Sometimes
It would be easier to think you never loved me.
To call it a hope, unfulfilled.
A dream, undiscovered.
To say it was a charade that fooled us all -
Even you.
But it's harder than that
Because you love me still.
You love me
With more love than you could ever conjure before.
And it hurts.
It hurts you.
When you give more than you knew you could,
And still I ask,
"Where's mine?"
And so you give again until there's nothing left except a stump to sit on.
And like any tree without its green, you decay.
Your roots crumble.
The ground collapses secretly beneath the rain-packed earth
Until a step -
A single misplaced (perfectly placed?) step.
A gentle step? A lumbering step?
It doesn't matter the step because it is the flooding years that have eroded your resolve.
The surface needs only a rift and then it falls.
And it hurts you.
It hurts you
When you watch me flail and fail
And be human.
To be a selfish human who uses you for my own gain.
To be a selfless human who - try as I may - can never save you.
Can never make you forget your pains and broken limbs.
Can never be the rock in your crashing waves.
Can never quite be satisfied in who you were or who you are or who you're becoming.
So, it hurts you.
It hurts you, and it hurts me.
Oh! How it hurts me.
To see this love be the greatest I will receive
With the best of intentions and the evilest of outcomes
That you will always want to blame on me.
Because it hurts you.
Saturday, June 24, 2017
Wednesday, March 22, 2017
Why Choice isn't a Cop-out
There are some people who will think this is a post aimed specifically toward them. For those people, I humbly suggest this video. Fact is that this post isn't for anyone, but me, really... as my entire blog always is. If it's interesting to someone else, or causes a reader to think about things in a new way... awesome. But ultimately, this is me talking about my thoughts and my experiences, and my beliefs.
Now that this is out of the way, let me proceed. As any acquaintance of mine knows, I'm rarely happy to stick to the surface of anything. Call me inquisitive, curious, contemplating, a tortured soul. They're all accurate.
Today, and for a few weeks now I've been investigating belief and choices. I've come at this from a few different angles, one of which is in whether or not we can choose what we believe.
I'm a big proponent in general of choice and free agency in life. While I realize that very few things in this world are black/white and that a person's choices will always be affected by their experience, I also believe that we are free to make choices outside of what our feelings and experiences tell us is comfortable.
But today, as I said, I'm thinking specifically about choosing what we believe. As in, refusing to be victims of our culture, our circumstances, and our limited experience when determining those ideas that become central to who we are. Some people think choosing our belief is a cop-out, that we have to talk ourselves into something that doesn't make sense. I say that our lives are too multi-faceted to rule out the need for cognizant choice in basically every part of our existence.
Let me give a scaled-back example of what I'm thinking about.
After several days of this silent back and forth, I told him how frustrating it was that he left his stuff everywhere without considering who was going to have to clean it up.
He replied by telling me that he had been emptying his pockets on the end table every night so that he would have a consistent place to put his things without having to wake me up each night clanking around in the dark. He knew that I was lacking sleep, having a newborn to tend to, and he very considerately made his noise outside of my earshot.
I felt like a loser. I had chosen to believe my husband of a year was acting out of careless self interest, and I allowed resentment to grow. Had I taken a little more initiative to consider other interpretations of his actions, perhaps even to assume the best out of him, I still might have talked to him about the situation, but the frustration I harbored would not have had the grip on me that it did.
The mindset we use when faced with an experience matters in what we believe about the situation. And we get to choose that mindset.
Further, this choice of belief is almost always based on a faith in something.
Another common way to speak about people in my situation is to speak about the importance of their faith. Again, this is meaningful to me, and I have no personal problem with saying that my faith is important to me. However, I take issue with the concept of some people being "people of faith" as a way to name people who have a particular belief in the presence of a god and a belief in who or what that god is.
The reason that this bothers me is that nearly everyone is a person of faith. Anyone in a relationship practices their faith when they trust their SO to go out and not cheat on them. We can counter that the SO must have proven themselves to be trustworthy, but this doesn't negate the fact that we still put faith in them based on their past actions.
After all, faith need not be baseless and irrational.
We have faith in a chair that has held us up in the past to hold us up again. And so, we sit. We have evidence that it will support our weight based on our experience and our understanding of how a chair was been manufactured. But we must somewhere also realize that it's impossible for us to have full information about whether that chair has suffered any damage between the last time we sat on it.
These daily life examples are minor, but only go to introduce the concept that what we believe about the spiritual world or lack of is also based on faith. Many an atheist base their unbelief in faith that humans can attain a thorough understanding of the world. Every atheist that I've discussed spiritual things with has used science (i.e. observation and interpretation of empirical evidence) as a major reason they don't believe in God. However, there's no empirical evidence that sensory observation and human interpretation of empirical evidence is the best way to determine if there is a God. So, they are putting their faith in human understanding via science as the determining factor of what is believable.
Science-as-ultimate-explanation advocates also put their faith in science as a tool* to eventually figure out what happened at the origins of the universe. Science has not yet allowed us to observe the universe's beginning. It hasn't allowed us to observe whether carbon has always had a consistent half life, and it hasn't allowed us to observe life coming from non-life**. Yet many people put their faith in science as the best way to understand the totality of existence.
