I skipped the debate to catch up on Gotham (I cannot vote in this country, but would happily do so for whatever hairball the Democrats hork up for the general election.) I’m sure those of you who DID watch the debate want to talk about it! Please do so at this time.
Marlon James won the Booker!!
And yet, the explanation has to be rare or coincidental. After all, this light pattern doesn’t show up anywhere else, across 150,000 stars. We know that something strange is going on out there. When I spoke to Boyajian on the phone, she explained that her recent paper only reviews “natural” scenarios. “But,” she said, there were “other scenarios” she was considering.
Jason Wright, an astronomer from Penn State University, is set to publish an alternative interpretation of the light pattern. SETI researchers have long suggested that we might be able to detect distant extraterrestrial civilizations, by looking for enormous technological artifacts orbiting other stars. Wright and his co-authors say the unusual star’s light pattern is consistent with a “swarm of megastructures,” perhaps stellar-light collectors, technology designed to catch energy from the star.
“When [Boyajian] showed me the data, I was fascinated by how crazy it looked,” Wright told me. “Aliens should always be the very last hypothesis you consider, but this looked like something you would expect an alien civilization to build.”
There are currently 80,000 Mormon men and women serving on 418 different missions around the world. Most of them will remain healthy throughout their terms, which last two years for men and 18 months for women. Those who get sick or injured, however, may face serious obstacles in obtaining quality health care. The church declined to describe its approach to providing health care to its missionaries and declined to comment at all on this article. But two dozen former missionaries and other sources with knowledge of missionary life, including active church members, recount the same disturbing story: Missionary culture counsels strongly against seeking medical help. Injuries are downplayed. Authority figures block access to care. Psychological disorders are stigmatized.
carolyn hax, set this lady straight
I am slowly but happily responding to the many, many emails I have received re: awkward prayer piece from yesterday. Thank you for being so nice about it (even those of you who were horrified were nice), I have been word-vomiting on the internet since roughly 2005, but this was the first time I’ve ever really been nervous about it. Do not worry, The Toast is not going to become a Jesus pamphlet, I’m going to tell you my conversion story when it’s done, and then if I sometimes write a funny church listicle or something, that’ll be it.
My friend Carrie’s new puppy is running out of lap:
Counting the closures of rural inns, high-street noise boxes, sticky-carpet boozers of the backstreets, it can be said that roughly 30 pubs shut every week in the UK; a rate of decline that, as one group of worried analysts has calculated, would mean total elimination of the British pub by the 2040s.
The massive number of pubs in Britain, something between 50,000 and 60,000, is credited by some to the Black Death. Plague-struck, the 14th-century Britons who had not been annihilated were left in an emptier land, earning higher wages, perhaps better inclined to enjoy themselves. They spent more time and money than ever before in purpose-built taverns or private residences that would sell them drink. Some 700 years later, the pubs themselves have contracted a form of plague. Call it the Black Development.
Obama and Marilynne Robinson (!!!!!):
The President: How do you reconcile the idea of faith being really important to you and you caring a lot about taking faith seriously with the fact that, at least in our democracy and our civic discourse, it seems as if folks who take religion the most seriously sometimes are also those who are suspicious of those not like them?
Robinson: Well, I don’t know how seriously they do take their Christianity, because if you take something seriously, you’re ready to encounter difficulty, run the risk, whatever. I mean, when people are turning in on themselves—and God knows, arming themselves and so on—against the imagined other, they’re not taking their Christianity seriously. I don’t know—I mean, this has happened over and over again in the history of Christianity, there’s no question about that, or other religions, as we know.
But Christianity is profoundly counterintuitive—“Love thy neighbor as thyself”—which I think properly understood means your neighbor is as worthy of love as you are, not that you’re actually going to be capable of this sort of superhuman feat. But you’re supposed to run against the grain. It’s supposed to be difficult. It’s supposed to be a challenge.
Just did the Telegraph‘s Which Brontë Are You? quiz with my teeth clenched lest I be Branwell.
Update: EAT SHIT, I’m EMILY, fuckers!
An Upper East Side aunt is suing her pre-teen nephew for six figures over a broken wrist she suffered when he excitedly jumped into her arms to hug her at his 8th birthday party. Her lawsuit claims his “negligent” and “careless” show of affection caused her serious injuries and losses, noting “I was at a party recently and it was difficult to hold my hors d’oeuvres plate.” Damn.
Tyler Coates on being conflicted about Milk:
Does the film knock its audience over the head with this message? Probably. In a pair of scenes, an anonymous gay kid from Minnesota contacts Milk. In the first, he tells him over the phone that he wants to kill himself because his parents are planning to send him to be cured of his homosexuality; he laments his inability to run away from home because he is wheelchair-bound. (I mean, a little much, yes?) In the second, on the night that Milk’s efforts to block the Anita Bryant-backed Briggs Initiative (which would have fired any homosexual teachers in California, as well as any teacher who expressed support for their homosexual co-workers), the same kid calls again to express his gratitude and and to tell Milk that he successfully fled to Los Angeles. It’s a scene so treacly and emotionally manipulative that it made me want to hurl a shoe at my TV.
BUT. But. Siiigh.
Deleted comments from a man who…has thoughts:
I too skipped the debate in favor of catching up on Gotham and I am HERE FOR IT, and though I am not typically a sports person on the whole, I am ecstatic that the Cubs are doing so well.
Does anyone want to talk about Gotham?
My cousin plays one of the new Strike Force recruits and I am SO proud of him!! I’ve never watched it before and I am just now trying to catch up/get into it.
I am going to tell my husband that the cousin of my Close Personal Friend plays one of them!
YES! Day made.
He’s the ethnically ambiguous one from the “tough neighborhood.” He’s still currently filming so they stick around!
I miss Fish SO MUCH.
Fish was a ridiculously great character BUT (unpopular opinion alert) I think the show is orders of magnitude better this season. We needed Fish so that we could see the roots of Cobblepot’s trust issues and business acumen, which are now coming strongly into play.
I am just seriously digging how many and how varied the shades of gray are in this series. No one–NO ONE–is fully right or wrong; no one is always in the clear; there is no angel of death or angel of mercy; every. single. character is deeply flawed and every. single. character is developed enough that their actions, to them, can be viewed as perfectly rational–we know exactly why each person is taking the action that they are. It’s astonishing. That isn’t even getting into how deep into canon we’re getting.
Alfred punching Selina in the face was really, really upsetting, but again, within the context of Alfred’s character, it made sense.
Since I decided to call it Got-Ham and view it in the same spirit as the old Adam West Batman, I’ve been enjoying it much, much more. I no longer care about anything making sense, and just let the ridiculousness wash over me.
That is, until Alfred hit pre-Catwoman in the face. There is no context in which I want to see a grown man hit a child, but particularly if I’m not supposed to see him as a villain.
I go for weekly therapy sessions in the building that doubles as Arkham Asylum. It’s even more frightening in person, which I sort of love. And I pass two grey buses parked in the back that say “Gotham City Corrections” on them.
HOLY CRAP
Trust me when I tell you that most of the folks who go there are too broken to be plotting crimes. Speaking of superheroes, on my first visit there, in the waiting room, a man dressed as Superman was sitting next to me.
It’s a serious place. I love it because it forces me to take my depression and self-worth seriously.
That’s actually really cool.
I just had to suggest gently that my friend’s boyfriend might not want to rename his band Brontë because since they comprise three girls and one boy he would have to be Branwell.
Nobody wants to be Branwell.
HAH! I got Charlotte. Booyah!
Me too! Outliving all y’all ladies and Branwells.
Same!
Anne. I can live with that, I guess.
*ahem* http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=202
Given that that strip (and the rest of Hark!) is 99% of what I know of the Bronte clan, I kinda wished I had come up Anne.
I got Anne too! She’s my favorite Bronte!! Agnes Gray is my favorite Bronte novel.
Also Anne. And, yeah, that particular Hark! strip is about right. I am NO FUN at parties.
Part of me wanted to be Branwell, just to be contrarian, but I’m not nearly degenerate enough.
“Aliens should always be the very last hypothesis you consider”
But why?
Not because it’s not plausible, but, I think, just to guard against wishful thinking? I was surprised at how emotional I got just reading that article–how wonderful it would be to know that we’re not alone in the universe. So I think you just have to eliminate all of the “boring” options before you can allow yourself to consider the really emotionally resonant one.
For anyone interested, here’s a more detailed discussion of the (non-alien) explanations as examined in the relevant paper, at Centauri Dreams, where “Paul Gilster looks at peer-reviewed research on deep space exploration, with an eye toward interstellar possibilities.” http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=34260
I suppose–because there are so many unknowns? We know nothing about the aliens, so you can’t rule aliens out based on what we know. I do not mean this in a snarky way, but–it’s kind of like God. You can’t rule out God, but you can rule out everything else, first.
Yeah, I’m agreeing with Fancy_Pants, but it’s not just wishful thinking, it’s also that aliens sort of shut the process down. Like, Yup, Aliens, gotta be that, moving on now….. and eventually SOMETHING is going to be aliens, but just think about how many things on earth look totally supernatural at first, but actually have scientific explanations? I mean, freaking magnets. With some basic science knowledge, yeah, sure, it makes sense. But without it, they’re freaking MAGIC. If we don’t carefully eliminate all the other options, we’re going to miss stuff.
I mean, wishful thinking makes aliens the sort of “stickiest” option (we WANT it to be true!), but it’s also the sort of “easiest” option.
And then, past that, once the Hard Science folks jump on the aliens hypothesis, then every non-sciencey conspiracy type nut will come out of the woodwork to get excited about it, and then it’ll be impossible to ever convince people it’s not aliens, even if we find good evidence it’s not.
Right. It’s much easier for some people to believe that aliens helped build the pyramids instead of believing that prehistoric people may have possibly had methods for building we haven’t figured out yet.
*FLAMES ON THE SIDES OF MY FACE*
Ooh yeah, that is a super important point too! Totally agreed.
Parsimony! In science you always always want to find the simplest answer. The possible existence of other life in the universe, let alone intelligent life, is complex as fuck (scientifically) so aliens are the last thing scientists should be considering.
Shaving with Occam’s razor!
RIGHT?
Oh thank god someone got the (bad) joke.
I’ve been reading all these brilliant and intelligent replies thinking ‘Guys, you really didn’t have to go to the trouble, I was making one of my misguided attempts at humor because that line made me laugh when I read it.’
Well, you know, it is kind of a serious question. There’s a lot of futurist speculation about being able to manipulate matter and energy on the sort of scale that would be visible to a less-advanced civilization light years away; there’s even something called the Kardashev Scale, which describes the ability to do so on a galactic scale. But all we have in terms of actual knowledge of what a sentient species can do is our knowledge of ourselves, and it’s still not certain whether we can get to the planet that’s closest to us, in terms both of distance and of a compatible environment, before we irretrievably fuck up the environment on our own planet. So, imagining another civilization with enormous orbiting artificial habitats or Death Stars or whatever is fun, but not super likely.
all the scenarios they suggest are pretty much equally implausible, including aliens. Implausible but not impossible. Exciting, no? I personally believe we are close to detecting real proof of alien life. But not evidence of their technology. Rather, just evidence of a biosphere.
“Aliens should always be the very last hypothesis you consider, but this looked like something you would expect an alien civilization to build.”
After an impressionable youth spent watching Star Trek and Star Wars, aliens are always the FIRST thing I’m looking for, TBH
Preferably ones with some crazy-looking foreheads.
Oooh, that Carolyn Hax column. When I was working at a bookstore a woman came in wanting to buy a YA book for her 15-year old and didn’t want there to be any sex in it. After presenting a few options, it became clear that this woman counted kissing as sex. I asked what other entertainment the daughter liked so I could offer up some more suggestions and the woman said she’d bought her daughter the Brady Bunch on DVD, though she’d fast-forward through the ‘racy’ bits.
WHAT ARE THE RACY BITS OF THE BRADY BUNCH?
MAUDE LIVES.
I knew that t-shirt cannon story was full of holes.
I do sympathize with your frustration when a peer pokes holes in your son’s protective shield.
OUCH.
Even as a kid I saw the stupidity in trying to shield children from everything, I just went around my mothers back and did it anyway; and most of my peers who had protective parents went further off the rails than I ever did, they just did it later and without a safety net.
the profane drunk fan in row 12
Is Carolyn me? And where else would we all learn how to swear other than from the angry drunk three rows down, WHO JUST WANTS HARBAUGH TO THROW A GODDAMN PASS THAT DOESN’T GO STRAIGHT INTO THAT FUCKIN’ CORNER’S ARMS!
No WAY is that letter writer taking their kid to football games, though. Way too PG.
I wasn’t allowed to watch PG movies until I was 15 due to me being the eldest of four but once we got netflix- and the opportunity to watch things by ourselves- the floodgates opened.
I’m a scholar when it comes to VeggieTales, though.
her 15-year old
I think my parents wanted to censor my life. They managed fairly well on the TV/movies front. (insert long story about PBS, cable, The Dinosaurs, The Simpsons, the OJ Simpson Trial, VH1, Dawson’s Creek, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Good Will Hunting, and Nip/Tuck)
But my parents failed miserably on the books end of things. My parents just couldn’t keep up with the number of books I was reading, and while they tried for a while, they just gave up entirely, eventually, and usually didn’t even realize what I was getting into. But occasionally they’d see me put a book back on their bookshelf, and then they’d realize which one it was, and they’d actually read that one, and Oh! there was sex in it, but I’d clearly already read it so too late there.
They shouldn’t have worried. There are plenty of books I’ve re-read later only to finally understand what was *really* going on there, just like every other precocious reader, I just didn’t really absorb the stuff that wasn’t age appropriate.
Yeah, my parents weren’t big on censorship in general. They did it to a certain degree with books and movies up until around middle school. They were firm believers in never telling their kids that they couldn’t read something and I had the same experience you did with books. The age-inappropriate stuff either went right over my head or I gave up on the book and put it away for later. Honestly, sometimes reading age-inappropriate material probably helped. Reading Flowers in the Attic put me and my fellow seventh-grade friends off sex for a long time because the descriptions sounded just AWFUL.
Those V.C. Andrews books were all the rage in my fourth grade class– we definitely got some weird ideas about sex from them.
(Our teacher gave me the raised eyebrow and asked “Does your mother know you’re reading these?”, but I just said “yes” because I knew she wouldn’t actually care).
My friends and I got caught passing around Forever, by Judy Blume (AFTER Flowers in the Attic) and the teacher brought it up with my mom at a parent-teacher conference and my mom just sort of snickered and said ‘You should see what ELSE she’s reading.’
Same with mine. The Simpsons, Ren and Stimpy, basically anything that had scatalogical humor was off-limits for TV, but sure honey, go ahead and start reading Stephen King at age nine, that’s fine.
My parents were the opposite– absolutely nothing scary, but they themselves were big fans of the shows you mentioned. And yet I was a sensitive child who was scared to death of Ren and Stimpy and while I love the Simpsons with my very soul I do remember some childhood night terrors relating to Treehouse of Horror episodes.
My parents forbid me from watching Ren and Stimpy, but The Simpsons was fine for whatever reason – we actually watched that together as a family. Also The X-Files, which was at times waaaay to scary for my little brain to handle. I’m not sure what my parents’ standards were for age-appropriate TV, actually.
