Wrong. You don’t want to pay me for the value of my work. You want a discount. You always want a discount. Yet, you’ll pay $8 for that freakin’ latte you’re holding. You down what, three of those a day? I’m not too expensive, you just have really lousy priorities, are selfish, and fail to value anyone in the service industries. Go away. I don’t have time for you.
Why? Because you want to share them online (which is fine if you’ve paid for the disc) or because you want to take them to the drug store and get really crappy prints instead of paying my prices? Or even worse, you’re not going to try printing them on your home inkjet, are you? After I’ve spent hours getting the tonal and color quality of your images just right, you’re going to ruin them by printing on some non-calibrated crappy little no-name printer you picked up at a garage sale? And then you’ll complain because the pictures don’t “look right.” Please.
Damn, you’re lazy. If you think I’m going to wait around for months while you do everything but choose your proofs, you’re crazy. Make a decision already. Chances are you’re going to go with your first choice, anyway. Better yet, let me decide for you. You’re too distracted to pay attention to what you’re doing. You’re giving me a headache.
[By the way, Joy’s answer to this one is spot on: To have an online gallery is $500 which applies 100% to your order placed within 1 week. It is $25 for each additional week. ]
Take a fucking selfie like everyone else? Pay for a session and we’ll happily give you permission to use the finished photos online with appropriate credit. Re-edit the picture or fail to give credit, though, and I’m SO going to bitch. Okay, not really, but I’ll think bad thoughts about you and complain about you to my dog.
Uhm, no. Part of my job is to make you look good. You know, remove the blemishes from things like really bad acne, or removing those horrid dark circles from under your eyes because you don’t sleep, eat horribly, smoke like a fucking chimney, and drink three bottles of wine a night. You come here wanting me to make you look flawless and glamorous like a model. So no, I’m not showing you all the photos.
Uhm, YES! First of all, pull those kids off the props. This is not a fucking playground. Do I look like someone who has the patience of a preschool teacher? You do realize there’s no way I’m getting five toddlers all looking in the same direction at the same time, even if I had a puppy. I’m going to need half a bottle of scotch after we finish this one and you had damn well better buy the largest package we offer. Your child just peed on my carpet. I hate you.
Of course, we would never actually say any of those things to anyone’s face. We do our best to be polite and nice and not curse too much in front of children. At least two-thirds of our clients are really wonderful people. We enjoy working with them. However, we keep having nightmares. Every photographer I know has nightmares.
If you look on our home page, where we describe our services, we provide the instruction: Please be sure to communicate your needs fully to avoid any surprises. One of those surprises is that we will charge an additional fee to clients who are especially difficult. If someone is going to be a complete pain-in-the-ass, they’re going to pay for that experience.
Now you know what we’re thinking. Be a good client, not a nightmare. Thank you.
We already have more advantages, more options, than any other generation to inhabit this planet. Maybe we should take advantage of that
I hesitate to write anything sounding too terribly positive. While I want to be encouraging and supportive, every time I do it seems to backfire on me and I have the worst day possible. There are times one might get the impression that the universe is saying, “How DARE you be positive and hopeful? You must be punished for your remarks.” I know I’m not alone. Many days we wake up and absolutely nothing we do goes as planned. Flat tires. Disappointing people. Failed expectations. A stain on your new shirt—before noon. I’m not really expecting today to be any different.
I finally got around to reading President Obama’s article in Wired this morning, though. He presents a rather challenging premise:
We are far better equipped to take on the challenges we face than ever before. I know that might sound at odds with what we see and hear these days in the cacophony of cable news and social media. But the next time you’re bombarded with over-the-top claims about how our country is doomed or the world is coming apart at the seams, brush off the cynics and fearmongers. Because the truth is, if you had to choose any time in the course of human history to be alive, you’d choose this one. Right here in America, right now.
Do I want to believe the President? Sure. Intellectually, the points he makes are valid. What we actually experience is often different, though.
When discussing how things have improved over the years, the President makes some compelling points:
I can’t and wouldn’t want to argue any of those points. Some tremendous strides have taken place over the past several years and, combined, they have made life on this planet better than many of our parents and grandparents could have ever dreamed. Tremendous advantages and opportunities make this a great time to be alive.
At the same time, however, being alive right now, in 2016, holds some pretty significant challenges.
We’ve made progress, but we’re a long way from being where we should, where we want, and where we need to be.
Taking an honest assessment of where we are right now, what it means to be alive in 2016, is both sobering and hopeful. We’ve gotten some things right, but there is still much to do. President Obama refers frequently to the late Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek science fiction franchise as an example of an ideal society:
What I loved about it was its optimism, the fundamental belief at its core that the people on this planet, for all our varied backgrounds and outward differences, could come together to build a better tomorrow.
While such optimism is laudable, it is difficult to anticipate we are anywhere near that ideal when one of the top headlines this morning reads: Russia may be getting ready ‘to level Aleppo to the ground’ While those of us in the United States might be in a cooperative mood, the same can hardly be said of the rest of the world. Uhm, Brexit, anyone? The current mood seems to be that everyone wants to do their own thing. Cooperation will just have to wait.
Looking to the future, though, we have to have some degree of optimism, don’t we? If we can’t find any points of hope, any signs of encouragement, any indication that things might improve, then what is it going to mean to be alive in 2020 and beyond?
I’m sitting here this morning wondering what the future of photography is going to look like. Will any of us manage to stay in business through another ten years of rapid change? We not only face technological advancements that are impossible to predict, but we are also experiencing a complete upheaval in how people view photography altogether. Is it possible for our profession to survive?
The President is sold on the concepts of Science in solving the greatest challenges facing the world. His take is that one of the reasons now is a great time to be alive is because science is poised to develop new solutions to problems that have plagued us for centuries. He writes in the article:
Just as in the past, to clear these hurdles we’re going to need everyone—policy makers and community leaders, teachers and workers and grassroots activists, presidents and soon-to-be-former presidents. And to accelerate that change, we need science. We need researchers and academics and engineers; programmers, surgeons, and botanists. And most important, we need not only the folks at MIT or Stanford or the NIH but also the mom in West Virginia tinkering with a 3-D printer, the girl on the South Side of Chicago learning to code, the dreamer in San Antonio seeking investors for his new app, the dad in North Dakota learning new skills so he can help lead the green revolution.
So, the answer to our challenges is that we need to re-conceptualize? I love the President’s optimism, but when I’m sitting here worried about keeping the lights on and having enough food for my family, it’s rather difficult for me to re-conceptualize anything much beyond how to find yet another way to make ground beef interesting. I’m not even sure what it would mean to reconceptualize photography. I try wrapping my head around that question and end up having to take a couple of pills and lie down for a moment.
I am thankful for all the advantages that come with being alive right now. I’m thankful that we have this thing called the Internet that allows me to share with you both my words and my pictures. I’m thankful that life has improved for whole groups of people and that there are almost endless opportunities for my children.
Still, there is more to live than just being alive. For life to be fulfilling we must also be functioning toward some end.
My AARP card came in the mail yesterday. I am of an age where many of my peers are enjoying grandchildren and looking forward to the joys of retirement. Not all of us are there, though. Many of us look at the potential demise of our careers and wonder how we are going to continue to function in this science-oriented future. We can try to keep up, but doing so is a struggle. We don’t especially have a lot of money to spend on new equipment, or classes to teach us what Millennials inherently know.
Did you catch that line in the President’s statement about “soon-to-be-former presidents?” President Obama is breaking with tradition and remaining in Washington, D.C. after the new president takes office. Rather than running away and retreating in quiet and solitude, as Presidents before him have done, Mr. Obama plans to stay active and stay involved in helping shape the future development of the world.
Maybe we can do the same. Stay active. Stay involved. Don’t let ourselves be pushed aside, relegated to some memory of how things used to be. We are alive now. Therefore, we need to be an integral part of what is happening now.
Will we?
What color brings to pictures is the same thing it brings to life: excitement, variance, and a different way of seeing things
I had difficulty choosing pictures to go with this article. I just finished reading the New York Times interview with William Eggleston that was published yesterday. Times writer Augusten Burroughs calls Eggleston, “The pioneer of color photography.” I’ve also heard of him referred to as the godfather of color photography. Whichever title one chooses to use, the man has done a lot to further color photography. So, choosing images that really match that topic involved a mental argument as to exactly what color photography represents.
Being brutally honest, I’ve not always been the world’s biggest Eggleston fan. I’ve seen the images from his 1976 exhibit at the New York Museum of Modern Art, which the article casually glosses over with little more than a side mention. I understand why critics at the time weren’t impressed. Eggleston’s work has, at times, been the sort that one looks at after a few years and thinks, “Oh, now I get it.” Just casually browsing through his images without taking the time to understand them can, depending on one’s level of photographic comprehension, leave one disappointed and unimpressed.
What Eggleston’s work did, though, was bring color photography legitimacy in a world that was stuck looking at things in black and white. As color film and processing changed over the years, color pictures changed our perspective of life. We were forced to look at things differently, something that a lot of people don’t find comfortable.
Photographers who have never shot film, and there are millions who haven’t, don’t understand the challenge of having to choose whether to shoot in color or black and white. Digital cameras inherently take color pictures. Even if one has a camera with a black and white setting [which is never a good idea, in my opinion], the sensor still “sees” in color and then makes the conversion. When using film, though, one has to make a decision before the pictures are taken, often before one even stops onto the set. Sitting in art meetings over the years, whether to use color or black and white film was almost always one of the first arguments the team would face. Opinions both directions tend to be strong.
Critical to this discussion is understanding that color changes the emotion of pictures. If I were to set two pictures side-by-side, one color, one black-and-white, your opinion hinges not on different qualities of processing, but on how the different images make you feel. Consider the image at the top of this page. Here it is processed in black and white:
Emulated Fomapan film with LAB processing
The question is not whether one version is better than the other; both have their distinctive qualities. What matters is which version best communicates the emotion I was attempting to capture with the image. In this case, I prefer color if for no other reason than the striking contrast of red blood in the water.That aspect is so muted in the black and white version that one might miss it entirely if just casually glancing at the photo.
One can argue that either version of the picture is better than the other and be technically correct. Are we shooting merely for technicalities, though, or are we taking pictures that allow people to feel something? When we choose color, we make a choice in how we want to direct viewers’ emotions.
Because photography started out monochrome, there have been, and always will be, those who are strongly adamant that black and white is the only legitimate format for professional photographs. The Times article makes that point when the author asks Eggleston what he thinks of Ansel Adams. Eggleston replied:
We didn’t know each other, but if we did, I’d tell him the same thing: “I hate your work.”
The sentiment runs both directions, though. The article recounts a conversation between Eggleston and renowned photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson in which the latter tells the former, “You know, William, color is bull shit.”
