Silver and gold...silver and gold...

Okay, maybe no gold, but silver. Though technically no silver either. I'm getting the last of my silver fillings removed today and a brand new crown put on the tooth. I used to have 10 silver fillings. Can you believe it? More filling than teeth in a few of them. Over the years Dr. Chung has taken them out and replaced them with composite resin fillings. Now Dr. Youngblood is taking the last one because the tooth around it is starting to crack. But this is one of those more filling than tooth ones so a new crown it is.

Which makes me extremely nervous.

As you can tell by the fact that I had 10 silver fillings at one point in time, I've had a lot of dental work done. A lot when I was very young. This filling, for instance, I've had since I was a kid. Most of the fillings in my mouth were from when I was a kid. I don't want to say that the dentist we had for awhile was unethical but it seems odd to me that my teeth were just super rotten up until around the age of 11 or 12 and then they were fine. Which also corresponded to when we switched dentists. The major work I've had done over the years has been taking those old fillings out and replacing them with new. Which has sucked. I have a whole section on the right side of my mouth that was filled, then taken out, then refilled, then take out. Then a crown, then taken off, then a root canal and then another crown. Awful.

And this was after the first go round of taking out a failing filling and Dr. Chung discovering that my trigeminal nerve is flipped. A very rare occurrence but really awful when you are doing dental work and can't figure out why your patient won't go numb. This was a big part of my fear of dental work. I knew if I was going to get a filling it was going to hurt, no matter what. No matter how many shots they gave once they started drilling I would feel it. And so for years if I was getting work done I just sucked it up. Just do it and do it quickly.

This tooth is on the other side of my mouth so I am hopeful that it numbs quickly with no issue. I'm also hopeful that the crown is all that's needed and we won't have to go through months of back to the dentist visits and then ending in a root canal anyway.

Hopeful, but really nervous.

Which is why I'm writing this blog.

Because I keep thinking about it and it's making me crazy.

Half an hour until the appointment.  Sweaty palms. Butterflies in my stomach.

*sigh*

Okay, well, this helped.

And by helped I mean not at all.

But thanks for listening to me whine.

Silver and gold...silver and gold...

Back that up...

So I had an awful nightmare last night. Terrible. Scary, awful stuff. And as I often do in nightmares I changed it. Lucid dreaming. When you are aware that you are dreaming and change the dream. I do it a lot in nightmares. As most of you know I have extremely vivid dreams. Lots of details, very realistic. Which is great when it's a cool dream, awful when it's a nightmare. And I have some doozy nightmares. So years ago I started trying to be aware of dreams when I was in them and change them. Sometimes I can, sometimes I can't. Depends how deeply I'm asleep, I think. The deeper the better really. If it's a lighter sleep I think I wake up before I can shift the dream, if it's deeper I can have that moment of realization that it's all a dream and start to shift the dream.

What normally happens is like last night, I took an awful dream and made it less awful. I sort of backed up the dream to the spot where it all went terribly bad and started over. It was still a nightmare and it wasn't great, but at least I shifted the worst part away and changed that outcome. I haven't quite yet figured out how to take a nightmare and just make it a good dream. It's like the bad part leaves a shadow that doesn't quite go away. But it's better.

So after I woke up from the dream I thought what a great skill that would be in real life. You are having just an awful day and you stop and think, nope, this is not how this is going to go, let's back up and start again. And then you shift a few things. The coffee doesn't spill. The shirt doesn't rip. The accident never happens. The day might still not be great, but at least it wouldn't be awful right?

Except, of course, there are those times where you are having a spectacular day and you run in to someone who is having a terrible day. If they restarted their day would it screw up yours? Would you be in the middle of an excellent day and have it start again and have things subtly shift so it wasn't nearly as great? Still a good day, but the ripple of change would make it less than excellent.

And would we ever get out of a day? I mean there is always someone who would want to shift and restart just to make it better, or perfect, or just to fuck with someone else. What would the rules be? Or would it be like lucid dreaming? Some people can do it and some people can't. And some people are like me and can change certain things but not others while other people could create something entirely new out of whole cloth?

