boingy-boingy-boingy-boingy...
I'm really bored right now. I want somebody to talk to me.
Now!
I have some thoughts going through my head. I've just noticed that there are more people in my age bracket using flowery language that I before this cared to realize. I tried doing the uber-Goth thing for a little while, and I looked and felt stupid. I have the voice of a Motorhead fan and the build of a Coop-girl. Sure, I can fake an accent, but I do a more convincing Cockney (think: Eliza Doolittle) or Scouse (think: Lister from Red Dwarf) accent than I do one of the more "upper crust" strains. I can do a French accent with some ease, but I'm told my French-proletarian is more convincing than the more preferable upper-class Parisian.
I'm just not designed to sound upper-class and flowery.
I'm not exactly upset by this. I'm more amused than I am upset. What amuses me most are the people who want to pull off a more punk-like image and fail miserably because they sound too upper-crust and when they attempt to sound more working-class, they sound seriously idiotic.
It's weird... I've almost always sounded very working-class and my manner of speech and mannerisms have fit that bill as well, but I've also been a sucker for the "classic English gentleman"-type of Goth boys (and just for the record, dating two or three girls at once does not make one a gentleman unless he's married to one and she pretends not to know about his little "side-projects" [j/k]).
Maybe my brother-in-law did this to me. At certain points in my life, I saw him as almost a father-figure. He was most certainly not a "gentleman" in many areas, but he had one thing that I associate with that archetype: he was "prissy" to the point that many people assumed him to be gay. Chan taught me the proper way to eat oysters and how to shuck escargot, fully understanding that I was more the type to sit with one leg on the coffee-table picking the fried-egg bits out of a carton of pork fried rice and watching Are You Being Served?. He was also the type to do that on occasion, but he said that he was enthralled to finally meet a girl (this one being my sister, Nik-Marie) who didn't try to impressing him by pretending to know what to do when there are more forks on the table than fingers on her left hand, but instead unintentionally amused him by saying "What the hell is this tiny bowl of salt for? And what's this little bowl filled with water for? Why is the waiter looking at me like that; because I'm wearing a Twisted Sister t-shirt?"
I like guys like that. Not the kind who would expect me to be completely stupid at an upper-class restaurant, but the kind who would be amused when I knew what to do and as equally amused when I would admit to not knowing what to do.
I'm not just impressed by bi- or polylingualism, I'm impressed when he knows what dialect he's speaking when he slips into French in order to impress the one he sets out to impress.
Furthermore, I'm still craving bacon...
Not to say that I can't stand guys that are about as "working class" as I am. I appreciate them very much. They're a sigh of relief in a world that seems too pretentious for it's own good. These are the guys that I usually impress by either out-drinking them or out-perving them.
Some would argue that these are my kind of guys. I admit, I can be a bit of a tomboy, but tomboys are often friends with the "classic" boys and have a secret crush on either the very intellectual little boy, or one of the class-room Barbie doll addicts.
I feel that dating one's "social twin" often leads to failure. It's very emotionally immature to want to spend the rest of your life with somebody who likes the same music and movies as you; one who dresses similarly to you; one you can't necessarily grow with, intellectually, and learn from because they know what you know.
Yes, similar interests are often recommended to have some common ground to start building the relationship off of, but personalities shouldn't be "identical". This is how we make sense of the willowy damsel seeking a big handsome knight. This is how we make sense of a well-fed Prince Charming chasing after a presumably muscular Cinderella (c'mon, do you really think hard labor all over her step-mother's estate would leave her skinny and without well-built biceps?). They have some common ground, but you can tell by looking at them that each party obviously has led a different life and has a personality that developed in a different manner.
I'm not saying that couples have to be 100% opposites, but it's quite immature when both halves are 100% alike, in addition to being quite boring.
Two narcissists could never make a good couple because they each want what the other one does. The same with two "woe-is-me" stereotypical "mopey Goths". I've noticed that quite often the most lasting couples often seem the most mis-matched to outsiders.
