it's meme time, yay
fakeplasticsnow demanded that I talk about the following topics:
+Labels
+Originality
+Adam Lambert
+Legacy
+Motivation
And then I believe if you'd like, I'm supposed to give you five words as well, or something.
Labels
(to clarify: not record labels but People Labels, like white, black, queer, neurotic, slutty, etc. I went through your other meta posts after the crack one and I figured you'd have a lot of *feelings* on this!)
This is interesting. In some ways, I think labels are important. If you buy into Durkheim, labels are the basis of society itself, responsible for forming the first religions and helping humans to think theoretically about symbolic meaning, totems, and the like. I guess I do buy into that in a way. I think that labels are necessary and useful to organize a society, to create structure within a society, for people to understand how they fit into that structure.
Because of that very fact, though, People Labels can be positive or negative, depending on the individual and the culture the individual is living in. We talk a lot about reclaiming negative words and labels--queer, fag, cunt, slut, bitch. Reclaimation of words is really interesting because those words can be so powerful, and when I take back the word 'bitch' and fully embrace the label as a persona, I am demanding that people accept me as a bitch, and also demanding that they change their preconceived notions of what 'bitch' means. This works better with some labels than others, though. Gay men can call themselves fags and it will be a powerful statement of reclaimation, but for anyone else to call a gay man a fag--I would still find that hateful and hurtful. Who uses the label and how they use it is still important, and that's where labels can get very tricky.
But lets (let's? let us = let's?) talk about sluts for a minute. There is nothing wrong with being a slut, or being CALLED a slut, except for that the people who usually throw that label around MEAN it in a bad way. Slut implies loose morals because sluts have a lot of carefree, no-strings sex. That's bullshit, though. There was definitely a period of my life where I was pretty slutty. I slept with a lot of people, I experimented with sex, sexuality, kink... everything I could think of. I had FUN. But that doesn't mean that I somehow LOST my morals, because I didn't. I just don't share the same moral values that Slut Shamers do. My morals rely on basically never doing things I don't want to do, trying to be honest, keeping myself safe and happy and healthy, supporting human rights, and so on.
Sex and morals have nothing to do with each other in my mind, aside from consent (ie, lack of consent makes sex immoral on the perpetrator's side). Sex is sex, it's fun, we do it for a lot of reasons, and it doesn't matter what those reasons are as long as you, the individual, are good with it. 'Slut' is a word created for the sole purpose of shaming others, specifically women, about the amount or type of sex they have. Sex should never be about shame; there's nothing shameful about the act of sex, and I feel sorry for people who think there is, and who are so insecure with their own sexual natures that they feel the need to shame others for not sharing that insecurity.
I get that some people believe in God, and some people believe that premarital sex is a sin. But I have religious friends--I have MORMON friends--who would never, ever call me a slut or try to shame me for having sex, even for having one night stands. Because my friends understand that I don't share their values or their idea of what moral-immoral means, so them calling me a slut wouldn't be about ME, it would be about THEM and their need to feel superior. (Which my friends don't. They are very secure in their superiority :P)
So, fuck you, Jordin Sparks. No, not everyone wants to be slut. But I refuse to be labeled by a teenage virgin who CLEARLY has never heard of Hester Prynne. Slut Shamers all need to read Blood and Guts in High School by Kathy Acker.
Originality
Hmmm. This is interesting because I'm not really sure even what to say. I appreciate originality quite a lot, but I also recognize that original ideas are really few and far between. I don't feel like I'm particularly original; I steal ideas from other people all the time. I think my originality comes out more in execution than in the idea itself. When I was in college, I was always arguing things or looking at things in ways other people wouldn't, and I think that's carried through into my life and thinking in general.
I like when people just embrace themselves, who they are, flaws and awesomeness and all, so fully and completely that you just KNOW them as distinct individuals. I think that's true originality--the ability to unapologetically be yourself.
Adam Lambert
(particularly, like, does he ever remind you of yourself?)
In some ways yes, in some ways no. Is that a cop-out answer? Maybe!
