Good Ole Days

Ahh, the good old days. How I wish I was living within them. Honestly, I think that I was born a few generations too late. Sucks for me, I guess.

I really like the ideals which used to exist in society; the ideals which are currently being eroded by my generation. Some of these ideals used to be very formidable, in my opinion. As bigot-y as it may sound, some of the "rules" which used to exist in society gave people a place. Let me be clear, I'm not saying that everything that used occur in society was correct. The diminishing (or at least the seeming of diminishment) of things like racism and sexism is a big plus of my generation. Why do I italicize "seeming"? Because of personal reasons. See, I was never a victim of bullying to my face, but does that mean I was never bullied? No, in fact, I was very bullied for a good deal of my time in elementary school. People from my generation are simply too frightened at the thought of openly telling someone what they think of them, they use something more painful - gossip. People (especially girls) used to gossip about me all the time in elementary and probably still do. 

Steering from anecdotes, let me get to the specifics of what I want to say. The parts of society (from the 50s all the way to the 80s) which I admire were the honesty, the up-frontness, the sensitivity level, and the decency. Yes, decency. A concept which has become meaningless to teens in the West (and of Westernized nations) and completely ignored by my generation. Decency was that thing that used to prevent girls from wearing underwear -oops, I mean "short-shorts"- to school. It was the thing that gave boys a sense of chivalry and honour. Generally, it helped society function "appropriately" and made women, women and men, men. It defined the genders. 

Obviously, it could be argued that this "decency" also forced women to stay in the home, and even so far as to say that this sense of "decency" prevented women's right to vote. Sure, I'll take it. But, I'd like to say that it wasn't so much "decency" that prevented women from voting, rather a lack of acceptance. Regardless, this is no longer a problem and can be disregarded. (Honestly, after second wave feminism, women had reached the majority of their goal, the rest of the feminism movement is more or less pointless and mean. It's beginning to treat men as second class citizens. Again, I stray from the topic at hand - decency.

I have a slight problem - ambiguity. There seems to be more and more ambiguity around genders. People behave more or less the same way, or at least, their body language does. 

Today, I was sitting in my English class. We had a substitute and she didn't allow talking in class, as our usual teacher does. Eventually, she had to let us talk because we were doing some group work. Naturally, my 5-person group didn't do too much work, and instead we chatted. During the course of this chat, one of the boys in the group, Nadje, kept making fun of the other girl in my group, Dujy. He was mockingly telling her that she was beautiful. I thought it was kind of funny (actually quite so) but being another girl, I tried to suppress my laughs and stand in solidarity with Dujy. Each time Dujy would show a picture of some girl on Facebook, and the other boy, Wrenad, would comment on the girl looking nice, Nadje would ask Wrenad how he could say such a thing when the beautiful Dujy was sitting right there.
Anyways, somewhere in the midst of this mocking, Nadje made an interesting statement. He said something along the lines of there only being one person more beautiful than Dujy. He named some other girl in our class. I laughed along with everyone, simply because we knew that he meant it as a joke. Nadje then went on to describe this other girl's beauty by telling us a little story about something she did to around him a little while back.
According to him (and his mocking voice), this girl sat down on a desk in front of him whilst wearing leggings. She then went on to spread her legs into a position similar to that of a straddle. Naturally, this resulted in Nadje having a covered vagina in close proximity to his face.
Don't get me wrong, I fully understand that the girl and Nadje had to sit close together and face each other - that constitutes productive group work - the problem I see is the position in which the girl sat. This is where my point of decency comes into play, as well as my seeing of a glimmer of hope for humanity. This girl did not have enough decency to spare Nadje from giving her an involuntary gynaecological check-up.
The girl is a self-proclaimed hipster, and we know that hipsters are famous (or notorious) for their sense of ambiguity about gender. Sometimes, it can be hard to distinguish a hipster female from a hispter male. Anyways, what I am trying to "get at" here is that this girl took gender ambiguity to a whole new level. It was, from the sound of it, disgusting. She spread her legs in front of a perfect stranger. Not only was that gross, it was also extremely disregarding of her being a woman.
Let me be honest. When I am sitting at home with my sister and talking about banal things, I sit in the most comfortable position. My little sister sees and doesn't mind, but would I ever sit that way in front of my parents friends? Would I ever sit like that at school? Most likely no. Why? Because my parents have successfully raised me in the aspect of modesty. They have explained to me the differences between things which I can do in the privacy of my own home and the things that I can do in public. Even as a small girl, they would remind me to cross my legs on the bus, so as to spare onlookers my underwear. I feel that this was, of all things that they attempted to ram through my thick skull, one of the more successful. Some may argue that there shouldn't be these kinds of barriers, but please, how else are we going to be able to tell whose stomach is going to carry around a baby for 9 months?
Men sit with their legs in the "child birth" position for a good portion of their lives, but that's just it - they're male. It looks nicer and simply politer to close your legs (at least partly) as a woman. This girl, who sits with her legs in straddle position, doesn't realize the repercussions. She thinks that she looks so cool, and that the rest of the people think so too. She doesn't realize that people talk behind her back about it and really don't find it too flattering. Boys, the group of people this girl would like to one day are themselves repulsed by the very things she is doing to show off.
The sad truth is that girls will never be guys, and guys will never be girls, so it's best to not act like it. Have some respect for the gender and sex, which you have been appointed. Try and act appropriately. In the case that this becomes far too difficult, there are things to help. 