Likewise, most actual belief systems have evidence, as well. Scientists carefully conduct experiments to see if their hypotheses are on the right track. A result will either confirm an idea or take the scientist back to the drawing board looking for a new explanation that fits their sensory observation, set of assumptions, and human understanding. Often, there are explanations that fit. Often, there are explanations that cause scientists to stretch what they previously believed. People with a spiritual creed also have evidence. It is based on science***, as well as reason. For example, we use reason to say that scientists are able to use the assumption of consistency (i.e. a ball dropped on earth will always fall to the ground) because there is something as yet unmeasured that brings consistency into nature. If nature is consistent, this is evidence that there is something bigger than nature putting that limitation on nature. Similarly, we see that humanity has a general desire for love and justice. Since "people of faith"/spiritual people don't start with the assumptions of science, we can open our minds to the possibility that the desire for love and justice come from somewhere outside of humanity.
*Science is a tool. It is not a cause for anything or an explanation for anything. This is a pet peeve of mine, as there's a meme going around that goes like this: "Why? Because... science!" It's a joke, of course, mocking that people actually try to use science as a reason for things being the way they are, when in reality, science is a tool that helps us understand nature and nothing else.
**It's important to read articles about science with a critical eye and not just read the headline. Many articles will claim a scientific discovery has been made only to explain that no such discovery has actually been made. In reality, it was only an experiment that was performed producing a result that was about 3,000 degrees removed from the claim in the headline.
***In my 38 years of knowing Christians and other people with a spiritual creed, I have only met 1 person that saw a problem with belief in God and science working together. My experience has shown that people use science as a reason to not believe in God but that people do not use God as a reason to not study science. It's important to note that Christian science lovers will come to empirical evidence with a different assumption, which is namely that we do not believe that we must limit all explanations to those of an empirical nature. But Christians don't, in general, run away from science as if it were a threat to their faith.
Now that this is out of the way, let me proceed. As any acquaintance of mine knows, I'm rarely happy to stick to the surface of anything. Call me inquisitive, curious, contemplating, a tortured soul. They're all accurate.
Today, and for a few weeks now I've been investigating belief and choices. I've come at this from a few different angles, one of which is in whether or not we can choose what we believe.
I'm a big proponent in general of choice and free agency in life. While I realize that very few things in this world are black/white and that a person's choices will always be affected by their experience, I also believe that we are free to make choices outside of what our feelings and experiences tell us is comfortable.
But today, as I said, I'm thinking specifically about choosing what we believe. As in, refusing to be victims of our culture, our circumstances, and our limited experience when determining those ideas that become central to who we are. Some people think choosing our belief is a cop-out, that we have to talk ourselves into something that doesn't make sense. I say that our lives are too multi-faceted to rule out the need for cognizant choice in basically every part of our existence.
Let me give a scaled-back example of what I'm thinking about.
Mind Set Matters
When Billy and I were first married, he got a job waiting tables at a fancy Italian restaurant. This position required that he carry around a significant amount of paraphernalia in his pockets, among which were a table crumber, a wine screw, a nice pen, and a change purse. He came home late each night, often after closing down the restaurant, and unloaded his pockets in the living room. I woke each morning and moved the pile to the desk next to his sleeping face.After several days of this silent back and forth, I told him how frustrating it was that he left his stuff everywhere without considering who was going to have to clean it up.
He replied by telling me that he had been emptying his pockets on the end table every night so that he would have a consistent place to put his things without having to wake me up each night clanking around in the dark. He knew that I was lacking sleep, having a newborn to tend to, and he very considerately made his noise outside of my earshot.
I felt like a loser. I had chosen to believe my husband of a year was acting out of careless self interest, and I allowed resentment to grow. Had I taken a little more initiative to consider other interpretations of his actions, perhaps even to assume the best out of him, I still might have talked to him about the situation, but the frustration I harbored would not have had the grip on me that it did.
The mindset we use when faced with an experience matters in what we believe about the situation. And we get to choose that mindset.
Further, this choice of belief is almost always based on a faith in something.
Faith is everywhere
As a Christian, it can be hard to discuss what exactly my belief system is, since it isn't a religion in the typical sense. A religion tends to have a set of tenets and rituals (or behaviors) that must be done (or avoided) in order to adhere to the religion. Christianity has the set of belief tenets, but there are no required rituals and behaviors. So, I tend to veer away from the term religion.
But when people use the term "spiritual," it is understood to be short-hand to designate people who believe in the spiritual nature of humanity, yet do not believe in any one system of belief to be correct. So, even though I personally resonate most with the word, I veer away from the term "spiritual" because of the cultural assumptions linked to it.
Another common way to speak about people in my situation is to speak about the importance of their faith. Again, this is meaningful to me, and I have no personal problem with saying that my faith is important to me. However, I take issue with the concept of some people being "people of faith" as a way to name people who have a particular belief in the presence of a god and a belief in who or what that god is.
The reason that this bothers me is that nearly everyone is a person of faith. Anyone in a relationship practices their faith when they trust their SO to go out and not cheat on them. We can counter that the SO must have proven themselves to be trustworthy, but this doesn't negate the fact that we still put faith in them based on their past actions.
After all, faith need not be baseless and irrational.
We have faith in a chair that has held us up in the past to hold us up again. And so, we sit. We have evidence that it will support our weight based on our experience and our understanding of how a chair was been manufactured. But we must somewhere also realize that it's impossible for us to have full information about whether that chair has suffered any damage between the last time we sat on it.
These daily life examples are minor, but only go to introduce the concept that what we believe about the spiritual world or lack of is also based on faith. Many an atheist base their unbelief in faith that humans can attain a thorough understanding of the world. Every atheist that I've discussed spiritual things with has used science (i.e. observation and interpretation of empirical evidence) as a major reason they don't believe in God. However, there's no empirical evidence that sensory observation and human interpretation of empirical evidence is the best way to determine if there is a God. So, they are putting their faith in human understanding via science as the determining factor of what is believable.
