Category Archives: School

Day 12: Short Essay for Ecocriticsim

I am midway through this course and I feel as though I am lost.  The strange stranger surrounds me.  The concepts are slippery, just out of reach, yet my fingers brush by them, feeling that there is something to grab onto, something to help hoist myself up over the ledge of misunderstanding.  Just as I start to believe that I will be seated upon the plateau of knowledge, basking in the glow of understanding, the strange stranger passes my peripheral vision; shattering the illusory idea that ecocriticism can be nailed down and dissected.

Ellen Meloy, in her essay “The Deeds and Suffering of Light” divulges that she suffers from a neurological disorder which causes “’a reduction in mental acuity’” (5).  Though I am unaware of having any neurological conditions that could be clouding my understanding, I can relate to this statement:

“because there is the possibility of an abrupt slide into chronic befuddlement, I thought it might be useful to acquire some basic motor and tactile      skills, like pushing around cool, gooey paint in mindless, repetitive motions, as preparation for that freshly vacated space, that airy void between the   ears” (5).

This course is a blank canvas, stark white and waiting for an image.  As the weeks pass by, I apply “cool, gooey paint” yearning for a familiar pattern to emerge.  With each new paint that I am provided, my frantic fingers rush across the canvas.  I stand back and I am not satisfied with the blobs I have produced.  Perhaps it is the angle.  Perhaps it is the lighting.  I must come at this canvas sideways; casting aside my expectations of the image I thought I would produce.  It is time for me to abandon the rules of painting and create my own guide on how to see the world surrounding me.  Shattering categories is hard work.

How can one create a “visual aphrodisiac”? (226). For Meloy, the color red is ecstasy, passion and a signal of reproduction.  Squeezing the cold metal tube of red paint, I dab a small circle in the center of my canvas.  I create a focal point.  I create a place to fall into when the outer edges blur out understanding.  And perhaps that is the point, to abandon the notion that the “Name ha[s] to match reality, and reality [has] to be made uniform in samples, chips, and swatches” (229).  The image I create does not need to be codified to that which is recognizable.  The red circle is the truth I have created on the canvas.  It has become the place that I dwell in to seek understanding of the slippery concept of reality.

My time is spent staring at a canvas, taking shape in unrecognizable ways.  The canvas demands to be worked upon quickly, though I find myself begging for time to slow down so that I can lean into the red splashes.  I beg for the strange stranger to reveal itself, but Buell thwarts any time devoted to the uncanny.  Oppermann insists that I examine paints I have not yet touched.  Yet I find myself comforted by Meloy’s words,  “Our sense of wonder grows exponentially; the greater the knowledge, the deeper the mystery and the more we seek knowledge to create new mystery” (243).  When ideas sweep past my fingers, when the red dot comforts an unsure mind and as each theory is placed before my befuddled mind, I am comforted that it is creating a mystery. I now paint on a canvas that must be viewed sideways.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under My thoughts, School

Day 11 – Essay on Patriarchy and Capitalism

Remember that commitment I made to write for 100 days … yeah well it will be 100 writings in one year, it seems to be the only time I have as recent.  Remember when I said I wouldn’t count my school writings, yeah turns out I lied 🙂

Marcy Taylor

Heidi Hartmann Presentation

Text:  The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a more Progressive Union

 

It was a well designed plan for Capitalism and Patriarchy to meet.  Years of starvation, monarchy, and patriarchal rule had the people ready – thirsty – for change and when Capitalism walked in, well the people saw the benefits to their relationship.

According to Hartmann, this relationship wasn’t mutually exclusive.  The people gasped in horror when they realized that Capitalism and Patriarchy were, in all actuality, fuck buddies.  They were not exclusive to one another, but the couple assured its people that this “arrangement” is not destructive to the masses.  And Hartmann was there to write the story so that the people would understand this quasi marriage.