My mom’s criteria was “gross,” which always worked out to cover things ranging form Roseanne to Married With Children to Simpsons or Beavis and Butthead.
Same, and it seemed to only be enforced for “You Can’t Do That On Television.”
I thought I was the only one not allowed to watch Ren and Stimpy!
The first argument I remember my parents having about rules for me (they argued about other stuff all the time) was about Stephen King. When I started Junior High the school sent home a permission slip about checking out Stephen King novels and my mom didn’t want to sign it. I remember my dad yelling that he was not going to support censorship. They signed the slip but I didn’t have any interest in Stephen King then and never read them.
When I switched elementary schools before third grade the librarian at the new school was outraged that I wanted to check out a Sweet Valley High book and set up a meeting with my mom and the principal. I was allowed to continue reading them, which I was pleased by since I had finished all the ones at my old school and the public library, and the principal was my mom’s nemesis for the next seven years until my sister finished there.
Hah, I was about to say the same thing about books. My parents didn’t really try to censor me or my brother, but we still had a good idea that there were age-inappropriate movies and music that we should avoid. But reading was so strongly encouraged in our house that it didn’t occur to anyone that there were maybe age-inappropriate books…
anyways, that’s why I learned what sex was from Dragonriders of Pern.
I LEARNED ABOUT SEX FROM CLAN OF THE CAVE BEAR DO NOT RECOMMEND
haha same!! but ohhhhhhh Vally of the Horses…
Ah, ages 13-15, when nerdy girls discover the holy trinity (where learning about sex is concerned): Dragonriders of Pern, Stephen King, and the Earth’s Children books.
Stephen King books played an alarmingly large part in my adolescent learning about sex.
Mine too.
Same!
Pern books left me very confused about how sex actually worked, because Anne McCaffrey puts in just enough detail to be salacious and a bit sweaty, but not enough for you to actually figure out what’s going on if you don’t already know.
omg me too!!! My mom was buying me, like, the fourth one of those books when I was maybe twelve or so and the lady at the bookstore was like, “You know these are basically porn, right?” And my mom had not known that. But awesomely pretty much had the reaction of, “Well, she’s read all the other ones so it’s probably pointless/too late to try to stop her now.”
Yeah I learned about sex from Valley of Horses and honestly I can’t say I don’t recommend it.
Same!! And did a book report on it (minus the sex, obvs) to get credit for a reading contest we were having in fourth grade. The teacher was very skeptical I’d read it, and kept quizzing me all about it to try and trip me up. I now realize it wasn’t so much that she thought I couldn’t read it, but that she probably felt it was really inappropriate, ha! And yes, Valley of the Horses made sex seem muuuuch more interesting and appealing than Clan did!
ETA: also, I highly recommend if you haven’t read this yet, it’s hilarious and you’ll get it: http://jezebel.com/5021551/the-clan-of-the-cave-b…
I learned about it from a crazy cold war era spy novel “The Second Lady” that I think I got at a thrift store because the cover looked cool.
Oh yes. Those books! And sex was so awful in Clan of the Cave Bear, and then the most gentle, loving, guiding the youth into treating each other well, thing in the sequels. Very educational. Or something.
Ditto VC Andrews. I read Flowers in the Attic and Clan of the Cave Bear in the same year and BOY was that interesting.
OH MY GOD WHY DID MY MOM LET ME READ THAT WHEN I WAS ELEVEN
I learned about sex from Harry Turtledove, I know your pain.
That said, I learned about the concept of GAY sex from Mercedes Lackey, to whom I shall forever be grateful
And the Dragonriders sex was NOT GOOD. Even my beloved F’nor was rapey. So much slapping of women. Soooo much slapping.
I reread the first few recently, and yeah that was a strange realization. Apparently dragon mind meld sex makes you an asshole. Or that is a trait dragons looks for, who knows?
Yeah, my dad gave me DROP to get me into adult science fiction and the sex was so…nonconsensual.
I never got into Pern, but I read all of her books in The Rowen series, and sex and relationships are preeeeetty messed up there, too.
Ha no kidding. Magically turning that one guy straight! Waiting for a child you took care of as a baby to grow up so you can date her! Worst of all, those two examples might actually be about the same relationship, I can’t remember.
Everyone hoped I’d have sex with your mom, it was practically an arranged marriage, and I certainly hoped she’d fall in love with me, good thing it didn’t work out so that I could avoid your really creepy advances for years only to change my mind for….. reasons?
Hahahaha, and I learned about homosexuality from the Valdemar books. It was at least a sympathetic, if weird, introduction.
Aw, I managed to do a middle school book report on that book without mentioning that he was gay at all, because as a babygay I felt it was too AWKWARD.
I loved Roald Dahl as a kid… so my parents gave me My Uncle Oswald when I was ~13. I was blushing non-stop reading that book, and so fascinated. It felt like porn.
I re-read it when I was ~18, and realized it was meant to be comedic.
I learned about sex from “Summer Sisters” by Judy Blume!
That one was unintentional, but my mom DID give me a copy of “Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret” instead of telling me about periods.
My mom made an effort to censor our movies & tv…somewhat. Like, her standards were not so much about the rating something had as it was her “eh, this’ll be fine” guessing. Nevertheless, she did a good job of, what the moment arose, saying “I don’t think you’re ready for that” instead of “THAT IS FORBIDDEN.” (Dad, of course, had no concept of “for kids” and “not for kids” which is how I saw “Jaws” at age 2.)
Music and books, on the other hand? Mom did not care at ALL. She had no interest in listening to the censored versions of songs and she was so thrilled about my brother and I reading that she was unwilling to ever tell us “no” about a book.
OMG MrChouffe has a perfect, perfect story about dads having no concept of movies for kids vs movies not for kids, which I shall tell in his absence.
MrChouffe’s father was relatively well-regarded political journalist/editor/etc during the 1980s and 90s (notably, Thatcher hated him) and would occasionally bring MrChouffe along when he had to go on junkets. They once, when MrChouffe was a little lad of perhaps six or seven, stayed at a hotel that had its very own single-screen movie theater!, which was of course terribly exciting, so Dad asked LadChouffe if he wanted to go see the movie.
“Yeah! Yeah!”
“You like Mr Spock, and space, and Star Trek, right?”
“YEAH! YEAH!”
“Well, I think it’ll be like that, so let’s go after tea.” So they did!
The movie was Alien.
My parents were both involved with the local community owned movie theater. My dad ran the projector and my mom sold tickets. I therefore saw a lot of movies that were really not appropriate from my age (see: Howard the Duck, Arachnaphobia, etc). I watched a number of them from the landing of the staircase to the balcony, where I could easily duck down if it got to scary.
notably, Thatcher hated him
I can’t think of many better accolades a person could receive. And that story is hilarious. I had a friend when I was seven who had something almost identical happen with Alien; it gave him nightmares for a month.
Hah, my dad also had a warped concept of movies kids should watch. I remember my mom coming home one night when dad and I had rented a movie to watch and being horrified that it was Forrest Gump. I was about 9.
On the other hand, my mom let me watch Buffy from the beginning (I was 11) and ER from whenever I started finding it interesting (around the same time), while my dad thought those were inappropriate for me. Basically I just had to learn which parent to ask for which type of media.
Ha! My friend’s dad also had no concept of “for kids,” but it was combined with a spitefulness for authority. One week, the D.A.R.E. officer asked kids to bring in “literature about drugs” to class to discuss Just Saying No and the badness of drugs, etc. So my friend’s dad sent her to school with a copy of “High Times.”
Being hated by Thatcher is such an honour! Go MrChouffe Senior.
My stepmom’s dad was notorious for taking kids to wildly inappropriate movies- e.g., “The Godfather” when she was maybe 7 or 8. Her brothers made fun of her because, after the scene where Sonny gets shot a million times at the toll booth, she whispered “……. is he dead?”
I watched Terry Gilliam’s “Brazil” at his house when I was about 8 (with the torture scenes and whatnot), which was…. quite something. (I also happened to see the movie “Annie” during the same weekend, and two films have been mixed up in my mind ever since).
I thought for a moment you watched the film at Terry Gilliam’s house.
If only!
(My stepmom’s dad was a TV director and gets free DVDs to vote on the Oscars, though, which is cool).
Oh my god yes. When I was maybe 9, which would make my sister 6 and my brother 12, Mom and Dad went out for the night and Dad had rented Puppetmaster for us. I think he really didn’t realize what kind of movie it was. So my brother turned out all the lights and had his little sisters watch it with him. He DID know what it was.
Brothers. Dads.
I could have gone my whole life without seeing that puppet with the drill thing on its head in action, though… discovered a whole new way to feel icky and sick and horrified!
Also seeing the Terminator movie with the atomic bomb scene with the fence at the playground… at Grandma’s, with brother and uncle I think, remains very vivid in my mind. Grandma’s was also where I discovered Stephen King, in one of my aunts’ and uncles’ old bedrooms.
Mine too. I watched a lot of tv when they weren’t around, but whenever they were home there’d be demands to shut off anything too much cursing or sexual suggestion. Of course, part of why I love horror movies now is probably cause I watched so many on tv when my parents were at work or sleeping and they felt deliciously subversive in the midst of my super safe suburban life.
Books though, I could do whatever I wanted. I think in my parents mind, reading was just always a positive, period.
I remember a friend of mine (Who’s parents were academics of some kind) telling me that her mum read the fourth Harry Potter in a few hours, at the time that was the biggest book I’d ever seen, let alone read, so the thought of reading it in a few hours baffled me. When I asked her why her mum read it so quick, she told me that he mum had just wanted to read it first to make sure it was ok for her to read (We would have been around 10 at this time I think), this baffled me even more! Why would you’re mum care what your reading! Especially care enough to read the book first!
I think my mother tried to censor TV because she could see/hear what I was watching, and then she’d see something questionable (she walked in on me watching Mysterious Skin as a teen, right at that shower scene. I was only watching it because JGL was hot) and kick off. But she doesn’t read much, especially not novels, so she would have had no idea what was in the books I was reading!
Sounds like I was similar to most of you though, if it was really age inappropriate it was usually also pretty boring so I’d give up (I think I tried to read Don Quixote once, in the first chapter there was something about a virgin and a unicorn and then the guy wanted to stick his dick in the girl; I though ‘Ew’ and gave up. I’d only wanted to read it because there was a horse on the cover.)
This reminds me that my ninth-grade English teacher lent me her copy of The Handmaid’s Tale. But she was EXPLICIT that I had to ask my mother (another English teacher) if it was okay that I read it before I did. (It was, and I did).
I never had a book-giving mentor as a young teen, I really would have liked one because it means that I didn’t read The Handmaids Tale until last month. I still haven’t read most of the ‘classics’ or important feminist books (One of my mums friends did give me The Penopliad when I was about 14 and my god did I love that book! I had no clue who Margret Attwood was though!)
No WAY would my son wait for me to finish a harry potter. By book 4 we were buying two copies at the midnight release parties.By the 6th i was yelling “no spoilers!” Because i had to take a crying break when dumbledore died, and he kept reading
My aunts and mum let me and my cousins rent ‘Total Eclipse’ because we wanted to see Leonardo DiCaprio naked. They figured if we wanted it enough to sit through two hours of French poets, why not? They got their revenge with our horrified squeals when David Thewlis went full-frontal, though.
Yeah, my parents were much the same–heavy on forbidding certain TV shows (Simpsons, most things on Nickelodeon, South Park, etc) or fast-forwarding through bits of movies/making me close my eyes, but with books, not so much. It might’ve been just because I was a painfully obedient child a lot of the time; if they told me a book had to wait until I was older, like the ridiculously soapy 80s teen series they bought (for me) when I was a baby just because the main character has the same name as me, I tended to listen?
Then again, I also spent a large portion of my childhood without a lot of access to books beyond what I owned myself (and therefore, my parents bought for me) and what I could find in my (heavily age-restricted) school library, so it might’ve also been due to limited opportunities to get hold of ‘adult books’ anyway. Lord knows once we moved back to the US and I got a public library card, all bets were off and nothing could (and did) stop me from reading anything I wanted.
Preteen me was very grumpy when my mom noticed me taking Interview with a Vampire off her bookshelf and told me I couldn’t read it yet. I’m pretty sure it’s a direct result of that event that I still haven’t read any Anne Rice.
Ooooh I was generally a pretty good kid, but I remember becoming very sneaky when I was 14 and watching illicit R-rated (which is the Australian equivalent NC-17, I believe) movies on YouTube, I just had to make sure I only watched ones my parents wouldn’t have heard of. I watched ALL of the Gregg Araki movies (and hated them, but I was young so the thrill of watching something forbidden was worth it).
Hee! Likewise. Mom made an effort re: romance novels for a while, but I just snuck them out of the used bookstore in a big old pile of Conan paperbacks, then hid them under my bed. Eventually she gave up and was like “…well, you do you, hon, but love doesn’t actually resemble that at all.” Which a) so ironic in retrospect, and b) pretty awesome of her.
I always was, er, into the sex bits, even when I was young, but that seems to be my nature. 😉
Around fourteen or fifteen, they stopped caring that much about what I watched, too. Before that Mom refused to let me rent horror movies (…which may have been as much self-protection as anything else, as Buffy the movie had me coming into her room at midnight when I was eight) and TV was very regulated: TGIF (nineties child), Saturday morning cartoons, Dr. Quinn/Touched By An Angel and that was it. There was a brief period where, if we were really really good, we could watch Lois and Clark on school nights. (It helped that we only got three channels, and two of them didn’t come in well.) And we could watch other stuff on vacation, so I think some of it was more “never on a school night” than actual content-based objections.
Mind you, I grew up at a boarding school, and Mom hosted movie nights for the students, so I inadvertently also saw The War of the Roses when I was eight, and bits of Alien when I was four. Also one of my parents, despite them both having significant amounts of education, decided that the cartoon video of Animal Farm was a perfectly fine thing to give ten-year-olds. NOPE.
My parents gave up on censoring tv when I was a teenager. Before that it was unlimited PBS (which my mom did not thing through because there was some very interesting British stuff on PBS at night that I probably shouldn’t have seen) and the TGIF-type stuff. Once I was in high school dad was traveling for work and mom was working most evenings so I could pretty much watch whatever. I did record X-Files every week to watch once I got home from Sunday evening church service. Once I forgot to set the VCR and called my dad to do it for me. Apparently X-Files and Touched By An Angel were on at the same time and an older woman in the church overheard me on the phone. When I hung up she told me that she never missed an episode and started talking about different parts of it, asking me my opinion. I wasn’t really thinking and told her that I what I was taping and that I hadn’t ever seen Touched By An Angel. I believe she went and had a talk with my mother about inappropriate tv choices and my mom asked me not to mention anything I was watching at church again.
I was never a very churchy kid, either, so now I’m wondering why I watched Touched By an Angel.
I suspect, in that benighted time and place, it was the closest thing to fantasy that I could find on the networks I got.
I was a very churchy kid, in a very churchy family, and I MST3K-ed Touched by an Angel with my aunt and grandma every week that I lived with them– snarking at the show’s glurgy theology over popcorn. Those are some great memories.