Not everyone wants to see the world in color. Not everyone wants to feel the emotions and challenges that color brings to pictures. Black and white gets straight to the point, emphasizes the facts, and allows some things to become lost in the shadows. We all know people who are the same way. The rules are the rules and either one follows them or they don’t. People who view the world in black and white tend to be very precise in their judgments, they appreciate the clarity of strong, well-defined lines and the clean contrast that black and white affords.
Color brings more freedom to the world, and to imagery. Color opens up possibilities that maybe the rules are bendable, or not necessary at all. Color lets us see what’s lurking in the shadows, enjoy the subtle gradients of light, and feel the warmth, or the coldness, of an image. You almost certainly know people who are colorful, who take chances without regard to the consequences, who explore beyond traditional boundaries, and are very open about how they feel. Their emotions are obvious and their communication often louder than we might appreciate.
If I have a favorite quote from the article, and Eggleston provided plenty of good ones to save for the archives, it would be this one regarding critical discussion of his work:
The only thing one can do is really look at the damn things. It’s just not making much sense to talk about them.
We are guilty, far too often, of analyzing both photographs and life to the point that they begin to lose any meaning. We too often need to justify our reasons for either liking or not liking a photograph, or a situation, or even a person. Some of us are color people. Some of us are black and white. And there are many who cross back and forth, constantly wrestling with the emotional and visual exchanges between the two.
I’ve no problem admitting that I am of the latter camp. I find pleasure in both forms of photography and both forms of people. While mixing the two doesn’t always work, I would hate to live in a world where either one fails to exist. What Eggleston’s work teaches us, if anything, is that we need both. One might be more appropriate for a given situation, but fundamentally neither is better than the other. They are, simply, different, and that difference is wonderful.
Life is the same way, is it not? The sooner we accept that both color and monochrome has value, perhaps then we can get on about the business of loving and caring for each other rather than this stupid arguing we’ve been doing. We’ve not been making much sense with our petty picking and fussing. Enjoy the pictures of life. We’ll all be better for it.
Judging from the warning signs on headlines this morning we must be doing everything wrong.
Erg. Another Monday. Looking through social media this morning I can sense the fear and trepidation. Signs are everywhere. No one is looking forward to today. Some people could lose their jobs. Other people might lose more. While there’s no way to tell exactly what the day might hold, all the signs point toward this being a less than stellar day.
I like to think that what comes across my social media feeds is a pretty broad and reasonably accurate feeling for what is resonating across America. Obviously, I’m getting a lot of political material, but there are a lot of other things, from memes to articles to status updates, that give me a reasonable snapshot for the general mood of certain demographic sets. The signs this morning seem obvious: We’re doing everything wrong, or at least, we’re willing to believe we are.
Personally, I rather doubt that reality is quite as bleak as it is being presented. When shown a picture of a bright, sunshine-filled day, there are a lot of us that immediately start looking for what is in the shadows. We go looking for trouble even where there is none. We expect things to go poorly for us. In doing so, we miss the beauty of the whole picture.
However, we do have a tendency to really mess up a lot. Fortunately, a lot of people have written a lot of articles to help us correct our mistakes. Consider some of the gems I found this morning.
Spoiler alert: You’re washing your bras too damn often. The whole purpose of the article, published by Harpers Bazaar, Australe, is to convince their readers that they need to be a little more delicate with their delicates. Apparently, while women are really good about taking care of silk blouses and dresses, they don’t show the same concern for lingerie made from the same material. Instead, everything just gets dumped into the laundry, washed with harsh chemicals, and then one wonders why they wear out so frequently.
I really have to wonder about the whole bra washing thing, though. I’ve seen enough bras and caught hint of the fragrance that comes from them when one has been perspiring a bit. The smell is far from attractive. Sports bras, especially, which some people seem to think are fine to continue wearing after they’ve had their workout, have the ability to stink just as much as men’s athletic gear. Do you really want to let those things sit around a ripen before their washed?
I get it, the elastic materials do break down and wear out in the wash. However, doesn’t it totally defeat the purpose of looking nice if one doesn’t smell pleasant when someone gets close?
Wishful thinking. Check the source when you see articles like this. They tend to come from websites such as globetoday.com and terrificphotostoday.me. Notice that I’m not giving you links to either of those sites. Don’t go there. I know a lot of women would really like to believe that the mass of their buttocks has a correlation to the amount of brain power one has, but let’s get real: you know damn good and well that’s not true.
Don’t take my word for it, Snopes already disproved this one for you. Same goes for the one about drinking wine at night to lose weight. And the one about children inheriting their smarts from their mother. Sorry, it’s all just wishful thinking. We keep looking for shortcuts and they keep just not happening. One would think that by the time we reach adulthood, at least by the time we’re 30 or so, that we would have figured out that there is no easy way to lose weight or get smarter. Both require work. Yet, time after time we continue to fall for articles like this that offer some hope that maybe, just maybe, we can get away with our desire to emulate sloths.
If there’s one thing we learn from Monday after Monday it is the fact that we have to work for everything we get, and even when we work for it we don’t always get it. There are no shortcuts. Sorry.
Because, yeah, that’s just the news you want first thing on a Monday morning. Are we really that desperate for bad news about our relationships or are we just looking for ways to self-sabotage? If you’re in a relationship and things seem to be going well, then why would you want to go looking for trouble? If your relationship is already not going well, do you really need more signs of the tragedy that awaits?
Articles like this exist for the sake of people who are fundamentally flawed and cannot accept the possibility that someone might actually care for them without having some ulterior motive. I’m not even sure that self-esteem counseling helps these people. They go through relationship after relationship, throwing away perfectly good people who would actually like to fall in love with them, but are jettisoned before they have the chance.
Here’s the real scoop:the number one sign that your relationship is headed to its doom is that you’re looking for signs your relationship is headed to its doom. Check your relationship paranoia and let someone love you.
I hate articles like this because they start from the premise that none of us really know what we’re doing in bed. Granted, every year yields a new crop of rookies and there are genuinely some people, specifically the most devout from any given sex-shaming religious group, who don’t have a fucking clue, literally. If the world really took relationships seriously, we’d be learning these things in school right about the time we’re losing our collective virginity. Heaven forbid we actually teach practical relationship skills anywhere, however. So, articles like this one continue to be popular.
Here’s the rub: everyone’s different. Want to know what will get your partner off every time? Talk to them. Find out what they like and what works for their body. You can’t trust what you read in an article because what feels great to one person might be downright painful for someone else. Blindly following the instructions of some how-to article you’ve read online can get you dumped out of bed before you even have time to unwrap that condom I’m sure you were planning on using.
Communication is a critical aspect of every relationship and the bedroom is no exception. Experimenting and trying different things is a lot of fun, but talk to your partner before actually attempting something new. The results will be better for both of you.
The very reason all these articles and memes exist is because we doubt ourselves and our abilities. We don’t think we’re as smart as we are. We don’t think we’re as attractive as we are. What we read online and what we see in various media has us convinced that we are horribly flawed and need all the help we can possibly get. Look down your newsfeed this morning and one can easily come away with the impression that we’re all doing everything wrong.
Guess what: we’re not. Most of us are just fine, thank you very much. Those of us who do struggle are not nearly in as bad a shape as we tend to believe. So, stop doubting yourself. Think positive. Believe in what you can do.
And then duck because this is still Monday and the universe is out to get you.
What if we ditched the existing political parties and went with one that has love as its political platform? Consider the potential
Another Sunday morning. I’ve already taken the dog for his morning walk, both of us enjoying the extra light from the full Hunter’s Moon. The second pot of coffee is on. Dishes are washing in the dishwasher. Clothes are drying in the dryer. For the moment, everyone is asleep except me and the black cat, Burberry. She’s taking advantage of the quiet to give herself a thorough cleaning. For however many seconds this lasts, it is calming.
We are so incredibly inundated with politics this season that there seems to be no escape. I don’t mind admitting I’m concerned. I doubt the accuracy of polls in a race where a large number of voters are likely to go with a literal coin toss on election day. With Russia threatening, Yemen simmering, and Syria ready to explode (again), moments like these where my blood pressure is almost back within normal range are few.
At moments like this, I can’t help wondering what might be Poppa’s sermon topic were he preaching this morning. He disliked politics and didn’t think they belonged anywhere near the pulpit. Yet, in an atmosphere as politically charged as this one, even the church isn’t immune.
Perhaps he would artfully dodge the matter by talking about love as a political platform. He would use John 13:34 as his text: A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. He liked that passage. From there, he would develop the political platform based on the qualities of love. Perhaps something like this:
When developing any political platform, one has to first consider how they are going to handle matters here at home. Certainly, we can use a lot of love right here, right now, and there are myriad ways love could be applied. One strong move might be to dissolve the two existing major political parties. They have become so incredibly polarized that they are no longer able to function. The hate between the two sides of the aisles in Congress has brought much-needed legislation to a standstill. Dissolving both parties and starting over with a stated intent of working from a basis of respect, loving those of contrary opinion, willing to sacrifice for the sake of consensus, would set a strong example for the people of the United States to follow.
Across the country, applying love through everything the federal government does would have a profound effect. We would end mass incarceration, mandatory sentencing, and find ways to actually help those who are challenged to fit into society. We would take an attitude of moving from community policing to community helping, perhaps putting more social workers on the street who can help people address problems before any law is broken. We would abolish the failed war on drugs, look at the legitimate power of cannabis, and address the basic conditions that lead to severe drug use.
A political platform that uses love for domestic policy invokes radical changes in the way we think, in the way relate to each other. We are not adversaries as many would have us believe. We are brothers and sisters committed to each other in Love, and that is a power that can take communities from the slums to the heights of prosperity, from crime to celebration, and from desperation to hope.
The economy is a huge and very sensitive issue in any political platform. When President Obama first entered office in 2009, we were in the throws of the worst economy since the Great Depression. Yet, while the numbers say that the economy has improved dramatically, those improvements haven’t been felt on the street where people are still struggling. That we need to apply some love to our economic policies seem obvious, but exactly how would we do that?
Perhaps we need to start by de-incentivizing greed. Love does not hoard, love gives. We have, since the beginning of the stock markets, based our measurements of economic growth based on monetary accumulation. We look at sales growth as a primary indicator of a company’s value with no consideration of whether they bring any actual benefit to the national or global population. If we change our valuation away from one that rewards greed to one that rewards actual benefit, we incentivize growth that is actually felt outside the corporate boardroom.
Love also is found in an economy where no one has too much and no one has too little. Our national wage system is in tatters and reinforces a social caste system that keeps the poor and disadvantaged, especially people of color, from making any personal economic progress. Yes, love rewards those who achieve, but it does not turn its back on those who struggle. Love sets a wage standard that allows everyone to live without need, without fear of being in want, and with an ability to be proud of who they are and what they do.
