Modern Shackles

I posted a status on social media today regarding a brief conversation with my late grandfather's friend, Greg, who works with me at Teleflex. The contents of which I'll post here:

Me: (As Greg strolls by with the mail cart) *sarcastically salutes* How are you today, sir?

Greg: Ehhh, I'm only here so I don't get fired.

Me: Ha! Just you?

Sometimes work is a pretty swell place to be.

Of course, a brief nothing as innocent as this got me thinking...

Hating the job we currently have is a tale as old as time. Some people really and genuinely like the job they have. Maybe they are Veterinarians, who really like animals. Maybe they are builders who have a real sense of accomplishment after they help build a house for a family or a skyscraper for a city/business(es). Unfortunately, due to professional protocol, it's REALLY hard to change careers. Especially in this day and age, it's near impossible to change careers without going back to school and forking over a(nother) life's worth of money first.

So what do we do?

Well, I don't know. And I know you don't know either, or at least I'm sure MOST of you (you equaling the general population) do not. What I do know is that we are a species (or at least a country) full of complainers. People use the #FirstWorldProblems hashtag like it's their job. Yes, I DO see that they are making fun of themselves for silly grievances, but they're complaining nonetheless even if it is passive. Getting back on track, my point is this: We're always analyzing ourselves and others on what makes each other happy, ultimately. I know that we are in control of our own path, but I think it's pretty clear that our society and our culture aid in our emotional confusion.

My mind says I should do this; my friend says I should do this; my mom says I should do this; my current job says I do this, and then *brain explodes*

With all of that said, we will always have to work. Unless we hit a 100 million dollar lottery, it's an unfortunate truth. Therefore, I'm looking for some of your ideas if you care to share them! If you're unhappy with your job now or have been unhappy with a job before, what was your best course of action? Did it aid in your overall happiness or decrease it?  Moreover, do you believe your job has a big impact on your happiness? Why or why not?

Personally, I think it plays a big role. I also think there are certain things regarding jobs that make people happy. For instance: in Europe employees are generally given 2 months off throughout the year. Some companies do a better job with team morale practices, whereas others just suck. I generally believe that more time with family is what really makes people happy. Family can be defined however you want it to be: Parents, friends, significant others, children, etc. 

Whatcha think?

- PatInTheHat

American Sniper: Review

So, I finally got to see the movie that has been a target of controversy since it hit theaters earlier this month. Now that I have, I can give my honest opinion of what I believe the producers and director--none other than Clint Eastwood--was trying to portray.

There were articles popping up all over the place about this movie, and although I skimmed one or two, I really tried not to read too much into them because I wanted to try to enjoy the movie as a movie and nothing else. Therefore, I will first review how I saw the movie as a movie, and then I will talk about whether the movie should be regarded as a controversial piece or not.

Spoiler Alert: I am going to do my best not to give a lot of the movie away, but know that it'll be a bit hard not to spoil a few things in the process. I'll do my best to keep the spoiling to a minimum. Moreover, I will be referencing another movie called Black Hawk Down. If you've never seen that movie, and want to, then you might not want to read this part. Your call.

The movie review: I genuinely believe the movie served its purpose. Since the movie was set in Afghanistan, it had a similar feel as Black Hawk Down. To me, the movie was basically a recreation of Black Hawk Down, except it was about one person as opposed to the rescue of a chopper that crash-landed. As I said to a colleague at the: the movie was just like any other middle-east war movie. It's exactly what you'd expect (mostly). The movie follows around a protagonist and his fleet that is attempting to dismantle the progress of [an] antagonist(s) and their fleet. It's also an American-made war movie so take a guess at who wins the battle between American and non-American. Yeah, you get where I'm coming from.

Bradley Cooper was the absolute cornerstone of the film. Though I never met Chris Kyle in person, I thought Bradley Cooper played a Texan very well. Chris Kyle was practically a warrior from birth, and Bradley Cooper played a stone-faced ass-kicking American very well. Huge props to his fantastic Texan accent and all the work he put in to build his body up for the role he played. Even though I thought the movie was pretty typical for a war movie, I thought Bradley Cooper was basically sensational. Considering how little the character who played his wife, Elise Robertson, was in the film, I thought she was pretty great, too. Fantastic raw-emotional acting on her part when it was needed.