Hartmann lets us know that the fuck buddy system isn’t always wine, fooling around, having a cigarette and heading out the door.  Quite the contrary.  Like the time when Capitalism was being stalked by Socialism … yeah, Patriarchy enlisted McCarthy to kill Socialism.  It was an ugly time for both of them; they barely had time to copulate!

But copulate they did … on a massive scale.  All the democracy babies where running around, being cute and shit, but then another argument cropped up for Patriarchy and Capitalism.  The kids … I mean Capitalism saw the benefits of the kids and women working in factories, pumping out profits faster than women could birth them!  Patriarchy got all uptight; talking about a woman’s place is in the home, taking care of the kids (because, well, they were sick, broken and hungry.)  And more importantly, Patriarchy was harping on women making money, which means his harem of women at home would be diminished.  Hartmann quoted this proclamation as “The material base upon which patriarchy rests lies most fundamentally in men’s control over women’s labor power.”  Whatever this means!  Patriarchy just wanted women in their rightful place.  Capitalism ignored his pleas to keep his women at home.

This got Patriarchy pissed!  He sat at home, sad that his women were gone to work, thinking of ways to get back at Capitalism. He was in awe that Capitalism didn’t see the problems with this money making scheme.  I mean, who would be in charge of sex if women got it their heads they were worth more than being a glory hole?    As the women came home, tired, depressed, dirty and unwilling to cook a “decent” meal he left to go hang out with the guys at the pub.  An idea popped into his head as he sipped on his suds and his stroke of brilliance would dazzle the men and create heartache for his lover Capitalism.  He suggested “unions.”   In unison the men sang out, “Unions?”  He explained that if they all got together and DEMANDED that men get paid a family wage then the woman could come back so they could cook, clean and breed.  Of course these unions made shit happen for Patriarchy.

Capitalism basked in the glory of being fought over!  Overcome with joy, she made compromises and allowed a family wage, but also kept women and children at work.  The workers would be segregated but she promised Patriarchy men would be in charge of when, how and how much the woman workers would be paid.  This pleased Patriarchy.

Hartmann made a prediction at this point.  Hartmann claims that as the need for a second income becomes prevalent, the divide of income will increase.  Turns out she’ll be right …

But back to Patriarchy and Capitalism …   During all this time, they are shacking up, usually lying in bed after a good romp, disagreeing and agreeing on how to go about getting their minions to squabble.  If they could get the people to disagree they wouldn’t notice that they were puppets in a well orchestrated Capitalist/Patriarchy show.

But the people took advantage of Patriarchy and Capitalisms fuck sessions.  At some point a group of “progressives” took pity on the children and demanded they be left at home, not working in deplorable conditions.  This got Patriarchy and Capitalism juices flowing.  Patriarchy decided that children would be the woman’s concern, as they were no longer productive and well, he didn’t have time for that shit.  Plus he was glad to have his women back in the kitchen.  Capitalism, not as pleased, did see another source of income … The housewife.  Oh she’d love a new stove, dishwasher, or other shiny object.  There was peace amongst them again.  Lying back, sweaty and tired, they congratulated each other while smoking pot …. “Hey, this could be worth some money Capitalism.”  Don’t be stupid Patriarchy; I need workers who want to work …” Anyways ….

But Hartmann turned out to be a traitor to both Capitalism and Patriarchy, as she was telling the people “women should not trust men to liberate them after the revolution, in part, because there is no reason to think they would know how; in part, because there is no necessity for them to do so.”  BITCH Patriarchy yelled.  Capitalism was laughing until she read, “we think the sexual division of labor within capitalism has given women a practice which we have learned to understand what human interdependence and needs are.”  Asshole Capitalism yelled!!  Patriarchy and Capitalism where not happy!

Hartman wanted to organize people into practicing techniques to struggle against Patriarchy and Capitalism.  WTF?!  After screwing away their angst, Capitalism and Patriarchy calmed down, as they realized most people won’t read the story Hartmann pushed into the public, because most of them were suckling on the glass teat of TV (an invention that Capitalism still threw in the face of Patriarchy … though he did enjoy Leave it to Beaver.)