Insomuch as the United States is a global power, we have a lot of influence in what happens around the world. We have the ability to change everything from the spread of deadly disease to the ability to grow crops and make a region self-sustaining. We have, too often, used our influence and power for bad. The world desperately needs for us to turn our foreign policy around and use it to spread love across the globe.
We do that by funding programs and providing assistance to efforts that help people, not those that hurt them. We spread love by helping to stabilize economies so that there is an absence of need. Love comes not when we sell our surplus weapons so that one tribe can have power over another, but when we trade their weapons for food, medicine, and economic support.
To those who insist on war and doing harm to others, we respond first to those they victimize, welcoming refugees, especially those persecuted and in need of medical attention. We keep our offers of love on the table at all times, but we fund no one’s aggression and do not allow our acts of kindness to be manipulated and misused. We defend where we must, but we do not utilize aggression as a means of getting what we want.
Love facilitates learning throughout one’s lifetime. Love looks for ways to remove the barriers to learning whether they be financial, logistical, emotional, or intellectual. Love finds ways to help those for whom learning is a challenge and is not satisfied with any excuse for one not being taught to the full level of their potential. Love rewards those who learn and encourages them to use what they know, along with the skills and talents they possess to make the world a better place.
Love also understands that as much as we are all lifetime learners, we are also teachers. Some may teach in a classroom, others may teach through skill development or helping to advance understanding in critical thinking. Love values teaching because it understands the necessity of teaching to improve the learning that moves the world forward. As a political platform, teaching is critical because we have, for too long, relied on inappropriate standards of measure that punish actual broad instruction. Love gives teachers room to utilize different styles, methods, and pedagogies to meet the instructional needs of their students.
More than anything, Love shares knowledge and wisdom with respect, teaching history with regard to its impact on different cultures, teaching science as the progressive understanding of the earth based on fact rather than mythologies, teaching mathematics in light of its practical applications, and teaching the arts as an open expression of culture and personhood.
There is no political platform that can promise to make everyone well, to increase everyone’s longevity, or prevent new disease. Living and loving involves risks and where there are risks there is inevitably pain and infirmities that love on its own cannot prevent nor take away. How love responds to these critical moments of need starts by, once again, removing the greed incentive that has placed adequate healthcare out of the reach of many. Healthcare as a profit center is not love. Medicine as a source of profit is not love. Instead of rewarding the healthcare system based on the amount of profit it can produce, love dictates that reward instead be based on the amount of good being done.
Love does not deny anyone the best available healthcare, neither does it distribute care based on status or economic or social standing. Love provides to each the treatment they need at the time they need it without any unnecessary delay. Access to medicines is universal and availability of appliances such as artificial limbs are unhindered.
As policy, love takes medical care wherever it is needed, looking for creative and different ways to reach remote rural areas where care has too often been sparse and insufficient. Love leaves no one hurting and seeks to improve the quality of life for all.
Responsibilities for the Department of Interior are overly broad and too frequently under-funded. Everything from infrastructure to energy to the environment falls under this enormous umbrella and its myriad subdivisions. Yet, here too, a political platform based on love offers a more balanced and practical way of addressing the many physical needs that occur throughout our country. Love reaches out, looks forward, and protects our resources.
Love develops infrastructure based less on what currently exists and more on what is necessary for the future, looking at new technologies and embracing means of transportation that improve efficiency while reducing environmental impact. Love longs for sustainability in an energy policy that relies less on resources that can not be replaced and emphasizes those that are naturally occurring and provide benefit to the environment.
Love understands that we are firmly connected to this planet and must be good stewards of its use. Protections for waterways and all that exists within them is critical to a loving environment. Reducing our own footprint is a demonstration of love that allows those who come behind us to continue enjoying the natural wonders that fill our lives with beauty and pleasure.
Our society is ill from all the partisan bickering to which we’ve been subjected. This is not a new disease for our country, but one which has reached such a critical point that have lost the use of some through alienation and marginalized many through hate. We need a political platform that brings love back as the dominant force in our society, encouraging and rewarding those who do for others before doing for themselves.
We need a national social policy that is wholly inclusive, so that people of color needn’t cower in fear, so that no one should ever be afraid to express who they are or what their sexuality might be, so that everyone gets an equal voice, even those with little to offer in return. A political platform based on love does not disregard the elderly no matter their age or level of ability. Neither does it leave children abandoned, starving, and without sufficient care.
Love rewards those who give, whether in terms of finances, or skills, or time spent holding the hand of one whose days are nearing their end. Love rewards those who strive for peace, diligently working to end conflicts before they escalate to violence. If the United States is to be the shining beacon of hope we want it to be, we must utilize love more than anything to stamp out all the fears that keep us from trusting, from engaging, and from appreciating those around us.
We are, quite obviously, too late to impact this election cycle with a political platform so radical as that dominated by love. We can, however, begin a conversation that moves us forward toward a future where our political discourse is less dominated by hate. There will always be those who disagree. Vice is as much a part of the human condition as is virtue. Yet, the one we feed, the one we emphasize, the one we practice in our own dealings is the one that will dominate the next election.
All religions, not just Christianity, hold the same mandate given in scripture that we are to love one another. Love is not an option. Even if one holds no belief in a higher power, the universe demands unity, cooperation, respectfulness, and peace. We have seen the depths to which the ravages of hate can take us. Now, let us reverse course and set our sights for the heights possible through love.
Yes, I realize that this all sounds so very Pollyanish. Ideals set goals that are seldom achievable in reality. Still, we get out of our government exactly what we put in . We have endorsed hate for too long. Perhaps it’s time we try the alternative.
Peace be unto you.
Recent studies show that the time of day one eats chocolate matters. So, chocolate cake for breakfast it is!
Whey my boys were small, we had a tradition of saving some of their birthday cake and having it for breakfast the next morning. The same rule applied to their mom and I, so five times a year we were having cake for breakfast and, yes, most of the time it was chocolate. Our reasoning was that the ingredients in chocolate cake (especially if it was homemade) wasn’t all that different from a bowl of cereal. Plenty of protein, grains, dairy, and actually less sugar than is in many kids’ cereals made having chocolate cake for breakfast a lot of fun.
What I never expected back then was for there to be any science supporting what we were doing. Now, there is. Multiple studies, in fact, having been looking at the effectiveness not only of what we eat but when we eat it. As it turns out, much of our weight issues have to do not merely with the content and quantity of our food, but when we are consuming it. If we alter when we eat certain foods, such as chocolate, they can actually help us to lose weight rather than contribute to gaining.
Wait, are we saying that eating chocolate cake for breakfast might help someone lose weight? Well, that could be stretching things just a tiny bit, but ultimately, yes, one piece of chocolate cake in the morning could help curb one’s appetite for sweets the rest of the day, leading to possible weight loss.
Chocolate cake for breakfast. This is one of those pseudo-science things that is easily debunked by real science, right? Next thing I know they’ll be telling us that staring at the sun cures cancer. We can’t really believe this, can we?
Yes, you can believe. The 32-week study was done at Tel Aviv University. They took 193 non-diabetic clinically obese people and divided them into two groups. The first group was given a 300 calorie breakfast and that was it. Good luck, folks. The second group, however, was given a 600-calorie breakfast that included chocolate pudding. Okay, not quite the same as chocolate cake, but damn close. I’m guessing the pudding was a little easier to prepare.
The results? The group that had pudding for breakfast lost, on average, thirty-seven pounds more than those in the group that only had 300 calories. Amazing, isn’t it? Now, why do you suppose that happened?
Basic biology here, boys and girls. Our metabolism runs higher earlier in the day, when we first get up. Therefore, our bodies are better able to process all those complex proteins and carbohydrates. Bonus points: by getting our sugar fix in earlier, we’re less likely to crave additional snacks and sweets during the day. This means going ahead and having a couple of donuts with that cup of coffee in the morning isn’t doing you as much damage as you might have thought.
This is not giving you permission to eat an entire chocolate cake in one setting. The type of chocolate being used makes a difference as well. Dark chocolate, with more than 80% cacao, not only helps squelch the cravings, but is shown to improve cognitive function and enhance reasoning, memory, and focus. Milk chocolate? Not so much. A lot more fat and sugars there. One has to be careful and apply a bit of those smarts that you picked up at school between naps.
Still, what these studies demonstrate is that we don’t necessarily have to starve ourselves in order to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. We don’t need to do all those crazy diets, take a bunch of questionable pills, or any of the other nonsense we submit ourselves to in the name of dieting. This goes right back to exactly the same thing you learned in second-grade health class: balance. What we’re learning now, though, is that in addition to that food pyramid, there’s also a time scale. Chocolate is best in the morning. Bananas, it turns out, are perfect for lunch, when they can really help you get through the rest of your day. Eat one after dinner, though, and it’s more likely to upset your stomach and cause digestive problems.
This whole time-of-day science is really just getting started. I’ve searched for similar studies and, so far, have only found the small-sample early studies used to justify larger studies. Eventually, though, we could end up with a much clearer picture of when we should be eating different foods.
For now, we’re very happy that we have scientific evidence that chocolate cake for breakfast is a good thing. With this news, and the fact that it’s really, really cold here in Indiana this morning, I might just have to bake a fresh cake tonight for breakfast tomorrow. Something tells me the family won’t object.
Calling a handful of spoiled brats photographers just because they take a handful of snapshots is insulting to those who really are photographers.
“Bella Hadid, Gigi Hadid, and Kendall Jenner Are All Photographers Now.”
I saw the headline yesterday and immediately seethed with anger. I didn’t need to read any further or see the pictures (though I did after I calmed down). There was no question as to the content or thesis of the W Magazine article. Put a camera in the hands of a spoiled brat, let her take some shots, publish them in a major fashion magazine and call it an editorial. Boom, three new photographers.
Horseshit. We’ve talked about this before. I started to link to the archived articles, but there were too many. This isn’t a new topic and not repeating myself is going to be difficult. The field of photography has become to crowded and too muddied, though, to let an insult like this pass without comment. Yes, I know I’m preaching to the choir—you wouldn’t be reading this if you weren’t supportive of what we do—but the fact that the topic keeps coming up again and again is evidence of how little respect we get from editors, and major publishing houses like Condé Nast, which owns W Magazine, Vanity Fair, and the Vogue franchise. If they think we can be replaced by know-nothing brats with no experience, they truly have no regard for the experience and professionalism of photography at all.
I understand why the editors wanted to use the particular spoiled brats that they did. The three girls, combined, represent over 100 million potential readers. Thanks to social media, reality television, and a massive PR effort fueled by parents’ money, each of the girls are marketing juggernauts. Any place they go, anything they do is immediately in the spotlight with millions of people—mostly teenage girls with wide-eyed dreams— watching and taking notes. What these girls wear become instant sell-outs. When brands and fashion labels hire them, it’s not because the girls are particularly talented but because of the massive social media following they bring with them. That’s it.