My parents DEFINITELY tried to censor my life. Didn’t have cable at all, ever, until college, and much of public access/network TV was off-limits. I would go grocery shopping with my dad every Saturday and he would let me sit in the magazine aisle and read instead of picking out zucchini or whatever, so of COURSE I would read Cosmo/Redbook/etc. As a result, one morning (I was somewhere between ages 10-14) I was talking with my parents and out of nowhere asked “what’s a condom?” My mom FLIPPED OUT and “convinced” me that I was thinking of a “condominium.” I was smart enough to realize that sharing the source of the Dread Word Condom would mean I was no longer allowed to be by myself on shopping day, and also smart enough to do my own research from then on. Sheltering doesn’t work, folks! Not if your kids are smart and independent like they ought to be!
A friend of mine has talked about limiting his kids to teach them resourcefulness; he basically wants them to rebel. When we were kids, we got good at sneaking about to get around our parents’ restrictions, so maybe there’s something to the idea.
I’d agree. Lying is a life skill.
I mean, there are inappropriate times and places to lie, but you can say the same thing about driving, or washing dishes.
And I frequently say that the best thing boarding school did for me was teach me that throwing tantrums wouldn’t work–not that I needed to follow the rules, necessarily, but that the other option was learning to work around them.
My parents were pretty liberal about letting me read whatever I wanted, for the most part.
The only thing I remember my dad taking away from me was “Looking for Mr. Goodbar”, when I was about 10/11-ish. (I think I may have been slightly misled by the candy bar title). I only got halfway through, so I’m assuming it’s about a single lady who has a nice time on the dating scene and lives happily ever after…
ha, mine were pretty strict on the viewing material. I was such a goody two shoes that I wouldn’t watch a PG13 movie at a friends’ house because we were 10 (this would be a movie OK’d and suggested by the friend’s mother, which suggests to me my mom would probably have been fine with it…)
I’m very thankful that my parents were never terribly concerned with censoring my reading material. I read Valley of the Dolls and Lolita around age 12. Most of Lolita went right over my head (and I’m sure a lot of it still does!) but I was completely enchanted by it because of how great the writing is. Like you can do that with language?
I was the opposite with Lolita! I think I was maybe 14 or so but my reaction was “Ew so gross so creepy how dare he” and I didn’t really get it about the language being pretty.
I read Lolita as an adult and that was STILL my reaction.
My mom would watch movies along with us and fast-forward parts. Some movies would be 30% fast-forwarded. In my mind I filled in the fast-forwarded parts with sordid details and flattered myself that I was being trusted to watch a Very Adult Movie.
I was confused to learn later that she was fast-forwarding harmless lines of dialogue like “Move your butts!”
(She didn’t like the word “butt”.)
Hahahahaha.
I watched I, Claudius with my family in elementary school and my parents kept telling me to leave the room. We rewatched it a few years ago and I realized they were sending me out of the room to avoid the sex and, like, 80% of Caligula’s reign.
I think they tried to limit the scary stuff for awhile, but I’d end up being fine with watching Aliens at age 5 and ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIED after ten minutes of the Garbage Pail Kids movie that my sister was watching and they just ended up confused about what would scare me.
My mom did the same thing! The one I remember most was the scene in A Knight’s Tale where the girl goes to Heath Ledger’s tent. My mom skipped through that every time. I thought it must be something horribly scandalous, and would skip when I watched it alone too (I was kind of a goody two shoes). That happened until I went to a party a couple of years later where they were watching it (my friends and I were all kind of obsessed with that movie in junior high and high school, because Heath Ledger) and when it got to that scene I realized that they barely kissed before the scene ended. I was super embarrassed for having skipped it for so long.
Arghhh. Let the 15 year-olds read about kissing! They will probably be fine. (My parents practiced little-to-no censorship, although they always seemed to walk into the room when we were watching Season 6 of Buffy, aged about 12, and Buffy and Spike were having rough sex. That just created a lot of awkwardness, but we were never actually stopped from reading/watching things. And yet I did not have sex until 19, and have been in a monagamous relationship with the person in question ever since. Reading about teenagers making risky life choices just put me off, to be honest.)
That scene where they basically destroy an abandoned house with the power of their hate-sex? BEST. It still turns me on.
Oh man, I was watching that episode while babysitting and the ten-yo girl couldn’t sleep. So I told her she could watch for five minutes… and was fairly horrified when that started! Lucky for me I don’t think she told her parents, or at least they never said anything to me about it.
GOD, YES but WHY
I may have recorded that episode and watched that scene over and over as a teenager.
Sounds like my mom, tbh. She would yell at me if a beer commercial came on the TV – because clearly I know exactly what commercials are about to play and deliberately chose to watch one with alcohol and exposed flesh!
“WHAT ARE THE RACY BITS OF THE BRADY BUNCH?”
(thinks hard, draws a blank)
Were they the first TV couple not to have twin beds? Maybe a married couple sharing a single bed was just too much for her.
Maybe? I think Jan’s imaginary boyfriend might have been too racy for this woman. I can’t remember what book she ended up buying, but I’m pretty sure it was more appropriate for a ten-year old.
They clearly replaced all of your friend Carrie’s new puppy’s body parts with snuggle noodles. How nice!
I don’t know if I want to find other intelligent life in the universe. What if they don’t like dogs???? Dog-friendly only need apply.
Skipped the debate to go to bed at 7pm and listened to Hilary’s Buzzfeed podcast this morning. Prob about the same, yeah?
Dammit, I got Anne. My whole identity here is a lie.
I intentionally answered so as to get Anne, but I see by your username we have different goals.
#ActonBelle
I bet Currer Belle isn’t even your real name! 😉
Im an Anne too. much to my chagrin, I bend my head to my inescapable identity.
I wonder what the real story behind the “woman suing her nephew” news bite is. Legal reporting always seems to take the most sensational and silly angle on anything, and then it ends up being either totally normal or totally horrifying. Remember the hot coffee lady?
There’s got to be some long history of family inheritance gone awry or something…
Gawker commenters were suggesting it’s some kind of insurance thing – her insurance company suing the father’s homeowners insurance because she made a medical claim. So insurance is the real fucked up thing.
Ugh, yeah, this seems very likely to me, based on the shenanigans that insurance tried to pull when my partner broke her own finger in our own house last year. (Oh, it was an ACCIDENT you say? Does that mean there’s someone else you can SUE? no, it was an accident because she didn’t break her finger on purpose.)
Ugh, that sucks. If it is a pretty valid insurance claim (in the scheme of these things), I feel bad for this woman, who is now always going to be “that awful person who sued her nephew” whenever her name is searched.
It is in fact an insurance claim, which the linkbait sites will never report as it interferes with the “evil bitch” narrative they’ve created. http://www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com/…
A quick scan of the comments reveals that the indecent happened 4 years ago, but the boys mother died last year. Signs are definitely pointing to an inheritance dispute.
What is it about inheritance that send people batshit crazy!
Or she just really hates her sister’s husband and couldn’t act on it while her sister is around. Do we know how the boy’s mother died? Have I been watching too many mystery shows? Yes.
It is neither: just an insurance dispute. http://www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com/…
*does insurance law for a living, annoyed AF at the media coverage*
Someone in the comments (you know, in between all the insults) was saying it’s likely that the father’s insurance refused to pay and she was forced to sue, because it would be the only way for her to get compensated for her injury/care/etc.
Yeah. Which would explain the time lapse as well – insurance stuff can take forever.
but why is the son the ONLY defendant here? Wouldn’t she be suing the father and the insurance then?
Why should the kid be the defendant, full stop?
Some states are “non direct action”: you can’t sue the insurance directly but rather the party alleged to be at fault, I.e. the kid. This has been confirmed in an interview to be an insurance claim suit and the aunt and her nephew are on good terms.. http://www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com/…
So basically EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS IS TERRIBLE. Apart from aunt and nephew being on good terms.
I was assuming that they had some kind of personal liability insurance – I don’t know if this is a thing in the US, but it’s fairly common in Germany that you’d have personal liability insurance to cover anyone having an accident in your home. Add in US-style medical bills, and I can imagine that suing could easily be your only option.
Right, like how a few weeks ago it was like “OMG unfriending someone is harassment now, lol!” when really it was part of a crazy pattern of harassment that varied widely over a long-ish period of time and it severely impacted their ability to do their work.
I saw someone yesterday say that suing insurance companies directly is either really hard or had to meet certain criteria, so it’s likely that this person was trying to get their insurance compensation but had to sue the individual at fault for the injury. I can’t say for sure because lawyering is very out of my depth but it makes more sense than a woman wanting to sue her nephew (who recently lost his mother!) for $170K because she can’t hold a dang cheese plate
Right, exactly. It’s always “hahaha look at this silly person” when usually there’s a very good reason, but that one won’t get any clicks.
I believe it. Insurance companies are awful. And one of the Gawker comments said that the amount being sued for is the “normal” amount/cap on these kind of insurance payouts. If she broke her wrist and had to get some rehab for it (perhaps because she couldn’t hold up a small plate, or carry shopping bags up 3 flights of stairs), it’s likely she needed money from insurance for it. And then we end up in these situations.
YEP http://foxct.com/2015/10/14/aunt-who-sued-nephew-…
Of course. And she’s the one who’s going to be dragged through the mud for a while, not the insurance company.
Poor hot coffee lady. I am relentless in correcting people who are wrong on the Internet about that.
I really wish Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb had been uninvited to the debate. They were both so painful to watch. Otherwise, it wasn’t a terrible debate! Some decent answers, Bernie yelling at Anderson Cooper about the dumb question about Hillary’s emails was pretty great.
people started using #feelthechafe, which made me sad for him … but also laugh.
I’ve been annoying my friends with “Sanders? I DONT EVEN KNOW HERS!”
my version of #feelthebern
Omg, I did not see #feelthechafe last night, but as someone who grew up in RI & knew that guy when he was mayor, this is HILARIOUS.
Ehh, I sort of liked the peanut gallery. They mixed things up but instead of the Republican field where you get surprise! Insensitive holocaust remarks! They’re just gently confused about what year it is.
I just couldn’t with Jim “All Lives Matter” “I killed a guy” Webb and Lincoln “My dad died so I voted to repeal Glass-Steagel” Chafee. Believe me, I get that this is my idiosyncratic wish. But yeah, it was quite a lot to watch.
My boyfriend commented early on that Webb looked like he got lost on the way to the bathroom and accidentally ended up at a debate, and then every time they panned to Webb he would turn to me and whisper “I’m pooping my pants right now,” so… I was pretty entertained.
His answer to the “who’s your greatest enemy” question, though. WAT.
Oh man, I did a big spit take on that line.
??? What was his greatest enemy?
he talked about an enemy combatant in Vietnam who injured him, but who he killed. And tried to make it a joke??
Webb’s service is real and impressive, but bizarre way to talk about at the debate.
My jaw is DROPPED. Also, he completely missed the point of the question. Bringing up some guy you killed in Vietnam does nothing to strengthen your position to win the Democratic primary!
Actual quote: “I would have to say the enemy soldier that threw the grenade that wounded me, but he’s not around right now to talk to.” And then he gave the creepiest little smirk, like YEAH I KILLED A MAN AND I’M PROUD OF IT.
Oh my god, this is the first time I’ve ever regretted not watching a debate. That is BONKERS.
WHAAAAAAT? Does he not know ANYTHING of the party for whom he’s campaigning to win their nomination??? Republicans would probably fall all over that guy, but Democrats?
I mean, I got that sense right near the beginning when he talked about being a Democrat like how Democrats used to be, and I kinda thought – yeah, the Democrats of the 30s/40 and 60s made some huge strides, but they made huge strides in the 30s and 40s by actively excluding minority populations from the programs they were creating, and when they started to (fitfully, painfully, slowly) embrace representing those groups in the 60s, the progress they made cracked that coalition. I have a tremendous amount of respect for what New Deal Democrats achieved, but I’m happy the Democrats of today aren’t those Democrats anymore.
That said, I felt like he and Chafee are examples of how far the Republicans have moved – as late as the early 2000s, you could still find those voices in Republican politics, and now the moderates are people like Kaisich, who only looks moderate in the context of the crazies on the Republican ticket right now.
As a RI voter, I don’t even think Chafee could win his own state. I didn’t even realize until this morning that the guy only has one F in his last name.
Seriously, he wouldn’t have been able to win re-elect for governor. This campaign would make sense if he had important issues he wanted discussed (Lessig), or he thought he had something to offer the party as a VP (O’Malley), but even as someone with the benefit of fond childhood memories of Chafee….. I just don’t get it.
Anybody want to talk about the self-insert fanfiction that is Stonewall?
Queer Studies yesterday was furious.
If your entire class, or even most of them, went to see it, then they contributed a significant fraction of the gross. Despite having a small budget (especially for a Roland Emmerich film), it bombed badly.
Oh we were originally planning to see it as a class but we shut that down when we saw HOW white and cis-washed it was. You don’t make Marsha P. Johnson a minor character. Nor do you cast a cis man as her.
*Giant squids of anger all over*
I don’t really have anything to say that others haven’t said better. Just, you know, outrage and disbelief-except-all-too-believable, etc.
Autostraddle’s stuff is a good place to start: http://www.autostraddle.com/tag/stonewall/
Especially this interview with Miss Major: http://www.autostraddle.com/how-dare-they-do-this…
I’ve read one or two really good takedowns in review format, but I don’t remember where they were and I got a bad headache today. May be linked to on Autostraddle though.
http://www.autostraddle.com/anonymous-activists-j…
WOOOOOOOOOO
I’m actually leading a discussion on Miss Major on Monday, it’s gonna be great.
Yeah, that was awesome!
Sweet, best wishes for your discussion. It’s great to see people learning more about what happened and building a stronger foundation for the LGBT rights movement (and so much more) by knowing and broadcasting the real history. I didn’t know how involved trans* women and sex workers were in Stonewall until the pushback against this stupid movie.
Every time I think I am past being angry at the LDS church, something like this pops up again and I am a rage machine for the rest of the day. 🙁
YEAH, that just seems so shitty, considering all the demands they already put on these vulnerable young people to be missionaries.
A friend of mine just finished her mission trip, and I know one of her companions had to go to the hospital for an ulcer…I hope she got the treatment she needed.
Right? I left the church a couple of years ago, and every time I think I can just ignore the problems and get along with all of the wonderful Mormons in my life (including all of my family) that are generally good people, something like this pops up and reminds me how screwed up the church can be. This article made me especially mad because my brother just got back from his mission in Brazil, and it’s terrifying to think what would have happened to him if he’d gotten sick. (And of course, the comments on the article are all the Mormons saying “my mission wasn’t like that, therefore this is all lies.” Mormons have the biggest persecution complex, it drives me nuts.)
hello, are you me??
Wow. That Guardian piece on pubs. Wow. I knew it was bad, I didn’t realize it was THAT bad.
Oh no, I can’t open the Bronte quiz!
So instead, I took the “Which The Worst Witch character are you” quiz. I’m Mildred Hubble.
And I don’t care about the Brontes in the slightest, but I’m Miss Hardbroom. ‘Cool, detached and fabulous in a way that 11-year-old girls really can’t grasp, you don’t suffer fools gladly, but you do want people to achieve their full potential. If you soften your exacting standards a bit, they might surprise you. One more thing: let your hair down more, it looks staggeringly good.’
I envy you so much.
I got Anne Bronte…but then I got Miss Hardbroom! ahhh, excellent
Ooo, that reminds me that I need to re-watch the movie version of “The Worst Witch.” So terrible, so amazing.
THERE IS A MOVIE VERSION?? Off to Google I go.
