I promise I’ll have an actual post for you tomorrow but for now, please feast your eyes on Jimmy Fallon and John Krasinski throwing it down in a lip syncing contest (you read that right) that covers both Katy Perry and RUN-D.M.C. and ends with Krasinski belting out a ballad from one of the best quartets ever to record music.
Seriously, I wish my job included acting like a goofball on national television with hilarious people while getting paid shit tons of $$$.
~Nikki
Man has used violence as a means to get what he wants since the dawn of humankind. Be it to exact revenge on one individual or to send a message, to reach the end of a dispute with one person or a whole nation in an all-out war, violence has been a part of the culture of mankind since our very earliest beginnings. It seems an inevitable part of our nature. And yet, when things like the London bombings in 2005 or the most recent explosions in Boston happen, nothing about them or their aftermath feels natural.
Undoubtedly there still are random acts of violence. Watch almost any news segment or episode of America’s Most Wanted or The First 48 and you’ll see that very often, some poor soul is the victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong deranged person. But more often than not, violence is used either to retaliate for some wrongdoing or to send a specific message. In the case of terrorism, it’s a bit of both. No doubt the members of Al Quaida believe themselves to be oppressed or otherwise harmed by global powers the likes of the United States and the United Kingdom (and others). And, of course, the acts of terrorism they commit are done to tell the world that they will not rest until their voice is heard, until their demands (whatever they are) are met. If these violent acts actually worked, maybe I could understand the rationalizations behind them. As it is – as far as I can tell anyway – no one benefits from these bombings. No one wins. And, at the risk of sounding like Dr. Phil, if they don’t work, why keep at it?
I do believe there are some folks in the world who simply want to wreak havoc. And maybe that is the case with the incident at the Boston Marathon yesterday. The investigation is still underway and no motive has yet been identified. But aside from wanting only to create chaos, no other motive for violence justifies the means. The destruction caused by these acts of mass killings and even the consequences of singular violent incidents – investigations and trials and years spent in prison, the emotional pain given to the mourners or even the offenders themselves – all of it seems such a waste of time and resources. Enough to warrant giving up this archaic means of proving a point.
Evolutionarily speaking, a gene or mechanism or behavior will remain in play as long as it is useful. When its benefits no longer outway its negative effects, it will be selected out. It may take a few generations but it will fall away. My question is this: will the day come when humans in every culture think it is not worth the destruction and rebuilding, the misery caused, the millions of dollars spent on investigations and trials and lives spent in prison to use violence as a means of making themselves heard? Or will we forever be caught in this hamster wheel?
Personally, I don’t think violence in humanity will ever cease to exist entirely but my hope is that the day will come when it is such a rarity that every day’s news won’t be filled with tales of murder and rape, of hate crimes or sexual crimes or crimes against children. That these things will be taboo and only a tiny percentage of people will fall victim to them.
Patton Oswalt’s response to yesterday’s events says it all:
“I remember, when 9/11 went down, my reaction was, ‘Well, I’ve had it with humanity.’ But I was wrong. I don’t know what’s going to be revealed to be behind all of this mayhem. One human insect or a poisonous mass of broken sociopaths. But here’s what I DO know. If it’s one person or a HUNDRED people, that number is not even a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population on this planet,” he wrote. “You watch the videos of the carnage and there are people running TOWARDS the destruction to help out. (Thanks FAKE Gallery founder and owner Paul Kozlowski for pointing this out to me). This is a giant planet and we’re lucky to live on it but there are prices and penalties incurred for the daily miracle of existence. One of them is, every once in awhile, the wiring of a tiny sliver of the species gets snarled and they’re pointed towards darkness. But the vast majority stands against that darkness and, like white blood cells attacking a virus, they dilute and weaken and eventually wash away the evil doers and, more importantly, the damage they wreak. This is beyond religion or creed or nation. We would not be here if humanity were inherently evil. We’d have eaten ourselves alive long ago.
“So when you spot violence, or bigotry, or intolerance or fear or just garden-variety misogyny, hatred or ignorance, just look it in the eye and think, ‘The good outnumber you, and we always will.’”
~Nikki
It’s snowing where I am. Yes, you read that right. The kids in the neighborhood are on Spring Break and it’s snowing right now. I’m watching it gently fall as I type this. That’s what I get for living in Ohio, right? I know, I know. And usually around this time every year, I try to talk my 
husband into moving out of state. The only problem is, we don’t know where to go. Setting aside the obvious economical issues of the day (crappy housing market, limited job possibilities, etc.), there are a great many things to consider. For example, my hubby and I actually did move to coastal Virginia after graduating college. We found jobs, got an apartment and for the most part, settled into the area. And there were several aspects of Virginian life that suited us, not the least of which was living within 20 minutes of the ocean. The weather was perfect – never too much below freezing in the winter and keeping the changing seasons. Since fall is my absolute favorite, I don’t know that I could live without it. But I also need hot summers. In fact, the hotter, the better. In those ways, Norfolk, VA delivered. What we didn’t care for was the rather extreme congestion of the area, the somewhat higher cost of living and the slight but significant cultural differences. I won’t get into detail but I will say that I never felt like I quite fit in with the people around me. For the first time in my life, I understood the differences between a “northerner” and a “southerner.”