How many times in one day could you back up and start again? And would you need permission from everyone involved? Like in my dream I just backed up the dream. The people in the dream had no say because they weren't real. But if you could actually do it? The people would have their own days going as well and might not take too kindly to you backing it up while they were trying to move forward. And if you had to have everyone in the area agree to back up and start again how long would it take to reach the agreement?

And as I thought about all of these things I realized...this is why I have insomnia.

C-c-c-c-c-ombo blog....

I have been going back and forth today trying to decide which blog to write. The kind of positive, kind of goofy, kind of silver lining blog, or the kind of ranty, kind of pissed off, kind of cynical blog.

So you get both. Because in a way they are tied together. And I said I was going to be more me this month and there is little that is more me than an odd mix of positive cynicism.

Okay, so I have tried and tried to make sure I stay away from the comments on public posts because, well, people are idiots. But I still look. It's like a train wreck, even if you know it's going to be bad, you look. So I decided to change it up. Make it a game. I thought I am going to look so instead of trying and failing to not look I will just look. If I am curious why a post gets 576 comments I am going to guess what most of them are, take a peek and see if I'm right. Usually I am. Which is sad. So I decided that's not that fun of a game. Even though being right is fun, (Oh come on! You know it is!), it's not enough. So I thought about it, what could make this actual fun? Something amusing to me? Something enjoyable?

So I decided that as I was scanning the comments seeing the idiots in full preen I would look for that one comment, or two, or three that were well thought out. Positive, insightful, actually read the article they are commenting on and have something to add to the discussion or just made me laugh. Because in a feed of hundreds of comments there has to be at least one. Right?

And usually there is. Sometimes you have to be patient. Because the idiots speak first and they speak the loudest and the most often. Why is that true? That those with the least to say, say the most?

Anyway, usually there is something in there that's good. Now the rules are that it has to be someone I don't know to count. Because I have a few friends who do comment on public posts and those show in my feed. And because they are my friends you know they are smart and funny and actually add to the discussion, so they don't count in the game. That would be stacking the deck. So I have to find someone posting something that is insightful (I don't have to agree with their point of view it just has to be insightful) or positive or funny that I don't know. And that makes it the game.

The silver lining game. The positive post game. The fun with idiots game. The constructive comments game. I'm not sure what to call it yet. But it's a game now. It's sometimes a really hard game, but that's because my rules are for me. I don't count "I'm praying for you" as a positive insightful post. I know a lot of you would. But that to me is a post that is a meaningful as "Bless you" after a sneeze. You might really be going to pray for them, but it's a knee jerk post. It's a what you should do post. Have to try harder. So I look. And sometimes you find a gem of an exchange like I posted on my Facebook status this morning:

"I have zero fucks to give about this stupid show."

"If you had zero fucks to give you would not have commented. Was that your last fuck?"

"Zero fucks"

"You have taken your last fuck to give and placed it in my hand. Do you want your fuck back? I have more fucks to give. I don't want to take your last one "

Not really adding to the conversation or dealing with the article that was linked but I laughed out loud at it. Because I recognized someone else out there playing their own game with posts. (Also true confession, I polished it just a bit for the status update, I'm a writer, I can't help it, but the exchange was basically this one)

So I am playing the game.

But because I am playing the game I am also again exposing myself to some of the nastiest of the nasties out there. And here is the ranty part of the blog....

SO...this morning someone linked a series of pictures from a FoxNews anchor about Christian refugee children in Iraq and how ISIS is going to kill them. Horrible. Really really awful. But it made me pause as I read her link. ISIS has been murdering people for awhile. A long while. It's been a terrifying story that has been unfolding for awhile. But I guess when it was just one group of Muslims murdering other Muslims it wasn't a big deal? Because make no mistake, that's what the picture was about. Christian children. We must do something now to protect the Christian children. Hmmm...