It is AMAZING. (And terrible) Diana Rigg, Tim Curry, wee!Fairuza Balk, and the earwormiest soundtrack ever. (PS–the whole thing is on YouTube. We watched it this weekend.)
IT IS A MUST-WATCH. I own the DVD, no shame. This movie has the most amazi-bad 80s music video break of all time, starring Tim Curry and an absurdly large cape. Long before Harry Potter, I desperately longed to go school with Mildred Hubble.
I read all of the first Worst Witch book to my cousin’s four-year-old daughter over the weekend! She was so absorbed and interested! I am failing in many areas of my life but KILLING the “Deborah Jenkyns-esque older cousin who introduces you to good literature” part.
That is my favorite part of older cousin/aunt-ing.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/a673646/steph…
Can we talk about this? I WAS NOT READY.
I’m so very torn; on the one hand, Yay Sandy Toksvig! Yay woman host! But on the other hand, WE’RE LOOSING QUIZMASTER STEPHEN!
What. What. Wait, what? What? (I agree with the yay Sandy, obviously, but WHAT??)
no no no no no
no
no
My reaction while reading the headline: “NOOO—oh? Oh, OK.”
I’m not unhappy per say, just shocked I guess.
I see what they did though; ‘Lets announce this horrible shocking news, with this excellent, brilliant news to soften the blow’. But it just feels like it came out of nowhere and I do not feel adequately prepared.
SANDI TOKSVIG!
I saw Sandi’s tweet first (at 6:30 this morning, two hours before I need to get up, so THANKS time zones) and frantically googled to find out if it was true. The thing is, I like Stephen Fry, but I like him more doing goofy comedy, and I think that Sandi will be an excellent host.
WHAT
FIRST THE TRAUMA OF LOSING HER ON THE NEWS QUIZ
AND DEALING WITH MILES JUPP AND ALL HIS POSHNESS
NOW THIS
SANDI YOU BEAUTIFUL FLOWER HOW CAN YOU REPLACE STEPHEN
HE IS ABSOLUTELY FEHNTESTIC
FEHNTESTICALLY FEHNTESTIC
Just discussing this with my gentleman caller and bemoaning that she won’t be able to flirt as convincingly with Alan Davis, and he said ‘do they flirt? Isn’t that just banter?’
Awwww.
……………… Well, they picked the only possible person i can imagine doing well other than Fry. But. But…….. but. I… sigh.
Toksvig was also in the running to host Have I Got News For You aeons ago, but lost out to Angus Deayton. Vindication at last!
And she lost it because she was gay! The BBC execs couldn’t imagine having A LESBIAN hosting HIGNFY.
But coke’n’hookers? Please, be my guest, Angus.
This was the first thing I saw when waking up this morning & I thought it was a bad dream. (I love Sandi, but it will be hard to replace Uncle Stephen.)
Stephen! 🙁 *clings to his leg*
Unless this means he is now freed up to do something fun and exciting on a regular basis for us to devour.
*clings to his other leg so he has to do that classic parent of toddlers zombie shuffle onwards to new projects*
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Noooooooooooooooo-Ireallydolikesandysheisawesomebut-ooooooooooooo
“Though we are all very sad he’s decided to move on, I am confident that we have found the perfect person to occupy his gigantic shoes.”
Or in actuality, she can make a home in one of his gigantic shoes, and use the other for a toolshed/garden room (Sandy is wee).
Twitter, the Daily Mail (*spit*) considers Marlon James to be ” a writer of nationality”:
https://twitter.com/spitzenprodukte/status/654205…
I originally saw this on Twitter and assumed it was badly subbed, but five hours later it’s still there, so, um, wow.
Is that… a new thing for “deviating from the default”? Like “person of size”, “ethnic” or the old-school “person of the sex”?
What a genteel way to say “foreigner”.
NOBODY EVEN KNOWS. Is it supposed to say “of Jamaican nationality”? Does it mean not-white? Does it mean not-British? WHO CAN SAY.
But I am 100% sure we can say it’s raaaaaacist.
A what? Are the Daily Mail making some kind of half-hearted attempt to use language properly (and getting it hilariously wrong) or are they making some kind of weird passive aggressive statement about what they would call ‘PC culture’?? I’m both irritated and nonplussed by that phrase, which is a weird feeling.
We do not know! Like I said, I assumed when I first saw it that it was a subbing error for “writer of ____ (Jamaican? West Indian?) nationality”, only … still there five hours later? So – so – so – who knows? It is like a parody of a thing that the Daily Mail would say. But then the Daily Mail so often is.
I’m guessing it was supposed to be “of any nationality,” because that’s the change that was made two years ago; before then it was limited to writers from Commonwealth and former-Commonwealth countries, and now it’s open to anyone writing in English. The subhead above that one looks screwed up, too — presumably some kind of description was supposed to come after “Novel about” — so I think it might legitimately just be a case of catastrophically half-assed copyediting.
I mean, that does not make it much less weird and racist to call attention to that rules change in the headline, since it wouldn’t actually have affected Marlon James’s eligibility (Jamaica is a Commonwealth nation) and it’s not really news (this isn’t the first award since the change took effect). But at least I don’t think they actually think “writers of nationality” is a meaningful phrase.
A twitter buddy shared this this morning: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/is-… “Is the Booker Prize winner worth reading?” They give a few examples of “divisive” reviews that really aren’t. But be warned: it is difficult! it has violence and Jamaican patois!
Google results for the phrase “Is the Booker Prize winner worth reading?” before this year? none. I mean, obviously, because The Luminaries was a breeze.
It feels like a silly thing to feel internet-outraged about but I suspect there’s gonna be a whole dang pattern of this shit.
But Rushdie won the Booker of Bookers in like 1989! HOW ARE THEY NOT OVER THIS BY NOW.
Compared to an average book, A Brief History of Seven Killings is at times challenging. But compared to literary works, it’s really not that hard. It’s also really well written, which rewards reading. What crap.
But … pretty much everyone is “of nationality” (are there enough stateless writers that it’s necessary to explictly state this?). Oh, Daily Mail, you’re the worst.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well, yes. Also, everyone has an ethnicity, yet “ethnic” still seems to exist (why oh why?)
“Ethnic” is terrible.
(Actually, do they mean that it’s the second year that American authors have been included and actually nothing to do with Marlon James being Jamaican? Because it’s not the second year in a row that a West Indian author has won, and it’s the third year in a row that a writer from a Commonwealth country excluding Britain has won. So maybe Americans are writers of nationality and the rest of us are Scotch mist?)
It’s the Daily Fail. Just another day ending in “y” for them. That said, though. BLECK.
Is this the right place to fangirl about Marlon James’ A BRIEF HISTORY OF SEVEN KILLINGS! It was so incredible. I lived in Jamaica for 2 years as a Peace Corps Volunteer, so I know the lingo and the culture a bit. It’s a challenging read for so many reasons, but utterly transcendent. So very pleased he won the Man Booker Prize, very much deserved.
I only saw the first hour and change of the debate, but I want a gif forever of Hillary just saying “No.” when asked if she wanted to respond to Chafee’s dumb nonsense.
Vine/buzzfeed has gotcha: http://www.buzzfeed.com/chelseamarshall/power-of-…
Oh my god if my nephew ever excitedly jumps into my arms idgaf how many bones I break it would be so cuuuuute!
Wait, how are overalls easy access? Is he getting them confused with skirts?
That puppy is a gem.
Thank you for being so nice about it (even those of you who were horrified were nice), I have been word-vomiting on the internet since roughly 2005, but this was the first time I’ve ever really been nervous about it. Do not worry, The Toast is not going to become a Jesus pamphlet, I’m going to tell you my conversion story when it’s done, and then if I sometimes write a funny church listicle or something, that’ll be it.
Thank you for being nice in the face of people’s horror! (And for the the reassurance re. the prospect of The Toast becoming a Jesus pamphlet.) I am sorry for my (hopefully politely-expressed) horror; it is your website and a thing that is very important to you, and you should feel able to talk about it! It is just a thing that, unfortunately, makes me feel weirdly distressed.
I think the dude meant easy boob access…? Since his first comment was so breast-centric? Or maybe the side holes are real long or something ???
I truly and not bullshit-edly appreciate you being honest about your distress. My best friend had a tough time with it, and it was so important to me that she TOLD me it was hard for her, and wasn’t just “um, how nice?”
When people have a visceral reaction of horror towards Christianity, it’s often because they’ve had a legitimately horrible experience of Christians and the church, and it only makes me furious that something I find really joyful and challenging and deeply kind (Jesus) has gotten so fucked-up by homophobes and misogynists.
My mom, who is the best person I have ever met, is still Catholic, and I used to get after her to quit, bc she’s pro-choice and pro-gay and a feminist and a baller, and she always grits her teeth and pulls a Michael Bolton: “Why should I have to quit, they’re the ones who suck!”
If you really think Christ is real, is the thing, you can feel like it’s your job to make things better for Christianity, to the extent you can. Which is what I want. But I understand so fully that the well is often so poisoned that it creeps people out just to think about it, and I do get it.
I still believe in gay marriage, and I think that women need the right to have and ACCESS for safe, legal, affordable abortions, and I’m still a colossal nerdwad, and I hope I will be able to reassure you with my life, if that makes sense.
I really appreciate how thoughtful you’re being and how willing to talk about stuff openly without sounding critical of readers with different beliefs.
(I have had no personal bad experiences with Christianity, so my feelings are way less justified than they could be, but my dad was brought up Catholic by very unpleasant parents, from whom he is now estranged; he never felt any of the things he was supposed to feel regarding God’s presence or any sort of higher power whatsoever being. I was brought up in a very atheist household, and my dad is still deeply scared that he’s wrong and he and his loved ones will go to Hell.)
Your mother sounds excellent! And I think that you are as well, and I have no fears that you’re suddenly going to start being anti-abortion or reducing the amount of brilliant nerd content on The Toast. It is more just a) a complete inability to even entertain the idea of there being a god, on my part (it’s not even logic, it’s just an unshakeable certainty that I cannot imagine not having) and b) the idea that other people have this certainly too and yet it can suddenly change, so what’s to stop it happening to me? Which is really scary.
My dad’s response is most definitely fear that if it happened to me, it could happen to him, for what it’s worth. I don’t think God would be so cruel to my father as to insist on appearing to him in the form of a burning bush, or something, so he will probably make it off this mortal coil with his non-beliefs merrily intact.
The “default” AM station on my car radio is a Catholic station, and every time I accidentally turn it on, it is people calling in and sobbing about how this or that family member is going to go to hell because of (what seems to me to be) really minor theological differences. It is terrifying, and I really hope my Catholic family members aren’t constantly beset by that feeling about me and other non-practicing family members.
That’s awful. It must be really scary to think about, and I hope your Catholic family members aren’t experiencing that. I think my dad experiences it less the older he gets and the further away he gets from his upbringing, but I assume spending your formative years being constantly reminded of the threat of eternal damnation must make it hard to shake off.
That’s how I felt about myself being raised Catholic (and also Pentecostal and Southern Baptist flavors of influence because Florida rural family), and just reading about people converting to Christianity from atheism is super distressing because it took me so long to accept that I’m not evil and horrible just for being human (ie: saving the last piece of chocolate for myself! being proud of my appearance and admiring my hair in the mirror!), and when people convert TO something that believes in SIN i just feel like they’re choosing to believe those things about me? it’s not something they were raised to believe?
my parents insist they don’t think i’m evil and horrible because i’m a sinner, but they raised me to believe it anyway, and I know my dad is extremely worried about the fact that i don’t go to church or anything. my mom is some weird mesh of religion now and seems to have a similar mental state about sin as i do, which means she thinks she’s so evil that god has forsaken her, which is why a lot of bad things have happened to her in recent years, and anyway it’s extremely distressing.
I also was surprised to find that I was deeply disappointed by Nicole’s happy announcement, and I have a great fondness for Christianity (at least as she practices it) and I’m not at all concerned about my own potential for conversion. I have been trying to examine that feeling and I haven’t yet figured out why that was my reaction, so I’m still working on it. It was just a big sinking feeling, like watching someone make a bad decision and being helpless to stop it. Why that would be true for something that makes her happy and that I myself believe is generally a good influence on the world is a little mystifying to me.
Yes, much of this. I was raised Episcopalian, surrounded by good people for whom involvement with the church was a positive force in their lives. My own atheism is pretty solid. It’s not that I think Nicole is making a bad decision; she seems happy and feels it is making her a better person, and that’s great!
But on a fundamental level I don’t get religion at all, I guess? Like, I don’t understand how you can decide something exists with no evidence just because it would add something nice to your life, and then sincerely believe it. I have no doubt whatsoever that I believe things that are untrue, and there are many things I don’t know, so I don’t look down on religious people or anything, but it is a much starker completely mystifying thing when someone goes from atheism to believing in a particular god and mythology. It reminds me that there is a major element of much of humanity that I don’t understand, which is a disconcerting feeling.
That said, I thought the prayer piece was great, and could probably benefit from that sort of designated time to think about if I feel good about the things I have done and failed to do!
I also don’t really get religion, but my parents started going to church when I was very young and have now been heavily involved in their church community (Presbyterian) for years and years. They’re both economists by training, but my mom enrolled in seminary school when I was about 12 and ended up getting a master’s degree in theology. She’s currently employed by their church, in a position that’s basically one step down from the pastor (I think her title is something like “spiritual director”). It’s FASCINATING for me to talk to her about religion, because her interest in it is very little of the “decide one day to believe in something with no evidence” variety and way more academic and intellectual (though of course she’s committed to her job and certainly doesn’t identify as an atheist).
There’s just so little nuance in the way that people typically talk about religion, and we’re all so used to hearing evangelicals yelling about how we’re all going to hell because God hates gay marriage and abortions and vaginas or whatever, plus everybody has that mental image of God as an old dude in a robe with a giant beard hanging out in the clouds and judging their choices stored away in their brain, so of course lots of people are gonna be like “yeah, pass on that weird shit, thanks.” But after a lot of conversations with my mom (and listening to her preach, which she gets to do on occasion), I’ve started to see it less like a comforting mythology and more like… almost a scholarly framework for how to make sense of and operate within a world that can seem really horrible and random and overwhelming. There’s a ton of theological scholarship, both contemporary and historical, that has far more in common with philosophy and ethics than it does with our typical idea of what religion is, and the God stuff just adds an extra dimension. Religious or not, we’re all struggling on some level with what the hell it even means to be alive and human and how to live well and be happy and not be a total dick at least SOME of the time (I mean, hopefully), and at its best I think religion and/or theology can give people a language for talking about those struggles that they wouldn’t otherwise have. Not to mention that the community structure and monetary resources of a church can really amplify an individual’s ability to do good in the world — my parents have been doing incredible LGBT advocacy work for like 15 years through their church, for example, and a big part of my mom’s job is meeting with people in the congregation and functioning essentially as a counselor (which she is fabulous at).
Obviously a lot of what I’m talking about can have a dark flip side (god knows plenty of people use their church resources and power for some pretty evil shit), but in terms of “why do reasonable, intelligent people become religious,” I think it’s… complicated.
(I wish I had a better handle on my thoughts on this, but I’m still very much working through my feelings on just about every aspect of it, so apologies if this makes literally no sense whatsoever.)
This makes so much sense. I come from a similar place, where my parents are very involved with their church and interested in history and scholarship. And the framework for life is so important. And I really wish it was easier to find secular community that has people of all ages that you can just show up to and be included like at church.