The Girl at the Pool - Part 10

I woke up on a terrible Monday to get ready for school. Luckily, I had gone to bed early and was well-rested. I put on my debating skirt, -boy, are skirts ever uncomfortable- my black pantyhose and my debate face on. I knew that talking to Mr. Forman would not be easy, so I had to be prepared. The previous night,  I had talked to my true friend and she had agreed to come with me to talk to Mr. Forman, as he had sent her an email requesting to see her as well. When I got to school, I began ranting about the issue to my girlfriend. I don't think that she was listening. She's heard me rant about so many things, so many times that I'm sure that she has a mechanism to go deaf each time I start ranting.

My classes weren't going well, all I could think of was what I would say to Mr. Forman. I was stressed,  but nonetheless, I kept a straight face. Over lunch, I saw my true friend, and she told me to not go off on a whim about the freedom to expression/speech. She told me to basically just say that I was wrong. As the gangstas would put it: "AWWWW, HELL NO!" There was no way in hell that I was going to accept guilt. I had done no wrong, and of that, I was sure.

My true friend came to my last block class to pick me up. We walked down the hall and arrived at the room. Mr. Forman was sitting there and he greeted both of us with a really nice "hey girls!" Then we got into what had happened. He asked if I understood his problem. I said no, because I honestly didn't. I couldn't believe it when he told me that his issue wasn't the emails, it wasn't my actual post, but rather that it was the comment that I had left about his "forcing". My mind flooded in disbelief. I honestly thought that he had some problems. A grown man was nit-picking over one word, telling me that he didn't force me.

I said, "okay, but then what would you call it?"

His answer was "nothing, your outburst was out of line, and apologizing was the right thing to do."

"Okay, I understand that it was out of line, but I still don't see why I shouldn't have used the word 'force', what else could I have called it?" I demanded.

"It wasn't force because it was the right thing to do, no matter what you think it was right, and I'm right. I'm done." He said, as he stammered out the door.

Wow, right? In between this issue, he had stated that he hadn't received the emails from the wretched woman until last night, and that he was upset by them. When I asked him what he intended to do, he simply responded that he wanted to forget about it. So why wasn't I allowed to forget about my outburst? Why was I FORCED to apologize for my statements? Most importantly, why was this woman getting a free pass?

Desperation: Or, Girls With No Shame

Desperation is a sad, sad thing. I have recently been exposed to the highest form of desperation and must say that I find it quite distasteful. This is the kind of desperation which shows an obvious lack of self respect, it is a desperation of the lowest kind. Let me be perfectly clear, I believe that all desperation demonstrates a lack of self confidence and respect, but some cases are more severe than others. Desperation is, in my mind, generally associated with females, as it should be. Girls are notorious for the lengths they will go to get what they want, whether it be money for the mall, a boy or a better mark from the school teacher. Girls will completely lose their dignity and integrity in order to achieve what they want. Don't get me wrong, having that ability is commendable - it is sly and cunning, but pathetic as well. Granted, there is a difference between being willing to go far to achieve a goal and being desperate, but it is such a fine line that it can almost be ignored. 