Goddamn, I can keep going like there's no tomorrow...
Now!
I have some thoughts going through my head. I've just noticed that there are more people in my age bracket using flowery language that I before this cared to realize. I tried doing the uber-Goth thing for a little while, and I looked and felt stupid. I have the voice of a Motorhead fan and the build of a Coop-girl. Sure, I can fake an accent, but I do a more convincing Cockney (think: Eliza Doolittle) or Scouse (think: Lister from Red Dwarf) accent than I do one of the more "upper crust" strains. I can do a French accent with some ease, but I'm told my French-proletarian is more convincing than the more preferable upper-class Parisian.
I'm just not designed to sound upper-class and flowery.
I'm not exactly upset by this. I'm more amused than I am upset. What amuses me most are the people who want to pull off a more punk-like image and fail miserably because they sound too upper-crust and when they attempt to sound more working-class, they sound seriously idiotic.
It's weird... I've almost always sounded very working-class and my manner of speech and mannerisms have fit that bill as well, but I've also been a sucker for the "classic English gentleman"-type of Goth boys (and just for the record, dating two or three girls at once does not make one a gentleman unless he's married to one and she pretends not to know about his little "side-projects" [j/k]).
Maybe my brother-in-law did this to me. At certain points in my life, I saw him as almost a father-figure. He was most certainly not a "gentleman" in many areas, but he had one thing that I associate with that archetype: he was "prissy" to the point that many people assumed him to be gay. Chan taught me the proper way to eat oysters and how to shuck escargot, fully understanding that I was more the type to sit with one leg on the coffee-table picking the fried-egg bits out of a carton of pork fried rice and watching Are You Being Served?. He was also the type to do that on occasion, but he said that he was enthralled to finally meet a girl (this one being my sister, Nik-Marie) who didn't try to impressing him by pretending to know what to do when there are more forks on the table than fingers on her left hand, but instead unintentionally amused him by saying "What the hell is this tiny bowl of salt for? And what's this little bowl filled with water for? Why is the waiter looking at me like that; because I'm wearing a Twisted Sister t-shirt?"
I like guys like that. Not the kind who would expect me to be completely stupid at an upper-class restaurant, but the kind who would be amused when I knew what to do and as equally amused when I would admit to not knowing what to do.
I'm not just impressed by bi- or polylingualism, I'm impressed when he knows what dialect he's speaking when he slips into French in order to impress the one he sets out to impress.
Furthermore, I'm still craving bacon...
Not to say that I can't stand guys that are about as "working class" as I am. I appreciate them very much. They're a sigh of relief in a world that seems too pretentious for it's own good. These are the guys that I usually impress by either out-drinking them or out-perving them.
Some would argue that these are my kind of guys. I admit, I can be a bit of a tomboy, but tomboys are often friends with the "classic" boys and have a secret crush on either the very intellectual little boy, or one of the class-room Barbie doll addicts.
I feel that dating one's "social twin" often leads to failure. It's very emotionally immature to want to spend the rest of your life with somebody who likes the same music and movies as you; one who dresses similarly to you; one you can't necessarily grow with, intellectually, and learn from because they know what you know.
Yes, similar interests are often recommended to have some common ground to start building the relationship off of, but personalities shouldn't be "identical". This is how we make sense of the willowy damsel seeking a big handsome knight. This is how we make sense of a well-fed Prince Charming chasing after a presumably muscular Cinderella (c'mon, do you really think hard labor all over her step-mother's estate would leave her skinny and without well-built biceps?). They have some common ground, but you can tell by looking at them that each party obviously has led a different life and has a personality that developed in a different manner.
I'm not saying that couples have to be 100% opposites, but it's quite immature when both halves are 100% alike, in addition to being quite boring.
Two narcissists could never make a good couple because they each want what the other one does. The same with two "woe-is-me" stereotypical "mopey Goths". I've noticed that quite often the most lasting couples often seem the most mis-matched to outsiders.
Goddamn, I can keep going like there's no tomorrow...