The people have questions!!  They beg for answers.

Why is this marriage so unhappy?  Besides the satire I provide above, do you think it possible to examine Feminist Thought from economic factors alone?  Why or why not?

Hartmann calls for a new analysis of feminism, one that would include examination of Capitalism and Patriarchy, however, in this new analysis, who sets the parameters and definitions?  Who will be the authors of these theories?  Are men and women included?  Should there be restrictions?  We could do this all day!

Hartmann suggests that men should relinquish their privilege.  How do men give up their privilege?

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under My thoughts, School

Day 9

I expressed, in an earlier post my new found love of Timothy Morton.  In this writing I take one of his ideas (strange strangers) and place it over the article (also referenced in an earlier post) “There’s a Gene for That.”

 

Timothy Morton’s book “The Ecological Thought” introduces the concept of “strange strangers.”  For Morton, the strange strangers are the gaps found within the “mesh” (interconnectedness of all things) and they cannot be defined or labeled.  “The strange stranger, conversely, is something or someone whose existence we cannot anticipate.  Even when strange strangers showed up, even if they lived with us for a thousand years, we might never know them fully – and we would never know whether we had exhausted our getting-to-know process” (Morton 42).  These “strange strangers” are the uncanny and each time we try to pin them down other “strange strangers” appear.

This concept is difficult for me to grasp, so I have chosen to utilize this notion in my readers response, with the thought it will push me to try to understand the vast connotations this theory suggests.

An article, written by Pankaj Mehta, immediately came to mind while reading about “strange strangers.”  Mehta is discussing the problems of biological determinism, such as racism, sexism, classism and he suggests “there is a gene for just about every inequality and inequity in modern society.” [1]  Mehta goes on to claim,  “[a]rmed with large genomic datasets and an arsenal of statistical techniques, a small but vocal band of scientists are determined to hunt down the genetic basis of all we are and all we do.” He goes on to say “… the genetic determinist’s playbook in the genomics era is clear: Collect mass quantities of sequence data. Find an ill-defined trait (like political preference). Find a gene that is statistically overrepresented in the sub-population that “possesses” that trait. Declare victory. Ignore the fact that these genes don’t really explain the phenotypic variance of the trait. Instead, claim that if we only had more data the statistics would all work out. Further generalize these results to the level of societies and claim they explain the fundamental genetic basis of human behavior.”

These scientists are continually seeking “The” answer to biological difference/sameness.  The gaps, or unfamiliar, is what genetic scientist are trying to chase down and make familiar.  Genetic determinist research is in a stage of “getting to know” process that can only reveal more unfamiliarity.  Morton would insist “[e]ven if biology knew all the species on Earth, we would still encounter them as strange strangers, because of the inner logic of knowledge.  The more you know about something, the stranger it grows” (Morton 17).  The argument could be made once a species has been identified and the more you try to understand that one species, the less you will know or understand about the identified species.

Mehta states “[b]iological determinism seems plausible precisely because it gives the illusion that it is grounded in scientific observation.”  Morton would agree and take this thought even further by stating, “the trouble with pure semblance is that it’s like an illusion … Monstrousness and illusoriness go together” (Morton 74).

In essence, when scientist seek out the “strange stranger” they are categorizing and trying to contain these illusory ideas, creating greater harm to the “strange stranger” which, as suggested earlier, could very well be ourselves.

Categories are typically created for inclusion or exclusion and for Morton “[r]ather than a vision of inclusion, we need a vision of intimacy.  We need threshold, not spheres or concentric circles, for imagining where the strange stranger hangs out” (Morton 78).