I think part of why it is strange to me is because I’m not completely sure my parents even believe in God. Some Episcopalians definitely talk about personal relationships with God and Jesus and everything, but on a day to day level I didn’t grow up with people talking about belief. They were more likely to talk about quality of the service, or interesting historical points, or what the newcomers committee had planned. And it was definitely a “biblical stories as metaphors” type of environment. So, I totally get “I’ve decided to go to church and to draw lessons from these teachings.” Whereas “I now believe these things are true and these deities exist when I didn’t before” is not a thing I understand. Which is fine! There are many things that are meaningful to other people that aren’t to me, and visa versa.
I generally don’t talk about this, as I don’t think “actually, that thing that brings joy and peace to your life doesn’t matter to me” is a very good addition to a conversation.
Yeah, I totally agree on the community thing! I go to church with my parents on occasion when I’m home (on Christmas, or if my mom is preaching), and I always feel a little bit uncomfortable, like I’m a heathen interloper or something, even though that’s not at ALL the vibe there. The closest thing I’ve found to that kind of community is my pickup soccer group, which has lots of nice people of all different ages from all sorts of backgrounds, but it’s not exactly analogous since the focus is less “let’s figure out how to be better people and make the world a better place” and more “let’s try to best each other at Sports and then go drink beer.”
There are various organizations that have things designed as secular church (“Sunday Assembly” is one that I’ve heard of, though I have no personal experience with them) that I’ve considered. I might check one out eventually. I don’t love the idea of gatherings that seem focused around something that we are not (religious), versus something we care about (like soccer, or God). Though the “how to be better people and make the world a better place” factor you mention is definitely a thing I care about.
I do also think sometimes about how when my grandparents died, we had the service at their church. There was a committee full of people, who knew them but who were not deeply grieving, who made sandwiches for their funeral and took care of things so we didn’t have to worry about them. I don’t know who will do that for my loved ones, and that does feel like a loss.
“And I really wish it was easier to find secular community that has people of all ages that you can just show up to and be included like at church.”
I think you’re looking for Unitarian Universalism. Some UU churches have God/Christ-leanings, but I believe the majority are secular humanist. (Credentials: one year of employment at UU seminary.)
>>our typical idea of what religion is
This is weird to me because that is very much not what my idea of religion is!
True story: growing up middle-class in England in the 1980s, “America” meant modernity,mpopular culture and consumerism, and was intrinsically opposed in my head to what I saw as Englishness and Church and traditionalism (what my friends who ran Sunday school described as “be nice to your friends and always tidy your room” – how to boil down every Bible story to a non-offensive positive message for children.) I was completely amazed when I found out there were Christians in America too.
Thank you for putting my feelings into words! I try to be a-ok super cool 100% fine with other people’s religions but I guess I always just assumed that I could trust the leadership of the Toast to be godless heathens like me? So it’s disappointing to hear that Nicole is going in another direction and I get worried that I won’t be able to feel the same level of fondness for the Toast, or something?
I went back through my initial immediate reactions for some clues, and I think what I’ve settled on is this: I see the embrace of faith as an abandonment of rationality. Not in the sense that someone becomes irrational in their actions or interactions, but in that faith has supplanted the scientific method as the most trusted system of navigation through the unknown.
I think you’re totally right. And this idea has been better stated by other commenters, but I just can’t for the life of me reconcile religion with real feminism/goodness/social consciousness, so I am scared that those things will start to drift away from the site.
I can assure you that if anything, MY religious beliefs have caused me to be more committed to goodness and social consciousness, and my feminism remains happily intact, so the site will remain as it has always been.
No, it’s all gone now, no religious person has ever heard of social justice, despite the term itself having been invented by a Jesuit in the 1840s, Dorothea Dix is a myth, Nicole has already murdered me due to reasons of bisexualism, the new categories for the site are Dour, Cold Biscuits, No Sandra You Can’t Have That, Post-Millenarianism, Jesus Yelling, Old Milk, and No.
uuuugh this is why NICOLE is the nice one
It is possible that comments in reference to very nice things Nicole has written about her conversion, which has no actual effect on any of us and brings her joy, is not the absolute best place for us all to dig into our feelings about atheism and other people’s religious beliefs. But I have very much appreciated the comfortable space to have way more feelings about it than I anticipated today!
And I hope it is clear to Nicole that most of these feelings were pre-existing and have nothing to do with her, and talking about them here only reflects how much we care about the Toast (personally I was not worried that it would change, but I think my average experience with religious folks has been much better than some commenters.). Her prayer piece was super great and I appreciated getting to read it!
Also, I feel like we could get behind “Dour” and “No”, and probably “Jesus Yelling.”
I think I figured out what the “disappointment/fear” reaction might be, and that is that there are a LOT a LOT of people in this lovely country of ours who 1)discover Jesus 2)suddenly become completely different people 3)start wanting to oppress everyone. Some of us have friends/family members like this! Or know public figures (see: Kim Davis) who this happened to. It’s a very American story. HOWEVER. Americans are just kind of like this, like people who lost a lot of weight or stopped smoking or whatever are also assholes who don’t want people to have fun, so I am deeply sorry that you are maybe getting lumped in with THAT whole thing. Also, you’re awesome and I hope continue to write for many many years to come. And I really don’t think your prayer piece was awkward at all.
Also, I suspect that many of those people were assholes to begin with, but they now have A Cause which allows them to justify their behavior.
Genuine question: does the scientific method really help you navigate unknowns like bereavement, love or pain? I come from a very liberal (and somewhat vague) Anglican tradition, which has never been in conflict with the scientific method to me, because the questions for which I would turn to faith are just ones that are completely orthogonal to science.
I can see why you’d ask, and this is probably something unique to me or at least to those of us who grew up outside of a faith tradition. It really does help me deal with those things, in fact as someone who’s never been a believer it’s the only set of tools I have. Here’s an example: when my dad died I found comfort in things like contemplating how his ideas and influence (not to mention his genes!) lived on in me and the people who loved him. I also liked thinking about the way his body and energy were re-dispersed throughout the universe, literally becoming future forms of life. For something like dealing with the pain of loss or something outside of my control it soothes me to think about how tiny that is in the grand scheme of things, the immensity of time and the universe and how little whatever seems so important to me now really is. Someone said yesterday that they wondered how Nicole’s faith was complemented by her zen practice (which I’m interested to hear!) I guess my contemplation of the universe is kind of like that.
Thank you for answering!
You see, all of that makes sense to me, but none of it is stuff that I would classify as “the scientific method”. All of those are also thoughts that I found comforting when my mum died too. I can see that they do not depend on a theist belief in the same way that “we will be reunited in heaven” does, but for me finding comfort in the thought of the physical matter which made up my loved-one’s body becoming the matter that makes up something else is not a “more rational” form of comfort, and it’s certainly not a thought which is unavailable to someone of faith.
I don’t mean to say that you’re secretly a theist or anything! I understand that for you that’s a way of translating scientific thought into a source of comfort. But I don’t think it’s objectively scientific, and I guess I do think that labelling this kind of thought as “rational” or “scientific” and setting it in opposition to theism as “irrational” (and therefore less valid) is a rhetorical device rather than an objectively true thing. I think everyone’s thought is made of of rational and irrational elements.
I feel like we’re very close to understanding each other but there’s something missing. It’s like we’re both going up for the HIGH FIVE! but our palms don’t quite connect. At the risk of beating a dead horse I’ll try to explain a bit more.
I really did mean it when I said I don’t think converts are irrational, and I don’t think faith divorces people from reason or an appreciation of the physical universe. But what it does do is to provide a kind of alternate way of approaching things. I find comfort in the idea of a universe governed by the laws of physics. You do too, but you ALSO have a totally separate belief system that runs concurrently and whose tenets by definition can’t be proven or unproven. You don’t see a conflict because your faith based belief system allows for a separate scientific understanding of the physical universe so you see them as complementary. I look at my understanding of the universe as a place governed by knowable (if sometimes not known at present), provable laws and can’t understand why you would layer a separate, unprovable, superfluous layer over what seems to be a complete set of tools for understanding.
For me? Yes, absolutely. When my partner’s mom died of a very virulent and aggressive cancer in her early 40s, it sure seemed like our outlook was the preferable one versus his grandmother’s secondary grief at “being a good Christian” and still having this happen anyway.
earlier today i briefly mentioned my mother’s relationship to the concept of sin, and how she seems to think that she must be irredeemably bad somehow because of all the bad stuff that has happened to her, and she tries so hard to be a Good Christian, so why does God let this happen unless she’s pure sin???
and that’s a huge element of why i’m more comfortable in my atheism. also, i find it comforting that death is The End and there isn’t some endless After Life. i’m probably in the minority of religious kids who were terrified of heaven instead of hell 😛 (but, then, i was convinced that i was going to hell, even when i was 5 years old, and everyone’s descriptions of hell were pretty consistent – no one could agree what heaven was like, and i hate big unknowns/surprises)
kinda late to reply to the post itself, but thank you for this honest and thoughtful piece.
My parents are lapsed Catholics in a predominantly Christian town, and I got almost no religious information as a child, which led to me being curious but getting responses that tended to range from vague unexplained pity to “you are going to HELL.” I once asked a friend while sleeping over at her house some time in grade school to explain what praying was like for her. She didn’t answer me, and I guess she told her mother what a heathen I was, because they cut all ties with us instantly. I really wish more people in my life had this kind of open dialogue about faith.
My friend had a babysitter tell her she was going to hell when she was about 8 or 9. Luckily her parents found out and never had that babysitter back, but I thought that was pretty stone cold.
ETA: but also agree about your main point, which is that I do think it does us all good to talk about this stuff. The good and the bad bits.
If my mother were Canadian I’d think we were related. She’s as deeply Catholic as she is a pro-choice PGLAG Democrat.
Dear fellow misandrists: I feel like this video of men photoshopped out of pictures is aspirational.
Think of everything we could get done. And have extra chairs on which to put up our feet too!
http://qz.com/521734/watch-what-happens-when-men-…
I enjoyed (masochistically) that! Very illustrative.
Wish lots and lots of people would see that video.
That conversation between Obama and Marilynne Robinson is lovely. Honestly, it makes me feel better about the world.
Yes, same. Maybe we aren’t all doomed.
It filled me with such delight! I hope, after his presidency, he goes on a tour of interviewing prominent artists with really in-depth philosophical discussions.
I hope someone gave Lincoln Chafee a hot cocoa or something after all that, he seems so KINDLY and I want to protect him.
Met him once as a wide-eyed high school congressional summer camper. He is indeed a very kind man. I can confirm that.
I was calling him Sitcom Dad for the entire debate; he just looks like all he really wants is to sigh at the hilarious scrapes his teens get up to for a half hour every week at 9/8 central, here on ABC.
I have complicated feelings about Milk because the cast is so stacked with men who have a history of assaulting women (Sean Penn, Josh Brolin, Emile Hirsch) and/or creeping on underage girls (James Franco.) Also the epilogue reinforced the “Twinkie defence” myth which, given the movie’s stated dedication to accuracy, seems inexcusably lazy.
In local news, my phone now immediately capitalizes the word Rock. Regardless of whether or not there’s a the in front of it. Thought y’all would appreciate that.
Never trust a man who uses a winking emoji.
CHARLOTTE.
Wow, I needed that today.
Emily.
Apparently even in online quizzes, my paradoxical nature — loner misandrist slut — reveals itself.
WHAT how did my husband and I both get Emily?? We are a couple of Emilies, I guess.
Carmella.
Here I am trying to decide when is old enough to start showing my nephews horror movies (they’re currently 4 and 7, but getting there), and this joker’s worried about Ferris Bueller.
Ha. I’m Anne. I’ll take it if that means I get to be the normal one in the Hark a Vagrant Bronte comics.
Same! I’m pretty pleased, especially since I already keep that comic above my desk for a daily reminder about who is REALLY the best Bronte sister.
Me too! It makes me especially happy after watching Rebecca last night and remembering how much I hate Byronic heroes. Rochester and Heathcliff (and Maxim) aren’t mysterious and sexy, they’re just assholes.
Or alcoholic dickbags, as Anne (of Hark a Vagrant depiction) would say.
I skipped the beginning of the debate because of the Cubs! Chicago is on fire and I am pretty sure no one is getting any work done during day games at all.
Hey Toasties- don’t want to hijack the post, but yesterday was a really, really, REALLY bad day and I can’t really post about it on social media so if I could get a hug or two that would be The Best because y’all are wonderful.
~*~hugs~*~ \o/ \o/
HUUUGGSS to Hawkeye. Also I have some chocolate-covered cherries here if you like those.
I have chocolate covered salted caramel, and dark chocolate covered pretzels. Hugs((((((())))))))
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3
*hug*
[[huuuugs]]
(((((hugs)))))
<3333 I hope today is a better day for you!
Love love love.
Thank you thank you THANK YOU. Let it never be said that when there was a call for hugs, the Toasties did not answer.
Belated but still sincere hug coming to you from over here!
I hope things get better! Sending virtual pots of tea and a warm throw and good novel.
All the hugs to you! Also tabby cat cuddles because Oliver always has cuddles and tiny purrs to give
.
*HUGS*
ALL THE HUGS TO YOU MY FRIEND. EVERY ONE.
*hugs* I really hope that today and tomorrow (and all the days thereafter) are better.
(((( you )))) !!
*hugs*
‘bug! Are you OK? You can have all the hugs you want. And LittleGirlDog will press her head into your palm, if it would make you feel better.
I am okay- yesterday was truly awful, but I’m hanging in there. Once I get through tomorrow, I think I might be able to breathe a little easier. I would LOVE to cuddle LittleGirlDog if I could- curse all my friends for not having pets for me to snuggle!
(((hug))) Sorry your day was bad.
ALIENS WHAT IF IT’S ALIENS WHAT THEN OMG ALIENS
Furthermore, it’s aliens who make things big enough to see from REALLY far away ….
^^^ Is me.
On the subject of prayer – I just got into an argument with a good friend last night about the phrase “I’m praying for you.” She has a kneejerk response to it as something condescending, I think it can sometimes be used that way, but most of the time is much more genuine and well meaning than that. Our views are totally informed by our pasts. Both our families are Christian (we are not) and she tended to hear it used in a condescending way more often, I heard it mostly in a positive way (like my aunt who texted me that she was praying for me during my house search – definitely nothing but well wishing there).
I think I was surprised how deep her association with the comment as a negative was though and am curious if others have similar reactions.
I don’t find it condescending but I do tend to wonder if the person means it, or if it’s just something they say. Like, are they REALLY going to sit down later and pray for you, or are they just saying that because it’s nicer than, “Wow, sucks to be you!” I know a handful of people who, rather than say “I’m praying for you,” will literally ask right on the spot, “Can I pray for you right now?” and then do it, out loud. Or, if it’s on Facebook, they will write out a prayer in the comments. I find that so genuine and kind, and it gives the other person to opt and say no, not right now or just delete the comment if they don’t care for it.
…wow. I would summarily defriend anyone who did that to me. Good thing that’s unlikely to come up, my flist being what it is, but wow.