That traditional print magazines are struggling is no secret. Even the massive Condé Nast, which has done better than most in converting its holdings to an online market, just had another C-level shakeup this week, which likely means more cuts coming to the rank-and-file. Money is tight. We get it. Anything they can do to increase the number of eyes coming across their pages they’re willing to try. This is why we see no-talent pseudo-celebrities on the cover of Vogue and Marie Claire.
We have no control over the foibles of celebrity fanaticism. To me, it has never made sense. I don’t go nuts over someone simply because they’ve been on television. I have been on television and let me tell you, it wasn’t all that difficult! Anyone who is breathing can pretty much do the television thing without any additional training or instruction beyond knowing how to talk. Yet, when someone becomes immensely popular, slapping them on a magazine is an easy way to increase sales; it’s easy, brainless content.
There’s actually a video of Bella Hadid’s “photoshoot.” The video focuses on Bella holding a camera and pushing the shutter button. She doesn’t worry about lighting, someone handles that for her. She isn’t seen processing the photos, someone handles that for her. She doesn’t even make any adjustments to the camera, such as focal length or shutter speed. Someone set those important elements before handing her the camera and told her to not touch them.
There’s no question the spoiled brats in question are good at taking snapshots. The Instagram queens have proven quite well adapted at making sure their face gets in the frame. That doesn’t make any of them photographers, though. Their understanding of cameras comes largely in relation to an app on their top-of-the-line cell phones. Do they understand why one might want to use different size lenses? No. Do they understand how digital cameras actually work? Of course not. Neither do they have any real concept of the delicacy of lighting, white balance, depth of field, focal length, or any of the dozens of other issues that real photographers have to consider before they ever snap the shutter.
Our industry has always been plagued by those who get lucky with a few good snapshots and suddenly think they should be photographers. Typically, however, they are put off by the high cost of entry or discouraged by the steep learning curve. None of those barriers exist, though, when one is rich and has plenty of people more than willing to compensate for their lack of knowledge or experience. So, spoiled brats get called photographers. Stand by, a lot of teenage girls are now interested in photography. Be glad cameras cost thousands of dollars.
All the complaining in the world isn’t going to make the problem of spoiled brats trying to be photographers go away. This is the new reality. Magazine editors are much less concerned about the quality of photography and immensely interested in how many eyeballs one’s name might bring to the publication. If you don’t have an Instagram following in the hundreds of thousands, you don’t stand a chance of any editor paying any attention, no matter how wonderful your work might be. We now live in a society where there is a tremendous disconnect between the artistry and talent of being a photographer and the value our perceived to possess. If a photographer is going to succeed, they not only have to take incredible pictures, they have to be champions of social media marketing, something very few of us even begin to understand.
The Hadid and Jenner generation will eventually fade, but they will be replaced by some other group of spoiled brats attempting to claim titles they’ve not earned. It is up to photographers, the real ones, to set a bar high enough that vanity cannot so easily claim a place on the platform. The challenge is ours. We must find an appropriate response.
Major marketing milestones are great, but reaffirming a little boy’s desire to wear makeup is even better.
Kat’s Little Man is bright. He reads well beyond his grade level, excels at math and problem-solving, and is quite sure he already knows everything (and isn’t afraid to say so). That part’s good. Where things become challenging are with his social skills. He likes people, but they annoy the crap out of him. Many of you can relate. They can also hurt his feelings quite easily and one of the most frequent reasons is he likes to wear makeup.
He’s asleep as I write this, but if I were to take a picture at this moment you’d see fingernails with chipped remnants of the nail polish he put on his fingers the other night. He did it himself and did a very good job. That’s about as much as he can get away with at school. The dress code prohibits any child from wearing makeup until fifth grade. If he could, though, he would probably wear makeup to school every day. He likes makeup. A lot. Unfortunately, his expression of that pleasure comes at a price.
So, when Covergirl Cosmetics announced James Charles as their first male spokesmodel, Kat and I thought it was a big deal. I waited until the Tipster had gone to bed before calling Little Man over to the computer. “Hey look!” I said, excited to show him something cool. “Here’s another boy who likes to wear makeup!”
His response was not what I expected.
“Yeah, I know. The girls at school still say that nail polish and makeup is only for girls and that boys can’t wear makeup.”
No excitement. He looked at the computer then down at his fingernails. I didn’t need to ask to know how he felt, but I did so that he can learn to express how he’s feeling. “I’m sorry they said that. How did that make you feel?”
“Angry,” he said. “I like wearing makeup and I want to wear makeup but those girls are just stupid.” He was visibly, physically agitated. Not wanting to get him upset right before bedtime, I tried to distract him with this:
It’s official: so excited to welcome @JCharlesBeauty to the COVERGIRL family. ❤️ #COVERGIRLJames! pic.twitter.com/088HlYBjQI
— COVERGIRL (@COVERGIRL) October 11, 2016
That didn’t work. “Yeah, but they still won’t let ME wear makeup to school,” Little Man mused as he returned to his seat on the couch.
“Well, maybe that could be you on that cover one day,” I tried, grasping at straws. I wanted him to be excited and encouraged and that just wasn’t happening.
He looked back at the picture on my monitor and said, “I can do better makeup than that.”
At this point, I should probably emphasize that sexuality is not part of the conversation we have with Little Man. He’s not close to understanding that topic yet and we see no reason to push him in any direction. That decision is his to make when he’s ready to make it. At this point, we try hard to not separate our friends into groups. Whether they’re gay, straight, bi, trans, or gloriously somewhere between all those choices, we still refer to them simply as our friends. The sexuality conversations can come later.
What matters for the moment is that Little Man really likes makeup. He always has. Kat has pictures of him when he was only two after he had gotten into her makeup. To some extent, that exploration is quite normal for a little boy at that age. I remember my middle son, the one who is now a Marine, coming out of the bathroom when he was four, his face covered in his mom’s makeup. Many parents have similar stories. Where other boys move on, though, Little Man never has. He loves makeup and is constantly “borrowing” his mom’s best makeup (always the expensive stuff) for his “experiments.”
Since the kids were on fall break last week, Kat took some time with her little guy to teach him how to apply makeup properly. She gave him a palette and the appropriate applicators, then let him put the makeup on her face. While his color choices made it appear in pictures as though his mom had a black eye, his general application and blending were surprisingly good. His eye shadow application was spot on. The kid may well be a natural.
Supporting Little Man’s interest in makeup isn’t difficult. We have plenty of makeup appropriate for experimenting. Kat has the knowledge of how to teach him to use the makeup correctly. No one at home judges his choice in any way (though we might sometimes wince at his color combinations).
We can’t control what happens when he leaves the house, though. He’s not content only wearing makeup at home. Little Man wants to look good when he goes out, even if it’s to the store, and we can’t control the responses he encounters in those situations.
The atmosphere for boys like Little Man is improving. We have male friends who wear makeup when they visit so he knows he’s not alone. People around him who know him help by not reinforcing old gender stereotypes. There are no “girl” colors or “boy” colors.
Attitudes, though, are a different thing. Seeing that even in second-grade children have already developed opinions about what boys can do or girls can do is disappointing. We not only limit our children’s means of self-expression, but we also limit their ability to explore and try new things. We limit their goals and their desire to achieve when we tell them that they can’t do something simply because of their gender.
As adults, our responsibility is to build a better world for our children. We make sure the air remains breathable. We make sure the planet can continue to provide food. Their safety, education, and ability to achieve are matters we take seriously. We fail all children, though, when we establish limits because of their gender. Boys can wear makeup. Girls can sport crew cuts. Neither should ever feel that anyone is limiting them because of who and what they are.
If we do not provide that world for our children, we all have failed.
Sexual assault is not a joke, nor a conquest. To treat it as anything other than a crime is wrong.
Processing the pictures above was emotionally difficult. They were shot for a special project a few years ago and I’m thankful to say that what appear to be bruises and abrasions on the model’s face are just an incredibly good makeup job. There are others from this project, a fight scene in particular, that I still can’t stomach. Never mind that I know the assault is fake, that no punches were actually thrown, that every step was carefully choreographed. The images are still disturbing.
I know there is perhaps some sexist bias in what I’m about to say, but I was raised to respect women. My father gave us no choice. He started by setting a strong example in how he treated our mother. We never heard him so much as raise his voice to her. He demanded nothing less from my brother and me.Being disrespectful to our mother was a capital offense and the quickest way to get a belt applied to our tail ends.
So, when I look at the recent news and see apologists such as Pat Robertson attempting to excuse a discussion of sexual assault as nothing more than macho talk, I’m not just disturbed, I’m angry.
Eighth-grade gym was when I first encountered someone trying to act macho. There was one bully in particular who figured out that offensive language bothered me and was constantly using that as a means of torment. As strange as it may seem now, repeated use of the word “fuck” could almost bring me to tears (partly because I wasn’t sure what the word even meant).
The locker room was the worst. There, this loud, unruly, frequently suspended classmate would attempt to brag about how “macho” he was. He would tell in graphic detail tales of his alleged sexual exploits with different girls in our class. Each afternoon was a new claim about a different girl.
No one bought his act. First, everyone knew he was lying about his conquest. He was called out on that fact more than once, and on at least two occasions I can remember, he took a punch to the face when the wrong guy’s girlfriend was mentioned. Every last one of us was interested in sex, mind you — we were 14-uear-old boys in the 70s. We looked forward to experiencing it for ourselves. Still, the whole macho thing wasn’t cool. If anything, acting macho was a good way to get your nose bloodied.
Who would have ever thought that all the way here in 3016 we would have a presidential candidate who not only brags about committing sexual assault but then attempts to defend it with claims of “just acting macho?” Even a year ago, when it was already clear that this election cycle was going to fly off the rails, I don’t think any reasonable person would imagine such horrible words coming out of a candidates mouth.
What is unquestionably worse, though, is that people are defending both what was said and what allegedly happened. There can be no more certain sign of complete and utter moral decay that for someone like Robertson, someone who has made a career of claiming to represent the most popular deity in the United States, to defend such disrespectful, disgusting, and distasteful discussions as nothing more than, “being macho.”
Mind you, I never liked Robertson in the first place, something else I learned from my father. Even n the early days of the 700 Club, Poppa called Robertson a charlatan who was siphoning money out of the pockets of those who already had the least to give. Still, to actually sit there on television and endorse bragging about sexual assault is so far beyond the pale as to completely remove any thin shred of integrity the old codger might have had left. There is no excuse for sexual assault and no room for those who tolerate it.
What may be most disturbing is that so many apologists for the candidate are treating the subject of sexual assault as though it were a humorous topic. Their complete dismissal of the seriousness of the matter is an affront to every woman on the planet. I am mind-blown by the flippancy with which too many people are responding to the candidate’s statement.