Mehta points out the problems of biological determinism by illustrating the harms it can create by inequality and power due to our capitalist structures.  Morton would expound further and say that by narrowly focusing our interest of the “mesh” to biology alone, we have limited our view of interconnectedness.  “At its limit, it [the ecological thought] is a radical openness to everything.  The ecological thought is therefore full of shadows and twilights” (Morton 15).

Ultimately, there is nothing “natural” about anything.  Science will not find why boys may be “naturally” inclined for aggression.  Science will not find why girls may be “naturally” inclined to be submissive.  Nature is the strange stranger and the more we try to unveil her/his/its “nature” the more “unnatural” it will become.  Life (in all forms) is a messy jumbled monster enmeshed in interconnectedness that does not allow to be quantified.


[1] Mehta, Pankaj, “There’s a Gene for That”, jacobinmag.com.

4 Comments

Filed under My thoughts, School

Death of the Queer Community: An Essay on Labels

Marcy Taylor

Independent Studies

Professor Hackford-Peer

The Death of the Queer Community

 

Hope as Propaganda

It all began as a crusade, a quest, to find what hope meant and why people invested in it so freely.  When I was diagnosed with cancer, hope was flung around like it held the answers to my very critical problem, yet behind hope was fear; fear of death, fear of saying or doing the wrong thing and fear of the unknown.  I could not seem to buy into the hope campaign and I had to figure out why.  Everyone around me seemed to take hope and the ideas surrounding it at face value, using the term hope so often that I am convinced most people did not question its relevance.

Cancer provided me a space, an opportunity, to re-evaluate many things in my life and labels, like hope, screamed out to me to be examined and reconsidered.

I began researching the definitions of hope, where hope initially appears historically and the commodification of hope in our recent past.  Hope now appears as snappy slogans to win elections and gain funds in a war against disease.  Yet anytime I mentioned I didn’t believe in hope it was met with immediate gasps of dismay or verbal assaults on the mere mention of eradicating hope from our vernacular.  It seemed hope was tied up in many peoples outlook on future events as if it were a solid bet in the outcome of people’s lives.  How did hope become so important?

In October, of this year, a dear friend of mine succumbed to liver failure brought on my Stage IV pancreatic cancer.  Prior to his death we had numerous heartfelt conversations but one lengthy discussion has stuck with me.

Rich was a fervent advocate for hope.  He explained that without hope he wouldn’t have lived past his “death date,” which was only to live 6 months past his initial diagnosis.  Rich lived 18 months to the day after his diagnosis.  Being a father of a teenage boy and an 11-year-old daughter, this was valuable time he did not take for granted.  Each extra day was spent with his wife and children and for Rich; hope was the ingredient to get those extra days.

When I explained my position on hope, Rich wasn’t disgusted, offended or shocked, he was interested.  He wanted to explore my thoughts and create a dialogue around our ideas of hope.  After hours of questions and answers it became clear Rich believed that hope needed a reclamation period, a rescue from a commodity driven society.  He felt hope was now being used with a flippant attitude and that true hope was what the terminally ill, or any other dire life-threatening situation a person may find them in, needed.  Not a pink ribbon that speaks of money but a true sense of seeing another day, a goal to live to watch your children grow old.

 

Propaganda invades every facet of our lives, yet usually goes unnoticed.  According to Professor Thomas Huckin, propaganda “is false or misleading information or ideas addressed to a mass audience by parties who thereby gain advantage.  Propaganda is created and disseminated systematically (though not always consciously) and does not invite critical analysis or response.”[1]  According to this definition, hope has become another propagandistic campaign that does not lend to critical examination of its internal inconsistencies and, for too long, has been disseminated systematically to a mass audience who refuses to examine its troubling nature of inactive compliance to established religion, social constructs and hegemonic principles.