Yeah, please do not post prayers or religious tracts on somebody’s Facebook unless you are sure of their religious affiliation!
yeah, same. I generally take is as a kindness, but it can still be awkward. I had to leave work early once due to illness and a nodding acquaintance took my hands and prayed for me for what felt like forever. I am absolutely sure he meant well and was sincere in his well wishes, but as someone atheist, it felt kind of terrible, like I was deceiving him by not saying anything but thank you. (I’m an awkward/socially anxious person generally, though).
If someone saying their praying for me ever seriously bothers me, it’s usually more because it came with an automatic and obvious assumption that I share their faith.
This is a legitimate question for any prayer-giving Toasties because I am genuinely curious: what is the purpose of telling somebody that you are praying for them (especially in a context like the above, where it’s a small thing like a brief illness rather than some kind of catastrophe or death of a loved one)? Isn’t the power of prayer supposed to be about energy and vibes and stuff? Like you’re praying to your deity of choice, and then said deity gets the memo and hopefully sends some kind of help or solace to the person? So theoretically there’s no reason the person has to know that you ever prayed for them, right? I get that from a religious person to another it would probably be nice to know that somebody was praying for you in a specific situation but if it’s a stranger and you don’t know what their deal is religion-wise, why do you want them to know specifically that you’re praying for them instead of just being there for them?
Yeah, I mean, if you have any influence, use it, right? But also, wouldn’t it be a weird system if you did have influence? I am not really special among people that I deserve a sudden bolt of solace, more so than any other person. Don’t worry though, I also don’t think I’m less deserving of solace. I just think we’re all equally deserving of all kinds of good things, and maybe thinking otherwise makes me spin out about concepts like justice and whether we live in a fundamentally unjust world. Those are all worries that pop up for me when someone says, “I’m praying for you.” And I just really prefer my own cosmology, which is, things are pretty much random, we can put in some effort to try to change things, hopefully for the better, but there will be a lot of stuff that’s just outside of our control and life isn’t fair, because there isn’t any sentient being giving or taking, which would create a measure for “fairness”. Are they giving too much solace? Not enough? But yeah, the more I think about this, the more I think that maybe I’ll just go ahead and say, “Please don’t” instead of just sort of taking it upon myself to be okay with being prayed for.
People can secretly pray for me though, because I can’t stop them from doing so and it doesn’t hurt me. Unless Sekhmet is the real god(dess) and she’s angrily tallying up every prayer not to her in some kind of burn book, which I feel is maybe possible because I went to a really great exhibit (in as much as any exhibit that has artifacts that were probably pilfered by Victorian gentlemen can be great) on her and Bes, and it was very much awe inspiring. Anyway, I basically don’t mind being prayed for, but I certainly don’t want to know about it, and from henceforth, maybe I will say something. If I can work up the courage to be slightly impolite. Which is doubtful.
Yes! If you pray for someone as a charitable effort to get your deity to do them a favor, and don’t tell the person you prayed for them, it’s still an act of charity done in secret, which is fine and (if I recall correctly) looked particularly favorably upon by Xtian deity! But if you pray for someone and tell them you’re praying for them it seems like outreach/proseletizing, like if deity puts out for them you want your friend to know it was deity that did it, and it was because of prayer.
Matthew 6:6 “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” I mean, the good thing about growing up around a lot of evangelicals is that I know my bible quotes back and forth. The bad bit, as I mentioned, was I did get prayed for quite a bit.
Same, same. I’m kinda glad I know their language and can argue with them about stuff like “being a good steward of the earth” when it comes to climate change, or treating the poor/sick/strangers as you would Jesus.
It’s a blessing and a curse, because I’m not quite brave enough to say, “No, but I know all about the composite Magdalene” when street corner preachers ask me, “Are you saved?”
Yes to the awkward bit! I went to school in the deep South, and our volleyball team used to pray together before games. I think the coach squeaked under the stepping on our right to not have to pray in school by say, “Let’s have our minute of silence.” With a conspiratorial wink. And then we’d sort of huddle around with our eyes closed. It was very uncomfortable for a non-believer. Some of the girls would mumble, I’m assuming the words to a prayer. And I just always kind of shifted around until everyone opened their eyes and we all clapped and I could pretend it never happened.
It’s occuring to me, reading over this thread and thinking about my own experiences, that my objections come from a place of having been coerced into feigning faith or having to hide my lack of religion out of concerns about being excluded or ridiculed. I think I’d feel a lot more neutral if I’d grown up in a more secular setting, but yeah, it does feel weird to have someone pray for you and then to not really be able to put a stop to it. Especially when the hand goes on the shoulder. Because then I’m just sort of stuck there until it’s over, which is awkward.
I think you have a point there for sure. My mom knows that I’m not religious (the poor woman is a lifelong Catholic with four children, all of whom turned away from the church) but I don’t talk about it with my extended family because I would feel like a brat being like “Suck it grandma, I don’t believe in god!” but that leads to things like having to join hands with my family at Thanksgiving when we say Grace and having to recite prayers/do the sign of the cross/take communion at family weddings and funerals just to avoid awkward conversations.
In the context of my dad’s death (which, geez louise, I didn’t expect to be talking about it so much today) it was particularly tough because his sister, my aunt, is a nun. She and the other nuns in her convent have done a lot for our family over the years and they’re wonderful ladies and I am grateful that they are in my life and I certainly am not going to shit on my aunt’s ideas about her brother being in heaven, but having her hold my hands and say “I know that he’s up in heaven with Ma and Pop” or “He’ll be so happy up in heaven finally knowing the answers to all those conspiracy theories he used to read about” was really hard because I don’t believe in heaven and at the end of the day I don’t totally believe my dad would be there if it does exist.
If it makes you feel any better, I was an event planner for two years for our local Catholic diocese, and had to do lots of “looking like I’m praying” and communion taking and (good grief) eucharistic adoration without believing in ANY of it and keeping that a big secret, so if you’re a terrible person for doing what your family expects, I’m at least three times as terrible 😀
I also met some absolutely stellar nuns, and also organized a lot of service projects for youth, so it wasn’t a total loss.
Doing things like that in a school setting is a *totally* different thing to me (but then I’m a former ACLU employee).
I don’t mind at all if individual people want to wish me well by praying for me, but I would be absolutely livid at any kind of institutionally-sponsored prayer that I was forced to participate in.
Oof, yes, this does illustrate that life-is-a-tapestry thing, because I actually don’t want to have a spontaneous religious moment with anyone, and I don’t appreciate it being put on me to find a way to gracefully back out of something that appears so well-intentioned on the surface. AND I would have a very, very negative reaction to someone posting a prayer on my FB. Like, I’d have the urge to delete it or say something scathing that they probably don’t even deserve. I think it partly goes back to how many of us are taught not to be showy about our faith (for Christians, Jesus did say something about praying in a closet rather than Tim Tebow style, why yes he did reference him by name) — and of course others don’t want it, period.
(Favorite hypothetical response at the moment: “HEY, get off my FB page and go into the closet like Jesus told you to!”)
If I say I am going to hold someone in prayer; it absolutely means I am going to make time in my day for prayer, and do just that.
If I say it online, it probably means I’m taking a moment right then to pray. Occasionally I do so in writing in a comment box (have done it here on the Toast) – and I try really hard to discern whether that is helpful and appropriate.
Strong me too. I always got it, although thankfully not from my family, as “I’m praying for you … to mend your slut ways.” Sometimes they would say the last part, and sometimes it just hung in the air heavily. Oh, and the preacher at the crosswalk by my university would shout it at any apparently gay couple holding hands while in the crosswalk. He’d occasionally also just point around and say, “You’re going straight to hell.” This eventually escalated to the point where there was a counter protest, and someone across the street held up a “high-fives for sinners” sign and would deal out high-fives to anyone who’d gotten an “I’m praying for your soul” from the other guy. It was actually kinda great to get a satisfying thumper of a high-five after a kind of harrowing wait at the crosswalk.
I have gotten the benign “I’m praying for you.” but I prefer “I’m thinking of you.” Because I do have bad associations with the phrase. Not that I’d ever correct anyone about it, I just sort of make an internal edit there.
I do! I associate “I’m praying for you” with people being too unmotivated to actually do anything about whatever the problem is. Like saying, “I care, but not enough to do anything about it.” It’s lip service to caring, rather than actual love-in-action.
I get that, but I also think there are times when “I’m praying for/thinking about you,” is the best you can do under the circumstances. Like, when my grandmother died, I was materially fine, and I was off to PA for the funeral within a couple days, so it’s not like casseroles or whatever would have been useful, plus many of my friends live far away. So “I’m thinking about you,” or “I’m praying for you guys,” or “Sending hugs from afar!” was nice, even if it didn’t change the basic situation.
I was just thinking about this! I just read Nicoles article about praying and I was thinking about the non-religious language of comfort. I am non-religious I guess (I have problems with Religion, but not with spirituality or belief), and I just haven’t gotten around to sorting out my own personal beliefs; its just something I don’t really think about.
BUT
I find I lack the language to tell someone I’m wishing well for them; ‘you’re in my prayers’ or ‘I’m praying for you’ just does the job! Same for when you see ambulances or hearses, I used to cross myself just because I felt like I needed something to do in that moment.
Perfect example is The Toast; people often post about personal things, and I want to tell them that I’m thinking of them, and hoping it works out for them, but there’s no serious heart felt way to do this! ‘I’m thinking of you’ doesn’t cut it, and the various virtual ‘hugs’ that are posted, while obviously heartfelt and probably appreciated by the person, feel insincere to me.
Personally I do believe that sending someone good vibes or good energy does help, and I do believe there’s an ‘energy’ to the world that can affect people, but the language just isn’t there without religion! (even talking about energy and vibes makes my skin crawl! I sound like some crusty hippie.). I often think about people who’ve posted here, but don’t have a way to express it or tell them about it I guess.
I struggle with this too! We need a better secular version of this. Wishing someone luck is often my go-to, but it’s not appropriate for all situations (like dealing with a death or something).
I usually go with “You’re in my thoughts” as a substitute but it lacks the same emphasis.
Right!
Like when someone passes, what do you say? ‘I’m sorry’? ‘I’m thinking of you’? Yes they do the job, but it lacks something I feel. Like when people wish you happy birthday on Facebook, I always think it doesn’t really count.
I was a fan of “I’m think of you/You’re in my thoughts” when my dad died because it wasn’t presumptuous or loaded, it was just supportive. I think people know what you mean when you say it. If you want something stronger, then honestly I think actions are more appropriate than words depending on your relationship to the person. Being present in the first place is big.
That’s why I like “I’m thinking of you” too. It’s so nice and neutral. If I’m in a bad place, I don’t want to explain that I don’t want to be prayed for. That being prayed for makes me uncomfortable at best. I especially appreciate if someone who I know is religious makes the effort to consider that I, as a non-religious person might not want to be prayed for and then respects my personal boundaries. I know people can mean well in saying “I’m praying for you” but my honest reaction is often “Please don’t.” Not that I would say that, because I get that it’s hard to find the right words to say, but yeah, for me, “I’m praying for you” are never going to be the right words to hear.
ETA: I know that’s a big old comment to just say how much I agree, but I feel like this is a preference that I so rarely have a chance to be honest about. Anyway, long story short, I really really agree.
For the record, I too get MASSIVELY uncomfortable when people tell me they’ll pray for me.
Yes…I do think religious people should know that the person they’re speaking to is also religious and, moreover, would appreciate hearing it before they say, “I’m praying for you.” I come from a religious background and I understand people (usually) mean well, but it still takes me off guard sometimes, as I do wonder about their motivations. It does feel a little intrusive.
Yeeeahhh, I’m lucky in that I’ve always lived in very secular environments, because “I’m praying about you” just feels slimily presumptuous. Along the lines of “I’ll be picturing you when I masturbate”.
So the “Please don’t” response sounds just about right.
I get the instinct to reply, “Please dont,” to people saying they’ll pray for you. When I was in the very worst of my depression (not that Im in the very best of it now), my aunt would say to me or would text to me that she was praying for me, and I was always like.. What is your praying going to do for my crippling depression?? What is your god, who I dont believe in anyway, going to do for my inability to even care for myself right now?
I dunno… I guess (esp when I was feeling so much guilt and depression) it just felt like a way for her to tell me I should be praying too/maybe this is all my fault and if I had a god in my life, I’d be better. It just made me feel worse in that situation
I’m not sure it needs to be so complicated. Why not just say what you mean? “Wow, that all sounds really tough, I hope you work it out,” or “I’m so sorry to hear of the loss of your grandmother, and I’d love to hear about her if you’d like to share,” or “I’m so sorry you’re having such a tough day, let me know if you want to meet for coffee or a Dr Who marathon or something,” or “I don’t know if it helps, but I’m thinking of you and sending you good vibes today.”
It takes a little extra thought and effort to craft something to say that isn’t trite and perhaps inadvertently insulting, but to me, it’s part of the same process as decolonizing my language and taking the time to actually say what I mean, instead of relying on shortcuts, cliches, or bigoted language.
It was sort of just something I was thinking about after reading Nicoles post and thinking about praying and praying for other people. In practice I usually go with some variant of I’m thinking of you; I’d never tell someone I’ll pray for them, purely cause I don’t pray! I don’t think anyone has ever said it to me either (although I can definitely see why people would find it upsetting/offensive, or said prayer is just being a condescending asshole). And although I don’t pray or meditate, I do often think of people and try to send some good will their way.
I was thinking of it I think, because I come from a very catholic country, a lot of our phrases/interpersonal language is religious. For example, my father is not religious, but if you say ‘See you soon’, he’ll always respond with ‘Please God’ (His parents were religious). And I was just curious about our use of language, and how many non-religious phrases just don’t feel like they have the same weight to them.
I even still use a lot of religious phraseology (Thank god, Oh Lord, Oh my god, Sweet Holy Jesus.) Most of them are probably sacrilegious, but its still a part of the culture and language I grew up in.
Yeah I think there’s a cultural component to it for sure, in that those types of phrases aren’t as much in use in the US usually, although I bet that depends on where you live. Even so, people here do seem to fall back on those loaded cliches and shortcuts when difficult things happen. I just know for myself that I’ve been a better friend and caused less inadvertent offense and harm since I’ve started trying to get rid of that kind of language.
I think the whole ‘Don’t take the lords name in vain’ thing is taken far more seriously in the US, you guys are very serious about swearing in general (Cussing? What is cussing? You have no idea how long it took for me to realize this mean cursing!). Since when is Heck a swear word? In Ireland we’d say fuck that shit.
So yeah, I think a lot more religious language has made its way into casual conversation in Ireland. Catholicism wasn’t a choice until very recently, you just were a Catholic (or at least religious in someway) and you participated fully. Pretty much my entire generation is agnostic/atheist, but we still us the language, and often respect the customs (baptizing babies, weddings/funerals in churches etc)
Yes, that is definitely regional in the US. Swearing is pretty common in my social circle, family, etc. 😀
But I also think that — whereas in Europe, things have drifted to where you are now, with the younger generations being mainly agnostic but still vaguely respecting the traditions (in the US this is often termed being “culturally Catholic,” to sort of go with “culturally Jewish”), in the US the younger generation has drifted, but not quite as far, if that makes sense. There’s still a baseline of “belief in god” that people mostly seem to take for granted, which is why being an atheist here can be such a big deal.
And I mean, I guess what I’m trying to get at is — I’m not sure that “what should we say instead of ‘I’ll pray for you’?” is the right question. I think the better question is “what do I want to accomplish by saying something to this person at this time?” and then saying something that goes with that.