Countless philosophers have noted this particular trait of desperation in women. For example, Petar  Petrović Njegos, a former Montenegrin king, clearly expressed his interest in the subject through a relatively famous quote ,,Ćud je ženska smiješna rabota! Ne zna žena ko je kakve vjere; stotinu će promijenit vjerah da učini što joj srce žudi."In translation, "A woman's behaviour is amazing! A woman doesn't know of faith; she will convert through countless religions in order to achieve that which her heat desires."
Despite being a woman, the feminist inside me can never let me give up my honor and pride and succumb just so that I can get what I want. Regardless, I still cannot sympathize with girls who do become clearly desperate to achieve a goal. My feelings however, aren't very important. My self-appointed job is to critique the way things are right now. It's time to begin.

In high school, there are countless scenarios of desperation. I see children in my school come to teachers prior to report card day and beg them for a few extra digits of percent. I can't do that. My pride stands in the way and occasionally leads to detrimental consequences. Honestly, I don't see a logical need for shame and pride. Rationally speaking, that teacher who you beg for a few extra percents, isn't really going to ever see you again, so why worry? I can't come up with a valid response. But I still cannot do it. Okay, in relation to other things, begging a teacher for a slightly higher grade isn't a big deal. There are way more embarrassing things to do in high school. To some people, the teacher example is nothing. Relatively, the example about the teacher and the marks isn't even close to the tip of the iceberg.
Certain things in high school shape the person you become in the future. No doubt, high school is a time to find yourself and realize your flaws, so that you can correct them for the future. Recently, I saw a behaviour that needed to quickly be corrected in the majority of the female population at my high school. The root of the problem? The male population.

SOURCE: virtueus.blogspot.ca

No, no, I am not advocating the castration of all men at birth, nor am I advocating for gender divided schools - I am simply stating a truth (in my eyes).
This behaviour is one that could have devastating consequences for girls in their futures. It could lead to abuse, unhappiness, social stupidity, repulsion and worst of all, no self respect. This behaviour is a melange of different behaviours: the inability to stop, combined with the inability to recognize and accept "hints", and possibly, an inborn lack of self-respect. Where is it seen the most? In dealings with males.
So often in media, we are exposed to the starry eyed girl chasing after the laid back jock. In most shows/movies, the end result of the starry eyed girl's flirting is a boyfriend. The sad reality is that, unfortunately, girls don't always get the cool jock. Now, this in and of itself, is a learning experience and doesn't have much of a downside. The girl isn't going to be scarred forever considering hormones and lack of real emotional bondage. What can have a potential downside is the manner in which the girls choose to handle themselves afterwards.