Okay... so how does this fit with the very same people screaming about sending the large groups of Christian children at our own borders back to Central America? If you are posting about the Christian children in Iraq being in danger because they must either change their religion or be killed and yet you are not concerned at all about the children who are seeking refuge here because they must either change who they are or be killed there is something wrong with you.

Now I know that part of this is the same as my politics. Because I don't belong to either party I think it's easier for me to see them both as idiots when they are being dumb. I don't feel the need to couch what I say with "Well they do it..." or "We have to do it so they don't win..." or what ever nonsense you are selling yourself. Religion is the same for me. I am not quite atheistic but I am strongly agnostic. So when you are posting about saving the kids in Iraq and not the kids at our own borders I can only see one issue. You don't love the little Christian children nearly as much as you hate the Muslims.

It's the only piece that makes sense to me. You have two groups of kids being terrorized. One group is running from extreme violence, gangs, rape, theft, murder. Join the gang or die. And you have another group running from extreme violence, FGM, rapes, murder. Change religion or die. And you are only concerned about one of these groups. So you tell me why.

You want to talk resources, can we afford to take in refugees? Well can we afford to enter in to war in Iraq again? You want to talk illegality of crossing the border. They are refugees on the run for their lives. If you have the Iraqi people who can get out streaming across borders over there would you judge them for it? Now I'm not saying we shouldn't do something to help in Iraq. I think ISIS is terrifying. But I've thought that for awhile. I didn't need them to start killing certain people to make me think that. Killing anyone was bad.

Ask yourself why you care more if the picture says, "Christian Children" instead of just children. And then look deeper and ask yourself if your opinion of the Israel/Palestine issue would change if the Palestinians were all Christian. Does their religion change your opinion on their deaths? And if it does then what is wrong with you? Seriously, ask yourself that question. Spend some time with your bible and find a biblically sound answer to that question. The verse that tells you to love your neighbors as yourself except if they are a different religion. Or the one where Christ tells them to bring the little children to him, but only the Christian ones, the rest he really has no time for. And then ask yourself what the hell is wrong with you that you would love and follow a god who only loves and protects some of the people he made. Though you won't have to ask yourself that question because it's you putting the qualifiers on your capacity to love. Not the book you should be reading.

(deep breath)

And that's the problem with the game. Sometimes it's just not fun.

But sometimes it is. Especially when people swear. Cuss words are always funny...

I don't think that means what you think it means...

I found a new word last week that I decided I loved.

Deepity

It was as a comment on one of those picture postcard wanna be a meme things that at first glance seems fairly profound but completely falls apart if you break it down. Now don't get me wrong, I love a lot of those picture postcard wanna be a meme things. I really do. And I've had my share where when I read it, it struck me and when I shared it I found out that other people either absolutely did not see what I did, or didn't get it the way I did, or pointed out that it really didn't mean what I thought it did. And then I saw this word that described that. Deepity.

So being me I went searching for how it came about. This is what I found on RationalWiki: "Deepity is a term employed by Daniel Dennett in his 2009 speech to the American Atheists Institution conference, coined by the teenage daughter of one of his friends. The term refers to a statement that is apparently profound but actually asserts a triviality on one level and something meaningless on another. Generally, a deepity has (at least) two meanings: one that is true but trivial, and another that sounds profound, but is essentially false or meaningless and would be "earth-shattering" if true."

Then they gave a few examples like There is no I in Team and Without God Good is just O. And a few others like that.

And then after reading that I fell out of love with the word.

I'm so fickle.

But here is why. I liked the idea of deepity, the way the person who was posting it meant. It was something that seemed profound but really fell apart. Researching where it came from it became more clear that it was really meant to mock metaphorical language. I can't get behind that part of it. I like my metaphors. I like my word play. I like a sentence that means more than one thing depending on where you are when you read it. And I really really really dislike smug bastards who want to mock you to feel better about themselves. And that's what this started to really seem like.