Was it or was it not controversial: No. It should be noted that Chris Kyle, before he died, obviously, aided in the production of the film. I'm quite sure that the movie portrayal is as real as it gets. The ending scenes show real footage of Kyle's funeral. I guess what I'm saying is: I don't buy the "glorification" argument. I mean, guys, comon, wake up. It's an American-made film. It no more glorifies war than Pearl Harbor, than Black Hawk Down, than Band of Brothers (I know it's a mini-series and not a film, but still). I mean, fortunately, we have the best military in the world. Like, hands down. No one can touch us. It's the one thing that keeps countries from nuking us, because they know if they tried that shit, they'd be in a world of hurt.

I hate war. I mean, I REALLY hate war. I generally think that war for a country that is in financial struggles is just no good for a country given that whole "history repeats itself" rule. The Roman Empire did the same thing. They warred everything until they spread themselves too thin, and then were in a world of hurt when the Ottoman's built up their empire and just said, "Yeah, nope, not anymore." With that said, people need to understand the effect of our military, and the affect the military has on us. For instance, if we didn't have a military, then we would be shieldless, so to speak. I mean, things like September 11th would just happen all the time. Because our men and women in arms are over there, in those other countries, that means that those shitty terrorists aren't so concerned about trying to attack here. See what I'm saying? Plus, even the way Chris Kyle was portrayed in the movie, as this humble "hero," (I put hero in quotes because our idea of a hero is different than our enemy's idea of a hero. It should be noted that we call their heroes terrorists. I wonder what they call our heroes, yeah?) who literally saved more lives than he killed. Yes, it's terrible that he had to kill anyone at all, but he had to. I mean, men, women, and children were being used as war pawns regularly. One of the Arabic men in the movie used a drill as his primary weapon. If you want to see the movie I won't spoil things for you, but A DRILL! If that was real, then he needed to be dead. There's no place on this planet for people who use drills on their "own people."

Not only that, but the way that Chris Kyle died was just terrible. Again, I'm not going to spoil the movie (or his life if you want to keep yourself from Googling him), so I won't.

Ultimately, go see the movie if you like war films. Just stop with this controversial shit, please?

Kthanks,bye

- PatInTheSassyHat

Beating A Dead Horse

Welp, it looks like there's been another killing by police just South of Philadelphia in the Bridgeton area of New Jersey. The incident is from December 30th, 2014, but the video has only recently been released  by officials--since anything like this that happens is public record.*

The story hasn't gotten a ton of news, yet, but it will. A man who got out of a car with his hands raised in the air got shot and killed. It's understood that the 36 year-old African-American man had a list of priors on his record including the shooting of an officer in his teens. Bridgeton is known as an impoverished area, and since this kind of news has been happening often, along with the fact that the gentleman who was shot and killed had priors, there is a decent chance this story DOES NOT get the news it should.

Some people throughout the country are probably saying, "He was a bad man and a suspicious man, I totally get why they shot him to death." Here's the thing, though: He served his time. He's been free for years. According to the video and numerous other reports, there WAS a gun in the vehicle. A gun which was confiscated by police shortly after the traffic stop, so the danger for the cops, at the very least, was minimized.

You'll see that the cops kept telling the two gentlemen in the car to stay in their vehicles (It should be noted that this traffic stop was for running a stop sign. The man who was shot and killed was not behind the wheel. He was just a passenger...not that that information makes the killing more or less acceptable, but the passenger, despite his known priors, was doing the least wrong from the get-go). Yes, the passenger does get out of the car, but he comes out with his hands up, surrendering. Although I'm not in his mind, he was probably trying to allow the officer to further search the vehicle, since it looks like that's what the officer on the right of the video was doing. The officer kept warning that he would shoot if he reached for anything. That didn't happen. So instead, he shot the guy for nothing.

This shit is just getting exhausting, isn't it?

*Here's the video  and story for you to make your own opinons about the situation: http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/01/video_of_bridgeton_police_killing_of_jerame_c_reid.html

SOTU

I do not have a lot to say about the State of the Union other than to say that I thought Barack Obama did a great job.

I have neither agreed with his foreign policy, nor his corporate dealings, but I believe him when he says that he has tried to make this country a better place since being elected into the White House. Other than Fox news, that news-source that's not really a news-source, I think it's hard to say that POTUS Barack Obama was unsuccessful as President. Yeah, he still has 2 years left, and he could tank out of nowhere, but I do not believe he will. He's been too good; he's been too consistent in the right direction for this country.