Let's imagine a scenario here ( I am literally making up the most common and basic hypothetical situation I can):
Sally likes John. Everyday, Sally gives John hints that she likes him. She talks to him a lot and everyone can tell that she behaves a little differently around him. John does not like Sally, so instead of breaking her heart by telling her upfront, he returns her favour of dishing out hints. He ignores her advances and just generally demonstrates his lack of interest in Sally as a romantic partner.
One fine day, Sally finds out from a little birdie that John doesn't like her and that, this whole entire time, John has been able to tell that she likes him, but hasn't wanted to do anything about it. Naturally, Sally is devastated. This is where the options to finish the story of John and Sally come in:
Option A) Sally has a hurt ego and gets over John.
Option B) Sally and John are extremely angry at each other and never speak again.
Option C) Sally and John are fine, but their friendship is damaged and they seem awkward around each other.
Option D) Sally continues pursuing John, and goes on as if none of this ever happened.
So, which option is best? (I ranked them in order of what I think is best. A = the best option, D = the worst option.) Am I a psychopath for believing that pretending nothing happened and going about business as usual is wrong and abnormal - even possibly inhuman? I've been told so before, but I think not. Rationally, Sally having a hitt ego is normal. After all, she got rejected. Again rationally, moving on is normal. I mean, people who have been married for decades get divorces and move on! Obviously, moving on from a high school crush should be no big deal. Not only is "A" the most normal, and thus viable option, it also the way it should be.
Option "B" is drastic and harsh, but still very normal. Sally may have a massive ego and find it hard to believe that any person on this planet wouldn't want to be dating her. Parallelly, John may feel hurt with Sally's behavior and tune out all together. This option seems normal to me, especially if one of the involved parties is an ego maniac.
Option "C" is quite bad. Nothing is really as uncomfortable as awkwardness, especially when the subjects used to be friends. They'll never be able to speak to each other the same way again, and that will lead to the end of their relationship.
Option "D" is unthinkably bad. It forces a feeling of awkwardness out and pushes a feeling of forgetfulness through. To pretend that nothing happened is absurd. Moreover, Sally continues pursuing John despite rejection. This is one of the ultimate signs of desperation and should not happen. Not only does it demonstrate an extremely distasteful lack of confidence and self-respect on Sally's part, but an obvious lack of shame as well.
I understand the whole new wave idea of "getting rejected is totally chill, brah! I mean, being a chick  and getting rejected is even more rad, yo. Who cares if you've been rejected, there's nothing to be ashamed of, duuude (notice the accentuation of the "u" sound in "dude")". Yes, I understand it and can even see how is can rationally protrude itself into a person's mind, but I can't see how a human being can truly -in their core- accept rejection with not reaction. I would be ashamed, no doubt, especially if the "John" in question knew that I liked him. It may be the culture in which I was raised, but dignity and shame are big deals. Getting rejected is a huge blow to both of those aspects. I honestly don't know how I'd be able to pass the guy in question in the hallway without blushing if I knew that he knew. But then again, that's just me.
In reality, I don't think that the concept of "If at first you don't succeed try and try again!" applies to relationships. Have a degree of respect for the boy in question. He doesn't like you. Pestering him non-stop to attempt to alienate his affection to you is not right. Chances are that that boy isn't going to start to like you all of a sudden if you are super pushy. Relax.
Let me try and explain this a little further by explaining my views on forgetting. To uptake in option "D" is to pretend that something never happened - it is to stick your head in the sand. It is not viable, nor is it okay by any means. You cannot forget any matter, you can forgive it, but you mustn't forget it. This is true for all conflicts. No one can, nor should they brainwash themselves to forget about any event. History is a perfect example of this. We can forgive German people for the crimes against humanity, which they committed during World War II, but we cannot simply erase those events from the history books. Moreover, we cannot fear discussing those events, for without discussion, repetition is more likely and progress becomes nonexistent. I don't want either of those things, and option "D" is advocating for that.

No, no. I am not saying that that girl should live the rest of her poor life in fear of asking a male anything. She shouldn't be trembling, but their should be a certain rest period. To pretend that something never happened is psychotic. Imagine a woman losing her partner in a car accident, and then going to work the next day in the same state as always. Wouldn't you be concerned? I'm getting off topic here, as per usual.

So, I'd like this post to be a warning to teenage girls everywhere. To know how to behave is the strongest weapon a female could have. Grace, elegance and even a certain degree of stuck-upness are appealing. If a boy rejects you, either to your face or through the grapevine, then move on. There are many fish in the sea. Don't pester the poor soul of John by continuing flirting at (not with) him after the fact. Give him space! It's distasteful and odd to look at a girl continue pulling moves on a guy after the whole school knows the feelings of both parties involved. 

Do some things to take your mind off the boy: go to a party, hang out with your friends, vent to someone - do anything but continue hitting on him. If you find out that he's doing something, have enough self-respect and dignity to not invite yourself to that same thing. Hell, even if he invites you to a party don't go. He rejected you, woman! He is not the only living soul on the planet. Give yourself the opportunity to hold your head up high, you're good enough for it! Have some self esteem. Don't seem desperate and lonely. Don't urge people to give you attention, if they don't want to. 