Adam and I are alike in a lot of ways, or at least we are from what I can tell in his interviews and such. We like the same movies and music and tv shows; we find the same things meaningful. We both call bullshit on a lot of things, we both have this idea of who we'd like to become. We both finally came into our own a bit late (mid 20s) and we both are fairly confident in that we like who we are after a very long time of NOT liking who we were. We grew up in similar households--one Jewish parent, one Christian parent, both pot-smoking hippies; outrageously smart siblings; both of us were far more invested in the arts and outside activities than school. I think because of this, we have a similar outlook on life. Both of us struggled with being queer from a young age. Neither of us felt comfortable coming out to our mothers; both of our mothers told US about it.
But in some ways we are very different. Our life experiences have made us different. Adam wants to find love. He wants true blue love. I never want to fall in love again. Adam is a PERFORMER. I'm not. I love dancing, and I'm even still pretty good at it, but I was never a good performer. I could never convey feeling with my facial expressions. Showing feeling has always been an issue for me, actually, and again in that way we're very different. I tend to keep my feelings inside (not my opinions, but my personal feelings). I don't trust very easily. I like being alone. Being alone feels safe to me--Adam seems to equate being alone as being lost. He's not into politics and I am.
I think mostly it's the love thing, though. The fact that he is looking for love, wants to fall in love again--that tells me that the ending of his relationship with Brad may have been devastating, but it didn't SCARE him the way the ending of my relationship with my first love did.
Legacy
I am honestly not sure I have any feelings about this. I don't have an legacies to carry on. I hate kids and will never have any of my own, so I don't feel compelled to like... perpetuate my DNA or my family name or whatever. I guess I have a sense of legacy in so far as societally, it would be nice if we could get our shit together re: the environment and human rights so that we don't leave a legacy of discrimination, hatred, and death to future generations. But as an individual... not so much.
Motivation
Motivation is something I have a lot of issues with. It takes a heavy dose of fear or medication to get me properly motived to do shit in my life.
Ironically, when I'm writing, motivation is always the key element to any characterization. Most of my stories are about what led a person to become who they are or do what they did or make the choices they did. I think the best stories are the ones that as Why, and spend the bulk of the narrative examining and coming to some sort of conclusion.
And that's all for now. People are lurking around my desk annoyingly, so I need to do some work. Sigh.
+Labels
+Originality
+Adam Lambert
+Legacy
+Motivation
And then I believe if you'd like, I'm supposed to give you five words as well, or something.
Labels
(to clarify: not record labels but People Labels, like white, black, queer, neurotic, slutty, etc. I went through your other meta posts after the crack one and I figured you'd have a lot of *feelings* on this!)
This is interesting. In some ways, I think labels are important. If you buy into Durkheim, labels are the basis of society itself, responsible for forming the first religions and helping humans to think theoretically about symbolic meaning, totems, and the like. I guess I do buy into that in a way. I think that labels are necessary and useful to organize a society, to create structure within a society, for people to understand how they fit into that structure.
Because of that very fact, though, People Labels can be positive or negative, depending on the individual and the culture the individual is living in. We talk a lot about reclaiming negative words and labels--queer, fag, cunt, slut, bitch. Reclaimation of words is really interesting because those words can be so powerful, and when I take back the word 'bitch' and fully embrace the label as a persona, I am demanding that people accept me as a bitch, and also demanding that they change their preconceived notions of what 'bitch' means. This works better with some labels than others, though. Gay men can call themselves fags and it will be a powerful statement of reclaimation, but for anyone else to call a gay man a fag--I would still find that hateful and hurtful. Who uses the label and how they use it is still important, and that's where labels can get very tricky.
But lets (let's? let us = let's?) talk about sluts for a minute. There is nothing wrong with being a slut, or being CALLED a slut, except for that the people who usually throw that label around MEAN it in a bad way. Slut implies loose morals because sluts have a lot of carefree, no-strings sex. That's bullshit, though. There was definitely a period of my life where I was pretty slutty. I slept with a lot of people, I experimented with sex, sexuality, kink... everything I could think of. I had FUN. But that doesn't mean that I somehow LOST my morals, because I didn't. I just don't share the same moral values that Slut Shamers do. My morals rely on basically never doing things I don't want to do, trying to be honest, keeping myself safe and happy and healthy, supporting human rights, and so on.