The only cringe-worthy part to the SOTU was when President Obama briefly mentioned his dealings with drones. I think that was the one part of his speech that we could all collectively call bullshit on. He mentioned that he is still using drones in the best interest of the people or some mumbo jumbo, and I don't believe that for a second. After all of this ISIS/ISIL stuff going on, I didn't care about the problems he created with the drones anymore--but there were plenty. Yes, he needs to stop killing hundreds of thousands of innocents. But if we need drones to help figure out what little sneaks like ISIS are doing, then I'm all for it.

Obviously, the best part about the speech--aside from Obama's hysterical one-liner directed at the GOP after they applauded him after explaining that he has no more campaigns ahead of him--was the soap opera happening behind President Obama between Vice President Biden and that Boener guy. Every time Obama used the line "It's the right thing to do," 9 times out of 10 Boener sat still while everyone else--minus some other members of the GOP--gave applause. One article writer after one specific "It's the right thing to do," moment said, "The GOP don't even pretend to care about people." After subjects on gender equality, equal pay among genders, climate change etc, the GOP, along with Boener, generally didn't applaud. Most of the democratic party likely wouldn't have known most of the GOP was there if they didn't sit in their reserved seats.

Subsequent to SOTU, the Republicans used Joni Ernst to voice their rebuttal. Needless to say, she was terrible. She denied that the Affordable Healthcare act was working, and continued to deny that climate change is a problem. Good job, republicans. Keep up the terrible work. At this rate, you will see, in the first time in American history, a Democrat following a Democrat in presidency. And, honestly, that's fine by me.

- PatInThePatrioticHat

Highest Learning

Suppose someone is 26+ years old, still living with their middle-class mother and father, and educated, but they have nowhere to go. They might even feel like they did everything they thought they could do to actually succeed. I'm sure that student loans is probably something that drives this person crazy, because they've come to realize that the value of their degree is significantly less than the value of their education--this is a problem, by the way. What I mean by that, is that if a 4-year degree costs $30 grand on average,* but the degree doesn't get the student a job, then the degree is useless and, more important to the point, worthless. There are a lot of people who laugh at students that go to school for subjects that are hard to be successful in, i.e. art, social services, etc, but they shouldn't be laughing. They should be realizing that there's a problem with the educational system. A problem with schools that over-value degrees for students that seldom lead to a career.

To put this idea into perspective, here's an example: Let's say we use engineering as the degree and the school as Drexel. Well, a 4-year degree at Drexel costs students $43,135. This does not include the potential  for scholarship--which would lower the cost--nor does it include room and board--which would significantly increase the cost. It doesn't matter what major you go to Drexel for, Drexel is charging every student the same thing even though Drexel's engineering program is near impossible to pass the first year in...so that would be 43 grand down the drain. However, if you made it through, 43 times 4 is da-da-daaaa 172. So that's $172 grand of debt with an engineering degree (assuming the student can't pay any of it out of pocket, which on-average is a poor assumption--don't worry, just scroll up, then scroll back down to the bottom to know what I'm talking about. Definitely scroll up first, though, and re-read everything. Streamlining is for quitters!). That's definitely a lot of debt, but on average a bachelors in engineering for a student will receive a $96,200 salary right out of school! Even with the loans that high, that's 3 of your $30K/year jobs combined--I'm pretty sure that person will be fine. I'm an accountant by trade, so I'll do the bi-weekly math for you: before taxes that's $3,700 each check. Yeah, in my dreams. No one wants to have a lot of payments, but with that type of money ($7,400 monthly) a $1,500 loan payment doesn't seem so bad. (In some cases, the monthly loan payment could be greater or lesser than the amount I'm giving. I've found that $1,200 is about the average considering both private and federal loans.) Engineers are the highest paid professionals without needing another degree, i.e. masters, PhD, etc.

Now, let's take a look at someone with a bachelors in business administration. Their average starting salary? $54,000. That's $2,076 per check and $4,152 per month. In other words, good luck ever leaving your parents basement, you piece of worthless crap. (Yes, I know that's still a good chunk of change, and I'm sure not many would be complaining, but after taxes, which nowadays is roughly one-third of your gross wages, you're never going to be able to afford an apartment that is more than 600 bucks a month. So, say "hi" to the roaches for me.) Oh, and P.s. $54,000 is not the lowest salary you can obtain out of school. That would be Animal Science, which obtains a whopping $31,100 average salary. They'll have to wait 10 years just to approach $54,000. Yuck.**

I know, I'm sure some of you already want to kill yourselves by this point because 1. This is some pretty depressing stuff and/or 2. You just hate anything that has to do with math. I understand that, but please stay with me, I'm getting to the important part.