Or even just admit that somethings are too awful to have good and graceful words about, and just say that. I think there are times when it’s true that we need a phrase that basically means, “I care about you and want good things for you.” Because sometimes that’s all there is when things are really tough. I think sometimes what you want to accomplish is having something to say to someone, so they know that their grief isn’t so big that it will stop you from reaching out to them however possible.
ETA: but following the do-no-harm principle, it really should be a phrase that doesn’t go against their principles or disrespect their beliefs or lack thereof. I totally agree there.
I’m clearly not getting my point across here? Because what’s wrong with saying “I care about you and want good thigns for you,” if that’s true?
Like, why does it have to be a phrase or a saying or something that you have in your back pocket? Why can’t it be context-specific?
Ohhh! I see! I thought you meant, no words, only actions! But I was wrong, and totally see what you mean now. Yes, very much agreed that it feels more heartfelt if it is indeed context-specific.
OHHHH ok yeah, sorry for miscommunicating! And honestly, sometimes it’s kind of a comfort to hear “wow, that is absolutely terrible and I don’t know what else to say right now,” because sometimes things are really terrible and you barely even know what to think, and hearing that the other person is also flummoxed can feel less isolating.
Totally! I’m not doing my best reading, because this is one of those things that touches a nerve for me, and I kind of didn’t even realize it touched a nerve until now. But it’s way comforting to see that it touches a nerve for a lot of other folks too. Which on one hand, of course it does! But on the other hand, I’d always felt like the unreasonable one to be bothered about something that people meant in a nice way. So, it’s a sort of quiet revolution over here. I’m singing We’re not gonna take it by Twisted Sister under my breath. Basically all hell has broken loose.
One of the kindest cards someone gave me when my mom died unexpectedly said “I’m not writing a lot here because words can be very noisy at a time like this,” which I did not understand in the moment but came to appreciate very quickly. Your approach reminded me of this, and it seems like a good one to keep in the toolkit.
That is amazing and I think I WILL keep that in my back pocket.
One of the things I tend to say to friends who are grieving is “I’m here for you no matter what you want to talk about or do, and just remember — those stages of grief are kind of bullshit, and there’s no right way to grieve.” I’ve been told that hearing “there’s no right way” can be pretty helpful at those moments, and I know it was helpful when my spouse was grieving his mom, so.
I was reading something written by a parent who lost a young child, and one of things they said they appreciated hearing from people was “It’s so unfair”. Because it IS horribly unfair, and all the platitudes that people often offer in that situation (e.g., “He/she is in a better place now”, etc.) are so enraging. Hearing that unfairness acknowledged meant a lot to them.
I was thinking of it I think, because I come from a very catholic country, a lot of our phrases/interpersonal language is religious. For example, my father is not religious, but if you say ‘See you soon’, he’ll always respond with ‘Please God’ (His parents were religious). And I was just curious about our use of language, and how many non-religious phrases just don’t feel like they have the same weight to them.
My dad’s family is Catholic (he and I are not), and I really associate a lot of that phrasing* with them (such as saying, “God bless” when saying goodnight to people). Unfortunately, that means that I have very negative associations with such phrases (because they are unpleasant people from whom my dad is estranged). I can’t even say “bless you” when someone sneezes, because my parents don’t and so it’s not automatic to me, and it feels really weird and forced if I try.
*not all; expressions of dismay like “oh God” or “Jesus Christ” are perfectly fine, for some reason.
I have the same issue with “bless you”! I feel weird about saying it but also rude when I don’t say it. And yet “oh god” as an expression of dismay, or, um, extreme-not-dismay shall we say — totally fine!
Ha, I’m glad I’m not the only one! It’s not that I think it’s a bad thing to say, or anything, I just feel far too awkward to do it. But sitting in silence when someone sneezes seems rude.
I say gesundheit!
I have never actually heard anyone say that in real life! Just in US-based media.
Yeah, for people I’m close to it’s often “Let me know if there’s anything I can do or bring you – wine, take out, an ear while you bitch for a while, whatever”
My family is Catholic and while I grew up with many of people who are certainly devout, I always had the sense that you don’t just go around telling people about your personal religious experiences, unless you are my grandmother and you’re promising someone that you’ll light a candle for them. Not because it’s condescending, necessarily, it’s just sort of… smarmy and Protestant? I don’t assume any bad intentions on the part of people who say things like that, but it makes me uncomfortable in a way I can’t quite put my finger on. Why are we making sincere references to Jesus on a weekday? What’s going on?
I want you to know I took your comment seriously but somehow the phrase “sincere references to Jesus on a weekday” made me LOLOLOL.
Don’t worry, I’m not taking it too seriously either
“just sort of… smarmy and Protestant”
OMG. What a beautiful turn of phrase. Wow, do I recognize this. Occasionally in the mirror.
Yes, exactly! I have family and close friends that I talk about religion with, and for those people, and ONLY those people, I’ll say things like “I’ll keep you in my prayers” unprompted when they’re going through a rough time. I would never say that to a stranger or to someone I wasn’t sure of their religious feelings. Thanks to the Catholic upbringing (and, as secondursula said below, thanks to Matthew 6:6), I’ve always been kind of weirded out by unprompted prayers. Especially when people say a prayer on the spot, and especially especially people who use prayer as judgment. Prayer should not be a weapon to beat people with.
My Irish-Catholic grandparents were very much like that. I’ve never been entirely sure if they actually believed in God or not, because it was considered rather bad taste (in their generation and part of the country where they grew up) to wear your faith on your sleeve. Basically, you went to mass and participated in religious activities, but you didn’t really talk about it much.
That’s definitely how my family is. I can think of a number of relatives who may or may not be privately atheist–and a few that I’m close enough to that I know they definitely are– but ehh, we’re all basically Catholic, so let’s please not worry about it.
People are welcome to pray for me if it does something for them but I absolutely do not want to know about it. Whatever the intention or feeling behind it, it would be very upsetting to me for somebody to tell me that they’re praying for me because to me that means a) You’re assuming that I’m religious or have positive feelings about religion, and b) You’re assuming that I need or want your prayers. For me personally, neither of those things will ever, ever be true no matter what shit is going on in my life. Don’t tell me you’ll pray for me. Treat me with compassion and respect, and help me if I ask. And if you want to pray for me on your own time, go nuts, but understand that your prayer is for you and I don’t need to know about it.
Sorry guys, I have developed strong feelings on this subject ever since my dad died last year. I come from a very religious family and had a whooooole lot of people telling me that I and my family were in their prayers, that my dad was looking down on me from heaven, etc. (all with very good intentions I’m sure, and I love my family) and it was really tough for me to be gracious about it because it was upsetting to me on a personal level.
Oh boy do I feel you on that one. A close friend of mine died last year, and I went to his funeral in the South. A lot of his relatives are super evangelical (he was an atheist, but I know he kept his mouth shut around them because he told me about bracing himself for it every time he went down there), and they kept talking about praying, and dead people looking down, and talking like he believed the things they did, and it was very upsetting. One cousin or something came up to me and started talking about how I need to look to Jesus in this hard time, and I said that friend was who I was used to talking to when bad things happened, and she said something like “well that’s why you can never rely on people, only Jesus” and I would have punched her if it wouldn’t have upset my friend’s mother.
At my grandmother’s funeral, the priest decided the service was a great time to talk about how much harder grief and dying was for atheists because we don’t understand that she was gone to heaven, etc., etc., and while I honestly think he didn’t even consider the possibility that her son and a few of her grandchildren might not be Catholic, it was such a terrible thing to say. I guess my point is, when people are grieving, give them the space and respect to frame it in their own terms and leave your own faith/ideas/worldviews out of it.
Yes! Another person’s grief is not a convenient opening for your beliefs.
My boyfriend’s grandfather dying was the only time I have ever wanted to be religious, because he was upset and I just wanted to be able to tell him that his grandfather was in Heaven and it would all be fine, but I couldn’t because we would both know I was lying. I would not have taken kindly to hearing that funeral service.
My boyfriend attended a Catholic funeral service for friends who lost a child in a car accident, where the priest decided to announce that the child might not have died if the parents had been married.
He was absolutely livid, and I can’t even imagine what the parents thought hearing this. That was pretty much the worst thing I’ve ever heard.
Horrifying.
That is appalling.
Word.
At my grandmother’s (Catholic) funeral, my weirdo born-again-cousin’s friends showed up with Chick Tracts. Swear to God. I only heard about this later, because my uncle apparently all but physically threw them off the property before they could really talk to anyone, because he’s awesome.
On the other hand, that was the funeral where the priest said that we should think of Margie as taking a beautiful journey…like the one the hobbits took in Tolkien’s Lord of the Flies.
Which did, I have to say, divert me rather intensely from my grief for a few minutes.
That is beautiful! The adorably and bizarrely mangled literary reference, I mean, not the weirdos.
Yup yup yup. My spouse (atheist) lost his (atheist) mother some time back, and for people to say that to him/us felt so incredibly alienating and disrespectful and just AWFUL I can’t even describe it. Yuck.
When my (atheist) father died, my (even more dogmatically atheist) mother was infuriated by this kind of talk. “People keep saying to me, ‘Oh, you must find comfort that Bob’s spirit is still watching over you…’ Shows how much they knew him! If he does have a spirit somewhere, it’s up in the woods, hunting with the dogs, not hanging around the house.”
I’m so glad you spoke up! I think this point of view needs to be well represented, because so many brought up in religious communities don’t understand that this response really exists and that “I’m praying for you” isn’t actually always appropriate.
Exactly—I find that “I’ll pray for you” intrudes on whatever my thoughts/feelings/reactions to a loss may be. It feels selfish on the part of the pray-er—as though they get to pat themselves on the back for doing something great/reaching out to the non-believer when all they’re doing is making me uncomfortable.
I don’t mind it at all… In my experience, it’s well intentioned and a way for someone to say, “I care about you and what you’re going through, and I hope it gets easier.” I know that isn’t always the case, though. But … I recently had a personal emergency that I found out about at work, and I was crying in the hallway while trying to reach someone. When I went to the bathroom to try to compose my snotty cry face, a woman in my office asked if I wanted a hug. And I said yes, and while she was hugging me, she said she saw me upset a few minutes ago in the hall and she had just been praying for me. In that moment, it was so kind and comforting. I don’t see a substitute for real action or help – sometimes, what can you actually do? This lady saw someone upset and didn’t know why, she didn’t ask why (which I also thought was very kind of her), but she cared and hoped it got better.
Obviously this isn’t the same as douchebigots saying they’ll pray for your immortal soul to escape the fires of hell. Those people, they are assholes. And of course, I realize that this is definitely not the same for everyone, and some people have a much more negative experience or connotation with the idea/phrase. But I think most of the people who offer an “I’m praying for you” mean well and truly hope that there is some relief for a person struggling or in pain.
This has been my experience too. I don’t think anyone’s ever said it to me in an offensive way, only in kindness. So interesting (and kind of disheartening) to hear how negative others’ experiences with the phrase are.
I find it uncomfortable and unwelcome even when it’s offered in kindness. I think it’s one of those things you shouldn’t say to people because you just don’t know their circumstances, like “do you want kids” or something. It’s well-intentioned but a freaking minefield.
That’s a great experience. Yes, the line really does rely so much on context and tone.
I’ve always found “I’ll pray for you” and its variants to be awkward, not least of all because I’m a person who has only very recently come to prayer. What I say, and I got this from Sipowicz on NYPD Blue for heaven’s sake, is “I’ll keep a good thought for you.” Which is basically the same thing, but somehow not freighted with all the baggage prayer can imply. I mean it, too! And I say it while wearing short-sleeved button-down shirts.
“If Detective Sipowicz jumped off a cliff, would you do that too?”
“Oh…I wish I was Sipowicz.”
I would jump right off that cliff, still wearing my short-sleeved button-down!
I find it… not condescending, but kind of upsetting? My relationship with faith is complicated (I wrote about it here! Jewish/Catholic family, mostly agnostic) and I just… I always think of the long, long history of praying for the Jews to find Jesus and convert so as not to burn in hell. I know this is disproportionate and I know, I know it is not at all what is meant, but it’s what it reminds me of. So usually I just grit my teeth and say thank you and go about my business. Fine with people saying they are thinking of me or sending good vibes or whatever, though.
I’m one of those “strong” atheists (I am sure there is no god), and to me, there’s an underlying wish that I’ll see the error of my ways and learn all about the whatever of god when someone says they’ll pray for me, or (ugh no please) that I’m “welcome” in their place of worship.
ETA — sorry got all het up and didn’t write clearly.
I am agnostic; I’ve had some experiences that leave me suspecting there is some sort of something, blah, blah, blah, though, to be clear, if it is the God of any of the religions of Abraham and Isaac, I’m sure we are all damned, no matter what.
I’ve been prayed at as well as prayed for (which seems to cover all the sorts of praying you are mentioning) and I am often told I’m welcome in a place of worship. Being prayed at, well, I don’t find that any more offputting than the smug atheists who inform me that eventually I will figure out that there is no god/whatever and very vocally sneer at people about their imaginary sky friend or Big Santa in the Sky or whatever. Yeah, not all atheists are like that, but (as has become apparent here) not all religious people are trying to beat you over the head with the religious club. They are expressing deeply held ideas and some of them just want to share them with people, whether or not those invitations are accepted.
Both the big gun atheists and big gun religious people (especially, in the USA, the Christians) sneer at anyone who doesn’t follow their lead. Beating people over the head with the religious or non-religious club is not exclusive to either side. Some people are going to be obnoxious about it, whichever idea they support. So I try to accept the prayers (or good wishes or whatever) from those who are sincere, and shrug off the rudeness of the others–they would be rude whichever club disguised as comfort they used.
Evangelizing is pretty much never a good look, from any position. And, yes, genuine sympathy will generally come through even if phrasing is not ideal.
Eh, I guess what I’m saying is that I can’t find any way to be comfortable with people telling me they’re praying for me, because there is SUCH a fundamental mismatch between our beliefs, if that makes sense?
And of course telling me I’m “welcome” at your place of worship can’t but carry with it a connotation of “and if you come and see how nice we are, maybe you’ll change your mind.”
I guess I’ve been told I’m ‘welcome’ to come to church (mostly) or other ceremonial gathering by people who know damn well I will never join their religion, and I know that many of the people who don’t know me are genuinely offering an invitation to ‘share some fellowship’ and they don’t expect me to change my mind (though I’m sure they would be happy to have me join their congregation of religious folks).
Yeah, there are some people who are trying to hook people in (including those totally misrepresenting their gathering), but, like the praying thing, some people are just saying ‘hey come by if you want’ because that’s how inclusive their gatherings are.
I can see not being comfortable with any of it, I’m often uncomfortable, but then, depending on the day and who it is, I can be uncomfortable being asked to go get a coffee. I find humans unfathomable in many ways, even though I usually intellectually understand what’s supposed to be happening, ha!
I’m put off by “I’m praying for you” (I’ve been aggressively prayed at a lot; to me it means “I’m praying for you to see the error of your ways and come to Jesus”) but Selma’s comment below reminded me that “you’re in my prayers” doesn’t set off the knee-jerk indignant response in the same way.
(eta: I’m religious but not Christian, so it’s not the religious sentiment that bothers me, it’s the frequently-implied evangelism.)