Fortunately, women are fighting back in a very powerful way by telling their stories. British author Kelly Oxford called for women to tell their stories of sexual assault, and they have, by the thousands. Their stories are not easy reading. Accounts of sexual assault are not entertaining. In fact, having read a few last night, I can only imagine how difficult it was for women to dredge up those horrible memories.
We have talked before about the problem this country has with overcoming a persistent rape culture. Treating sexual assault as though it were some kind of adolescent right of passage reinforces that rape culture. As we continue to allow such conversations to exist we continue to put every woman on this planet at risk.
Some have attempted to dismiss the candidate’s remarks as merely locker room banter. I can imagine there are still some locker rooms where such misogyny is still tolerated, but those locker rooms are the exception, not the rule. Want to know what a professional locker room is like? It’s LeBron James picking up the towels his teammates left behind. It’s the Colts dancing after a victory.The locker room is also the seen of a lot of crying after a loss and challenges among teammates when someone fails to pull their weight.
We all know that sexual assault is wrong. Being macho has never been cool and has never been an excuse. There is no reason to tolerate this among anyone. We would punish any teenager we caught acting up like this. We certainly have no reason to tolerate it from a presidential candidate or his supporters.
Dismissing sexual assault is disgraceful and so are those who excuse it.
Politics be damned. There are things more important. A lot of things. Time to re-focus
My newsfeed is full of comments,articles, statements, and quotes regarding last night’s Presidential debate. I’m doing my best to ignore as much of it as possible. I was having hot chocolate and cherry pie while the debate was occurring, enjoying time with family. I went to bed before the debate was over. I slept well, not giving a second thought to either candidate.
With a field of candidates more unlikeable and unqualified than we’ve ever seen, the intelligent move would have been to shut down the conversations, ignore the buffoonery, and focus on issues we could actually change for the positive. Apparently, we’re not that smart. From the very beginning, we went for the clown show, laughing at how absurd it all was. Our constant attention encouraged even more stupidity and it grew to the point we now have a circus that is nothing more than really bad slapstick.
Meanwhile, there are really important things going on in the world. There are probably thousands of things I could list that are more important than politics, but we’ve narrowed the list to five in hopes that maybe someone will actually pay attention this time. Take a look.
The death toll is over 1,000 in Haiti now. Cholera is beginning to sweep the island, which could kill more than Hurricane Matthew did. Rural areas, once again the hardest hit, are in desperate need of help with the most basic of necessities, such as clean water and sanitation. If you live anywhere in the United States, even if you are homeless, you are better off than the people of Haiti at this moment.
Calls for help are, of course, going out, but one thing we learned from the aftermath of the earthquake there three years ago is that the government is so incredibly corrupt and cares so very little for its people that very little aid actually gets to the people who need it. By some accounts, as much as 90 percent of aid sent to Haiti never reached its intended destination. Instead, it was hoarded by government leaders who used aid funds to line their own pockets.
What do we do? I don’t know. There’s no aid that does not have to go through government channels.While NGOs such as the Red Cross and the UN are doing their best, what we are seeing so far is a repeat of the disaster from three years ago. Haiti’s government doesn’t care if people die. Only a full-scale takeover of the government gets people the assistant they need, and no one is going to do that. The people of Haiti are screwed.
Meanwhile, the death toll from Hurricane Matthew in the US is at 17. That story is buried in most newspapers this morning, too. I had to hunt for it.
Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos won the Nobel Peace Prize last week for his efforts to end the long civil war in his country. Some were surprised that he won despite an election that turned away an agreement that would have ended the conflict. Yet, the Nobel committee chose to acknowledge his efforts, saying that the election results were out of his control.
The monetary piece of the Nobel Prize is 8 million Swedish krona, which, based on this morning’s exchange rate, is just under a million dollars US. That much money buys a lot in Colombia and President Santos had many options. Politics being what they are, no one would have been too surprised had Santos chosen to put the money behind something that would benefit him politically. Instead, he chose to give it to those most affected by the ongoing war.
With the peace agreement having been shot down by voters and a cease-fire set to expire this week, fears in Colombia are mounting. The rural people have that country have been especially hard hit. Yet, unlike the situation in Haiti, they have a President who, at least on the surface, seems to care.
Food is so much more important than politics. With the weather having cooled off, we can once again turn our attention to the savory and flavorful dishes that not only fill us but keep us warm. I made my first pot of chili for the season last night and will probably do some manner of veggie stew later this week.
Is stew actually better than steak, though? Really?
Think about that question for a moment. Think of the variety, the flavors, the options one has with stew that simply doesn’t exist with steak. If I prepare a steak for dinner, I have to be careful to choose just the right cut of meat, prepare it in just the right way with a limited group of appropriate spices, and pray that I’m not distracted and ruin it by cooking it a touch too long.
Stew, on the other hand, is a rainbow food. Toss at it whatever’s left over in the fridge, or what you’re still pulling from your garden. Maybe you add meat, maybe you don’t (though, by definition, most stew at least has a meat stock base). One can get really fancy with the ingredients, or one can play it loose and adventuresome. Making a bad stew is almost impossible. Oh, and cutting the meat into chunks also makes it more tender and flavorful, something you can’t do with a steak.
See? So much more important than what the Republican called the Democrat.
Tonight is game 3 of the National League playoffs, Cubs vs. Mets. The Cubs took the first two games. They have a talented pitching staff. The bats have worked when they were needed. The Cubs could sweep the Mets tonight.
Politics? Who needs politics when there is a more than reasonable chance that the Chicago Cubs could end up in the World Series for the first time in 108 years?
I have to admit, it has been interesting to watch the playoff coverage in the Chicago Tribune. They have been so very careful to not get too excited, to not be overly positive, to not give the Cubs any undue credit. We’ve been down this road before: the Cubs make the playoffs but can’t seal the deal. To be a Cubs fan is to spend every October crying into your beer.
Yet, this year, with this team, things could be different. Maybe. Just maybe.
Okay, this is sort of political. Although, politics aren’t the only reason we vote. Duty, commitment, love of our country, and an obligation to participate in our government are why we vote. Politics are merely an annoying side effect, rather like anal leakage.
Voting is always more important that the politics surrounding your vote. There are too many people in our country who would take votes away from people whose voice needs to be heard. If you have the ability to vote, you have a moral obligation to do so. This is the way our country was designed to work. You not voting is exactly the same as Congress spending roughly two-thirds of the year on vacation: neither are doing what the country needs us to do.
No, voting doesn’t make the politics go away. Sometimes, the politics get worse. We are such an ideologically diverse country that our passion sometimes gets in the way of doing what is right.
Voting is not an endorsement of a candidate. Voting is saying to those elected, “Hey, I’m a citizen. My life matters. And I’m watching you.”
If you are not registered to vote, do so now.
Our relentless pursuit of happiness is very likely the one thing that is making us unhappy
Our little ones regularly tell me that I’m mean. Typically, that accusation comes when I tell them to go to bed, or don’t let them play with knives, or deny them the fourth cookie. In their view, I am impeding their path to happiness. For all their short little lives, other people have been focused on making them happy: grandparents, teachers, babysitters, etc. They are told in a thousand different ways that their happiness is what matters. Then, Kat and I come along and ruin by insisting that they take a bath, or not play in the litter box, or tell them to stop climbing the walls in the hallway (not kidding). We are so very mean.
I’m rather sure that when Thomas Jefferson included that line about the “pursuit of happiness,” he didn’t realize the level of horror he was unleashing on us a little more than two centuries later. We have come to take his words as a mandate: we must pursuit happiness. We think that we are not being fulfilled as individuals if we are not pursuing happiness. Oh, and by the way, it is our own individual happiness that matters. If your pursuit of happiness interferes with my pursuit of happiness then what you are doing is wrong. This is where our current social thought process has taken us.
Could it be that we have become so incredibly focused on being happy that we’ve lost sight of all the other things in life that matter? Does happiness need to be our highest priority or might there be more to life?
Such obsessiveness over whether we are happy is apparently a uniquely American thing that doesn’t occur in other societies. Ruth Whippman, an English writer, journalist, and documentarian currently living in California, wrote a rather interesting book, AMERICA THE ANXIOUS: How Our Pursuit of Happiness is Creating a Nation of Nervous Wrecks. You can get a taste of her book in this article on Vox. Part of the motivation for writing her book was the experience of coming from a society where happiness isn’t given a second thought and being tossed into the heart of a culture that is wholly obsessed with how happy they are. What she notices is that, as hard as we try, we’re really not any happier. In the Vox article she says:
To an outsider, it can sometimes feel as though the entire population has a nationwide standardized happiness exam to take and everyone is frantically cramming the night before to get a good grade. Like a stony-faced “that’s hilarious” after a joke in place of laughter — another mildly unnerving staple of conversation in this country — it appears that somewhere along the line, the joy has been sucked out of American happiness.
Americans are obsessed with being happy, I am convinced, because we somehow see it as part of our national birthright. We look at our lives and if we don’t think we’re happy then, somehow, our country is letting us down. Certainly, the Republican candidate for President whose slogan is “Make America Great Again,” enjoys such ridiculous appeal despite all that is inappropriate about him because what he’s actually saying is, “Make American Happy Again.” People respond to that desire to be happy, even if it denies happiness to others.
Because we, as Americans feel entitled to being happy, we give that feeling a priority and refuse to accept any other emotion for very long. Sadness is not acceptable. Depression requires medication, as does anxiety. If we are angry then we “have issues.” One who is overly enthusiastic is “out of touch,” but one who is embarrassed or feeling guilty needs to “get in touch with their inner self.” We look at happiness as our diety-delivered right and refuse to accept anything else.
One of the most ridiculous yet widely followed and often quoted statements in history comes from Ayn Rand:
Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values.
Can you see how that self-centered piece of horseshit is guiding the entitlement philosophy of an entire political party? Rand, and those who blindly follow her, put one’s personal happiness as a moral imperative above things such as being kind, helping others, compassion, caring, and empathy. When we become so singularly focused 0n achieving a state of happiness, when our purpose in life is to please ourselves first, we end up with policies that are anti-women because that infringes on the happiness of the men making the laws. If our integrity hinges on an imaginary emotional state of bliss, then we develop hate toward others whose conditions of poverty make us look bad. When we depend on the unachievable as proof of our values, we then question and criticize the values of others.
I’m sitting here looking at Little Man’s report card for the first term. He’s in second grade. Back in the cultural stone age of when I went to school, second grade was the last year we received the grossly over-generalized grades of S for satisfactory and U for unsatisfactory. Either we understood the material or we didn’t. No gray area. By contrast, the grading scale for Little Man’s class is as follows:
There are a tremendous number of 4s on this report, which pleases Kat. However, as Little Man was going over the report card with me this past week, he wasn’t happy. “Threes aren’t good enough,” he told me. “Threes mean I’m just the same as everyone else. 4s mean I’m better than most the people in my class.”