The $54,000 salary average for business admin divided by the $92,600 salary average for engineers is 58%!!! Holy fuck-balls, mom and dad! OK, so with that in mind, what I'm trying to say is that institutions should lower business degrees by roughly 42%--this way degrees are directly proportional to the amount of potential salary they'll likely obtain leaving college. That means that business degrees should be offered for $25,233/per year for the Drexel student. So on and so forth for the other majors. Using the same formula, Animal Science would be roughly $14,014/year at Drexel.

I'm sure this sounds a bit idealistic. I know there's a lot more number crunching that would have to go on for Universities to make this work, i.e. wages, other expenses, etc. but here's the start of the conversation! Let's get it going!

- PatInTheMonocleAndTopHat

* No joke. I thought it was higher than this originally, but here's the article for proof: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/11/13/average-student-loan-debt-hits-30-000
** Here's your top ten lowest paying salaries. Until the educational system gets fixed, I'd stray away from some of these: http://college.usatoday.com/2014/08/13/the-top-10-lowest-paying-college-majors/

Who Wrote the Book of Love?

Love.

Real love is hard work. Married couples know this. Those that aren't married or have only been married for the better part of a year (aka: the honeymoon period) seem to think they know the secret behind everlasting love. I've seen articles written all over the place about this, and I hate that these articles make love sound like a "quick-fix" to your life.

"Just do this and you'll feel like your flying through rainbows on top of a Pegasus! Weeeeee!"

No.

The only people that understand the power of committed love are parents, grandparents, aunts & uncles, etc. that have been together for years and years.

So, what's the one constant I've heard from both of those parties in my life?

Answer: Hard work, an indomitable will, and compromise. Everything else is just a prolonged chemical reaction within the body.

If you find someone who feels the same way, then, hey look, you've found your soul-mate.

'Nuff said.

- PatInTheHeartHat

My Name Is French

There has been a ton of negative headlines lately. Those negative headlines normally turn into a negatively charged rant by yours truly, but this time around you may be surprised to see less hostility. At least, for the most part.

It is definitely sad to hear about what happened to Charlie Hebdo. Terrorism is a terrible thing. I'm glad that there are enough countries out there that agree that terrorism should never happen, because sometimes it looks like the world is going to implode on itself with the amount of internationally recognized organized crime.

I'm also glad that a good majority of the world is joining around France to show that France has allies that will always stand against terrorism (along side them and hopefully any other country that gets terrorized). I'm NOT glad that our American leaders do not seem to be one of them (by action). I'd LIKE to believe that Obama and the others at the very least called and told French leaders that they can't attend the unity rally for some reason, but that they will always stand with them against terrorism. I'm not sure of that, but I'd really like to believe that. I'd also really like to believe that our American leaders aren't showing bitterness towards the WORLD with this action--by not attending the unity rally--because of the lack of koombaya-esque world-unifying unity rallies after 9/11. I really would like to believe that, but I know this is America and America is full of bitterness.

It's also strange looking at all of this from the outside looking in. It was almost 14 years ago that a monstrous terrorist attack occurred on American soil. In the first moments after the attacks, we likely felt like sheep. But after we realized what happened--that we were terrorized by Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden's henchmen--the country came together and realized we could take control back.

We did.

France has always been an iffy country to stand behind for Americans. I'm sure we all remember a few years ago when tensions were rising between France, America, and a few other allies to the point that we denounced the name of a McDonald's cornerstone: The "French Fry." Subsequently, we dubbed the fried potato slices as Freedom Fries! And then we all koombaya-ed again!