So, we returned to Ohio and got new jobs and a house and six years later, here we still are. Not committed to staying, per se, but without a clear picture of where it is we’d like to go. We’ve traveled a bit in recent years and found things we’ve liked in several cities. I love Boston, for example, and my husband fell for San Francisco, which also impressed me. But the outrageous cost of living there keeps me grounded in reality. We both enjoyed Seattle and plan to return for an extended visit as soon as time and means permit. We had a blast in Moab and the two Portlands, Oregon and Maine. Vermont’s lush vegetation took my breath away and Sacramento’s sunshine made it hard to leave. I didn’t see nearly enough of Colorado - both it and the Black Hills of South Dakota have been calling my name for too long.
All things considered, I don’t think I’m suited for the South or the cold Midwestern states (North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin) but the Pacific Northwest, California, Colorado, and the New England states seem like real possibilities. I’ve never been to Arizona or New Mexico but I don’t know that my husband would like the extreme summer heat. So, today I offer you a poll. Click on the place you think is most suitable for us given all I’ve mentioned above (assuming we’d be able to find jobs, that is) and if you’d like, leave your reasons in the comments below. Feel free to be specific; on this fine, snowy spring day, I’m open to suggestions.
~Nikki
Forgive me while
I climb up on my soapbox for a bit. But I’ve noticed this trend in movies and TV shows, not a pervasive trend, but one that rears its annoying head every now and then. And it’s grating on my nerves. You see, men and women as depicted in film simply cannot achieve a life of fullfillment unless they find their soulmate and have babies. I know, I know… the vast majority of adults want to be married and want to be parents, so this depiction is merely mirroring real life. But what irks me are these characters who at the beginning of the story profess their desire not to settle down and have kids and proceed to undergo some life-altering revelation during which they realize they’ve been lying to themselves all along and really do, like everyone else, just want to be happily married with a kid or two.
Four Christmases is the most recent example of such a scenario. At the start, main characters Kate and Brad want to enjoy their lives without the constraints of parenthood. They travel around the world, excel in their careers and dote on each other. That is, until they get stuck spending time with their families during the holiday season and after seeing their nephews and nieces, realize what they’ve really been wanting the whole time is that which they adamantly insisted was not for them: marriage and babies. Yes, by the film’s end, they pull a complete 180 and confess their deep desires for those very things they originally claimed to abhor. Fifty Shades of Grey and Twilight, while not expressly about this subject, also fall victim to its themes. Both sets of couples end up happier than humanly possible at the close of their respective stories because they wind up with something they never thought they wanted (or never gave much thought to at all): marriage and babies. Such stories are less about couples finding happiness and more about conformity and lack of individuality and/or free will and WHAT THE FUCK, HOLLYWOOD??? When will you give it a rest?
Just to be clear, I have no problems with marriage, commitment or parenthood but I don’t understand why any person should be c
onsidered in denial or even unstable simply because he/she doesn’t want either one or both of those things. Do we all have to live the same life? Is it such a radical idea to believe that marriage and/or parenthood simply aren’t for everyone? Isn’t the great freedom of America that we have the right to pursue our own happiness, whatever that entails? Does anyone actually believe George Clooney is a repressed wanna-be husband/father who’s been in denial or somehow unaware of his true desires his whole adult life? Bitch, please.
Look, I love a good romantic comedy and I’m certainly not suggesting that all movies in which two people fall in love, marry and copulate are worthless. I, too, swooned when Harry and Sally finally got together and I rooted for Bridget Jones and Mark Darcy to fall in love from the very first scene. ”A life without love, that’s terrible!” (To be said like the most swoon-worthy of them all, Ewan McGregor, in pursuit of a certain cortisan.) But do ALL love stories have to end in wedding bells and a bun in the oven? I, for one, feel that each of our lives should be sort of tailor-made. Countless “I’m a single career woman suddenly forced into custody of my sister’s/best friend’s/random relative’s baby” movies the likes of Baby Boom, The Family Man, Raising Helen, No Reservations, Life As We Know It, etc. perpetuate the idea that single/child-free individuals can only know how empty their lives are after being forced into parenthood. Then, it all becomes clear and they can move forward in their new, enriched and superior lives. Frankly, it’s a played out and tired tale.
Occasionally, we do get stories about individuals who truly do not yearn for marriage/parenthood. And those people are portrayed as having a 
mental illness. Cases in point: Big Fan and Young Adult. While both are excellent flicks in their own right, I would love to watch a film about a character who doesn’t desire to be a parent and is simultaneously a healthy, stable and happy adult. I realize they’re the minority but they do in fact exist. Actually, only once, just ONCE, and very recently, have I seen such a character. In last week’s episode of the superb HBO series, Enlightened, guest star Dermot Mulroney who’s playing an unattached journalist described the reasons for his past divorce and never have I heard someone explain it as simply and succinctly as this: “We just wanted different things. She wanted kids and dogs and Christmas trees. What I want is to live in this world. I’m greedy. I want meaning. I want experience. I want to make a difference… all that bullshit.”
I know that a healthy, committed relationship is deeply satisfying and I don’t doubt that being a parent is a tremendously rewarding experience. But that path is far from the only road to a full and happy life and I’d really love to see the other side get its moment in the sun.
~Nikki
