A Feminist and a Lady

Yeah, Yeah, it sounds like an opening for a joke . . . 

But really.  With all this feminism going around, I feel like the whole concept of being a lady is lost.  I can still be an independent woman, equal to men, and allow him to buy me dinner or open my door.  And is it not more gracious to allow men to help me? To be chivalrous? I feel like in striving for equality, women are trying to make men redundant or worthless, trying to completely replace them. I think we're forgetting that we want EQUAL, not better than, or else we're just reversing the prior roles and becoming hypocrites. It's also important to remember that we are equal in potential but if we don't take full advantage of this, then NO, we are NOT equal.  Yes, both you and your husband can go to law school and be lawyers.  But if he is an ECON major and you decided to get pregnant instead . . . yeah, he's smarter than you.  Sorry dude. But on the flip side, it's entirely your choice, and you have to own it. And you can't get upset if he get's a scholarship or better grades because he worked harder. but you can do that too!! We, as women, are just as capable as men, we just have to work for it, too! 

I also have this problem with the lack-of-personal-hygiene generally associated with Feminism. If there can be lipstick lesbians, can there not also be lipstick feminists? Can I not be attractive and independent? 

So this was kind of ramble-y but anyway, I think you can be a feminist and a lady!

Easter

In any Christian religion, one would think that Easter would hold just as valuable, if not a higher value, than Christmas.  Christmas celebrates the birth, but the birth is irrelevant without the resurrection. And yet, Christmas generally results in a much larger celebration.  But perhaps this is just the commercialization, and Christmas presents provide a larger revenue for Corporate America.  Regardless, my mother always tried to make Easter special for us kids while we were growing up.  We generally had two, if not three, days of Easter, so that we could keep the Pagan rituals (eggs, bunny, basket) separate from the Spiritual (church, Jesus, resurrection).  I really like this.  It enabled us to be kids and enjoy the commercialization and materialization we thought we needed.  But it also allowed us to learn of the Savior and his role in our lives.  We even have a special family home evening lesson pioneered towards Easter that we use, even though we almost never have family night. 

And so, today, I wish you a Happy Easter. May you remember the Savior and enjoy the chocolate! 

Philosophy

Part of the requirement for my degree was to take two upper division philosophy classes. So I, of course, picked one from a professor I have taken before (with a similar topic, too!) and one that was at a convenient time. Unfortunately for me, this class was on Aristotle's Metaphysics. I was clearly the most unprepared for this class. All of the graduating seniors have been accepted into at least one grad school, some on scholarship.  One of these students will ask questions I can't even understand, let alone follow the answers the professor gives.  

Now, personally, I find philosophy to be completely bunk. It's absolutely brilliant people talking about things  and ideas, but not about action  or change.  Nothing is actually provable, tangible, or real. They just talk about it, like they're superior to everyone else. I mean, it's the study of knowledge.  Okay.  And Aristotle says the best knowledge is the knowledge obtained for knowledge's sake, not for any useful actual purpose. I just feel like all these answers could be answered by religion or science. 

Now everyone great once in a while in class, I will ask a question or make a comment that my professor finds absolutely brilliant.  I often find them over simplistic. I just feel like everyone is over thinking everything, and it's really not that confusing. Now, either my professor thinks I'm a complete idiot and is completely surprised that I understand, or he thinks I'm a complete genius by being able to answer the questions or address the problems of soon to be grad students. But I have to be completely honest.  I am really good at regurgitating information.  If my professor has said something to be 'the truth,' I will remember it. And then regurgitate it in class. I don't understand why it's true, or what it means.  I just know that it's the truth because my professor has said so. That, or I simplify it down much further than my classmates.  

And that, my friends, is how Philosophy works. 

Return to Oz

 When I was a child I was simultaneously enthralled and frightened by Return to Oz.  The thought of a witch/princess taking my head for her own scared me half to death. But at the same time, it was a pretty thrilling adventure.  And the inspiration for The Lava Game at my house.  But I the actually storyline isn't too memorable in my head.  So when Jordyn suggested watching Return to Oz at almost ten tonight, I agreed. And even though she fell asleep within the first few minutes, I decided to continue watching after I put her to bed. 

The witch still scares me. Actually, the staff at the mental institution does as well.  It's kind of a creepy movie! The character of the witch reminds me a lot of The White Witch from Narnia, actually, what with her turning people into stone and the way she talks to Dorothy is similar to the way The White Witch talks to Edmund. This witch, however, is solely a princess and is subject to the Gnome King. 

Return to Oz introduces an entirely new cast of characters, such as Belinda the Hen, Jack Pumpkin Head, and Tik Tok.  They are not as lovable as Tin Man, Cowardly Lion, or the Scarecrow, but she still calls them "the best friends anyone could have." It really is beneficial to think of it as a movie version of the book as opposed to a sequel to the movie.  The movie is actually much clearer with knowledge of the novel.  Solely having seen The Wizard of Oz  is not enough, and gives you much different expectations.  The quality is very different, and the feel is not nearly as magical. It is much more focused on saving Oz than her journey home. Even when Dorothy saves the Scarecrow, he looks worse than the original.  It is very much a low-budget Disney film from the 80s. And the whole concept of Princess Ozma is not made clear until the very end, and I'm not sure I even really understand the purpose of the character in this film.

Return to Oz is a fun watch for me, as a memory into my childhood of a movie I feared, but it is certainly not the greatest film out there. I'm not quite sure why I was fascinated with it as a child, but Jordyn seems to love it, so perhaps it's just a kid thing.  So if you see it at the library or it's on tv, give it a try.  Otherwise. . . .