Hope as Commodity From

A campaign wanted to inspire “hope” for marginalized youth was created in March of 2010.  “The It Gets Better Project’s mission is to communicate to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth around the world that it gets better, and to create and inspire the changes needed to make it better for them.  “It Gets Better Project™” has become a worldwide movement, inspiring more than 50,000 user-created videos viewed more than 50 million times. To date, the project has received submissions from celebrities, organizations, activists, politicians and media personalities, including President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Adam Lambert, Anne Hathaway, Colin Farrell, Matthew Morrison of “Glee”, Joe Jonas, Joel Madden, Ke$ha, Sarah Silverman, Tim Gunn, Ellen DeGeneres, Suze Orman, the staffs of The Gap, Google, Facebook, Pixar, the Broadway community, and many more. For us, every video changes a life. It doesn’t matter who makes it.”[2]

“It Gets Better Project” is now a trademarked non-profit organization, infiltrating the hope industry, catering to the queer community.  It has become a corporation in peddling the idea that hope can heal and create a community within a commodity form.  To back its message a list of “famous” people have created a video to show solidarity for the queer community and, for the true follower, you can purchase merchandise from the It Gets Better store, to show your esprit de corps.

 

This campaign does not aim to change the climate of bullying, but is asking the queer community to hang in there until changes are made.  It is inactive.  It is placating hetero-normative principles and is asking a subculture of the population to use the tools that have created its own imprisonment.

Though many would argue, the fact queer suicide is now a national topic shows an improvement in social acceptance, I would argue usurping the Queer community into the dominant social structures is a marker of the cancer invading our Queer minds and bodies.

 

Many times it is not the queer youth that needs the counseling, or services or messages of “it gets better”, it is the community that is demonizing the youth that needs the societal shift in thinking.  The picture above states: “Coming Out, Overcoming Bullying and Creating a life Worth Living.”  Should the work to be accepted be placed on the victim?  Should coming out be a prerequisite for creating a life worth living?  Why are we asking these youth to change and create anything?  We should be placing the blame on the aggressors and bullies.  Videos by angry queer youth, shaming their community, could be one way of combatting passive compliance of flippant phrases like “it gets better.”  Society at large has the problem, not the queer youth of our nation.

When politicians, courts and mass media create a spectacle of peoples emotional, domestic and physical lives through the lens of “daytime drama” it creates the dollar driven dreams of the capitalist industry.  People scurry to watch the live coverage of the Prop 8 case, and the gaze of the viewer sees the rainbow flags flying before the courthouse steps.  The labels “gay” and “lesbian” are used too often to count.  All the while, viewers are making assumptions on those terms and the retail stores stock their shelves with pink triangles and bumper stickers proclaiming “Repeal the H8.”

 

 

 

 

 

From Subculture Resistance to Hetero-Normative Incorporation

Style, for marginalized groups, provides a means to visually upset dominant ideologies.   These styles allowed for subculture to challenge dominate culture “at a symbolic level the ‘inevitability’, the ‘naturalness’ of a class and gender stereotypes.”[3]  Within these style codes, labels and definitions are given new meaning by the marginalized groups, creating a “style” within verbal queues and identification through labeling one another with words.  Detournement literally means, “detour”, however in the 1950’s an organization called “Letterist International” (a group of radical artists and theorists) used it as a technique to take capitalist icons or symbols and repurpose it to redefine or call attention to the internal logic (or lack thereof) of the cultural industry.

The queer community erected codes to include: argot, clothing, locations for leisure time, music, etc.  An example for the queer community would be the pink triangle.  Once used in concentration camps in Nazi Germany to signify homosexual males, in the 1970’s the symbol was reclaimed by the queer community as a symbol of pride for gay rights.  This type of resistance was shocking to the collective community, however for the queer community, it was a signal to dominate ideology that the queer community was reframing the labels placed upon them by reclamation and redefinition. There was solidarity in strife.

Due to the capitalistic structure of society, it is impossible to continue with a “brand” of opposition.  The cultural industry, with the help of mass media, begins to redefine the style of subculture groups and makes it a style fit for public consumption.  Today the pink triangle can be purchased on shirts, mugs, key-chains, flags, pillows, earrings … any object that can be redeemed for money you’ll find the pink triangle adorning it.  This illustrates how subcultures themselves get usurped into mainstream/hegemonic ideologies.