I’m also deeply uncomfortable when someone says “I’m praying for you,” not because of a fraught personal history with religion, but because it feels incredibly intrusive, like that person is inserting their personal religious beliefs into my crisis, and forcing me to wrestle with ideas of faith instead of just sincerely offering sympathy or support.
I think this is definitely part of it for me, too, and very well stated.
I would probably not take it well if someone said they were praying for me, although it would depend on how well we know each other. But in general, it really raises my hackles.
I think it really depends on the context and the sincerity behind it.
I’m a dyed-in-the-wool, third-generation atheist, but I appreciate the sentiment if people are sincere and are just wishing me well.
I don’t live in a terribly religious part of the country, so I don’t generally hear that phrase directed at people in a snarky, you’re-going-to-hell kind of way. I only usually hear it when someone is genuinely trying to be supportive, like with family illnesses, deaths, etc. (Basically, the religious equivalent of “I’ll be thinking of you”).
I appreciate it and just say “Thank you” if people are well-meaning.
Months ago I was reading through an open thread and one lovely toastie said to another lovely toastie something along the lines of “Would it be okay if I prayed for you?” or “Would it be alright if I included your husband/sister/friend in my prayers?” (I can’t remember the exact situation).
I’d never heard the sentiment expressed as a question, and it seemed so perfect and so caring that I may have shed a tear. It caries all the emotional weight of “I’ll pray for you”, but with the added message of “Although this is meaningful to me, I realize you might not be comfortable with religion or prayer. If that’s the case, I respect that and I respect you.”
I don’t know — I have strong positive feelings toward the toasties who I know do that, and their intentions — but I’d feel really awkward answering that question. I would genuinely appreciate both the expression of sympathy, and the understanding that I might not share the beliefs. But “no” seems to reject the sympathy, and “yes” seems to embrace the belief, and saying something like “I appreciate the sympathy but prayer in itself doesn’t mean much to me” seems like an invitation to a wider discussion that I might not want right then. Though, in an internet comment, there is always the option of appreciating the thought but not answering the question. It would only really be a problem in person.
Oh, my, I have had so many unexpected and lengthy feelings about religion in this link round-up today.
Yeah, it feels like a trap sort of. I appreciate that you *asked,* but there’s still no nice way to say “no.”
It’s an odd saying, but I have said to people genuinely wanting to pray for me, but they didn’t really know what was going on, and I didn’t want to get into it: “No, please, but thank you for the thought.” I’m sure some of them did add me to their daily/nightly prayers, but no one was upset (at least not visibly).
My reaction is essentially negative as well. I’m not entirely sure why, since I’m definitely aware that most people mean it in the same way that I would mean “sending good thoughts your way,” and I had a perfectly pleasant religious upbringing.
I think part of it is because the way I was brought up is that prayer is deeply personal, it’s not really the sort of thing you tell people about, and actions speak louder than words and all that. I’m an atheist now, for what it’s worth, and so I also think part of my negative reaction is probably because to me, prayer doesn’t do anything. I don’t think there’s any god listening or interceding or whatever, so you might mean well, but I still kind of think you’re wasting your time? I don’t know.
All of this is tied up in the reasons why I am generally irked by #PrayForWhoever hashtags, even though I KNOW those are well-meaning.
Yes. I know they mean well but it makes me super uncomfortable because sometimes they mean “I am praying for you to repent for being queer” or “I am praying that you will convert to Christianity.” I just…don’t feel the need to be prayed for. And even if someone means something non-obnoxious by it, even if they mean it as a gesture of affection, I feel like they should ask for my consent instead of just announcing to me that they’ll pray for me. Kissing someone can be a gesture of affection too but that doesn’t mean you should go around snogging people if you’re not sure they actually want to be snogged.
Context definitely matters, like, if Nicole offered to pray for me I’d be totally cool with that. But most of the people who’ve wanted to pray for me have been homophobic strangers, so.
This very night, I shall cheerfully and with your permission pray that no homophobes ever again insist on praying for you to cease being queer.
This may be too late in the link roundup so maybe I’ll post it again in Friday’s open thread but I found out that Steven Strait, who is starring in the upcoming Expanse series which I am super excited about, played WARREN PEACE in Sky High. I am filled with glee.
AIGHT I’m gonna talk about aliens y’all. Sorry.
Maybe this is a super dumb (but still depressing) theory, but like… what if interstellar/FTL travel IS impossible? Like maybe no civilization can overcome this limitation of physics? so aliens can exist and thrive and advance technologically to crazy limits but … they won’t really make physical contact with other species. Maybe ever! What if we’re all just trapped on our little islands looking at each other through little periscopes, trying to figure out how to shout “HELLO!” in such a way that someone can hear us?
Of course I also subscribe to the Mass Effect universe theory of alien cultures having some sort of accord to leave “underdeveloped” planets alone until they are able to master interstellar travel themselves, lest they corrupt our natural development. I like to think there’s some big ol ugly alien sitting around tapping the sharpened points of its horrible appendages on a table, impatiently waiting for humans to get our act together so they can finally invite us out and give us the intergalactic version of hazing that every other species has had to endure.
‘Humans, prepare to bare thy buttocks and be lashed by my slime testicle! And then thou must chug 20 beers and not puke, so it is written in the galactic code.’
(Sorry you’re making some great points, but this visual is quite amusing.)
Oh, no, that was the exact visual I was hoping to impart.
Now, off to write my hard sci fi novel about a humans encountering a new spacefaring race that are really just annoying alien fratboys
I don’t have much hope that non-human men will be a whole lot better than human men. I guess I’d prefer to be pleasantly surprised.
Alastair Reynolds’s usually uses a hard no-FTL limit in his books, which is kind of refreshing (and kind of depressing.) You can get where you’re going, it’s just going to take a reeeeallly long time, probably in cryosleep, and pray you don’t end up on the wrong flight.
I’ve always wondered why no one has used this premise for a great, brainy sci-fi book, or at least a short story: Aliens are discovered and humans develop the technology to communicate with them over time but neither species has FTL travel technology. It could be such an interesting study about cultural exchange/ coming to grips with humanity’s place in the universe without the threat of physical exploitation/danger, which is pretty much the premise of all alien sci-fi ever written.
Ursula LeGuin sort of used this premise for The Left Hand of Darkness. There’s an interplanetary UN-type federation which sends a delegate to a planet without travel technology to see if they want to join the party. The folks on the planet are pretty unfazed by the whole aliens thing and are more into the delegate’s spaceship. (and the whole sex thing but that’s another discussion)
Have you read The Sparrow? Seems like it might be right up your alley re: Aliens. But, then again, I would recommend that book to literally anyone if they’d hold still long enough, I love it that much.
I’m gonna read the heck out of that!
Wasn’t that how the Vulcans (and eventually the Federation) acted in Star Trek? Once a culture figured out the warp drive then they would come and be like, “hey,” but no messing with them before that.
Whatever the heck was going on in Enterprise aside, it is pretty much the Federation’s Prime Directive (and yet the humans in the Federation are so incredibly bad about actually adhering to it!). I’d put good money on the Vulcans being the ones who came up with it in the first place, though.
(Speaking of whatever the heck was going on in Enterprise, I’m now picturing the Vulcan High Council debates 80+ years into the Vulcan-Human cooperative thingamajig where we’re treated like some horrible whatever-the-opposite-of-a-war-is quagmire, and why the hell did that research ship have to go and check in with humanity in the first place?, and it kinda makes me giggle a little.)
Didn’t First Contact imply that was what the Vulcans did? Since they showed up when James Cromwell got his ship working.
I kind of like Tanya Huff’s take on “underdeveloped” species in the Valor books. It turns out that all known species have evolved past their violent urges before developing FTL travel, so they’ve formed a confederation with lots of bickering but no actual fighting. But then the confederation is attacked, so they have to recruit “younger” species to fight for them, because they’re all psychologically incapable of doing it themselves. In return, the younger species get access to advanced technology, and also they get a few colony planets.
The books take place some time after humans and two other species were recruited, and the main character is in the resulting mixed-species space marines.
Nicole! I love hearing you write about religion! But also, this is your website and your faith and such, so thank you for sharing as much with us as you have.
The nice thing about that Carolyn Hax letter is that the Bad Advisor already answered it after the online discussion it was adapted from.
I choose to take this as a comment on the religion discussion.
Man, every time I read Marilynne Robinson I almost convert back to Christianity.
I learned about it from Danielle Steele & Judith Krantz. Don’t really recommend that either.
I’m glad to hear a bunch of people reached out to you personally about that piece, Nicole. It speaks to the safe space you’ve created here. The only thing I would have added to my comment on the thread had I recalled it is that I shared the post from here on women praying furiously in Western Art History with my rosary group and they loved it, which speaks to the good space they’ve created. That’s the thing I look for in anything Goddy–a sense of home or safe haven.
MY BEST FRIEND JUST GOT ENGAGED AND I AM SO EXCITED, YOU GUYS!!! I LOVE HER SO MUCH AND I AM SO HAPPY FOR HER!!
Also, I just made an intensedebate account so that I could post this without it going through moderation. Such is my deep and abiding love for her.
“I cannot vote in this country, but would happily do so for whatever hairball the Democrats hork up for the general election.”
Ahaha, that’s an excellent succinct stance, I think.
It encapsulates my own political views perfectly. 10/10.
Films my friends’ cool parents let them see when we were 7 that I couldn’t and it made me SO MAD and also socially ostracized:
– Dirty Dancing (the off-screen abortion? like I would have even grasped what was happening – and if I did, so?)
– The Birdcage (for Hank Azaria’s tiny shorts?)
– Hair (for the boobs?)
– Grease (okay my parents may have had a point, or probably just didn’t want to have to answer what “chicks’ll cream” meant)
It’s okay I’m totally over it.
Grease is actually one of the few things I am still sort of appalled by how often I watched it as a child. Even though a lot went over my head. Like that creepy DJ trying to drug one of the Pink Ladies? (Marty, maybe?)
Fun fact: It was after my parents took me to see Grease on Broadway when I was in elementary school that my mother ended up having to give me one of my first thorough/comprehensive discussions on sex/reproductive health. All because, in her joy at finding herself not pregnant, Rizzo says to her boyfriend, “Take me out to the drugstore!” And of course as a child I had no idea why she would say something like that and so… I learned much that night.
My catholic mother would have probably let me watch hair, because she lived through art school in the 60’s and it had bonus musical theater points. Dirty dancing was totally forbidden, though.
My dad wouldn’t let me watch Power Rangers as a kid because he said it was “too violent” (lol) but we watched The Birdcage as a family and loved it! It was solidly one of my favourite movies as a kid.
My best friend made me watch “Dirty Dancing” EVERY SINGLE WEEKEND when I came to her house, and I grew to loathe it. You really didn’t miss much, IMO. (She was a huge Patrick Swayze fan, plus I think that was one of the few VHS tapes they owned).
I remember my mother trying to explain to me why she thought it was bonkers that a friend in my class was allowed to watch Dirty Dancing when we were – 9, I think? – without saying anything disrespectful about the friend’s mother for permitting it.
My mother very rightly decided that it was absolutely fine for me to watch Dirty Dancing when I was 4 because everything but the dancing would go right over my head. And lo I did not twig to what the boring non-dance bits were about until I was a teenager watching for the first time in some years. I was appalled then but I think my mom had it right for me. Kids filter out a lot of stuff they aren’t ready for, especially when it’s all words, and I was often a slightly oblivious child.
Violent movies were another matter, but obliquely sexy stuff? Eh.
Does anyone else ever do that thing where you write a big, long, earnest post about some question you have, and then 3/4 of the way through you realize the extremely obvious answer to the question & just delete the whole thing
I just did! And then I basically got to the point at the end and was like, hmmm, yeah I think that’s been said more eloquently already. Ok, time to pack it in.
Definitely. Sometimes I set out to write the big long post solely so I can talk myself through to the conclusion.
Frequently, both here and on Facebook. Thankfully Twitter enforces rapid clamming-up.
Yes indeed! I’ve been journaling a lot lately and it’s been really helpful for just this reason.
I’m missing open thread this week because I’ll be visiting my BEST FRIEND SINCE KINDERGARTEN in MONTANA and hiking and camping and laughing at farts and I am SO EXCITED!!!
even those of you who were horrified were nice
I feel like this is a result of the basic niceness you and Mallory and Nikki always exhibit. It is so nice to have The Toast as a more-or-less snark-free refuge.
(Not that there is anything wrong with snark per se [except for the infernal sound of the word], but pop culture is so aswim with vacuous sarcasm that it is utterly relaxing to hang out in a place where “rich tapestries” is the de facto mantra.)
Can’t comment on the state of affairs in every place in the world, but I was a Mormon missionary and we had a doctor “on staff” we could call and (if we lived in the same city) visit. And there were clinics we could get referred to if we were elsewhere. There were still some risks associated with living in eastern Europe, but I felt as taken care of as anywhere. For example, I got terrible food poisoning and a 103 degree fever hat kept climbing, all while on a distant city and was able to get the medicine I needed and was okay. So, anecdotal, but very much a different story.
I just finished reading the Guardian pub piece–amazing journalism, that–and have big feels about it. I understand the housing crisis in Britain, esp in the southeast and in London itself, but I think that the need for public gathering-places, third spaces as theorists call them, is just as great. Such spaces provide civic, political, social, and psychological benefits far beyond the balance sheet. Perhaps we need to repurpose the old rallying cry of “Bread and Roses” to “We want flats, and pubs too!”
“Do not worry, The Toast is not going to become a Jesus pamphlet.” Phew, that’s a relief. I think what straight/mostly straight Christians need to understand is that the people who represent your faith in the public eye have been so misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic and racist that it’s really hard for many of us to see you discussing Christianity without also discussing these things. I mean, discussing them *first*. It’s kind of an emergency situation.
Charlotte! To my great relief, since I love Jane Eyre but have no patience for Wuthering Heights. I mean, sure, Wuthering Heights has a more gripping, dramatic beginning. But Jane Eyre builds and builds, while Wuthering Heights gets mired in all the stuff with the second generation (there, I said it).
Yesterday’s link roundup had a piece about Geoff Marcy, the big-shot astronomy professor who molested his students, and I work at his university and today the Chancellor sent out an email saying that Marcy had resigned and I am crying with relief. Sometimes faculty come to my office with questions (usually to demand why they didn’t get what they wanted), and I am honestly viscerally afraid even of the ones who are NOT known molesters; I was so, so terrified that Marcy would come to my office with a question and I would have to try to explain to him why he didn’t get his way on something WHILE sitting right in front of him at an easily gropable distance, because as support staff you can’t just refuse to serve a faculty member. And now I know that I am never, ever going to have to do that, at least not with him. I am an atheist but frankly I hope that there is a hell and that he is going there.
Yeah, that was awesome!
Sweet, best wishes for your discussion. It's great to see people learning more about what happened and building a stronger foundation for the LGBT rights movement (and so much more) by knowing and broadcasting the real history. I didn't know how involved trans* women and sex workers were in Stonewall until the pushback against this stupid movie.
Wish lots and lots of people would see that video.
I say gesundheit!
I decided one as a less experienced sitter to try the kids on Little Shop of Horrors. I still see them now, and five years on, they remind me about how much I traumatised them (it was a PG!) Might need to remind them it could have been worse.
(Or maybe my standards are off from my stepdad letting me watching 'The Fly' at 8.)