There is one more thing: take some hints to not degrade yourself to the lowest possible point in school society. As in, if you mistakenly continue hitting on the boy and, say, ask him to help you with your homework, realize what his response means. If he is too nice to blatantly say no, and instead makes something up like "I have music practice on the other side of town", let him go. Don't say "Oh, don't' worry, I'll take the bus with you to music and you can explain the homework to me on the way there!" Not only are you creeping him out, and not letting his wretched soul breathe, you are making yourself seem like you have no life. Do you really have no life? Do you really like that boy so much that you are willing to make an utter fool of yourself in front of him? Are you really that desperate?  

The Things I've Done

A few days ago, I updated the quote on my blog to the lyrics of a song by the band Grøenland. The Things I've Done is a great song, and the quote is the first I have ever posted that is song lyrics. I was so inspired by the song that I actually decided to close read it (in my own hipster way, of course). I must say that I usually detest close readings of anything, but this song really felt right. I think that its effect might be because it reminded me of myself. Seriously though, the lyrics are very relatable in my mind and seem to fit the events going on in my life at the moment. Below, you will find my close reading with regards to myself (narcissistic, maybe?) I guess it's a small scope into my mind, and particularly, how I feel about myself. Enjoy!

I wonder 'bout the things I've done, and I question the morality of the events I've instigated. Part of me regrets them and the other part finds justification for them. I am still so young, and it doesn't seem as if there has been ample time for me to do everything that I have, nor has their been enough time for me to reflect on events and question my actions in them. I have done so many terrible things with society as my guide. For some sad reason -perhaps because my parents have only ever tried to teach me the morally fulfilling things- I've only managed to pick up and retain the atrocious parts of society's behaviour, and I've filled my heart with so much junk. The glimmering goodness, which remains in me, seems to be withering away. It causes me to fear to what degree and how the bad things will manifest themselves in the future. I fear the possible repercussions they will have on me and those around me, if they have not already caused damage. I am honestly scared to see what my heart will become. 

I wonder about the things that last, and fear the long term, especially in human relationships. I question every part of any long term commitment. I feel as if any relationship, especially the long term ones, will result in lies, secrets and other malicious things. I have experienced it, I have done it and I undermine everyone else because of it. I don't want to be hurt because I know that deceptions hurt like broken glass. When I do start a relationship, I want it to last, I want it to come to fruition. I haven't gotten into it to lie, and hurt other people. However, I don't do anything without carefully calculating the possible consequences. I don't put effort into something to not get something out of it, I don't water trees to watch them die.
Sometimes, I sink into my own little world. I put myself behind the bars inside my mind, and I observe everything and everyone. I seem to come to peace with myself in these situations and determine right from wrong. Usually, I cannot come upon a verdict about a situations quickly and it takes me time, so, to apprehend the next sign I keep waiting in line. This line is the constant debate over everything in my head. When I do come upon an answer that satisfies me, and when I have successfully determined right from wrong, I am happy. The answers can become extremely important to me. They can determine countless fundamental aspects of life, and despite that, I am eager to come upon them. I know that when I do make up my mind, I'll take good care of what I got. Due to my stubbornness, I will never accept another person's view. Moreover, I will fight for my view and do everything I can to propagate it. When this, however, is not possible, I protect my opinion and defend it, no matter what. I'll go to the point of no return -in debating terms- I'll stay awake to watch the sun come out, if that means that my opinion will reign supreme.
I won't lie, all the things that I've done because of my pride and behaviour, have sometimes got me wandering alone. Sometimes, it's just me against the world, with regards to my opinions. Even then, I can't keep quiet, and I can't accept any differentiation from my thoughts.
I am not a total psychopath. I remember regretting my stubbornness a few times. I remember looking back and realizing what a lunatic I had been to propagate an idea in such a manner. Sometimes, like now, my eyes are looking down. They are looking down, in a way, at people in contempt. Contempt for those bold and brave enough to disagree with me. On the other hand, they are looking down in regret. It's like when you put a person in their place and they know that they've erred, so they just look down. I have put myself in my own place. I yelled at myself, because I am the only person who I will listen to. I got myself off my high horse and a little more in touch with reality. Sadly, I can't tell which is better. I don't know if it's better to just blindly accept criticism and thus, see yourself as inferior, or if it's better to feel as if you're never wrong. A part of me wants to change; to find a "grey" area, but it's a very small part. I fear myself the way I am right now, but I hate the appearance of all those other good people. It's like I fear the night (or the dark side) and hate the sun. Preferably, I could just be reborn, but time doesn't permit for that to happen, nor does the environment. I want to become a different person. I want to change the way that I speak and everything else associated with my current self and turn into something ideal. I want be free. Totally free, with everything at my disposal for a fresh start. I want to just let loose. I want to play and feel the beat.
So, what have all the things that I've done, done to me in return? They've got me wandering alone, sometimes and they cause me great stress - too much for a child of my age. But I don't know how to stop it all. How do you make a 180* turn in your life, without destroying the balance and state  of everything drastically? You don't, I guess.