Much like propaganda, pop culture works by manipulating the viewer into a Utopian principle based off the premise of collective logic.  According to Fredrick Jameson, the mass-produced media “must otherwise rest on a peculiarly unconvincing notion of the psychology of the viewer, as some inert and passive material on which the manipulatory operation works.”[4]  In other words, the goal of production of media is to change the collective logic by granting the “manipulated viewer … specific gratifications in return for his or her consent to passivity.”[5]

Incorporation and Death

Once the queer community is given a space on the stage of popular culture, all the nuances of that subculture are reified and paraded on television commercials and witty sitcoms.  “Consumer products and brands are increasingly being used to signal identity, lifestyle choices and group memberships.”[6]  For the lesbian and bisexual community The L-Word is the beginning of the end of a the lesbian community, who had defined itself, wasn’t wanted by the general population, and without a doubt, disregarded by mass media.

Prior to The L-Word, advertisers ignored lesbians, as they were not a target group worth selling to.  For many lesbians, this was the only delight in being relegated to marginalized status.  There was satisfaction in creating ones own style without a heavy, constant pressure of advertisers infiltrating our bedrooms, our closets and our minds.

Going to the bar tonight?  Flannel shirt it is, with no regrets as to not being “sexy” enough.

Hiking you say?  Well sure, let me grab my fleece jacket and “waffle stompers!”

With the advent of The L-Word, however, the days of being unencumbered by the beauty culture are over.  Now you can purchase clothing, on the Showtime website, to match up with your favorite character and better yet, can purchase the make up to match your clothing.  Lest ye forget, you now have a pattern, a template, of what lesbian and bisexual women look like.

 

For consumers, The L-Word is their fetishized fantasies of “real” lesbians realized.   For the heterosexual male there is pillow fighting-girls-sleeping-over-doing their nails-piercing-ear lesbian-co-eds that they have fantasized/fetishized and can now be viewed on mainstream cable, no more embarrassing porn charges on the credit card bill.  Take the above sentence and place “lesbian”, “straight girl”, “hiker dyker”, “butch”, “femme”, “molly mormon”, whatever label you choose, each can now watch fetishized women’s bodies, adorned in hetero-normative ideologies and call it gay.

The funeral for the queer community has gone unnoticed.  The dead body of a subculture has no memorial, no resting place, because it is silently being passed around from one news agency to the next, from one sitcom to the next, from one political campaign to the next and from one social program to the next, all the while, consumers believe they are helping the queer, giving resuscitation efforts to a dead corpse.

 

Solutions/Resurrection

            In a word:  Resistance.  Resistance is the only solution to the problems illustrated above.

In my research I have found the queer community has become a product, which keeps us alienated from our “true” selves.  Mass Media has now made queer identity a commodity, an object, no longer a living, breathing, human being.

Long gone are the days of resistance through style.  Long gone are the days of solidarity in strife.  Magazine articles, television and commercials now infiltrate young queer minds and have them assimilate to their straight neighbors, friends and family.

Resisting the brand of “queer” is no simple task, as wearing a label (physically and mentally) is now required on the uniform of cultural identity.   Within the queer and straight communities everyone is lead to believe that we must identify our sexuality, political leanings, religion, etc.  Though it has been argued (and in some cases rightly so) that labels give us a seat at the table, in what ways are we restricting our participation in other groups?  In what ways are we hindering ourselves by applying labels?  And last, but certainly not least, who is in charge of the definitions given to those labels?

I have no perfect solutions, but one that I have given most thought to is a campaign of simply giving our names.  If people were forced to not label who/what they are, then people would have to spend time actually getting to know each other.  If, when meeting you for the first time, I was restricted from labeling my sexuality, it would provide a space of getting to know the “real” Marcy, not the quick adhered labeled Marcy.  In dialogue with a new person they would find nuances about me that would otherwise be lost in the label “lesbian.”