Science-as-ultimate-explanation advocates also put their faith in science as a tool* to eventually figure out what happened at the origins of the universe. Science has not yet allowed us to observe the universe's beginning. It hasn't allowed us to observe whether carbon has always had a consistent half life, and it hasn't allowed us to observe life coming from non-life**. Yet many people put their faith in science as the best way to understand the totality of existence.
Each belief system has its gaps and its evidence
Of course, science (and its close counterpart math) haven't truly allowed us to observe the grandeur and scope of the universe. They are often only used to estimate. These estimations are then used to justify near impossibilities by relying on what Richard Dawkins calls the "magic of large numbers." Given enough time, any statistical impossibility will become possible. And so, we end up with estimations of how many planets there are in order to allow for the presumed evolution of life on some of them. And we end up with an age of the universe based on human calculations, the assumption of consistency, and the question of how long it would have taken for the statistically impossible events to finally happen. And now, just as theists might choose to hide behind the god of the gaps by claiming anything we don't understand can be explained by the idea that God is beyond our understanding, atheists also choose to hide behind the magic of large numbers.Likewise, most actual belief systems have evidence, as well. Scientists carefully conduct experiments to see if their hypotheses are on the right track. A result will either confirm an idea or take the scientist back to the drawing board looking for a new explanation that fits their sensory observation, set of assumptions, and human understanding. Often, there are explanations that fit. Often, there are explanations that cause scientists to stretch what they previously believed. People with a spiritual creed also have evidence. It is based on science***, as well as reason. For example, we use reason to say that scientists are able to use the assumption of consistency (i.e. a ball dropped on earth will always fall to the ground) because there is something as yet unmeasured that brings consistency into nature. If nature is consistent, this is evidence that there is something bigger than nature putting that limitation on nature. Similarly, we see that humanity has a general desire for love and justice. Since "people of faith"/spiritual people don't start with the assumptions of science, we can open our minds to the possibility that the desire for love and justice come from somewhere outside of humanity.
Everyone is agnostic
Going back to Richard Dawkins... He put out a pretty helpful little system of identifying where we fall on the continuum of theist to atheist. Dawkins himself is not an atheist, but rather what he calls a "de facto atheist," which he defines as not knowing for sure, but thinking God is improbable and living under the assumption that God doesn't exist.
I, on the other hand, fall anywhere from de facto theist to just above a weak atheist, depending on the day's circumstances, including whether I've been able to meet my physical needs, whether I've felt emotionally or intellectually threatened, and whether it's raining. I found the quotes below the chart to be helpful and relate to all of them from Jesus down through Thomas Jefferson.
So, how is it that I can fall on such a large part of the spectrum, including "pure agnostic" and "weak atheist" yet still call myself a Christian and have that belief system affect so deeply my life?
It's because of choice. I have looked at evidence and reasoned that I need not limit my interpretation of the evidence to nature. When I start to limit myself, I make the choice not to. I use my rationale and my free agent status to make a decision for myself rather than be a victim to my circumstances.
Our choices have consequences
I've also weighed the consequences that the beliefs bring with them.
There's no lasting negative consequence to me choosing to believe and living my life as a Christian. The worst that will be is that narrow-minded people will assume I hate the trans community and think women are less valuable than men, simply because of stereotyping. Those people have their own issues, and what they think of me is actually of very little consequence to me, as I find my worth in something higher than them, anyway. Perhaps my moral code will keep me from having sex with as many partners as someone else might, but I fortunately have found so much more purpose to life than collecting sex partners, that this seems more of a positive consequence than a negative one. However, the worst consequence of not believing is significantly deeper and potentially longer lasting.
I often choose based on consequences. I don't speed because accidents and tickets cost too much. I don't drink excessively because I have alcoholism in my family and that is some really serious stuff. So why wouldn't I put the real question of the mysteries of life up against the consequences of the answer?
Can't we all just be a little more generous?
Here's the thing. The TL;DR, if you will.
There are some of us out there that will point fingers and make statements about who the logical people are or aren't. If we want to be honest about it, we all come to our beliefs based on a combination of experience, faith, and choice.
To pit people in one camp as the rational ones and people in the other camp as the blind faith ones is uncharitable. (I hear this division from people all along the theist/atheist spectrum.) To further insist that one side has all the evidence and there's no choice involved regarding what assumptions we start with, how we interpret evidence, and which belief we ultimately end up at is disingenuous.
*Science is a tool. It is not a cause for anything or an explanation for anything. This is a pet peeve of mine, as there's a meme going around that goes like this: "Why? Because... science!" It's a joke, of course, mocking that people actually try to use science as a reason for things being the way they are, when in reality, science is a tool that helps us understand nature and nothing else.
**It's important to read articles about science with a critical eye and not just read the headline. Many articles will claim a scientific discovery has been made only to explain that no such discovery has actually been made. In reality, it was only an experiment that was performed producing a result that was about 3,000 degrees removed from the claim in the headline.
***In my 38 years of knowing Christians and other people with a spiritual creed, I have only met 1 person that saw a problem with belief in God and science working together. My experience has shown that people use science as a reason to not believe in God but that people do not use God as a reason to not study science. It's important to note that Christian science lovers will come to empirical evidence with a different assumption, which is namely that we do not believe that we must limit all explanations to those of an empirical nature. But Christians don't, in general, run away from science as if it were a threat to their faith.