Now don't get me wrong, I have a hard time sometimes not pointing out to people that by dropping a word or changing the order of the phrase they are using they are not saying what they think they are, but that to me is being someone who loves language and word play. Pointing out that your little personal self -help mantra is a load of shit? That's totally different. See the difference? If you say you could care less and I let you know that you really mean you couldn't, that's different than telling you that nothing tastes as good as thin feels is a ridiculous statement because taste and feeling are not the same sensation. So nothing feels like chocolate tastes either. They are different things. (though to be fair, this particular mantra doesn't work for me on any level, metaphoric or not, I've been thin and I've had some incredible food, thin doesn't stand a chance)

I know someone right now using a phrase they have fallen in love with that makes absolutely no sense. None. So much so that I spent an afternoon googling it in various formations to try and figure out where he picked it up. Because it's like their sign off now. End of an argument drops the phrase like a mic and leaves the thread. I finally found something close. But they've dropped a critical word. So what they are saying and what they think they are saying aren't the same. I thought about asking them, "What in the hell do you think you are saying here?" but I haven't. Instead I watch how often they use it, the confused reactions they get to it, and wait to see if I will witness the time they realize it makes no damn sense. Why? Well because this amuses me...

But now I am search of a new word. One that means what I thought deepity meant. One that perfectly captures that feeling you get when you read a pretty picture postcard memelite and people are fawning over the deep profound message and you are cocking you head like the RCA dog going...ummm...what?

Oh! And the picture that started it all? Here you go...

It seems like it should be deep right? I mean it has the moody back ground. The sort of ambiguous pattern there in the lower right corner...the short phrasing making you pause to really get the full feel for it...

But it's just passive aggressive bullshit.

Turn that background red. Put the print in bold. Say what you mean. Which I believe...and I am good at this interpretation stuff so don't be upset if you missed it... was...

Fuck you. 

Now to find a new word for a new word that didn't mean what I wanted it to mean...

Are you a goooood witch? Or a baaaad witch?

So yesterday in my blog I mentioned that I taught C to use his powers for good and not evil. Even if evil could be funny. And I've written a lot about choosing happiness and staying away from things that don't make you happy. Today I'm going to talk about the flip side a bit.

So last night a friend of mine linked me to an article he read. It was ostensibly about a word he and I disagreed on for years. But that's not really what the link was about or the article it linked. See there was this paper written that was researching the effects of hostile, benevolent and ambivalent sexism on daughters when practiced by their fathers. The paper was written by two professors and the sample size was 86. Two professors at Marquette University and the article was abstracted in The Medium. A Marquette University school paper.

It was an interesting read. But Marquette University. Two professors. Eighty six subjects. Can you and I agree that this is small time? Insufficient sample size to draw any sort of real conclusions, though there were trends that warranted further study. Written because that's what professors do. They posit theories, do studies, analyze, then do more. Science, bitches. Interesting, semi-dry reading, done back in 2012. Possibly opening a door to discussion about what exactly benevolent sexism is, and if you think it's an issue or isn't. Maybe even talking about the messages we send our kids about gender norms and how that affects their self-esteem. That is if you went and read the actual article, or the actual paper. But that's not what was going on. That's why I say the article linked was ostensibly about a word. It wasn't.

It was about making people angry. It was "wouldn't it make people angry if..." Not "wouldn't it be funny if..." because they weren't trying to be funny. They were trying to make people mad. To make sure there was a divide. That's what they were after. Don't believe me? This is the first paragraph of the linked article "Have you ever called your daughter “princess” or, if you are a daughter, have you been called “princess” by anyone? If so, you are sexist scum." And the link that was posted by our local guy "More garbage being spouted by liberal professors..."

Tell me how that's supposed to lead to anything other than anger? And honestly, reading the comments that were posted, people didn't even get that far. They read the title of the article, the link comment by our local guy and were off and running. The comments ranged from insulted, you can't tell me what to call my kids, to homophobic, oh yes, lots of homophobia, to insulting liberals, to telling people to eat a dick. Because ...reasons.

And you see this all the time. The talking heads out there that only have one reason to get up in the morning. Stir discontent. They aren't fostering discussion. Aren't bridging gaps. Aren't working toward an understanding between people with different points of view. Oh hell no. If that happened they would be out of work. They want you angry. They want you sure that when god was giving out brains the (fill in your opposite party member here) thought he said grains and since they were going Paleo that week they skipped out. Which is why the original guy found an article on Marquette University's website. About a paper written in 2012. With a subject pool of 86. Tell me that his research department wasn't, isn't, searching for shit just like that. "Wouldn't it make people angry if..."

It's the same reason why the conservatives point to Bill Maher as if he speaks for all liberals. And why liberals point to Rush Limbaugh as if he speaks for all conservatives. Because they know it will piss you right the fuck off. Because they have extreme points of view. They are good at making people angry. It's their job. And pointing at them is someone else's job. The Bill O'Reillys of the world naming their pinheads. But none of it really represents the majority of people. Just the loud ones.

So what I want you all to do for me. Just as a favor. Just for awhile. Is when you read an opinion piece that is obviously, OBVIOUSLY, working at just stirring up hate and resentment, you back away. Or at least tell yourself, "You know, self, this person is only doing this to manipulate my emotions. What a douchebag."

Don't let them do it. Don't be the pawn in their little game of "Wouldn't it make people angry if..."

Read. Study. Learn. Find friends you can have discussions with. Share opinions with. Bridge gaps with. Because that's how we make it better. That's the only way.

For instance, here is one part of the article and the paper that was really interesting, that those out there screaming their heads off about "I'll punch a liberal in the face if he tells me what to call my daughter!" would have seen and should have calmed them down if they had actually read it. The girls that were called princess by their fathers had higher self-esteem. So is it the word? I doubt it. My guess would be it goes back to the results of other studies that show that girls who have good relationships with their fathers have a stronger sense of self. It makes sense. Your parents are your first relationships. If that goes well it gives you a pretty strong foundation right?

And just so you know where I stand on the whole princess thing...

My sister was the princess in our family. The long hair. The ringlet curls. The pretty dresses. I was the short haired, wearing my brothers' hand me downs, helping dad in the garage work on "projects" girl. But we both had a good relationship with our dad. Just different. The word isn't the issue here. The relationship was.

And the reason I don't like to be called a princess? Well...

Why settle for Princess when you could be Queen?

Wouldn't it be funny if...

This blog is eventually going to have a bit of a spoiler in it from Guardians of the Galaxy. If you haven't seen the movie yet you should probably come back and read this again another time.

You should tell a pretty girl she's smart and a smart girl she's pretty. That's the advice I gave to Brent years ago. It comes from growing up the smart one. I always liked to be told I was pretty. And my best friend who was the pretty one like to be told how smart she was. Being told I'm smart or her being told she was pretty was expected. It's what people did. It didn't make it much of a compliment. But if you find a smart girl and tell her she's pretty? Now that's unexpected and taken as much more of a compliment.  I wouldn't have believed you, but at least it would have been more unexpected.

Really, deep down, what I want you to tell me is that I'm funny. Funny trumps all. Always has. My dad was funny. My mother is nice and people talk about her smile and her laugh and how much they like that but my dad? My dad was funny. People talked about how he made them smile and made them laugh and that's even better.

If I can make you laugh, that full on true laugh? My day is better. I want you to smile when you think about me. Because your first thought is something funny. Or just that you know if you spend some time with me you are going to laugh. Tell me I'm funny. And be funny yourself. Then we will be friends forever.

But this comes with a warning...I'm funny. But I'm dark.

I told you about watching Bob's Burgers with C in Burlington and him saying that Louise reminds him of me. Now in the episode we were watching she was basically conning people for pie. And pretending to interpret for her sister but really just making up what ever amused her and saying that instead. When I pointed this out C said, "And?" Hmmm...so then we were watching another episode and she was messing with her sister pretending that a cow was sending her secret messages in its poop. Because it amused her. Again C's reaction was, "See?"

Okay...so this weekend we went to see Guardians of the Galaxy and when I talked to C on Sunday he had gone as well so we talked about the movie. And he said, "Rocket reminded me of you..." So in the movie Rocket Raccoon is like this mechanical genius and they are going to break out of prison. He needs a battery, a control pad from a guard's arm and the electronic prosthetic leg from one of the prisoners to break them out. Everyone goes about getting him what he needs, he matches the battery to the control panel and boom they are good to go! "What did you need the leg for?" "I didn't. I just thought it would be funny to make you take it." And that's what reminded C of his dear, sweet, mother.

And I laughed.

I could act insulted. And I tried with the Louise thing. But neither Brent nor C bought it for a second.The big grin on my face as I yelled, "HEY!" probably didn't help my insulted act at all. Because I'm not insulted that my son sees a character that is basically uncontrolled Id and thinks of me. I think it's funny. And it's somewhat true.

I have to say somewhat because no good parent is ever solid Id. You have to put aside things you want when you have kids. There are a lot of times you make decisions based strictly on what is best for them, not you at all. And not at all what you want the most or what you think would be the most fun. Being a parent (a good one at least) often means stepping back and being the grown up.

However...all that being said...anyway...

I still think it's funny. And it makes me smile that that is how he thinks of me.

Because I raised him on a steady diet of "Wouldn't it be funny if...." added to Roald Dahl books and Lemony Snicket stories and any number of darker than midnight comedies. He knew from a very young age that we in this house found certain things funny that other people might not. And that if he and I were riffing on a joke we might (probably would) take it a lot further than other people (including his father) and still think it was hilarious. "Wouldn't it be funny if..."

As a parent I did my job in teaching him not to use people for his own amusement. Even if it would be funny. But I also never really squashed that sense of humor about life. About the absurd things that happen. The things people say and do that are ridiculous. The ways they could be used against them in the most hilarious of ways. Use your powers for good not evil. Even if evil can be really funny. Don't actually do them... but..."wouldn't it be funny if..."

I never stopped sharing those thoughts with him because one of the best things in life is to make him laugh. That doubled over full on laugh. Another thing that makes me ridiculously happy? Seeing how much he digs making me laugh that same way. "Wouldn't it be funny if...."

Everything's secure...ish...

So everyone has insecurity issues sometimes. Okay, maybe not everyone, but I already wrote about Nadine. But for the rest of us, there are days where we are just almost crippled with that feeling of "oh no I can't!" I have said before that I have a good deal of impostor's syndrome and you all know it's true because you read my blog where I spill my secrets, well they aren't really secrets since I spill so many. And I wrote a few weeks ago about getting hit with an issue that I didn't even still know I had. And you all know I've been drifting for a little bit trying to figure out the what next for me.

So this morning as I was working out and my "surprise me" playlist went for all of the slower songs with the heavy lyrics I started thinking. Still trying to figure out the goals thing, trying to decide what to do. I was listening to Dawes and the lyric "is anyone that's making anything new only breaks something else" just flared in my head. And then of course in the song it's quickly followed by "Oh you can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks. Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's starin' right back" And it lead me to thinking that maybe what my goal right now should be is to stop worrying about what other people think I'm breaking and go back to being my own sparkle.

How many times do you let someone else decide who you are? Big ways and small ways? I've talked over and over about the whole potential thing, and the fact that I've never ever been able to figure out what to do as a "grown up" and that I am starting to figure out that that is my point. My purpose is to not have a purpose. To not figure it out. To always question and look and see and share. To be the most me I can be, and that means curiosity, a drive to share what I see and a strong level of dork. But how many times do I step back and change what I was going to do because of someone else's issue?

I post a lot on Facebook. And there are a number of people out there that feel the need to point it out to me. "How many posts is this today?" Which gets the split reaction from me, the Good Denise/Bad Denise response. Usually Good Denise answers "A lot" with a smiley face, while Bad Denise seethes, "You tell me, asshole, since you are obviously keeping track" And Insecure Denise pauses before posting the next thing and thinks about it.

They have been painting the house for two weeks. TWO WEEKS... anyway...today I was cleaning house and had my music up singing along while I cleaned. I noticed the ladder up by the window as they were going to start painting the trim and my first thought was to turn down Neil and stop singing Forever in Blue Jeans. What a dorky song. But then I thought...why? I love the song. I have no qualms about loving it. And I don't even know the people painting my house so why should I care if they think I have lousy taste in music? And I thought to myself, how many times do we do this? Turn down the radio because we think the people in the car next to us might not think our music is cool enough? Too many times I think.

Looking at Facebook and Twitter and any number of articles that are posted there is a strong current right now of people trashing other people to make themselves look better. Did I say right now? I meant always. It's always there. You see it in political ads, they spend all of their time telling you how awful the other guy is instead of telling you what exactly they are going to do. You see it in tweets about movies or music or TV shows, the put down of something you like or you watch to make it look like they are smarter, cooler, better. And you all know how I feel about the Book/Movie people and their snide comments.

So what is going on when I've posted my 5th post for the day and someone wants to tell me about it? Why do I then hesitate to post again? Or conversely why do I then post 6 more things in rapid succession? It's because I'm buying in to what they are saying. And I don't have to do that. Facebook has a button they can click to unfollow me and another one to unfriend me completely if my abundance of posts bothers them.

And how often to we buy in to an opinion someone shares about us that we don't really agree with? I don't drink much and I am an early to bed, early to rise person. Even if I don't sleep much I still am in bed by 10 during the week 10:30 on weekends and out by 6 or 7. And this seems to bug the crap out of people. There is a lot of talk about my lack of drinking and staying out late. Like sobriety and an early bedtime are personality failings. That I am somehow missing out on the world because of them. (I am working on a short story that was born from this idea, I think it will be a good one, there are aliens in it) And there are times where I buy in to that idea. Which is ridiculous. But I can't help it. It's human. But I shouldn't. Not ever. Even when I am feeling smug when the Saturday afternoon hangover posts start rolling in. I shouldn't do that either.

How many times have you seen a post on Facebook by one of your more passive aggressive posting friends and seen the responses of people wondering if it was about them? I tend to stay away from such things because it makes me crazy. If you have a problem with someone tell them. Don't post "some people need to learn how to constructively present criticism..."

But here is the big secret. The big truth. It's not about you. Ever. It's really not. Even if it is clearly about you, it's not about you. It's about them. What's the famous quote? Your opinion of me is none of my business. Because it's their opinion. It's all about them. Not about you. Not really. And I have to keep that in mind. You are bothered that I post a lot. You are bothered that I am sober. You are bothered that I eat incredible food and take a picture to share it. You have issue with the fact that whole world is fascinating to me so I want to share it. None of that has anything to do with me. And when I am frustrated with what someone else is doing I have to keep in mind that it's not them either. It's me. Why am I frustrated? What bugs me? Is there a valid issue here? Or am I just over tired and over done?

Now here is where it gets tricky for me. Thinking about other people is part of who I am. I want people to be happy. I want them to live great lives. I don't want to be rude. I want to be inclusive. If you tell me a word I've always used is offensive I'm not going to call you out on being too PC I'm going to try my best to take that word out of my vocabulary, because to not do that would be rude. And I cannot abide by rudeness. So what do I do when someone is snarky? Or posts something that makes me angry or sad or feel less than?

Honestly, I bitch to my family about it. They have to love me. It's a rule we have. Even if I am being horribly, awfully, disgustingly, bad, they still have to love me. They get to tell me I'm being an asshole as well, but they still have to love me. And trust me, they can tell you there are times they get an earful, or a paragraph worth depending on which family members get hit with the barrage. And we bitch for a bit, the release valve is reset and I am able to put it all back in perspective. Though they know my triggers and can see them coming, "prepare for barrage in 3, 2, 1..."

So where does this leave me now?

With my August goal.

It's a nebulous one. Much harder to track, but worth the time I think.

This month I am going to work really hard at just being me. If I feel like posting 30 times in a row I will. If I feel like spending a day absorbed by the fascinating world of whatever and then share it with you, I will. If I feel like rocking out to Neil Diamond then I will. And what you think of it? That's really none of my business.