Privacy

Privacy is always an interesting matter to discuss. It has a number of variables which need to be taken into account in order for it to be attainable and existent. Surprisingly, today I will not be taking a legal standpoint on the matter, rather a moral one. I know, it's rare, but I have morality too. As a side note however, legally, law-abiding citizens have a right to privacy. As long as they remain law-abiding they are free to do what they wish in their own homes.

So what is my view on privacy? To what moral extent is one obligated to provide privacy for another? That is the question which I will be trying to answer today, as it has recently come up in my life. In which context has it come up? Well, I'd rather not say (actually I would, but it's complicated). I will be trying to do my best to eloquently describe the matter without giving too much away, so beware, it may sound choppy.

SOURCE: ulovesomethingmore.com

Firstly, I'd like to say that I hate being told what to do very much. This post is perhaps written a little out of spite, so take it with a grain of salt. 

As a blogger, I take it upon myself to release information which I learn. I focus and dedicate my blog to critiquing subjects which are of interest to me. I feel that, as a journalist, it is my job to release the information I learn from my sources without any regret. I owe it to my readers to provide the most upfront, direct and fact-based pieces of writing. To do this, I disregard the privacy of subjects many times. Of course, I do this to a certain extent, i.e. not blatantly naming names. Obviously, I take many liberties as well. Many times, I do not ask for consent before publishing because I do not need to. It is my right to post what I wish, as long as I don't give away who it is I am speaking of. That is why no names are named. 

A prime example of a post in which I took the liberty of posting without regard for privacy is Don't Kill the Messenger. I found out very some very delicate information on a very delicate subject. In fact, my sources disclosed information to me on a subject which was being -and still is being- investigated by the police. I gave away as much as I could without getting myself in trouble. Now, did I trample over the privacy rights of the people involved? Perhaps, but I don't feel guilty. Am I bad person for it? I think not. Firstly, no one can pin-point who the involved people are based on my post; they can only assume. Secondly, I didn't personally know any of the parties involved and I was left outside of the "loop" by them- I was simply a bystander in the matter and did what I see as my job. (Finding a source, getting information and letting my readers know.)

Now, do I blame the people involved in the Vancouver Taddler incident for not running to me to give me the "scoop" on the story. Absolutely not, I would behave the same way. Not only did I not request the information from them, but I also did not know those people. I would, quite frankly, be a little creeped out if the writer of Vancouver Taddler -whose name has still not been released, and thus  cannot be released by me- came to me to give me her story. I'm not that popular.  

This is where my problem arises. If I was good friends with the writer of Vancouver Taddler and asked her for some information on the blog, I'd expect her to give it to me as part of the obvious loyalty and trust, which is part of a healthy friendship. Since I am her friend, I would then ask her if she would be kind enough to let me publish the information on my blog. If she said no, I would not publish the information, for the simple fact that my friend comes before my blog. If she said yes, then I would go ahead and publish it. 

I'd expect that my friend has enough trust in me that she is willing to confide her secret in me. In my mind that is how friendships work. 