Resistance to labels, though difficult, is the solution that fits best in a society that wants things done quickly and efficiently, that has information in 0.12 seconds on a Google search, and doesn’t want/have time to make dinner.  In our mad dash of a life, the best resistance is idleness, a time to slow down and make a person get to know you, instead of you making it easy through the application of labels.


[1] “Propaganda defined”.  Unpublished, 2012.

[2]

[3] Hebdige, Dick,“Subculture the meaning of style.” New York: Routledge Publishing, 1979. Print.

[4] Jameson, Fredrick, The Political Unconscious; Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Cornell University Press. Print. pp. 287.

[5] Jameson, Fredrick, ibid

[6] Ladendorf, Martina: “Commercialization of Lesbian Identities in Showtime’s The L-Word”, Culture Unbound, Volume 2, 2010: 265-282. Retrieved in October 2013. http:/www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se

Leave a comment

Filed under My thoughts, School

Catching up …

Going back to school is the best thing I’ve ever done for myself!  But in doing so, I’ve found less time to write in my blog.  With writing critical analysis and making chapbooks (look it up it’s really cool!) I’ve found less time to write about what’s going on with general life.

Wyatt and Cheyenne are doing amazing in school (straight A’s) and both are spending the weekends with their dad.  Makes me sad not to have them here on their days off school, but I know that their school work is getting done.  I hate that we can’t just pack up the car and head off to the museum or planetarium … we did get a telescope so my spaced out (in the good way) son can enjoy the night sky.  Cheyenne is obsessed with duct tape and making wallets with it.  It’s amazing to watch them grow up and find their interests.  Wyatt has his whole life mapped out, ok he’s had it down for at least 3 years, and he’s determined he will get his PhD in geology (he’s going to be a Palentologist of course!)

Rizzi is still at the S.O, but it’s worked out really well.  Rizzi is my constant, my best friend and just amazing!  I’d be lost without her and quite frankly she’s put up with more than she has too!  I’d be so damn lost without her!!

I start the U of U in Jan and I’m so excited!  It’s amazing to follow your dreams!  Don’t let fear tether you from your life … that is my best learned lesson this year!

1 Comment

Filed under Family Time, My thoughts, Relationships, School

School news …

Excited doesn’t even cover it!

I found out today, from my academic advisor from the U of U that ALL of my generals are finished to their standards (WSU told me I had 5 more classes) and now I can begin work on my new major (I say new because I recently switched to English from Criminal Justice).

The exciting part, I will start course work at the U of U Spring semester and am only one and a half years from getting my Batchelor’s in English … then, I’ll fast track to my PhD!!

With all sincerity I almost cried during that phone call.  It’s all within reach and the ball is rolling … full steam ahead because NOTHING can get in my way now.  No work schedule conflicts, no financial burdens (well, there will be those but doable), and most importantly … I will no longer stand in the way of what I know I want in my life.  Fear no longer tethers me … absolute freedom, that is what I feel and it’s fanfuckingtastic!!!

Oh, and don’t let me forget, I got my favorite treat in the mail today as well!!  PERFECT!

Leave a comment

Filed under My thoughts, School

What mom wouldn’t be proud?

This is Wyatt receiving his award for Wildcat of the Month.  I think I cried way to much and he probably got sick of hearing “I’m so proud of you” but I really am.  This son of mine is smart, witty, funny and not bad to look at!  He won his award for best scores, making friends with all he meets, turning in his homework on time, and though not announce, I think it may have something to do with the fact that he makes his teacher a card every night telling her how wonderful she is.

I love ya Wyatt, I’m the proudest mom!  You are incredible and I know you truly are one of a kind!

Mom

100_26571

Leave a comment

Filed under My kids, My kids ROCK!!!, My thoughts, Relationships, School