Monday, February 29, 2016
My Open Letter to Dave Thomas
Dear Dave Thomas, Founder of Wendy's:
You could have never known when you opened your restaurant decades ago that one day, you would make me the happiest lady in Dublin with just a simple menu addition. I suppose you will still never know because 1) you are dead and 2) due to #1, you will never see this. Unless my theology is all wrong and you are actually sitting on a cloud with a harp looking down at the earth watching people enjoy your food. Then, perhaps you already know this because maybe you happened to be tuned in to my local Wendy's last Saturday at lunch time.
How does that work? Do you rotate through the restaurants to see people enjoying your food across the US, or do you just kind of go, "Oh, it's been a while since I honed in on Dublin, CA. I should see what they're up to," the same way I do with my facebook friends whom I've hidden from my feed? (Did you see that elegant use of "whom"? Not to brag or anything, but I did happen to use it correctly, and imho, non-pretentiously. Does my boasting about my non-pretentiousness counteract that?)
Regardless, I'll save my theological musings for another day, although perhaps someone in your fine organization is an angel for coming up with the new 4 for $4 meal deal, which I can't help but think was devised because someone's hand was super glued to the 4 key of their computer. (You know you're looking at your keyboard now and realizing that you can type "4 for $4" without moving your finger as long as you ghettofy it and substitute 4 in place of for, which I personally would never do, even for the sake of example.)
Anyway... your successors to the Wendy's throne are benevolent. They've understood that the big question I face when I go to Wendy's is whether I want to commit to an Old-Fashioned Hamburger or a set of chicken nuggets that is of slightly higher quality than Tyson's. This used to not be an issue for me. I was content to pack on the pounds in middle school with a thrice weekly chicken nugget kid's meal, complete with fries and a Frosty. This cost $2.32 back in the day. I would tell you to ask me how I know that, but I think you are probably smart enough to realize that someone who literally ate that 3x a week for 2 years will come to memorize the price and be particularly defeated on the day when she ordered the same meal for her children only to be told it was more than twice that price. And just in case you weren't smart enough to realize that, refer to previous sentence for the answer to the question of how I knew that.
These days, I've developed a penchant for bacon cheeseburgers, much to my chagrin, as I am typically disgusted by the thought of eating pigs. So, when I go to Wendy's or anywhere really, it's hard to make up my mind. It's rough, the life I live.
But alas, Dave.... in your finite wisdom and understanding, you set in motion a lineage that had me, your faithful customer, in mind and they have come up with the 4 for $4 deal, which allows me all the choices I can never choose between in one complete, cheap package. A Jr. Bacon Cheeseburger, a 4-piece Chicken Nugget, a Small Fry, and a drink (which can upgrade to a Frosty with no extra charge, what!).
So, I thank you, dearly departed Dave. For you not only educated the country on the value of adoption, but you started the fast food chain that is least likely to make me regret all my decisions for the 4 hours following my meal.
You, sir, deserve more than I can give for what you've given me. Although I suppose the fact that I have had to work consistently for the last 20 years to keep off all the weight I put on from your meals probably makes us about even.
Enjoy your cloud!
You could have never known when you opened your restaurant decades ago that one day, you would make me the happiest lady in Dublin with just a simple menu addition. I suppose you will still never know because 1) you are dead and 2) due to #1, you will never see this. Unless my theology is all wrong and you are actually sitting on a cloud with a harp looking down at the earth watching people enjoy your food. Then, perhaps you already know this because maybe you happened to be tuned in to my local Wendy's last Saturday at lunch time.
How does that work? Do you rotate through the restaurants to see people enjoying your food across the US, or do you just kind of go, "Oh, it's been a while since I honed in on Dublin, CA. I should see what they're up to," the same way I do with my facebook friends whom I've hidden from my feed? (Did you see that elegant use of "whom"? Not to brag or anything, but I did happen to use it correctly, and imho, non-pretentiously. Does my boasting about my non-pretentiousness counteract that?)
Regardless, I'll save my theological musings for another day, although perhaps someone in your fine organization is an angel for coming up with the new 4 for $4 meal deal, which I can't help but think was devised because someone's hand was super glued to the 4 key of their computer. (You know you're looking at your keyboard now and realizing that you can type "4 for $4" without moving your finger as long as you ghettofy it and substitute 4 in place of for, which I personally would never do, even for the sake of example.)
Anyway... your successors to the Wendy's throne are benevolent. They've understood that the big question I face when I go to Wendy's is whether I want to commit to an Old-Fashioned Hamburger or a set of chicken nuggets that is of slightly higher quality than Tyson's. This used to not be an issue for me. I was content to pack on the pounds in middle school with a thrice weekly chicken nugget kid's meal, complete with fries and a Frosty. This cost $2.32 back in the day. I would tell you to ask me how I know that, but I think you are probably smart enough to realize that someone who literally ate that 3x a week for 2 years will come to memorize the price and be particularly defeated on the day when she ordered the same meal for her children only to be told it was more than twice that price. And just in case you weren't smart enough to realize that, refer to previous sentence for the answer to the question of how I knew that.
These days, I've developed a penchant for bacon cheeseburgers, much to my chagrin, as I am typically disgusted by the thought of eating pigs. So, when I go to Wendy's or anywhere really, it's hard to make up my mind. It's rough, the life I live.
But alas, Dave.... in your finite wisdom and understanding, you set in motion a lineage that had me, your faithful customer, in mind and they have come up with the 4 for $4 deal, which allows me all the choices I can never choose between in one complete, cheap package. A Jr. Bacon Cheeseburger, a 4-piece Chicken Nugget, a Small Fry, and a drink (which can upgrade to a Frosty with no extra charge, what!).
So, I thank you, dearly departed Dave. For you not only educated the country on the value of adoption, but you started the fast food chain that is least likely to make me regret all my decisions for the 4 hours following my meal.
You, sir, deserve more than I can give for what you've given me. Although I suppose the fact that I have had to work consistently for the last 20 years to keep off all the weight I put on from your meals probably makes us about even.
Enjoy your cloud!
Monday, August 24, 2015
Why I've Abandoned Goals - At Least for Now
I've posted a couple of things on facebook recently about goals. But because I more recently deactivated my account, I can't access them. Story of my life.
Well, here's the thing. I think on the surface the two things seem contrary. One is an encouragement to shift goals to something that makes a good story. Something along the lines of "if a movie were made from your pursuit of your goals, and it wouldn't make for a compelling movie, change your goals." The other quote was a bit different. More like "don't let goals take the place of relationships."
Maybe in reality, these two things are the same. After all, the stories that we all love are the ones that are relationship-driven, aren't they? But I'm not really here to talk about relationships.
I'm here to talk about guilt.
And the fact that, lately, my goals have been nothing more than a source of it.
I think goals can be a good thing. They bring focus. They bring a sense of accomplishment. They force us to state our priorities in a tangible way. But goals in the wrong context also brings stress, anxiety, overbearing emotional weight. And for me, right now, it's the wrong context for goals.
We recently moved across the country, and I went from full-speed-ahead preparation mode to trying to settle into this new town, new lifestyle, new (small) apartment with children underfoot 24/7. I'm not complaining about being a mom here (I do that plenty, just not here). I'm simply saying that my life for the last 4 months has been full of goals. Full of deadlines. Full of tension, stress, worry, tears.
And school starts in 2 days.
Right now, I am questioning how in the world I ever homeschooled children. It seems an impossible task. And this is how I know that right now, my goals will take a backseat to breathing. I am not shifting my goals from moving tasks to relationship building. I am completely 100% letting go of goals and feeling amazing over it.
This doesn't mean that I don't still have priorities. It means that I am saving up my energies so that when kids come home from school and Billy comes home from work, I can be happy about it, rather than miffed that I "accomplished" all day and haven't had a spare moment. It means I am good with the idea of caring for myself emotionally and physically without making it a measurable item on a list.
It means, most of all, that I just want a little time to simply live and not always do.
Well, here's the thing. I think on the surface the two things seem contrary. One is an encouragement to shift goals to something that makes a good story. Something along the lines of "if a movie were made from your pursuit of your goals, and it wouldn't make for a compelling movie, change your goals." The other quote was a bit different. More like "don't let goals take the place of relationships."
Maybe in reality, these two things are the same. After all, the stories that we all love are the ones that are relationship-driven, aren't they? But I'm not really here to talk about relationships.
I'm here to talk about guilt.
And the fact that, lately, my goals have been nothing more than a source of it.
I think goals can be a good thing. They bring focus. They bring a sense of accomplishment. They force us to state our priorities in a tangible way. But goals in the wrong context also brings stress, anxiety, overbearing emotional weight. And for me, right now, it's the wrong context for goals.
We recently moved across the country, and I went from full-speed-ahead preparation mode to trying to settle into this new town, new lifestyle, new (small) apartment with children underfoot 24/7. I'm not complaining about being a mom here (I do that plenty, just not here). I'm simply saying that my life for the last 4 months has been full of goals. Full of deadlines. Full of tension, stress, worry, tears.
And school starts in 2 days.
Right now, I am questioning how in the world I ever homeschooled children. It seems an impossible task. And this is how I know that right now, my goals will take a backseat to breathing. I am not shifting my goals from moving tasks to relationship building. I am completely 100% letting go of goals and feeling amazing over it.
This doesn't mean that I don't still have priorities. It means that I am saving up my energies so that when kids come home from school and Billy comes home from work, I can be happy about it, rather than miffed that I "accomplished" all day and haven't had a spare moment. It means I am good with the idea of caring for myself emotionally and physically without making it a measurable item on a list.
It means, most of all, that I just want a little time to simply live and not always do.
Thursday, May 14, 2015
The Post in which I Detail the Intricacies of Finding Housing in the San Francisco Bay Area
Just to start off, this is not a post about finding housing in San Francisco proper. I have some advice about that, but what it boils down to is this: Have a crap ton of money. Live somewhere.
This is a post about finding housing in the Bay Area. Because we ruled SF out pretty darn quick considering the costs and our preferred lifestyle. Which, really, is all that it takes to find housing where you want to be.
This is a post about finding housing in the Bay Area. Because we ruled SF out pretty darn quick considering the costs and our preferred lifestyle. Which, really, is all that it takes to find housing where you want to be.
Basically, there are several factors to consider, and you want to understand how they fit into your situation, prioritize those for yourself and then the options get really narrow. Here's my list of factors that we weighed when finding our apartment.
1. Budget
2. Safety
3. School Ratings (and its subset "school guarantee")
4. Demographics (including race, economic, and subculture)
5. Yards
6. Transit Time
7. Weather
8. Types of Activities (sports, arts, etc.)
Let me break down how each of these things can factor in.
Budget
For us, the number 1 priority was budget. We are dedicated to a no-debt lifestyle, so we absolutely had to find a place that allowed us to easily pay for all the necessities, as well as invest for our future so that we can maintain a debt-free lifestyle when we are old and grey. Once we found our per-month number (along with our minimum bedrooms we were willing to have), our Craigslist results plummeted. It all but ruled out Alameda and Berkeley, which was disappointing, but so be it. Time to sift through our other factors.
Safety
We currently live in the high-end ghetto of our city. It was a choice that we made and we knew what we were doing. Still, it hasn't been easy to live in a neighborhood where you're not necessarily shocked that a murder happened down the street.
Moving to the Bay Area is a different ballgame, though. There's like... real crime there. I was a lot more hesitant to move into a location in a shady part. Plus, the reasons we moved into our current neighborhood just don't apply to our family situation anymore. So, we decided to avoid the red areas on the Trulia crime map. Basically, we are now avoiding Oakland down until you reach San Leandro.
Demographics
As a multi-cultural family, we are ardently opposed to living in a homogeneous town, particularly when the majority race is white. I was more willing to keep looking at places that have a majority of Hispanic or Asian, although diversity was still my priority. What I really was looking for was a place that had a population of each of the cultures that are represented in our family. Asians are much more abundant in California than Alabama, but African-Americans are much more of a minority. So, I was looking for a town that had a reasonable amount of blacks. Berkeley had the highest percentage at 9% (Huntsville is around 30%), but it was already ruled out due to price. Racial demographics also ruled out places like Pleasanton (60% white; 2% black), Walnut Creek (which, let's be honest... was really ruled out because of its Little House on the Prarie sounding name), and South San Francisco (only 1% black).
School Rating (and its subset "School Guarantee")
Another high priority for us was that our kids be in resourced schools with an environment of academic success. What this translates into is that we wanted a school with at least a 7 on Great Schools, which is based on testing. But we also wanted to be seeing good reviews that talked about parental involvement and a partnership mentality among the staff.
This kind of thing used to not be important to us because we homeschooled, but now that we have our kids in schools and have seen what the low scoring schools are like compared to our kids' magnet school (which scores high), we definitely know what we're looking for in schools.
The requirement of a 7 school ruled out the rest of the East Bay coast cities, such as San Leandro and Hayward, as well as the towns north of Berkeley. We were left with Castro Valley and the end-of-the BART line town Dublin.
Daly City (a town very close to SF) was eliminated through demographics, but also I think it's important to note that their school assignment process is something that I have not come across before because if Daly City had the demographics we wanted, we would have ruled it out quickly due to this process. Turns out that the high school district is huge and there are no assigned school. It is a first-come, first serve system, and our 7-rated high school in Daly City was already full for next year. The district had some other good schools, but they were far away from where we were looking. Schools that were closer were not well-rated by tests or the community reviews. Unfortunately, we wouldn't know what school our daughter could go to until we had a signed lease and applied. This was too much uncertainty for me, so I crossed Daly City off the list for good. Some places have more structure to their school assignments and some are purely based on applications and luck of the draw. So, if schools are important, it's worth finding out how schools are assigned.
This kind of thing used to not be important to us because we homeschooled, but now that we have our kids in schools and have seen what the low scoring schools are like compared to our kids' magnet school (which scores high), we definitely know what we're looking for in schools.
The requirement of a 7 school ruled out the rest of the East Bay coast cities, such as San Leandro and Hayward, as well as the towns north of Berkeley. We were left with Castro Valley and the end-of-the BART line town Dublin.
Daly City (a town very close to SF) was eliminated through demographics, but also I think it's important to note that their school assignment process is something that I have not come across before because if Daly City had the demographics we wanted, we would have ruled it out quickly due to this process. Turns out that the high school district is huge and there are no assigned school. It is a first-come, first serve system, and our 7-rated high school in Daly City was already full for next year. The district had some other good schools, but they were far away from where we were looking. Schools that were closer were not well-rated by tests or the community reviews. Unfortunately, we wouldn't know what school our daughter could go to until we had a signed lease and applied. This was too much uncertainty for me, so I crossed Daly City off the list for good. Some places have more structure to their school assignments and some are purely based on applications and luck of the draw. So, if schools are important, it's worth finding out how schools are assigned.
Transit Time
It got a little frustrating to see how far away our viable options were. Dublin, for example, is a 45-minute BART ride. With 3 kids to care for, it was hard for me to think about being on my own for the full work day plus commute, but it turns out that Dublin's position on the end of the line may actually allow for less time away from home because Billy's job is such that he is not required to be in the office certain hours. Getting on the train first guarantees him a seat where he can open up his laptop and work for 45 minutes; whereas, a 20-minute ride would essentially be wasted time standing up not working. For someone who is required to punch the clock at for a certain number of hours, this might not work as well, and the shorter commute time might be important, but for us, it wasn't.
What was important regarding the commute, though, was that Billy be able to bike reasonably to the BART station. That means that we really had to stay on the BART line and didn't have the freedom to go off too far to the side... places like San Ramon were ticked off the list (not sure if that would have still been on there with the other factors or not, but it's definitely too far from the train).
What was important regarding the commute, though, was that Billy be able to bike reasonably to the BART station. That means that we really had to stay on the BART line and didn't have the freedom to go off too far to the side... places like San Ramon were ticked off the list (not sure if that would have still been on there with the other factors or not, but it's definitely too far from the train).
Yards
Yet another thing to think about is how important a yard is. Part of me wanted to live in more of a city setting. That's my personal preference for myself. But I also have little kids to think about, and truly my own sanity with said kids. I knew that we would need a place to run around, so I was limiting my search to places that at least had a park or school yard within a child's walking distance.
Weather
I never actually considered that I'd need to think about weather when I'm comparing cities all within an hour's drive of each other. But I've learned that the Bay Area has pockets of weather and the difference between the peninsula and East Bay can be huge. Ultimately, for us, weather wasn't such a big deal. It was truly low on our priority list. But I am happy that our final decision puts us in the warmest of all the cities. I have lived my whole life (as long as I can remember, anyway) living where 95 degrees is a normal summer temperature. And I was having a hard time thinking that I might live somewhere that barely breaks 70 at its hottest. I don't even know how people swim in that weather!
Fortunately, just a quick jaunt away from SF, you can find 80 degree summers, and I'm thrilled that our apartment has a pool.
Fortunately, just a quick jaunt away from SF, you can find 80 degree summers, and I'm thrilled that our apartment has a pool.
Types of Activities
The last consideration was what kind of activities were important to us and how important those were. We are an art family. I think we all know that families usually choose... it's either sports or arts. I've rarely met the family that can find it in themselves to commit to both.
Part of the lure of San Francisco is the art culture, and I have to say, I was pretty bummed for a while that all the signs were pointing toward living further rather than closer, but in the end, we decided that our kids will have good opportunities to pursue arts through the schools, and SF isn't too far away, so we will just have to make a point to take a family outing every so often.
Monday, May 4, 2015
Spinning through the Mud of my Mind
It's 9:18, and I'm an hour ahead of schedule. Not that there aren't a million other things that could go into that slot, but with the sheer volume of to-do's, I just need to decompress and let myself rest.
I'm telling myself that I need to go shower and then start packing again, filling every little minute of time into this whole move-across-the-country thing. And I guess I will soon enough. But right now, I want to sit and think. Maybe it's not the right decision because, sometimes, sitting and thinking only makes things worse. But other times, it helps me move forward. I guess we'll see where it takes me today.
I'm tired.
I've been waking up at 5:30am for the last few weeks. I guess it's the changing season and the early rising of the sun. A hint of light slides through the window covering and my mind takes its queue that this is when we wake. Instantly, the lists flood my head... the things I've forgotten to write down, the deadlines that are soon approaching and still not accommodated. It's a lot.
Especially for a perfectionist. I've tried - trust me - to let go of that. It's like telling someone to just stop smoking. Possible? Sure. Easy? No. A life-long battle? Absolutely.
Normally, writing things down helps. It helps to get things out of my head and not have to keep track anymore. And that's still true. But writing it down also solidifies it. It's a quick, one-stop spot for the overwhelming amount of tasks on the plate.
And for some reason, my head feels cloudy. Perhaps a little sludgy. I can feel it when I try to think about moving on and accomplishing something to cross off the list. It's like the gears in my brain are spinning through mud.
The worst thing is actually when I do a task only to have to add another task onto the list because of it. Like the phone call I made today (which was actually the 3rd one to AT&T just so we can have fiber optic internet) that led to another phone call that I have to place after 11am, which will likely still not resolve the problem. All for internet service?
I'm telling myself that I need to go shower and then start packing again, filling every little minute of time into this whole move-across-the-country thing. And I guess I will soon enough. But right now, I want to sit and think. Maybe it's not the right decision because, sometimes, sitting and thinking only makes things worse. But other times, it helps me move forward. I guess we'll see where it takes me today.
I'm tired.
I've been waking up at 5:30am for the last few weeks. I guess it's the changing season and the early rising of the sun. A hint of light slides through the window covering and my mind takes its queue that this is when we wake. Instantly, the lists flood my head... the things I've forgotten to write down, the deadlines that are soon approaching and still not accommodated. It's a lot.
Especially for a perfectionist. I've tried - trust me - to let go of that. It's like telling someone to just stop smoking. Possible? Sure. Easy? No. A life-long battle? Absolutely.
Normally, writing things down helps. It helps to get things out of my head and not have to keep track anymore. And that's still true. But writing it down also solidifies it. It's a quick, one-stop spot for the overwhelming amount of tasks on the plate.
And for some reason, my head feels cloudy. Perhaps a little sludgy. I can feel it when I try to think about moving on and accomplishing something to cross off the list. It's like the gears in my brain are spinning through mud.
The worst thing is actually when I do a task only to have to add another task onto the list because of it. Like the phone call I made today (which was actually the 3rd one to AT&T just so we can have fiber optic internet) that led to another phone call that I have to place after 11am, which will likely still not resolve the problem. All for internet service?
Sunday, April 19, 2015
My $29 Food Stamps Menu
So... I've seen some things about Gwyneth Paltrow and how she failed at the Food Stamp challenge. I needed a little diversion, so I used Walmart's new online ordering page to make my own $29 menu.
There are a couple of caveats, of course. First of all, Alabama's average payout is $29.66, and the average in the US is actually $30.71, according to KFF.org. So, I'm shooting for the Alabama amounts because I have to pick a zip code for the Walmart prices and I have information about Alabama's sales tax (and yes, it does apply to food).
Next, there's the idea that lots of people on food stamps are not cooking for 1. And I think we all know how difficult it is to cook for 1 on a budget, mainly because the most budget friendly meals are ones that you make with ingredients and you often need to buy in larger portions. For example, I did my weekly shopping today and spent $126, which is just $11 over the average payout for a family of 4. We'll have a different meal every night. But when you want to cook for one, you often have to choose between eating the same thing every single day or going over budget. Since going over budget isn't an option for food stamp recipients, there will be a lot of repetition in our menu here.
To me, this isn't really that big of a problem. I mean, if I were literally depending on the government for my groceries, then I think lack of variety in my foods would be the least of my worries. However, I decided that I do like variety, and I would try to find ways to add in some options.
Another issue that comes when you're talking about families is that while kids are in school, the children are given a free meal (or two if the school provides breakfast, which many do) every week day. So, when you talk about the per person rates, these really are not intended to cover for every single meal unless you're talking about individual adults.
Limited to $29.66, it's hard to get a balance of healthy and cheap. So, what I ended up with is certainly not an ideal diet that we should all follow.
Fortunately, though, there is pretty much no one in the country that is completely dependent on food stamps. There are churches on every corner in America, and they pretty much all have resources for people who are hungry. In all actuality, as soon as someone moves from 1 person of food stamps, I would suggest an organization like One Harvest. They have great prices and good quality foods.
My last disclaimer is that this list is based on a zero-pantry starting point. The next week, however, I wouldn't have to buy bread or peanut butter, so I could add something different in... maybe some tuna, for example.
Regardless, here's my list of food, which adds up to $27.83 (I'm not sure if states are allowed to charge sales tax on food stamps, so for those states that charge sales tax, this could be problematic. Huntsville's sales tax would take this up another $2.50, putting the total at $30.33. I will readily admit that I am having trouble getting it down below that, but I'm also having trouble believing that a person couldn't scrounge up 67 cents a week just by asking the person behind them in line if they had any change. So, we'll call that one even.)
Mahatma Long Grain Rice and Beans w/ Seasoning (2) - 3.28
Weight Watchers Smart Ones Classics (7) - 13.16
1/2 Gallon 2% Milk (1) - 1.88
Frozen Mixed Veggies 32 oz. (1) - 1.98
Bananas (2 lbs) - 1.04
Imperial Margarine (1 lb) - 0.68
Smucker's Natural PB (1) - 2.78
Eggs (1 dozen) - $1.55
Whole Wheat bread (16oz) - $1.48
Here's what a typical day will look like for this person:
Breakfast:
2 eggs scrambled - made with margarine
1 piece of toast with margarine and peanut butter
1 cup milk
Lunch:
Beans, Rice, and mixed veggies
Water
Snack:
Banana
Dinner:
Healthy Choice meal - one of several varieties
Water
Nutritional Info
Calories: 1221
Carbs: 175g
Protein: 64g
Fat: 37g
Fiber: 18g
So, as you can see...
Yes, it's boring; yes, I will be hungry if I eat this and only this; no, it's not the perfect healthy menu, but still it's doable.
There are a couple of caveats, of course. First of all, Alabama's average payout is $29.66, and the average in the US is actually $30.71, according to KFF.org. So, I'm shooting for the Alabama amounts because I have to pick a zip code for the Walmart prices and I have information about Alabama's sales tax (and yes, it does apply to food).
Next, there's the idea that lots of people on food stamps are not cooking for 1. And I think we all know how difficult it is to cook for 1 on a budget, mainly because the most budget friendly meals are ones that you make with ingredients and you often need to buy in larger portions. For example, I did my weekly shopping today and spent $126, which is just $11 over the average payout for a family of 4. We'll have a different meal every night. But when you want to cook for one, you often have to choose between eating the same thing every single day or going over budget. Since going over budget isn't an option for food stamp recipients, there will be a lot of repetition in our menu here.
To me, this isn't really that big of a problem. I mean, if I were literally depending on the government for my groceries, then I think lack of variety in my foods would be the least of my worries. However, I decided that I do like variety, and I would try to find ways to add in some options.
Another issue that comes when you're talking about families is that while kids are in school, the children are given a free meal (or two if the school provides breakfast, which many do) every week day. So, when you talk about the per person rates, these really are not intended to cover for every single meal unless you're talking about individual adults.
Limited to $29.66, it's hard to get a balance of healthy and cheap. So, what I ended up with is certainly not an ideal diet that we should all follow.
Fortunately, though, there is pretty much no one in the country that is completely dependent on food stamps. There are churches on every corner in America, and they pretty much all have resources for people who are hungry. In all actuality, as soon as someone moves from 1 person of food stamps, I would suggest an organization like One Harvest. They have great prices and good quality foods.
My last disclaimer is that this list is based on a zero-pantry starting point. The next week, however, I wouldn't have to buy bread or peanut butter, so I could add something different in... maybe some tuna, for example.
Regardless, here's my list of food, which adds up to $27.83 (I'm not sure if states are allowed to charge sales tax on food stamps, so for those states that charge sales tax, this could be problematic. Huntsville's sales tax would take this up another $2.50, putting the total at $30.33. I will readily admit that I am having trouble getting it down below that, but I'm also having trouble believing that a person couldn't scrounge up 67 cents a week just by asking the person behind them in line if they had any change. So, we'll call that one even.)
Mahatma Long Grain Rice and Beans w/ Seasoning (2) - 3.28
Weight Watchers Smart Ones Classics (7) - 13.16
1/2 Gallon 2% Milk (1) - 1.88
Frozen Mixed Veggies 32 oz. (1) - 1.98
Bananas (2 lbs) - 1.04
Imperial Margarine (1 lb) - 0.68
Smucker's Natural PB (1) - 2.78
Eggs (1 dozen) - $1.55
Whole Wheat bread (16oz) - $1.48
Here's what a typical day will look like for this person:
Breakfast:
2 eggs scrambled - made with margarine
1 piece of toast with margarine and peanut butter
1 cup milk
Lunch:
Beans, Rice, and mixed veggies
Water
Snack:
Banana
Dinner:
Healthy Choice meal - one of several varieties
Water
Nutritional Info
Calories: 1221
Carbs: 175g
Protein: 64g
Fat: 37g
Fiber: 18g
So, as you can see...
Yes, it's boring; yes, I will be hungry if I eat this and only this; no, it's not the perfect healthy menu, but still it's doable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)