As an aside: Looking at this situation holistically as I (annoyingly) do all the time, it kind of bothers me a tad to see the majority of America being like, "Oh, yeah, we like you guys now!" after this attack. Why does it take a people to be terrorized to stand behind them? Maybe that's just me. I mean, don't get me wrong, the outpouring of support is awesome to see, it's just, I feel like we should be focusing on Charlie Hebdo and not necessarily France as a whole, yeah? No? I've seen a lot of people specifically supporting Charlie Hebdo and not necessarily France, but I guess one of the reasons people are upset with the Obama administration is because they didn't go to France to support France. I also think it's possible that the Obama administration was too afraid to send all of its leaders in a group with a lot of other leaders without a lot (enough) of security and potential chance for more terrorist threats. /rant

Ultimately, I really appreciate what I've seen. I appreciate that people can come together and support free speech. There were a lot of people who even wrote in saying that they don't necessarily agree with the message that Hebdo's comics were portraying, but that free speech should not be POD in any situation ever!

Let's end terrorism together!

- JeSuisCharlie

(Dis)Honoring the Dead

My grandfather on my mother's side was an amazing man. You'd never know it, though, unless:

1. You read my blog and just read the first sentence.

2. I talked to you in person about what he has meant to me in my life, or

3. You've met him in person.

The third bullet point is the least likely. He died 10 years ago this August. The other two bullets, especially that first one, are most likely. I also might not have ever mentioned him at all to many of you.

You might have noticed that there's a bullet missing. If you feel like there IS a bullet missing, then this post is about that missing bullet. If you don't think there is a bullet missing, then either you wouldn't know what bullet is missing without someone first mentioning it or you really don't believe there should be another bullet. I digress...

The following is a touchy subject, I know, but this post is meant to make you think. I'm not trying to hurt anybody, I'm simply trying to instill a certain wisdom, here. I mean that in the most sincere way possible. I'm not trying to toot my own wisdom horn or something, I just think that this subject matter is important. And I think it takes a different perspective to change for the better. If you don't think this is wisdom, and you ultimately think I'm full of shit, then I'm full of shit. I'll leave that for you to decide.

Death is not easy to deal with for anyone. Everyone uses different ways to cope with death, but I've noticed a trend on social media when deaths of local people happen--no I'm not talking about any one specifically. This is a trend that has been going on for years, now. This trend has irked me to my core.

I'm not sure of a good name for it, but for the sake of this article I'll call it: Pity Posting.

Pity Posting, by my subjective definition since I just made it up, is the public posting on social media by a friend/acquaintance/someone the deceased person in question once passed at some point in their lives that over-exaggerates their closeness with that person by way of talking directly to them as if they were still here on this Earth, even though that person, unlike the friends, family, others of that person whom can tangibly see the post, is dead. Before you reprimand me from your life, let me explain in full why this irks me. I am trying to be as sensitive towards this subject as possible, because I know it's my opinion, and I know that most people don't have this same opinion. 

The reason this "Pity Posting" bothers me has less to do with the messages that are posted. I've seen some pretty heart-wrenching/inspirational posts that can really choke a person up. For the family and very close friends/girlfriends/boyfriends of the deceased, I'm sure these messages really help them move on. I'm more so talking about the people who all of the sudden act like they super care about a person they haven't seen in 5 to 10 to 15 to 20 years that just died. So I beg the question...

Where were you when they were alive?

The best time to care about someone and give them accolades, praise, and love is when they are conscious/alive! Not dead! All of the people I currently have in my life, the ones who I've chosen to keep in my life, are people I want around, because if I didn't want them around then I wouldn't care about them. For those that have been around me over the past year or so, I'll tell you right now: You're awesome! You are all some of the best people I've ever met. I want you around because you're great. You inspire me to be better. You inspire me to do great things! If I haven't already, one day I will go to you individually and tell you what you all mean to me, I promise! For now, just know that what you do, even if it seems little among all of the crazy things going on in your lives, makes me happy. Makes me keep going. If any of you died, it would suck. It would hurt. It would also likely take me a very long time to figure out how to cope with your death.

If you're someone outside of that circle, I promise to not act like I care about you more than I do, because I don't. If I did, you'd be around or you would want me to be around. Yes, you could have left an indelible mark on my life YEARS ago, and I will remember that--I'll keep it close to me. But I won't selfishly screen myself in the form of a publicly scripted lie as someone who genuinely cared if you're gone when you haven't been around me in a long time. I'm sure you were a good person, but that does not make us best friends! It makes us acquaintances at best!

I have found that in these situations, those closest with the deceased member say the least publicly. You know why? Because it's no secret that they care. They've made it publicly known while the person was alive! More importantly, they made it clear TO the person while they were alive. They don't need to justify their feelings!