“So, three isn’t good enough?” I asked.
“I wish there was a 5 to show that I’m the best,” he answered. “That would really make me happy.”
Good god, we’re raising an over-achiever. Yet, this is how Little Man defines whether or not he is happy. S for satisfactory would never be enough for him. Exceeding standards isn’t enough for him. This social culture has convinced him that he needs to be on top, leaving everyone else behind, in order to be happy. The kid is likely in for a world of disappointment. Yet, if he demonstrated any lesser amount of determination then he would be labeled as an underachiever and probably considered uncooperative.
In the world of creating happiness, there are two buzz words that come up a lot. One is empowerment, the other is mindfulness. On their own, both words can have some really positive meaning. Yet, as we’ve taken them to become significant parts of our push to find what makes us happy, we might have taken both words a little too far. I like what Ms. Whippman says about empowerment:
As a rule, “empowerment” appears to be the consolation prize for those of us who will never have any actual power, and you can safely assume that no one in any position of genuine authority will be joining in. Creating a Tumblr of photos of your post–C-section wobbling and scarred naked stomach? Empowering! Creating a Tumblr of photos of your post-prostate surgery rectum? Not so much, senator.
Mindfulness requires being completely focused on whatever one is doing right at this moment. For example, if I was fully mindful, I would be totally consumed with writing the article and probably miss the fact that I have water boiling on the stove. Yet, the Mindfulness movement is so large that it has even made the cover of TIME (January, 2014). Should one make a trip to mindfulness.org, the home base of all things mindful, one sees articles such as The 7 Qualities of Mindfulness Trained in the Body Scan and Take a Mindful Hike. Here, happiness comes through hyper-attentiveness on a specific object or thought, not letting the mind wander, and thereby avoiding all things negative. That sentence is an over-simplification, of course, but again it is pushing one to focus on themselves to the exclusion of other things and other people around them.
I’m not anti-self-help, mind you. Rather, I think that when we improve ourselves it should be so that we are better able to help others and our community. Society only works when we are involved outside ourselves.
Happiness is elusive. To the extent that we spend all our time, all our motivation, in the pursuit of a condition we often cannot even define, we end up making our lives miserable. Gallup does an annual Positive Emotions Survey that essentially matters how happy people are. They poll adults in 140 countries and ask the following questions:
• Did you feel well-rested yesterday?
• Were you treated with respect all day yesterday?
• Did you smile or laugh a lot yesterday?
• Did you learn or do something interesting yesterday?
With all the effort Americans put into being happy, one might be tempted to think that we’re at the top of the list. We’re not. The US isn’t even in the top ten. Want to know who is the happiest? People in these countries, scale based on 100 being the happiest:
Paraguay 84
Guatemala 83
Honduras 83
Uzbekistan 83
Ecuador 83
El Salvador 82
Indonesia 82
Costa Rica 81
Uruguay 81
Colombia 81
Switzerland 81
One doesn’t need to look long to realize that none of the countries listed are likely to be engaged in things like empowerment and mindfulness. They’re not doing yoga and attending seminars on How To Be A Better You. Yet, they are consistent, year after year, happier than we are. We’re still in the top 25, mind you, but that people in lesser industrialized countries with fewer opportunities, higher unemployment, and lower wages would still be happier than we are should give us a hint that we’re probably going about this the wrong way.
One of the lessons I learned from going to church every waking moment of my youth is that no one promises us happiness. In fact, we’re pretty much assured that happiness isn’t going to happen all that often. If Poppa were sitting here with me this morning, and perhaps he is, he would likely use this scripture to make his point:
11 I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. 12 I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. 13 I can do all this through him who gives me strength. [Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.]
Look back up at the questions asked for the Positive Emotions Index. Did you sleep well? The question isn’t whether you slept as long as you want. Neither does it involve the type of bedding on which one sleeps. Simply sleeping well is sufficient and being content with that is more likely to leave us feeling satisfied. Were you treated with respect all day yesterday? That’s going to change from day to day and perhaps even moment to moment. Yet, to the degree we can find contentedness, not happiness, in our situation, regardless of how others treat us, we are more likely to feel better about ourselves.
Now, look what happens when we focus questions outward. Did you help someone else smile or laugh today? Chances are, if you helped someone smile, you were probably smiling also. It is easier to feel good when we are helping others feel good. Did you teach someone something new and interesting today? Does not improving someone else’s life not improve your own at the same time? When we are content, we might just increase our happiness because contentedness allows us to focus outward rather than inward.
One would think that the pursuit of happiness is a virtue, a positive character trait to be admired. Unfortunately, Americans, in their obsession to find happiness at any cost, have made that pursuit negative. Too often, our happiness comes at the expense of others. We focus so fully on what we think might make us feel better that we lose sight of what we could do to make the world feel better.
If we were some type of larvae that lives in a cocoon with no interaction with or obligation to the outside world, then sure, focusing on our own happiness might be totally appropriate. We do not live in cocoons, though. We are part of a vibrant, loud, emotional, and needy society. When we focus on our own happiness to the exclusion of those around us, we ultimately do harm to the whole.
Instead, perhaps we should work more to find contentedness and focus our intentions and actions on helping others. Something tells me that when we stop pursuing happiness so hard it might just show up on its own.
Every once in a while we need to go back through the archives and revive some photos that were once ignored
This is one of those days where I just couldn’t handle the current topics in my newsfeed. The top five news stories this morning all dealt with the same issue which dominated yesterday’s news. I don’t want to add to that noise. Plus, I’m still tired, recovering from a month of fashion shows and trying to get things in gear for next year. This is typically a quiet time where we don’t shoot as much, but we’re extremely busy with business stuff.
Given all that, today seemed like a good day to show you some pictures we’ve revived from the archive. Rather than put them in a slide show, though, which would be very easy, I want to take you through each of them and explain why they were omitted from their original set’s production. Perhaps this method will be a bit more interesting.
Let’s start with the photo above. This is a picture of downtown Dallas, TX taken from the passenger seat of my brother’s vehicle. I love that Dallas is not afraid of modern architecture. There is a lot to that city that will surprise you, despite the large number of morons who live there (No, baby brother doesn’t actually live there). Why was this image not part of the original set? Two reasons. First, the uniqueness of the architecture leaves me uncertain as to where the straight lines are supposed to be. Perspective is a wonderful thing and this image defies it. Second, look in the bottom right corner and you’ll see my reflection in the snow-covered hi … uhm, I mean, car window. Rather creepy.
Why I Revived This Picture: I love the ambiguity of this frame. We see their arms extended upward but have no reason why they are engaged in such a pose. I had only recently met both girls and they were such good sports to be out shooting on a rather cool Sunday morning. What are they actually doing? Pullups. There’s a bar just above them, hence the reason for their arms being in the position they are.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: The very reason I like this image is why we left it out of the original set: it’s too ambiguous. We were doing an article on fitness, had tons of photos, and this one just muddied the water too much.
Why I Revived This Picture: Symmetry. This is the tack room at the stables where my niece rides. I was taken first by the color of all the different tack, but as I looked I noticed the symmetry with which they were hung on the wall. I couldn’t resist the photo.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: We were on a family vacation. Do you see any family in this picture? No. This happens every vacation. I take a lot of pictures and then never get around to processing the ones that don’t include family members.
Why I Revived This Photo: I really love the painting Kelly Oswalt did for this set. Having to cover an entire body in white is a lot more difficult than it sounds. The design she chose was absolutely wonderful and has always been one of my favorites.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: At the time we shot this I was cropping everything to a square orientation and this photo just doesn’t fit. I was also dropping in a substitute background and that didn’t work with this photo, either.
Why I Revived This Photo: Color. It’s not often we have a photo with such high contrasting color, especially with any level of nudity in the photo. Here is one of those rare instances where it all comes together and looks best with very little treatment to it at all.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: Originally, this photo was part of a composite image, hence the blue background. The image was heavily blurred and at a reduced opacity so that the bright contrast of the colors was not evident.
Why I Revived This Photo: This sleeve is one of the best examples of detailed color ink work I’ve seen. There are a lot of times I don’t like full sleeves like this because, depending on how the arm is bent or what clothes might be worn, the flow of the image is interrupted. This piece works nicely, though, even under blouses that cover most of her arm. Very beautiful work.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: When we first processed this series of photos I really wanted to make sure every image focused on the ink more than a model. I was concerned that the nipple might be distracting because, as the past few hours have demonstrated, the world is full of pigs.
Why I Revived This Photo: Because this is one of those sets where we should have done better. We had been shooting all day outdoors and hadn’t taken enough lights to adequately handle shooting after dark. Not many of these photos are worth saving, but this one is.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: The whole set was largely buried. I only processed three images when we first shot them. As an aside, since these photos were taken, the model returned to college and is now an RN. A lot of people called her a lot of not-so-nice names and refused to work with her. To those people, we say, “Fuck you.”
Why I Revived This Photo: Lines. Look at them. The perspective of the hallway, uniquely shaped by unseen staircases, trailing off into darkness, lends itself to so very many stories. My imagination runs wild when I think of all the adventures that might have had their beginning or ending in this hallway.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: This image is not from a public set. We were doing some location scouting and this was one of the images that convinced me we needed to shoot here. However, I typically don’t process photos from a scouting shoot. In fact, it’s rare I keep them at all. I just couldn’t let this one go.
Why I Revived This Photo: Nothing from this set has ever been processed. They were shot a few years ago, the middle set in a three-set shoot. First set was processed, third set was processed, these were skipped. Since I was going through looking for photos that hadn’t been seen before, this seemed like a pretty good choice.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: I don’t remember exactly, but the set that comes after this is a very popular series involving a pocket watch. Some of you might remember having seen those photos. I think there’s still one in my portfolio. Excitement over that last set most likely led to this set being ignored.
Why I Revived This Photo: This poor young woman has had a rough go of it lately. Every time she turns around, someone she cares about is dying. There are other issues as well. This is one of those moments when life is not being kind and there’s not a helluva lot anyone can do about. So, I’m hoping this photo might bring a smile to her day and remind her that someone cares.
Why This Photo Was Omitted: At the time we processed the other photos from this set, this one didn’t seem to particularly fit the narrative. We’d had a fun shoot. She had a fun shoot. This image seemed a little too serious to match with all the smiles and laughter. The photo feels a lot more poignant by itself.
There, ten photos revived from the archive. I hope you’ve enjoyed the stroll. Maybe I’ll think of something important to write by tomorrow.
For some people, dressing stylishly is a requirement but what if how we dress were a competitive sport?
Imagine getting up every morning knowing that what you choose to wear could affect your income for the day. What would you choose? Stylish dress with heels that can’t be ignored? Colorful separates with the new ballet flats that are all the rage? Perhaps a dress suit for that meeting this afternoon.