What would I do if my friend refused to tell me her secret? I'd even accept that. I would understand the fact that she has some trust issues. There is really only one scenario in which I wouldn't respect my friend's wish of privacy and that would be if I wasn't treated like a friend. Basically, as long as I was treated the same as rest of my peers, I would respect her wishes. Most friendships see the friends treating each other better that the rest of their peers, but I don't require that, I just require being on the same level as everybody else. However, my goodness in the situation should not go for granted - even I have standards/limits which should not be tested.
Here is what I am trying to say: if my friend never told anyone their secret - that'd be fine. If my friend on the other hand, told a mere aquanitance their secret and kept me out of the loop completely, then I would be offended. This is the point at which I feel that I have a right to posting what I see fit about that "friend". If the reason is still not clear enough, let me help:
If my friend turned me into a bystander on the matter, then that is how I'd behave. The point where I become less sacred than some other child in the school, is the breaking point. This is the point where that friend's privacy is no longer of concern to me. That is when I become a Zoe Barnes.
In my journalistic eyes, privacy is only attainable to a certain degree. A degree, which depends greatly on the way you are treated. Privacy exists with those you are close with and should be adhered to. Privacy is not a worry when you are simply reporting on a matter, which you are not directly correlated in. Privacy can only exist when the subject of your reporting keeps you informed, and you aren't forced to use confidential sources to get the information you want. When that subject decides that you are unfit to know their secrets, but someone else is, then you are perfectly entitled to say/write what you wish from your own sources.
I love blogging, but I love the people who are close to me more. When those people betray me, there is no justification. I then turn to my second love - blogging - and treat the person the way they treated me - as a stranger. These people then have no right to be upset with me, for it is their fault. They have no right to demand that I not blog about them, for it is morally wrong. Am I jealous? Perhaps, but I think that as a friend I have earned the right to know some things. That is all. 

The Legalization of Prostitution

My friend Ivan has a wonderful blog, the only difference between myself and him is that his blog is absolutely right-wing. Last night, he posted a very long post against prostitution and in support of some Swedish model. Considering that he is a good sport and that we used to be debate partners, I took it upon my left-wing self to rebut his points and give my stance on why prostitution should be legal. Be warned, he has thoroughly researched the topic, I have purely refuted his points on little to no foundation. Here is his article: http://ihsieh.blogspot.ca/2014/05/prostitution-commercialization-of.html?m=1

Here is my response, which you can also find in the form of a comment on his post:

Oh Ivan! I adore your right-wing, intolerant speeches. They are just so fun to discuss! You know I have to rebut: :) First, I don't like being called an "ill informed liberal moron". Second, it is absolutely lovely that you want to protect women; sadly, it is not your place to do so as a man. Most men are unable to understand women and your view especially, is exceedingly naïve.