Those facts make me wonder why after someone dies the secret feelings come out. The secret carers. I'm not talking about an ex-boyfriend or ex-girlfriend/ex-spouse. That is considerably different. I'm also not talking about supporting a family at a Wake or Funeral for that person. That is also considerably different. I'm talking about those "friends" that come out of the wood-works to publicly declare their feelings for someone out of nowhere on social networks.

I'm not going to give examples. You've either experienced this happenstance or not, it's just something that I've seen and something that I hope ends. If you really care about someone, think about them right now, and tell them how much you care about them--how important they are to you--before it's too late. 

To conclude, I will reiterate that coping with death is not easy. There is no right or wrong way. I'm sure that when I was younger I was guilty of a similar act, but over time I've realized how selfish the act is. If you want to tell a story for the potential benefit of others--family members, close friends, etc.--that's fine. It's also understandable. But if you're a mostly-internet friend who only met the deceased member one time or was someone who you never actually liked and you come out of nowhere to profess how much that person meant to you to social media, then I call bullshit. In doing that, you dishonor the dead; you dishonor the family of the dead; and most of all, you dishonor yourself.

- PatInTheHat

In Case of Fire, Keep Working

I'm looking for a lot of feedback for this post, which is why I'm saying so right out of the gates. I'm really curious to know where our culture is headed on certain subjects, and I'd like to know your opinions on these topics. This post is only on one topic specifically, but I'm thinking about polling you, my readers, when it comes to certain situations, on how certain situations make you feel and why they make you feel the way you do. First, I'll tell you a story of something that I experienced, give you how I feel about it, and then I'll ask you to comment about it either on here or on FB, which many of you seem akin to using.

This story comes from a specific happenstance that occurred a couple months ago. I've only told this story to a few people, but if you have heard it, sorry for the redundancy. I already know how you feel if I've talked to you about it, but for the sake of polling, definitely give your opinion for discussion.

In May of 2014, two months after the company I currently work for moved from a 1-story building in Limerick to the top floor of a 4-story building in Wayne, a fire alarm went off in the building with no warning of a drill on our email system. The fire alarm was intermittent, but did not stop for a good 5 to 10 minute period. Many of those in my department looked around, joked that it was nothing, and continued to work. Meanwhile, me and a person, who has worked for the company since before I was born and also sits in the cubicle adjacent from me,  decided to get out of the building. No one followed.

The building itself, for those keeping track, is about two football fields in length with an East wing and a West wing as the major areas where employees work. Both of those wings have a set of stairwells to walk down in case of emergency. Although my department didn't move, and the adjacent and visible department didn't move, we come to learn that other departments were moving to exit the building. I believe this company has about 10 or so departments in Wayne. And about 3 of them moved.

I was pretty infuriated. I could not believe that a building full of (seemingly) sane adults didn't know how to handle a fire alarm. If video was made of the moments in action and sent to a first grade class, the majority of that class, if not the whole class, would have raised their hand to their teacher and asked, "Ms. Hearst, why aren't the people leaving the building when there's a fire alarm?" The teacher, embarrassed, would have likely been speechless or said something along the lines of, "I'm not so sure, Billy. Maybe they like the heat?"

The problem that I see here is that the company created a culture where working is more important than a potential life-threat. You're probably thinking something along the lines of, "Well, that's corporate America for ya, Pat." And, lord baby Jesus, do I wish it was just corporate America. Those that I have talked to mentioned that a similar culture developed in their non-profit organization, or their private organization, etc. From certain feedback, it sounds like a cultural pandemic. I mean, if people really regard their work as more important than their own life, or less selfishly, their family, then that's a problem, right?

I'd really like to be told I'm not crazy for thinking the way I do about this, but I've been wrong before. Please let me know what you guys think about this one. Have you seen similar instances like this in your business culture? If something like this happened to you, would you be outraged? Compliant with the culture? Find a new job? Complain to the board/management? I'd love to know your approach.

All I did was talk to some people and write a blog, but trust me when I say that I had some radical thoughts that would have lost me my job if I acted on them. At the very least, this is my attempt to promote awareness on this subject, because unfortunately it's more common than we think.

- PatInTheHat

Your Idea Of Chivalry Is Not Dead

I'm getting sick of all of these negative articles written by either men or women that go over the idea that modern chivalry is dead. (These articles never say "modern chivalry" because I think a lot of the writers really believe that chivalry is opening doors for women or something. We live in a sad world. I digress...) When, exactly, was chivalry born? I'll get into that in a sec. The modern idea of chivalry is not dead, because if it was, then we'd all be dead. OK, that's an exaggeration, but you'll see what I'm getting at shortly.

Chivalry is a human construct. Yes, I know, words and many other things are, too, but I'm not talking about calling green "red" or red "green," I'm talking about specific verbage that humanity has created over the years as some sort of historical symbol. For instance, a lot of people wonder how a disease like the Black Plague just disappeared one day. Well, it did and it didn't. It did in the sense that it's not wiping everyone out like it did in the medieval era, but it IS still around. Doctors just found a cure for it so we don't freak out about it anymore. Therefore, the Black Plague is not dead. Similarly, a lot of men (and women, really) turned into assholes. So many turned into assholes that when someone, of any gender, does a kind gesture we ooh and ahh at the specter.

"But, Pat," you might be saying, "kindness and chivalry are two completely different things."
And I say, "That depends, which chivalry are we talking about? The real one, or the one that millenials made up--for the most part?"

You see, the idea of chivalry, as we (don't) understand it, started in and around the medieval times.* In that time, men were dressing up in armor, getting on a horse, and jousting each other. Moreover, the code was originally written for the Catholic Church to honor and defend it. This chivalry is pretty much dead, but you can still find it at your local Renaissance Faire.

The chivalry WE are talking about is a different kind of chivalry. This chivalry we just sort of made up. There's no code written anywhere. For instance, no where does it say (Disclaimer: I'm not including urban dictionary, because I'm sure some asshole might have wrote something similar down somewhere) that chivalry means opening doors for women, or giving women your coat when its cold, or walking on the left side of the road, or sitting down on the outside of a booth instead of the inside against the wall. A couple of those are simply kind gestures i,e. opening doors and giving a coat. The other couple things i.e. the street thing and the booth thing, are preferences. Like what if the woman likes walking near the road? What if the woman likes sitting on the outside seat of a booth? "No, Pat, you don't understand, you need to force your kindness on them!!!!!" I've opened car doors for men and let men borrow a sweater of mine, does that make me chivalrous, or are you saying that doesn't comply?

 "No, Pat, you don't understand again. Chivalry only applies to men doing nice things for women, not the other way around, and not for the same genders. You has the dumb."

I mean, I think what you're describing, and correct me if I'm wrong here, is kindness towards women (or men). I really hope that's not dead, because if it was dead, then we'd be dead, because all women would hate men, and then no more reproduction.

You see, modern chivalry isn't dead, because the basis of the idea of modern chivalry is kindness. Take out the mumbo jumbo about the booth and the street and you have kindness. Really, if you think about chivalry like that, it SHOULD be dead. Perhaps, if alive, shot and killed. Why? Because some of the concepts of modern chivalry ignore women's desire--or anyone's desire for that matter.

I've been wrongly saying a phrase for a while that I will edit. The original phrase is: Chivalry is dead, but kindness is infinite. Sounds all warm and fuzzy, right? But I start out with a contradiction to my whole article. (Modern) chivalry is not dead, so here goes...

New phrase: Be kind, kill chivalry.

- PatInTheHat

* Here is a wikipedia article that accurately explains each of the chivalric codes originally instituted around 1170 and again in 1220. If you don't believe in its accuracy, Google chivalry and check out the other "educational" articles that wikipedia practically pulls from. I'm using wikipedia because its writers do a better job of putting things in layman's terms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chivalry

(If This Was A Blank Space (baby), Then Should I Insert Your Name Here?)

Hello readers! Happy New Year! I can tell that some of you have been anxiously awaiting for me to write a new (goddamn!!) post, so here goes...

What better way to start the new year than with a rant, right? So, that's exactly what I'm going to do. And I'm sure by my title you've already figured out what this post is going to be about. If you thought "Taylor Swift," then you win!
Your prize? Reading what I'm about to say! Wooooo!!!

I have NOT written a post ranting about musicians. I've indirectly ranted about no specific musicians, and this will be my first segment-of-many specific rants on musical performers. I digress..

Taylor Swift...is crazy.

There's really no other way to talk about her after some of the music I've heard from her most recent album. I mean, yeah, I THOUGHT she was kinda crazy before this past album. I gave her the benefit of the doubt after a shitty relationship with John Mayer--for those who don't know, he's kind of the worst human being. If only he was as beautiful as his songs, right ladies and non-straight men? But now...now I KNOW she's out of her mind.

I know. You're probably already half-yelling at the screen like, "What? Are you saying women whom write emotional music are crazy? THAT'S SEXIST!" No. First off, men and women are both crazy to their core. Over the course of MY life, I've seen more of the opposite--more crazy men than women--that go against the silly social stigma. What I'm saying is: Taylor Swift, this woman specifically, is a nut-fuck. She needs serious help. The following paragraphs will explain what I deem to be evidence of this scientific FACT i.e. not at all an opinion <----- for future reference, this is a specific example of me being facetious/sarcastic in case you haven't figured me out already.

I will start off from the beginning of her career and work my way up to the current year.

1. She WAS a country star. WAS. What happened? Everything was perfectly fine. She was sane. She was writing good, clear messages and music that everyone could relate to. Hell, we could even snuggle up next to OUR significant others and be all, "Don't you worry your pretty little mind, people throw rocks at things that shine, and life can seem unkind..." We were all so happy with Country-star Taylor Swift, weren't we? I mean, I was, and obviously everyone needs to be on the same page as me so LET'S GO, PEOPLE! =) All kidding aside, Taylor Swift was the one country star who cared more about bringing people together and less about singing about trucks, fishing, and drinking--she cared about those things, too, just not nearly as much as, say, Dirks Bentley. She was also successful and becoming more successful, but some SOB came along and turned her into a psychological monster! Whoever it was, curse him/her! For all intents and purpose (that's right intents and purposes, people. Not "intensive purposes") Taylor Swift may have someone to blame for her lack of sanity, but there is a decent amount of evidence to the contrary.

2. Taylor Swifts albums are COMPLETELY about her relationships with men she dated. Before her most recent album, just about every song specifically related to an ex-boyfriend. Sometimes she was berating them lyrically. Other times she was apologizing--I forget the name of the song, but there's one in particular that she is apologetic towards her relationship with Taylor Lautner. Ya know, the shirtless guy from Twilight. Oh, you didn't watch that movie/trilogy? Yeah, me either. I know I could just as easily Google the name of the song, but I would feed her insanity with my own if I did that, and that's just not happening. At least...not this time =) Her insanity shows through here, because it's almost like she's crying out to either be fixed by some go-getter of a guy or to never be in a relationship ever (ever ever ever) again. I mean, she does know that men AND women listen to her songs, right? She's pretty much lyrically singing, "If you date me dadadaaaaaa I will write a song boopboopdeedoop about you so it better be ohhhhhhhhhh so good or else I'll give a giant *symbol crash* fuck youuuuuuu through song, yeahhhhh." See any red-flags, people? Exactly. Basically 6 red flags. Except it's not a symbol for a great adventure. It's a symbol for a torurous hell.

3. Lastly, one of Taylor's newest singles specifically wants to eradicate the human race. This, for me, is the nail in the coffin. If you've ever listened to "Blank Space," did you carefully listen to some of her lyrics? I mean, there's a part of the song that you pretty much can't NOT (double negatives are cool) listen to, because if you're with a group of people--mostly girls-- when the song comes on wherever you are, then you're going to hear them singing it, too. The lines are, "Boys only want love if it's torture. Don't say I didn't (say I didn't) warn ya." Does anyone see any problems with these lines? And don't even tell me she's being artistic. She's blatantly saying, "All men suck. Don't date them." Yes, there are women that don't listen to her songs, and MOST of those that DO don't take her seriously, but that's what the lyrics are saying! And then the rest of the song is her ADMITTING that people call her insane--gee, I wonder why--and THEN saying, "I have a blank space baby, and I'll write your name!!!!!!!" I mean, holy hell, talk about someone straddling the fence.
*Temporarily acting as Taylor Swift* All men suck. Don't date them. But I'll date them. Not to date them, but to write more songs. Yeah. I don't have any problems. Everyone else does. *End scene*

Ya know, this reminds me of that saying about assholes that I'll contort for sake of the insane:

If you go throughout your day and one person calls you insane, then you're fine, and they're insane (they're also probably assholes). If it seems like everyone you see throughout the day is calling you insane, then you're insane (and you're the asshole, so stop trying to act like you don't need to be institutionalized).

Ahhhh, that was like taking a swig out of a fresh can of soda. I love starting the new year off right!

=D

- PatInTheHat