Among the list of characteristics that one might give Americans, casual and competitive are two that would seem to be at odds with each other. How can one be competitive and any portion of them still be relaxed? The answer, of course, is that we’re not competitive and casual about the same things. We’re competitive about our sports, obviously, and a lot of people are competitive about work. Some are competitive about how much stuff they have and what kind of stuff it is. At the same time, we’re very casual about things such as how we dress, what we wear when we go to the store, and how people perceive us when we’re “off duty.”
Many of our workplaces have dress codes, some of which are driven by safety requirements or a need for uniformity and visual recognition. However, what if you were graded based on how stylish you are? Perhaps even more frightening, what would life be like if your compensation and eligibility for advancement were connected to how on trend you are in your choice of clothing? How would that change your life?
There is an interesting article in this past Wednesday’s New York Times that is titled The Situation With Street Style. Coming at the end of a month’s worth of fashion shows, the article focuses on an aspect of fashion that has not only changed dramatically but become rather competitive. Before the advent of social media and hordes of street style photographers lingering outside every runway venue, most editors and buyers dressed for anonymity. Part of doing their job was to report on the fashion, not be the fashion. So, they dressed in monochrome outfits that were stylishly boring and reasonably comfortable. Those 14- to 16-hour days can be grueling, so best to dress for the long haul.
However, now there are a number of editors and buyers whose Instagram accounts are followed by hundreds of thousands of people. Being anonymous is no longer an option. Everyone who enters a fashion show, especially those in Europe, is photographed multiple times. Pictures are uploaded to Instagram and other social media almost immediately and those who are recognizable are tagged. For those who once enjoyed anonymity, how they dress has become a liability.
Street style among those who attend Europe’s fashion shows is now competitive. Anna Dello Russo, an editor at large for Vogue Japan, changes her clothes as many as six times a day during fashion weeks so that she’s not continually photographed wearing the same thing as she moves from show to show. For many, dressing stylishly enough to capture the attention of street style photographers isn’t a bonus, but a requirement for the job. They must dress to attract attention which, in turn, drives sales for advertisers.
Would being competitive about how we dress really be all that bad? In some ways, we are already there. The whole reason many schools have switched to requiring uniforms is because, allegedly, individual style had become so competitive that it was giving rise to theft and bullying. Teenagers can take anything and make it hyper-competitive and sometimes that isn’t a good thing. We also see the same competitiveness in urban cultures where the amount and kind of “bling” one wears is a status symbol. The concept of competitive styling really isn’t that foreign to us.
We tend to push off a lot of the competitiveness as we get older. We’re told to work more as a team and to do that we have to set aside at least a certain portion of our competitive drive. We start dressing similarly to those around us, careful to not dress higher than our status. For example, if one’s immediate supervisor dresses in khaki and cotton button-down shirts, wearing a suit and tie might be seen as an aggressively competitive move. Americans are much more comfortable taking a casual approach to clothing in large part because it feels more friendly.
Competitive dressing could potentially be a good thing, though. Taking our appearance more seriously encourages us to take other things more seriously, especially the work we do. When we put more effort into how we dress, our attitude changes. We tend to act more determined, more focused, and more driven. Women who dress stylishly not only command more attention but also give more attention to their peers. Men who are more attentive to how they dress are generally seen as being more reliable and trustworthy. Being competitive in our everyday style could be a good thing for all of us.
Of course, if we’re creating a competition, then we need a scoring system that reflects current trends but doesn’t punish those who can’t afford designer labels. Being able to pull together different pieces to create a unique and attractive look needs to have greater value than merely copying what was on the runway. Taking something simple and turning it into something fabulous would earn bonus points. Companies could have a special employee Instagram account with rewards given for those whose style generates the most likes.
Extreme fashion makes assessing penalties difficult, though. It’s not like one could be dinged for wearing pajamas to work when we’ve seen multiple instances of pajamas on the runway mixed with things like suit jackets and button-down shirts. Then, there’s the question of how to address the inherent sensuality of some designs. Sheer was huge on the runway this season as was wearing bras outside one’s clothing. Addressing what is appropriate without being unnecessarily inhibitive could be challenging.
Ultimately, though, I think putting more emphasis on how we dress, on styling ourselves to attract attention rather than avoid it, might be just the attitude adjustment we’ve been needing. We need to think more of ourselves rather than trying to hide. Our society and culture shouldn’t be dominated by a handful who happen to dress better than everyone else. Going to the effort of looking good, and let’s face it, looking good takes some serious effort, should be rewarded, not discouraged. Perhaps being compensated for making an effort might encourage more people to make an effort. I see that as being a positive thing.
Competitive street styling, your time has come.
Regrets are motivational because we can’t fix them. They are permanent reminders we need to do better.
Does anyone else hear Frank Sinatra in their head? I don’t think there’s any escaping that. His song might be part of the issue here.
We have, I believe, a problem owning up to our regrets. There has been a line of popular philosophy the past several years that thinks we should live life with no regrets, that we learn as we go and whatever happens is exactly what was supposed to happen. Such thinking is, in my opinion, complete and utter horseshit. There’s a difference between simply making a mistake and doing something we regret. Regrets can’t be fixed. Regrets are forever.
What got me thinking along this line was an article in Marie Claire about women who regret having children. The article caught my eye because I know some of these women. They both became pregnant while on birth control. They never intended to have children. These women knew in advance that they did not have the temperament to be good mothers. Yet, they allowed family, friends, and/or religion to bully them into keeping the kids. Now, they regret having given in. They feel trapped in a life they never wanted, that arguably should never have happened. Consequence after consequence reminds them that their life was meant to be different. These women really understand the inescapability of regrets.
Regrets happen. Ignore them if you want, but there are lessons to be learned here if we take a moment and pay attention. Don’t shove that regret in the back of your mind and forget. Let it guide you.
Imagine how differently My Way would sound if Frank sang, “Mistakes, I’ve made a few …” It’s just not the same, is it?
Why? Because there is a fundamental difference between mistakes and regrets: Regrets can’t be fixed. The consequences of your actions or inaction are irreversible. Nothing you do makes up for your error. You’re stuck.
Mistakes, on the other hand, might have difficult and long-term consequences, but you have an ability to make amends for the wrong-doing. Let’s say, for example, that in the haze of a misguided youth one commits an act of vandalism. Sure, what you did was wrong, but there are things one can do to rectify the situation. One might repair or replace what was broken, repay a property or business owner, and clean up any mess that was made. Life moves on, lesson learned. Someone says, “Hey, we all make mistakes,” and we put the event in the back of our minds.
Suppose, however, that in committing that act of vandalism one’s actions resulted in the death of someone else. You didn’t intend for anyone to get hurt, but it happened and it was your fault. Nothing you do will ever bring that person back. Even if you take that person’s place, do their work, take care of their family, behave like a model citizen the rest of your life, nothing replaces the soul your actions terminated. Nothing. Ever. That’s a regret. Regrets never go away.
Hopefully, one gets through life with few regrets. Certainly, most of us don’t have the burden of being responsible for someone else’s death. Those we have, though, we need to address and accept.
What do you really regret? When one is asked that question our tendency is to mull over some of our larger mistakes. Mine would be going through my youth trying to be who I thought my parents wanted me to be rather than being myself. A lot of time and energy and money was wasted on things that I never really wanted. Opportunities were missed. Yet, over the years I’ve been able to rectify that problem. Who I am now is who I want to be. Sure, I cannot regain my youth, but I am not bound by the errors in judgment I made when I was 15. Do I wish I had done things differently? Sure, but those were mistakes, not regrets.
My biggest regret is not listening to the stories being told, especially those my parents had to tell. Only after they passed did I begin to realize all the questions that we never asked, the lessons we never had a chance to learn. I can’t get that back. Those stories are all gone, lost to eternity because I wasn’t paying attention. Was the action excusable? No, I knew what I wasn’t doing. We even talked about the need to sit down and record conversations, but we never made the effort for that to actually happen.
Regrets don’t have to be huge, they don’t have to be horrific. Regrets do alter lives, though, and the effects are permanent. Facing them doesn’t give us the ability to change the outcome or make amends. However, accepting our regrets lays the foundation for what we do next with our lives. Our regrets tell us what we must change, what to do differently as we move forward with our lives.
Once we deal with the reality of our regrets, we are then challenged to not become enslaved by them. For the women who regret having children, they struggle to regain their lives, their sense of self-worth. I remember one young woman whose child died at the hands of an abusive husband. For her, the regret of not leaving and protecting her baby was insurmountable and after five years of struggle she committed suicide. Dealing with regrets isn’t always life-altering, but it certainly can be.
What we must understand about regrets is that while lives might be changed by our actions, we are still in control of what happens next. We can’t change the past, but the future we build is our own. Regrets give us the ability to change not only our lives, but perhaps the lives of others.
Each of the women in the Marie Claire article thought they were alone, that they were the only one who ever regretted having children. As they spoke up, though, they discovered that others felt the same way and they all needed help coping with that regret. A community was formed. Books were written. New mothers now have resources to help them because of how others dealt with their regrets.
What we learn and how we respond to our regrets is going to be different for everyone, but the one thing for certain is that we must be willing to move beyond them. Regrets might change our lives but they should never stop them.
Wednesday, aka Humpday, is a marker: your week is half done. You are going to make it.
I have had a Nina Simone song stuck in my head the past few days and it won’t leave. I step outside, look up, and it’s there:
Birds flying high you know how I feel
Sun in the sky you know how I feel
Breeze driftin’ on by you know how I feel.
It’s a new dawn
It’s a new day
It’s a new life for me yeah
… And I’m feeling good.
It really is a lovely song, but when you look up and realize that those birds you see flying up there are actually turkey vultures, then you get a slightly uncomfortable feeling that maybe we’re not feeling so good after all.
Happy Humpday. This is the last day of Paris Fashion Week. We’ve already reviewed the new Louis Vuitton collection this morning, which was rather cool. Only one more to go and we’re done until February. We can do this, right?
Oh, wait, the kids are home for fall break. There’s no napping today. Instead, we’ll have to do something creative like bake cookies or draw pictures. They helped me make peach cobbler yesterday, which didn’t go too badly. The results were edible. Fighting over who gets to measure the next ingredient gets a bit tiresome, though. Maybe I can convince them to take a long walk.
I don’t mean that as evil as it sounds.
How do we make the most out of Humpday? I know Kat’s struggling, too. Wednesdays can be really rough. We’re still too far from the weekend. Additional stimulus is necessary if we’re going to avoid killing someone. What ever shall we do?
How anyone makes it through a Humpday without music I don’t know. When we hit this point in the week it takes some serious sounds to keep me moving. Does it really matter if I dance like a one-legged ostrich? No, not at all. We need some serious sounds in our lives to keep us going. Here are a few suggestions:
Yeah, you know I had to slip that last one in there. It really is a cool song. Just try to not think about the vultures.