SOURCE: conservativepapers.com

You must ask yourself what is wrong with having a man turn a woman "into a living, breathing, masturbation fantasy." Personally, I don't see anything wrong with the statement, if the woman consents to it. Most men have this goal, and prostitution is an ideal way for it to be achieved and satisfied. Regardless, what you fail to realize is that men and women are already doing this on a very regular basis, and would continue even if prostitution was eradicated. What I am speaking about it "one night stands". I'm sure you know what this is and I have no need to further elaborate. The only difference between one night stands and prostitution is that prostitutes get paid for sleeping with a client, whereas those who participate in one night stands do not. It is so common for both men and women to disregard the personality of a person and treats them as genitals. It happens in high school all the time. As for the statement "She acts the part of the thing he wants her to be." you fail to realize that the man also acts as what the woman wants - a client with cash.
I am rather uninformed on the prostitution models around the world, so I won't say anything about that.
Next, "Trudeau like imbecile"? Really? Trudeau was a great man, who did many great things thanks to his charisma.
Ok next, Ivan, why do you think that personal questions are not allowed in debates? Exactly for the reason of tolerance variations. A person may support legalizing marijuana, but be opposed to having their child smoke it. They support legalization because they want that option to be available to the general populace, not necessarily because they want to participate in the action themselves. I too would not like it for any of my family members to be hookers, but would not mind seeing hookers on the streets. I also, for example, would not support a family member's decision to become a trapeze artist, but would I prevent the people from doing it? No. There are a flurry of dangerous/degrading jobs out there, but there is no need to disallow them. Somebody has to do them. Think about the tremendous taboo which society puts on prostitution, if it did not exist everything would be fine. As for prostitutes not choosing their jobs, - I agree completely. Ask yourself however, if the cashier at WalMart legitimately grew up hoping to be a cashier - probably not. They too are pushed to society's classist perception of the "bottom rung of society".
Next, your argument about the scarring which occurs due to prostitution makes me happy. Do you not realize that if legalized, they would no longer be scarred - the government would regulate it. I bet that the Netherlands model could have succeeded had the police out an emphasis on regulating brothels. Prostitutes would have better living conditions, including being subject to minimum wage. Don't be sleezy, no one is "coerced" into being an escort. They know what they are getting into and have their own reasons for it. Prostitution does not harm society as a whole. To finish my rebuttal (it didn't let me post the whole thing at once)
Granted, the government has role to protect the citizens, but to a certain extent. Only recently has prostitution become taboo. It is the oldest profession of all time with reason.
Morality is part of forming law. But it is a VERY small part. Prostitution is Only morally wrong in our eyes because it is propagated that way. It shouldn't be taboo.
I beg to differ that, if enough care is put into regulation, prostitution conditions can only get better.
Lastly, that is absurd!!! You want to stop men from wanting to have casual sex? Are you kidding? You'd have to either castrate them at birth, or live in an entirely gay/asexual society. You can put pressure on men to not find prostitutes, but rest assured that then the one night stand rate would go through the roof. Humans thrive in casual sex, it's a sad reality from primitive times, but you have no right to try and change nature by eliminating chances for men to have sex. It is their right. No one should be forced into a monogamous relationship. Kk, I think I said my piece. I'm so happy you finally posted again!!! :) Keep it up!!

The Girl at the Pool - Part 9

My cursor was headed for the "pokes" button, I poked back all the people that had poked me. As soon as I was done, I was off back to the newsfeed, with every intention of logging off. Something stopped me, a comment from my old coach at my old school. She was telling me that she was dealing with the issue, and that I have no reason to write a response. She understood my anger, but cautioned me against writing the email. Though I am not sure of the exact timeline, I believe that my ex-partner private messaged me to say that I was putting my debating career in jeopardy, if I were to send this letter. I expected him to say this, so I didn't think anything of it. I thought however, that my old coach would be more supportive and she wasn't. I don't blame her, in fact, she may be right. Okay, okay, credits to my ex-partner too.

Alright, I obviously had to explain the circumstances to them fully. So I did, and I added that I was forced to apologize by Mr. Forman, and I implied that he needed to do something about it, just like my old coach had done for her school. Look, he made me apologize for something that was actually fairly justified, but was he going to do anything about this crazy woman who was making unjustified, false allegations against my ex-partner and I? I didn't know yet, it was already around midnight, and I didn't expect any sort of answer from him until morning. I went to bed that night with a clear conscience.

I woke up in the morning, and had a really good breakfast. I gobbled it down, despite the fact that I wasn't hungry. Then, I proceeded to logging onto Facebook. I was interested in seeing if Mr. Forman had responded or not. Surely enough, there it was; a scalding, scorching, rage-filled comment from him. He told me that my comment was "out of line" and that he hadn't "forced" me to apologize, but that that was the right thing to do! I was in utter shock. I mean, I know that he isn't an English teacher, but still, is he unaware of the meaning of the word "force"?

First of all, I don't believe that my post, or comment, was out of line. I simply responded to a person's comment with clarification for why I would need to write a response to this tournament director. Secondly, I was indeed forced to apologize. Maybe I'm retarded, but from what I know "forcing" is when you make someone do something against their will. I apologized to that woman because Mr. Forman requested it of me, not because I felt like it. Mr. Forman forced me to apologize. Regardless of whether or not apologizing was the right thing to do, I didn't want to do it, hence I was forced. Also in his comment, Mr. Forman told me that he would speak to me after the weekend about the remarks I made. I was excited. I loved getting in trouble when I was right!