Sex and morals have nothing to do with each other in my mind, aside from consent (ie, lack of consent makes sex immoral on the perpetrator's side). Sex is sex, it's fun, we do it for a lot of reasons, and it doesn't matter what those reasons are as long as you, the individual, are good with it. 'Slut' is a word created for the sole purpose of shaming others, specifically women, about the amount or type of sex they have. Sex should never be about shame; there's nothing shameful about the act of sex, and I feel sorry for people who think there is, and who are so insecure with their own sexual natures that they feel the need to shame others for not sharing that insecurity.
I get that some people believe in God, and some people believe that premarital sex is a sin. But I have religious friends--I have MORMON friends--who would never, ever call me a slut or try to shame me for having sex, even for having one night stands. Because my friends understand that I don't share their values or their idea of what moral-immoral means, so them calling me a slut wouldn't be about ME, it would be about THEM and their need to feel superior. (Which my friends don't. They are very secure in their superiority :P)
So, fuck you, Jordin Sparks. No, not everyone wants to be slut. But I refuse to be labeled by a teenage virgin who CLEARLY has never heard of Hester Prynne. Slut Shamers all need to read Blood and Guts in High School by Kathy Acker.
Originality
Hmmm. This is interesting because I'm not really sure even what to say. I appreciate originality quite a lot, but I also recognize that original ideas are really few and far between. I don't feel like I'm particularly original; I steal ideas from other people all the time. I think my originality comes out more in execution than in the idea itself. When I was in college, I was always arguing things or looking at things in ways other people wouldn't, and I think that's carried through into my life and thinking in general.
I like when people just embrace themselves, who they are, flaws and awesomeness and all, so fully and completely that you just KNOW them as distinct individuals. I think that's true originality--the ability to unapologetically be yourself.
Adam Lambert
(particularly, like, does he ever remind you of yourself?)
In some ways yes, in some ways no. Is that a cop-out answer? Maybe!
Adam and I are alike in a lot of ways, or at least we are from what I can tell in his interviews and such. We like the same movies and music and tv shows; we find the same things meaningful. We both call bullshit on a lot of things, we both have this idea of who we'd like to become. We both finally came into our own a bit late (mid 20s) and we both are fairly confident in that we like who we are after a very long time of NOT liking who we were. We grew up in similar households--one Jewish parent, one Christian parent, both pot-smoking hippies; outrageously smart siblings; both of us were far more invested in the arts and outside activities than school. I think because of this, we have a similar outlook on life. Both of us struggled with being queer from a young age. Neither of us felt comfortable coming out to our mothers; both of our mothers told US about it.
But in some ways we are very different. Our life experiences have made us different. Adam wants to find love. He wants true blue love. I never want to fall in love again. Adam is a PERFORMER. I'm not. I love dancing, and I'm even still pretty good at it, but I was never a good performer. I could never convey feeling with my facial expressions. Showing feeling has always been an issue for me, actually, and again in that way we're very different. I tend to keep my feelings inside (not my opinions, but my personal feelings). I don't trust very easily. I like being alone. Being alone feels safe to me--Adam seems to equate being alone as being lost. He's not into politics and I am.
I think mostly it's the love thing, though. The fact that he is looking for love, wants to fall in love again--that tells me that the ending of his relationship with Brad may have been devastating, but it didn't SCARE him the way the ending of my relationship with my first love did.
Legacy
I am honestly not sure I have any feelings about this. I don't have an legacies to carry on. I hate kids and will never have any of my own, so I don't feel compelled to like... perpetuate my DNA or my family name or whatever. I guess I have a sense of legacy in so far as societally, it would be nice if we could get our shit together re: the environment and human rights so that we don't leave a legacy of discrimination, hatred, and death to future generations. But as an individual... not so much.
Motivation
Motivation is something I have a lot of issues with. It takes a heavy dose of fear or medication to get me properly motived to do shit in my life.
Ironically, when I'm writing, motivation is always the key element to any characterization. Most of my stories are about what led a person to become who they are or do what they did or make the choices they did. I think the best stories are the ones that as Why, and spend the bulk of the narrative examining and coming to some sort of conclusion.
And that's all for now. People are lurking around my desk annoyingly, so I need to do some work. Sigh.