You know how Wednesdays can be, sometimes you need to just step away before things get violent. The problem is that you really don’t have the time to get immersed in a good book. Someone has to do all the work that no one else is touching. You’ll also need to fix the fuckups that were left for you. There’s no way you can sneak off for the entire afternoon. What you need is something short and distracting. Do we have suggestions, damn straight we do. These are about as distracting as we could find.
You might start with What Sex Means For World Peace. No, it’s not scandalous. This is real foreign policy talk going on here. If we want world peace we need to focus more on women’s rights.
… the very best predictor of a state’s peacefulness is not its level of wealth, its level of democracy, or its ethno-religious identity; the best predictor of a state’s peacefulness is how well its women are treated. What’s more, democracies with higher levels of violence against women are as insecure and unstable as nondemocracies.
If that doesn’t work for you, then perhaps you can try something a little more provocative such as A Professional Sex Toy Tester’s Guide To Buying A Vibrator. Why? Consider this:
Why, if existing rabbits and dildos are doing such a good job at getting us off, do we need more? “As women become more comfortable with the concept of using toys, the technologies and materials that we might use to create them develop too,” says Jaques. So there’s always room for a new favourite to make its mark. At Lovehoney, they hold regular “gap analysis” meetings,where the boardroom walls are plastered with hundreds of polaroids of their current toy range to identify what’s missing. “We also look to other industries and markets for new ideas,”explains Jaques. “You’d be surprised how many of our toys have been inspired by a power tool or communications device.”
Now, some of you take Humpday rather literally, so for those of you in that camp, I might suggest 11 Ways to Make Doggy Style Even SEXIER. Nope, I’m not going to comment.
You don’t want to overdo it, of course, but getting out and taking a walk really isn’t a bad idea. Yeah, there may be a chance of rain late this afternoon, but for most the day the temperature is going to be lovely. Getting out of wherever for a minute or two gives you a chance to step away from the stress and the people causing it and breathe. You don’t need to work up a sweat, mind you. That could make things uncomfortable for the rest of the day.
Again, it’s that whole going-back-to-the-office thing that you have to keep in mind. A gentle stroll for ten minutes or so, roughly the same amount of time someone else might spend smoking a cigarette, should be just about right. You can then go back in with a clearer head and power through the rest of your Humpday without any serious problems.
Of course, the ultimate experience here might be to walk to the nearest coffee shop and grab a cup. The walk, the caffeine, the fresh air, all sound like the perfect recipe to keep your hands off the throat of that lazy, no-good … uhm, well, you know who.
We’re strong. We’ve been through weeks worse than this and survived. Only two more days after this one and you have the weekend. Or something. If you don’t have the weekend, there’s surely a break for you out there somewhere. Look for it. Set a goal. You’re getting closer with every passing second.
And if that doesn’t work, I have a shovel. We’ll bury the bodies and pretend nothing ever happened. Happy Humpday.
I Think It’s About Forgiveness
The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong. —Mahatma Gandhi
Forgiveness is never easy, but it is forgiving ourselves that is perhaps the most difficult task of all.
Forgiveness is a challenging topic, and a rather sobering one for a Friday. Normally, I try to keep things a bit lighter as we head into the weekend, but my instinct, or my gut, or whatever you want to call that nagging voice in the back of my head tells me to go with it. We need forgiveness and we especially need to forgive ourselves.
This is important. I want my boys to see this not because of anything they’ve done but because, as humans, they will inevitably do something that lingers on their conscience. Forgiving ourselves is a lesson we are challenged to learn because we must first have a reason to learn it, and that reason is often painful.
Also, before we get too deep into the conversation, I want you to know that the examples I use here are intentionally fictional. I’m not throwing anyone under the bus, so to speak, and I’m certainly not inclined to make any great confessions of my own faults. Confession is good for the soul, but not for the Internet.
Let’s start, however, by taking a look at a new short film by the folks at Pixar. This isn’t the same fun, cheerful, feel-good type of film we usually see from the animation company. What we see here strikes a dark tone and, honestly, I’m not sure I would recommend it for young children unless you are ready, as a parent, to hold a serious conversation. The film runs a little over six minutes. Take a look:
Borrowed Time from Borrowed Time on Vimeo.
[This video source doesn’t always scale well for some mobile devices. If you’re having difficulty viewing the video, you can find the original on Vimeo]
We’ve All Been There, Sort Of
Borrowed Time is one of those poignant little films that one almost wishes were longer, but at the same time we’re rather glad it isn’t. Emotion that strong carried out for the length of a feature film would be difficult for a lot of people to handle. The short film is challenging enough. The producers behind the film wanted to quickly, briefly, drive home the point that it’s not only okay to forgive ourselves, but that forgiveness is necessary if we are to continue living.
We’ve been there. Okay, perhaps we didn’t accidentally kill our fathers as they clung desperately to the side of a cliff. We’ve done other things, though; things we shove to the back of our mind and try to not think about. Letting a dying aunt suffer in pain because you stole her Percoset. Beating up that little kid when you were eight-years-old because you were angry about being abused yourself. The night you let a drunk friend drive away and they killed someone with their car.
Those experiences, those moments of personal trauma, never really go away. You remember the look of pain, the pleading, in your victim’s eyes. Maybe you remember screams or cries for help. Or maybe you just remember the silence as you did nothing. We do our best to hide those memories. The past is the past. That all happened when you were young and didn’t know better. Yet, those pictures still haunt your mind. No one else in the world may know what you did, but you do. If you dare think about it very long you fear you’ll go mad.
Some Things We Can’t Fix
Recovery programs often include a step called “making amends,” doing something to make up for the wrong you’ve done in the past. The exercise is appropriate for some discrepancies, but there are some things we do, the really big things, that simply can’t be fixed, ever. Like the young man in the film, there’s no bringing his father back. We see the pain in his eyes, drawn beautifully by the Pixar animators, and know that he has replayed that scenario over and over in his mind, trying to find some way to fix it, looking for scenarios where his finger doesn’t find that trigger. There’s no changing what happened, though.
How do we get beyond this? How do we pick ourselves up and keep moving? For the man in the film, it was a matter of revisiting the site of that most horrible event, walking among the skeletons of dead horses and a decayed stage coach, feeling the desert wind, and finding his father’s watch. Everything happened in a neat package of six minutes. For most of us, however, forgiveness takes a little bit longer than six minutes.
Let me say right here that if you have a matter of guilt, justified or not, that is interrupting your life to a severe degree, seek professional help. You don’t have to do this on your own. Finding a path to forgiving yourself is not safe for everyone. If you’re prone to depression, have had thoughts of suicide or harming yourself, don’t address such emotional matters on your own. Don’t even try.
For the rest of us, though, there are multiple ways of finding your path to self-forgiveness.
Identifying What Really Happened
Memory is a tricky thing that loves to mix up the facts. The further removed we are from an event, the more likely it is that we are getting at least some of the facts wrong. This is why witness testimony is often unreliable. Our memories are easily influenced by external sources, including our dreams, and therefore unreliable.
So, before you continue beating yourself up over something, consider what actually happened. Get the facts straight. Try to understand what your motivations were at the time and how the circumstances participated in your action. Come to grips with the decisions you made and how the consequences of those decisions affected you and other people.
Only when we are totally honest with ourselves about what we did and why we did it can we begin to move forward. Again, this can be a very emotional and difficult step. Don’t be afraid to ask for professional help.
Mistakes Don’t Make You A Bad Person
There are few truly horrible people in the world. There are a lot of people whose actions are misunderstood and regrettable, but the number of genuinely murderous, maniacal beasts are actually small enough that you’re probably not among them. Unless you’re burying bodies in your backyard or somewhere, you have hope.
Society likes to label people and, especially throughout the 1980s and early 90s we, as a nation, were obsessed with labeling “bad guys.” The whole “three strikes” program that sentenced repeat felony offenders to life in jail, is a sad commentary of how quickly our society just gives up and throws people in the trash. The personal effect of that philosophy is that we become willing to throw ourselves away, also.
When you have someone tell you that YOU are valuable, they’re not just pandering to you. You are not a bad person. What you did might have been very wrong, but it does not rob you of your humanity. Even if you vote for the Republican nominee for President, as deplorable an act as that might prove to be, you are still not a bad person. You are capable of love and of being loved. Don’t every forget that.
You Can Start Over
Too many people feel that they cannot escape their pasts. Granted, sometimes making that jump is difficult. I can think of one acquaintance right now whose past is chasing him like a hound dog. He feels that he can’t catch a break because every time he turns around something he did in the past raises its ugly head and knocks him back down. When that happens you have but one move: start over.
Leave town. Change jobs. Go back to school and study something completely different. Select a radically different group of friends. Become someone who makes you proud. You can do it. This isn’t a new path that no one’s been down before. In fact, this path is so well-worn that it’s deep-rutted from use. Forgiveness means, at some level, shutting forever those doors to the past and making a conscious decision that you are moving on with your life.
Yes, starting over is scary. I get that. Again, we’ve been there. You can do it, though. You deserve this.
Learn From Your Mistakes
You’ve heard this advice before. Just as it applies to other less traumatic mistakes in our lives, it applies to the big stuff as well. Okay, so you totally blew it. Part of the forgiveness process is learning what to do differently so that we don’t make those mistakes again. Sure, we hope the circumstances that led to that error don’t re-occur. Part of learning may be knowing how to avoid the circumstances that put you in the position to do whatever you did wrong. Fate sometimes intervenes, however. You need to be ready.
Life throws us a lot of curves. We never know when a situation might arise that requires us to make a critical decision. One does not always have the luxury to sit and reason through the possibilities and possible consequences. When those moments come, it is our experiences that teach us how to respond. Those who have frequent mistakes in their lives are better equipped to know what not to do, which inherently puts them closer to the correct action.
What happened in the past can make you a better person today and into the future. We make better choices. We avoid dangerous circumstances. We are able to forgive ourselves and continue living.
Borrowed Time
Notice that I’ve not excused anyone’s behavior. The man in the short film was placed in a situation where any number of accidents could have occurred and a most horrible one did. Not everything bad that happens to us is an accident, though. When we intentionally make bad decisions there is no excuse.
What we must do instead is forgive. Not forget, mind you, but forgive. Forgiveness opens our souls, our consciousness so that we can move on and achieve great things. We diminish our potential when we bind ourselves with guilt. As humans, we are capable of truly amazing things when we remove all the obstacles that we place in front of ourselves. The process of forgiveness helps clear the way for us. We move on. The clock starts ticking again.
Time is elusive, though. Don’t wait. The longer we hold onto that guilt the tighter we bind ourselves.
Give yourself permission to live. Forgive.
Share this:
Like this: