Thursday, February 22, 2007

Why I would never be a K-12 teacher. (Also: Ode to Teachers)

Because I am not a good enough person. Now, just in case anyone wants to come running to my defense (leave me my fantasies, people!), I'm not saying I'm a bad person. I am simply not a good enough person to teach below a 12th grade level (I might someday consider teaching at a JC level). Both of my parents became teachers in the early 1970's. My Mom became a first grade teacher, and my Dad taught high school history (American and World), geography and, on occasion, civics and econ. By the time my brother and I came along, they had both been teaching for a decade, Mom was still teaching first grade, Dad was still teaching high school. They retired soon after my brother and I graduated from high school (my ten-year high school reunion is only two years away which is just freaky), Mom taught first grade until she retired, and Dad continued teaching high school history, and geography (he gave up econ and civics at some point). My parents were incredible teachers. And they loved teaching. Both of them were passionate about what they taught, and they constantly tried to find new ways to engage their student's interest. They took their jobs very seriously. If a student wanted extra help, they would always stay late to work with that student, no matter how much my brother and I complained about having to hang out in their classrooms. We were always hanging out in classrooms. While I never had a problem referring to teachers as Mr/Mrs/Ms, even though some were family friends and of course I knew them by their first names, as well. Although I did develop a cavalier attitude about areas of the school that were "off-limits" to students. I hung out in teacher's rooms all the time (sometimes interesting stuff would go down and, in elementary and junior high, they'd usually let me stick around even if the teachers were being a bit unkind about some of their colleagues but that changed once I hit high school--they booted me out more often, always asking me why I didn't have any friends, which didn't bother me because I had BOOKS, and they were my friends). They would often talk about union stuff, which I loved because one of my earliest memories is our family (I was about five) picketing the school district's office on behalf of the teacher's union. I thought that was about the coolest thing you could ever do with teachers when they weren't in their classrooms. Wave around signs and yell at passing cars. All of my life, my parents (with their union) have had to fight for the meager salaries they were paid, and for proper benefits packages. Until recently, one of the few good things you could say about teacher compensation was that they had good benefits packages--now even that's not true, anymore. Before they might not have had any type of deductible (which was true for my parents, so I can safely say that this was also true of most of California) and more services were covered in full, instead of in part (again, a true statement about my parent's situation). That is just wrong. Without teachers there would be no doctors, or lawyers, or stock brokers, or you get my drift. Everybody has benefited from the (often self-less, and far too under-appreciated in my eyes) work of teachers. Not a single one of us can say that we did not learn something from a teacher. You would think that this rant is leading to "And I wouldn't be a teacher because they don't get paid enough, respected enough, lauded enough, and generally appreciated for the work they do." Nope. I only care about the money because teachers are worth more than they are currently being paid. I do not have the patience, stamina, or even the drive to be a teacher. My Mom ended up teaching year-round school for most of my life (that's when they thought it would be a great idea to combat over-crowding in the schools by having the school operate year-round, with teachers moving in and out of a classroom every three months), so I would often spend my summer helping out in her classroom. (I am never again going to tear down, or set up a classroom. I can probably still cover a classroom in colored butcher paper in my sleep. And my parents used every square inch of their classroom walls for bulletin boards. I also am never again digging through a dark, dirty and smelly cavernous storage room looking for an extra anything.) I was not good at helping in the first grade classroom. You would think it would be fairly easy if I was at least in the third grade, that by that age I should be able to deal with kids a few years younger than me. I never learned how to deal with a large group of first graders. Do you know that you can't tell a first grader to just sit down and read quietly because they can't read yet? Do you know that if you give a class of first graders an assignment, and then turn your back on them for a few minutes because all you were asking them to do was sit and color, that half of them will be out of their chairs and wandering around the classroom when you turn around? Do you know that sometimes first graders throw up on their teachers (it's happened to my Mom more than once)? Do you know that first graders still throw massive tantrums and see no problem with throwing themselves on the floor, kicking and screaming like a banshee? Do you know how hard it is to teach first grade? I do. And my Mom was brilliant at it. She didn't teach kids just the basics, she taught them about Van Gogh, and Gaugin. She played classical music for them and talked with them about it. In addition to assigned reading groups, her students always had access to Mom's extensive classroom library of books (which ranged from simple picture books to fourth/fifth grade level chapter books). That every single day of her class was organized in fifteen minute increments because that was the only way she could get in everything that she wanted to teach those little kids. My Mom is a saint for what she has done to help shape the lives of so many people. I still get stopped by people who recognize me as her daughter (I wasn't kidding when I said I was in her classroom all of the time, and as I got older, most of my babysitting clients were parents of her students) and how they want me to let Mom know what they're doing now in life (they are almost always college students/grads) and that they still remember and love her for teaching them in first grade. My Dad was also a saint, in his own way. His focus was always about trying to get the students to love what they were learning, which is damned hard when it's high school history. He would show clips of current movies that were even remotely historical in nature to supplement the text-book readings. He loved reading aloud passages from some of his favorite history, biography, and geography books. He was also addicted to the over-head projector. If a student asked a question, Dad would write it down on the projector and then he'd map out his response so that all of the other students could enjoy the answer. Every worksheet he passed out, every group of notes he ever gave, and every assignment was written down on that over-head projector. He'd write on clear transparencies, that he would keep for months in case a student needed some clarification of a point for an upcoming test, or paper. There were often days that I sat in his classroom and got all of my homework done while he worked something out with a confused student. Every day when he came home from work, his hands were stained blue-green because he always rested them on the over-head projector as he wrote, but he didn't care that the ink dyed his hands because it was from writing on the projector, which meant he was doing his job and teaching his students, so it became his badge of honor. Even though Dad loved what he was doing, there were still some high school kids that were just plain jerks and tried to make his life a living hell. I can't even begin to remember how many times our house got tp'ed by an angry student, or the few times the brats actually rang our doorbell and through eggs into our house. Dad had expletives scrawled onto his car by irate students. One student even tried drugging him with some over the counter stimulants, which almost lead to a fourth heart-attack (Dad always carried the same thermos of water to work with him, and the student in question spiked his thermos with the drugs, and we know this for a fact because the rest of the students in the class were very up-front about seeing this girl essentially poison my Dad, and they felt guilty for allowing her to do it in the first place because Dad got really sick almost immediately after drinking the water). It was a very sad day in our family when Dad decided to retire early because of how he was being treated by his students. I'm almost crying now just to think about it because one of his students poisoned him and almost gave him his fourth heart-attack. That girl didn't even get suspended. She was an elite athlete, in choir, and generally beloved by the rest of the school. The administration passed it off as a foolish, but childish, prank. I found her once on myspace and had to refrain myself from writing to her and telling her what her little stunt did to our family. Which is why I cannot stand it when people make sweeping, negative remarks about teachers. Especially if they've never been a teacher. That's why I got so mad yesterday about the things Shannon Hale wrote in her blog. If you read through yesterday's entry, you'll see that I was accused of committing libel and defamation of character. The administrator for Shannon Hale's blog felt that I was misrepresenting her client and that it was strong enough to be defamatory, and libelous in nature. So, just to clear that up. I went back today and found eleven passages in which Shannon Hale either obliquely criticized teachers (by making constant negative references to what is being "taught" in our school, which is simply another way of saying "teacher," since they are the ones doing the teaching) or spoke negatively, and always unfairly, about some of the people who were her teachers at some point in time. While I realize that people can criticize a specific teacher, I also feel that the criticism must be fair, and just, and not simply conjecture on the part of the complainer. I also don't think it's right for a popular YA author to encourage her blog readers to commiserate with her over these "bad" teachers. Check out the new part of my side-bar that says "Clipmarks," to see the specific references that I found in the YA author's blog, and my comments that mostly pointed out the fallaciousness of every single one of her arguments. I do not take accusations of libel, and defamation of character lightly. Hence the need that I have to offer evidentiary proof to back up the critical statements that I made about her blog. Not all teachers are good. Even less are great. That does not give someone the right to constantly make broad, negative generalizations about all teachers. Because when someone does that, they are talking about my parents. My parents were great teachers. I could never be as great as they were in their classrooms. In the same email in which the YA author's site administrator accused me of libel, and defamation of character, she also signed off with the following line: "Please remember that Shannon, I, and everyone who comments at squeetus are still human beings. It'd be nice if you could think the best of us and not be too hasty to judge." Personally, I feel that advice is better directed towards Shannon. Teachers are also human beings, and she should think the best of them before leaping to hasty, negative conclusions about all teachers. Because, as I said, she was talking about my parents. I'm sorry if my post yesterday came off as rude to anyone but if someone criticizes all teachers, then I will rush to the defense of my parents, and their almost seventy combined years of teaching. It's so easy for some people to focus on only the negative aspects of our school system instead of trying to create positive solutions to the perceived problems. It's easier to complain in a blog, to many readers, instead of trying to utilize that readership for good, positive things, such as letter writing campaigns to state and national legislature to encourage them to give more funding to our schools. Is our educational system perfect? Heck, no, it's actually far from it. Does it help any of us if we do nothing but sit around and complain? No, of course it doesn't. I'm always sending emails to members of state and national congress about education funding. I don't talk about it here because I don't really see the need, it's something I feel strongly about and I'm doing my best to focus on creating a positive change, instead of dwelling on the negative. Because we all know that teachers are under-appreciated, not paid nearly enough for the work that they do, and are no longer receiving stellar benefits packages (health insurance, pension, etc.) I'm doing what I can to make a positive difference, and I can only hope that someday teachers will be truly compensated for the work that they do.

Labels:

Posted by Katie. at 7:52 PM | | 0 comments | links to this post  

0 Comments:

Commenting Is Fun

<< Home

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Should my comment have been deleted from a website?

Earlier today I found a journal of a young adult author Shannon Hale. She had a blog linked from the main site (and you all know me and my voracious blog reading) and I began reading her archived entries. I read quite a few entries in which she speaks unkindly about teachers because they aren't doing enough to motivate students to read, and that it's their fault for pushing so many "classics" on kids and not "fun" books. Apparently, she received some negative feedback and wrote the following post: Have you hugged your teacher today? In response to those earlier posts (made by her, in her blog) that showed negativity towards teachers, and their lack of willingness to teach anything but the "classics." Today I posted the following comment for the above mentioned post: [Begin Post] I've had far too many great teachers to count but I do think it's great that you all are celebrating good teachers. Personally, I don't think it's fair to toss blame around in regards to what you (and some commenters) think students SHOULD be reading in schools. As many people pointed out, some schools have a set curriculum (both my parents taught for over 30 years apiece) and teachers can be penalized for not teaching required curriculum. On the OTHER hand, in the state I live in (California), The California Department of Education has posted an extensive catalog of recommended literature for grades K-12. CA Recommended Literature (K-12) You might be surprised to realize how many books are recommended by the state for use in classrooms. The "classics" actually take up a small portion of that list, and it is updated every few years to account for new YA books that should be added to the recommended reading list. Please stop railing on the teachers (I know you're going to say, "But look! We're talking about great teachers we've had!" but this thread was in response to a great amount of vitriol from the blog author towards teachers, trying to backpeddle after the fact is nice, but it doesn't take away from the fact that you have unfairly blamed teachers for problems that are often out of their control--standard curriculum set by a specific school district--and you were often unkind in your remarks. Teachers are incredibly underpaid and are trying to do the best they can with the resources made available to them.) In almost every class I've ever taken (from 3rd through 12th grades) we always had to read specific books as a class, and then had to do at least two more supplemental book reports on a book of OUR choosing. Meaning we could head straight to the library and just grab whatever caught our eye. There were also teachers I had (mostly in junior high and high school) that would excuse students out of the standard reading if they had a good reason for it, and would assign an alternate book for that student. There were also teachers (Hi Mr. R.!) who were tenured and completely disregarded some of the required reading list for their class (thank you, Mr. R., for not making us read "My Antonia"). I have been a voracious reader my entire life--I began reading the classics at an early age. (My Dad had me reading Homer and Shakespeare before junior high, and I would have to write a two-page report on the book and that report became a type of voucher for me--if Dad approved the report, which he always did, then he and Mom would take me to the bookstore and I could pick out three books of my own choosing, no censorship from them at all.) (And I loved reading Homer, even at that young age. I might not have understood all of it but I got the basic idea and truly enjoyed it.) And that's a great example of how PARENTS can encourage their children to read and learn to love it (I don't think I've seen anyone mention the role a parent has in what a child reads, when their role in their child's life is much more important than any English teacher's influence). Again, please look at the recommended literature reading list for grades K-12 (specific to California, but I'm sure every State Education website has a similar list). It has recommended books that were printed just two years ago. It has recommended books for all genres (you complained about the lack of genre reading in schools, which is also not true) including (but certainly not limited to): fantasy, humor, horror, mystery, and science fiction. All of those are genres that kids might view as "fun," and shows that there is far more variety in classroom reading lists than you give teachers credit for. Personally, I think parents should be more involved in what their children are reading. It's easy to blame the teachers (and you are blaming them, no matter how you try to cushion it by saying you are "appealing" to them) when, again, they are doing the best they can with the materials provided. That's my last point. You complain about teachers not assigning fun books but that's almost always a FUNDING issue. The current administration has constantly tried to cut funding to our schools. Without those funds, teachers cannot go out and buy an entire classroom set of a newer book because they simply don't have the money. If you were to actually talk to some teachers, instead of appeal to them, you would be told that they would LOVE to be able to teach a wide variety of books but that they lack the funding to make it happen. So. Instead of blaming, complaining, or appealing to the teachers, you should be writing (and complaining, and appealing) to members of your state legislature about your concerns that teachers aren't getting the funding they need to keep their reading curriculum current. To allow teachers access to the money they need to buy classroom sets of newer books, books that, as you have said, might grab the student's attention and convert that student into a life-long reader. [End Post] I went back to the site later to see how people responded to my post and found a notice from the site administrator explaining that two comments had been deleted and that the commenters had been notified by email (not me, but check my last entry for the site admin's response--even though I posted the same email address I always used--my katie@exaggeration.org account--the site admin said that it wouldn't accept his/her email) The site administrator also said that anyone who wanted to read the deleted posts and be told the reason they were deleted (although not the authors, apparently), that an entire copy of both posts would be emailed to these curious readers. To which I replied (as another post to the aforementioned blog entry): [Begin Post] I posted my email address when I posted the comment that was later deleted. I did not receive an explanation for this deletion. I also want to make it clear that I do not give my permission for you to forward my deleted post to anybody who asks for it. Since it was deleted entirely from your site, the rights to it reverted back to me, the author of the post. I will be posting my deleted comment in it's entirety on my own website (http://journal.exaggeration.org) and anyone who wants to read it may read it there. Please do not violate my rights by sending a "copy" of the post to your curious readers. I have no way of knowing that you are actually sending them the entire post, or an revised/edited version. Which is why I'm directing those who want to read it to my journal site. The post will be there in full, no revisions, no editing. [End Post] Of course, that post was also deleted. I figure that I am somehow violating the site's stringent commenting rules (which were laid out in an October 2006 entry: On Commenting). Perhaps I was a bit condescending (I honestly don't think so but I'm going to let you all decide) but it wasn't an offensively condescending manner. My post also could have been considered "smarmy, rude, or critical of others," by the site administrator. I personally don't feel that it was smarmy, I was not rude--in fact, I made a conscious effort to try and not be rude and to simply stick to what the blog author has posted in her blog, and my opinions about her postings, without resorting to juvenile name-calling--but my post could have been construed as being critical of others. As for the possibility that I was "critical of others." I was critical of people, specifically the blog author and the content of some her posts. I do not understand how criticism is a deletable offense. (This blog author is a published YA author, in case you were wondering, so she must understand the merit of good criticism.) The second definition of "critical" in the American Heritage Dictionary states that is is "characterized by careful, exact evaluation and judgment." Although I fully admit to being critical in my post, I also did my best to make it a careful, exact evaluation and judgment. Although, again, I'll let you all decide in my comments trail (if you want to weigh in on this matter, that is) and, no worries, there is no censorship here, so post whatever you like and be assured that it will not be deleted. Also semi-important to note: The post made by the site administrator saying that two posts had been deleted and anyone who wanted to know why could simply email a request to the site admin and the admin would send full copies of both posts along with the site admin's explanation for deleting them. The site admin deleted that post after I posted about how I was just going to post my comment on my own site, and anyone who cared to read it, could find it there. (Again, I find it odd that the authors of those deleted posts were not notified of their deletion but the readers of the blog were told about deleted posts and only had to send an email request to receive copies of them. I always post my contact information when commenting anywhere on the internet. Not once have I had a problem with someone not being able to contact me through the email address I include with every post I make (the katie@exaggeration.org account) and I have gotten quite a few emails from people who have read my comments on various sites. So I do not see how it would not work this time around.) So, what do you all think? Was my original post smarmy, condescending to the point of rudeness, or offensively critical? Please feel free to let me know in the comments. None of which will be deleted--I firmly believe in our right to express our opinions (regardless of whether you agree with mine, or not) and I am tired of people saying that they are against censorship, only to turn around and censor the critical opinions of others. The author of this blog has published four young adult books and I realize that she can police her blog in any way that she chooses, I simply find it sad that an author would embrace censorship, and delete critical opinions of her blog. Although if you read her entry about how she feels about negative criticism, it makes some sense. (Shake That Groove Thing blog entry) P.S.: I finally received an email from the site admin explaining why my post was deleted. The first reason that it was deleted was because it was too long. Which is true, it was rather long for a comment.
The second reason was: "The content was inflammatory and the result was that other commenters were rushing forward to defend Shannon. She's asked me to help keep this a positive place, and the shouting match brewing was very negative.The content was inflammatory and the result was that other commenters were rushing forward to defend Shannon. She's asked me to help keep this a positive place, and the shouting match brewing was very negative." (Since I don't know how to keep my damn mouth shut when prudence dictates that I should hold my tongue, I will simply say that if the site is meant only to be a positive place then she shouldn't have done so much complaining about teachers and curriculum. She should, instead, have focused on positive solutions for the problem instead of empty complaints. But that is only my opinion.)
Thirdly: "The content crossed the line from 'opinion' to 'libel.' The accusations you made against Shannon are unfounded (feel free to browse Shannon's past blog entries for proof), and besides that, they came across as rude. I'm sorry if you didn't intend that, but it read that way to me. As long as I have any say on this blog, I want to maintain it as a place of truth, and if people want to express differing opinions, they should be based on fact and be offered in a friendly manner. Having a differing opinion is one thing (I don't delete those, as you'll see if you browse the blog comments, and out of thousands, I've only ever deleted five), but your accusations were defamatory."
I was also sent the other deleted post, that I will not reprint here out of respect to it's author. I will say that the negativity in the other deleted post was directed towards me, not the blog author. Basically, it came down to this paragraph of mine:
"Please stop railing on the teachers (I know you're going to say, "But look! We're talking about great teachers we've had!" but this thread was in response to a great amount of vitriol from the blog author towards teachers, trying to backpeddle after the fact is nice, but it doesn't take away from the fact that you have unfairly blamed teachers for problems that are often out of their control--standard curriculum set by a specific school district--and you were often unkind in your remarks. Teachers are incredibly underpaid and are trying to do the best they can with the resources made available to them.)" People objected to my use of the term "railing on the teachers" ("railing" in that context was synonymous with "scold," and I do think she was scolding teachers); the line "great amount of vitriol from the blog author towards teachers" ("vitriol" was considered a defamatory statement, and I probably should have said "great amount of vitriol from the blog author towards english curriculums being taught by english teachers in our schools," which would have been more of a factual statement.; and lastly, people objected to my (misspelled! ha on me!) comment that her current post was simply an attempt to "backpeddle [sic] after the fact." What I read as backpedaling, others saw as a clarification from the blog author about her true feelings towards english teachers. The reason I think it's necessary to include this long post-script to an already massive entry is that I want everyone reading this to know that there are differing opinions than mine. Also that I have been accused of libel, defamation of character, and rudeness. The rudeness doesn't bother me, although I am sorry that I came across that way but I am bothered by the other accusations. I can't remember ever having been accused of libel, or defamation of character, for something I wrote on the internet. Which is why I'm surprised that it was the above post that got people so riled up and hurtling these accusations at me. Nevertheless, the accusations have been made and if there is anyone left reading this far, thank you for making to the end, and please feel free to form your own opinions about anything posted here.

Labels:

Posted by Katie. at 1:49 PM | | 2 comments | links to this post  

2 Comments:

suzanne said...

wait, what, LIBEL? libel is when you publish "the mayor is a queer" (assuming that is unfounded). what in your comment would be considered libel? did i miss something? we leave worse comments on the times-delta web site that would legally be considered libel, but we leave it there for the interest of free speech.

 1:41 AM |  

Katie. said...

I know! I mean, there are SO MANY things that I have written in my life that have gotten published (COS newspaper, Times Delta, my own blogs, other blogs, etc.) that were borderline libelous but the fact that THIS is the post that resulted in a site admin telling me I'm libelous is just... yeah, you've got it, WHAT?

And I posted the whole damn thing in it's entirety. Even with the misspelling of "backpedal." I'm trying to work on a reasoned, logical response to the site admin (the one I wrote last night when I got her email was DEFINITELY rude, so I shelved it in my drafts and later deleted it before going to bed because I just want to scream at that woman).

I mean... yeah. Me defending teachers is libel. That was one of the more reasonable things I've ever written! It followed every damn rule about a good argument that I learned in Debate class.

So. Yeah. Color me shocked. That YA author seriously needs to grow some major backbone if she's going to go after people like me for libel, and defamation of character. You don't just throw those terms around.

(I don't think she realizes that it's only libel and defamation of character if people are writing malicious lies about her, not simply disagreeing with her negative blog comments.)

(Is it kind of sick that, now that it's morning, I'm almost proud that I got that site so riled up with just one long-ass comment? I am a muckraking journalist again!)

 9:04 AM |  

Commenting Is Fun

<< Home

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Surprisingly thrilled to be married.

Anyone who's known me for any length of time knows that I have always said that I would NEVER get married. I even told my husband this after we had been dating for a while, that I never, EVER wanted to get married. Who needs a religious official and a piece of paper to tell them that their relationship is forever? Not me! But did you know that you get a major tax break if you're married? I know, that's not a great reason to get married but it really is a significant amount of money that you get from the tax-man just for making your relationship legal. There's also married sex. I know, married sex isn't anywhere near as fun as un-married sex but there are some advantages. (I'm trying to think of the advantages. This might take me the next hour, or so, but I'll come up with something, dammit!) Got it. Usually, if you're married, it's just you and your husband in the house. So, you can have sex anywhere you want. (Although, come to think of it... HA!... we used to have sex wherever the hell we wanted to long before we got married.) Okay. So maybe there isn't the advantage of married sex. We fight less now that we're married. Which is not to say that we are always in agreement (something that will never happen), or never have arguments (I. Am. Always. Right. Goddammit.) but we no longer have those screaming matches that end with one person stomping out on the other person. To put it simply: The stakes are higher now. While I never wanted to get married, now that I am, I take it quite seriously. I am going to grow old with this man, and that's all there is to it. After we first got married, we both had lists of what would be considered "deal-breakers" of the marriage. At first we pretty much had only one deal-breaker: No cheating. Over the early months of our marriage, we slowly began adding more and more deal-breakers to the list. To the point where it had just gotten stupid. And we had started invoking the "D" word, saying that something would be grounds for divorce. Since you all are probably MUCH smarter than I am when it comes to inter-personal relationships, you probably know that we were heading down a very dark, depressing road. Which was why I finally put my foot down and said that we are not EVER again going to invoke the "D" word. Because why the hell did we get married then in the first place? Wasn't that supposed to be the whole point of getting married? That we were now stuck with each other for the rest of our lives? Once we got out of that immature mentality, the screaming fights just... stopped. Honestly. Now that the fights were no longer devolving into "Well, if I'm so horrible, why don't you just DIVORCE ME, THEN?" we began to act like adults, and our arguments got resolved. Your grandparents weren't lying when they said that any good marriage involves a LOT of compromise. That's why our, "Well, why don't you just DIVORCE ME, THEN?" fights got us nowhere. It was either my way, his way, or we would have to part ways. Yes, we realize now that we were stupid. (Although, for the record, cheating is still a deal-breaker for both of us. But that's our ONLY deal-breaker.) Fighting that way made our marriage seem temporary. It kept us both from reveling in the fact that hey! we never have to go on another first date again, EVER! Now that we argue like adults, we've started to settle into this marriage. Which is when the marriage started to pay off. Even though we've been living together for four years, we never got completely comfortable with just being ourselves around each other. We were both still trying to show the other person only the good things, and not the strange quirky things. (And you are nuts if you think I'm going to detail those strange, quirky things. It's nothing outrageous like a third boob, or something, it's just... okay, ONE THING. I still sleep with this security blanket thing called "Conkie." When we first started living together, I tried to sleep without Conkie. Except I seriously couldn't fall asleep without it. So, I would hide it in my pillow-case because I didn't want Devin to know that I'm a 25 year-old woman with a freakin' security blanket. Once we were married, though, I finally told him about Conkie. And yes, he teased me about it but in a very nice way, the nice way you all are going to tease me about it, I hope.) (See? None of these quirks were earth-shattering. And I don't know why it's called "Conkie." My Dad named it that when I was a baby. And no, it's not the original Conkie. That Conkie got lost in Sears when I was five and my Mom would gladly tell you the story about Katie throwing the world's biggest hissy-fit in the parking lot of Sears upon learning that Conkie had been lost. After that, my parents stocked up on Conkies. The current Conkie is really just a patch of flannel. I run it through my fingers while I fall asleep.) (I seriously cannot believe that I just told the internet about my Conkie. Right after posting about how the internet can hate on me all it wants. I must have taken stupid pills this morning.) Back to the matter at hand, though. While Devin might have given me some good natured ribbing about my many quirks (and I certainly returned the favor about his), it actually brought us closer together. After the horrible fights, with both of us blasting each other with conditions that must be met in order for this marriage to work, it felt SO GOOD to learn that there are actually no conditions to our love. In fact, once we started opening up about our inherent quirkiness, we both realized that hey, those are just a few more reasons why we love each other. You would think that we would love each other despite those quirks (that we would merely accept, or tolerate them) but it turned out that we even love each other's quirks! Who knew? And that is why I'm surprisingly thrilled to be married. I knew going into it that Devin was a great guy. I simply didn't realize that it could be so wonderful. To be able to share your life with someone who loves every. little. thing. about. you. Someone who washed my hair for me after my eye surgery because I couldn't get my eye wet, so it took some fancy maneuvering on Devin's part. Someone who doesn't mind sharing the bed with Conkie. Someone who just laughs and shakes his head when I talk about "basketball fields" and "baseball courts." Someone to clean up after I've been sick, and to be there when I come out of surgery. I didn't know it would be this huge. That I would end up feeling SO MUCH for another person. That just thinking of a life without him could make me feel so sad. And I never, EVER thought that I would even consider having children. And now we're talking with doctors about doing just that. At first, it was something I agreed to because it was so important to Devin and now... well, I realize that I think I do want that little piece of the both of us. That little transparent ghost baby. Because I love him a little more, each day. It's as if my love for Devin is this huge reservoir inside of me that has no boundaries. Just when I start thinking, "Okay, that's it, I'm full up on love for Devin, I can't fit any more," he serenades me with "Endless Love" at a karaoke party and I realize that he is going to give me hundreds more reasons to love him as we grow old together. I can't wait.

Posted by Katie. at 3:07 PM | | 1 comments | links to this post  

1 Comments:

squeetus site administrator said...

Katie,
I am unable to access your email address. I was only able to locate your URL, which is why I couldn't email you. If you'd like me to explain why I deleted your comment, please email me and I'd be happy to. I can also forward to you the other comment I deleted, which was a response to yours. I won't forward your deleted comment to anyone else, as you've requested. I hadn't considered that you might think I'd alter it. I never would, but as you say it's a fear, so I deleted my note as well.
squeetus@gmail.com

 2:04 PM |  

Commenting Is Fun

<< Home

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

The Anti-Disclaimer Disclaimer.

So, I've been doing this crazy online journalling thing for almost a decade (it wasn't called blogging then). Back then, I had the standard angry blogger disclaimer, "Don't email me with your petty grievances."



Not only does that now seem to be a standard disclaimer among bloggers, they also implore their readers to not offer their opinions on the blog, their criticism, or basically anything that isn't "OMG! i luv yr blog!"



Screw dat. It might have taken me ten years to realize this but I'm the idiot with the online blog. Sure, I used to retaliate against the haters and password-protect my journal. Or I would wonder why me, internet, why hate ME? Maybe even respond to their emails with pleas that I'm a real person, with real feelings that really hurt!



Which made me a real idiot.



How in the world did it become standard for people to write whatever the hell they wanted to in their blogs, but then implore their readers to NOT respond to their diatribes?



I know the hate mail sucks. I've gotten my fair share of hate mail. I'm not belittling the fact that those barbs do sting. Not many people enjoy getting hate mail (except I actually did enjoy it as I got older because it meant that people were reading my journal and responding to it).

It's like when certain people grant interviews and then get upset because everything they said came off as a bit creepy.



If the hate mail makes you cry, then watch what you say. Or, better yet, just password-protect your blog and give out the password to all of the people who have praised your blog.



Otherwise. Do not ask me to not respond to something you post in your blog if my comments could be construed as negative. If you want to surround yourself with sycophantic yes-people, that's fine (although it hasn't done our President any good) but be prepared for some dissension in the ranks.



Because that is why the goddess, in her infinite wisdom, created the "Delete" key in email programs. Or if you have a particularly verbose hater, who can't help but write to you about every little thing you mention in your blog, just make a message filter and have them go straight to the trash.



As for me, and my blog. You can hate on me all you want. I can't promise that I'll take you seriously but I am ready for it, baby. Hit me one more time.



My ONLY disclaimer is that if you want to write about me (or something I wrote) in your own blog, give me some linkage love or I will ask you to remove the purloined content.



Although. You've got to remember that any email you send becomes the property of the recipient. That means it is well within my legal right to post your email here (although I would redact real names and email addresses because I'm not cruel).



(I don't know about you but that makes me think about all of the crappy, self-important emails I've written during my life. Thank goddess no one cares enough about me to save those things and publish them somewhere.)



So, flame away all you haters. Sycophants welcome, as well.





powered by performancing firefox

Posted by Katie. at 3:08 PM | | 0 comments | links to this post  

0 Comments:

Commenting Is Fun

<< Home