I wish I wish I wish I could remember where I heard the advice “do not compliment the girls on their height, their hair, etc., because that basically shows them you are only interested in their physical appearance…”
But it. is. so. true.
Overly-showering someone with compliments turns into a two-edged sword, particularly in light of my previous post called “Addicted to Lipo”. As this current article states:
“Teaching girls that their appearance is the first thing you notice tells them that looks are more important than anything. It sets them up for dieting at age 5 and foundation at age 11 and boob jobs at 17 and Botox at 23. As our cultural imperative for girls to be hot 24/7 has become the new normal, American women have become increasingly unhappy. “
Who wants that!?
I don’t think ignoring their looks is the answer, but I do think wording is particularly important. We were all children at one point, I am sure that comment / compliment / remark from Ms. Whoever or Mr. Soandso that you overheard (or were directly told!) sticks out in your mind to this day. Kids remember things. They have a lot less cluttering up their brain than we do and arguably, it’s what they remember from their younger years that really begin to define how they think of themselves.
I’d be interested to hear others’ thoughts on this.
“We learn that the Holy See’s spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi, SJ, commented on recent SSPX priesthood ordinations, I assume both at Winona, MN, and Econe, Switzerland. Lombardi said that the SSPX doesn’t have canonical status in the Church and that their ministers don’t legitimately exercise ministry in the Church. The press release says that Fr. Lombardi was reaffirming Benedict XVI’s letter of 10 March 2009.”
Just thought this was worth re-posting.
“Wu—herself the mother of a seven-month-old—was walking by when she noticed the baby hanging out the window. She ran across the street and caught the falling baby, breaking her arm in the process.”
That is one of those stories that only comes around once in a long while. So glad that the baby and the one who caught her are safe!
“So here is a related question for your blog: Why are the prices of modern weddings extravagant, as divorce and cohabitation also become so much more common? Why do the externals of marriage become more elaborate as its true meaning disappears?”
A good friend of mine posed this question and I’d like to mull on it now.
Why ARE the prices of modern weddings so extravagant? Especially in light of the increase of divorce and cohabitation? And my favorite part of the question, “Why do the externals of marriage become more elaborate as its true meaning disappears?” That really is a good question, segway-ing into my somewhat-un-researched take on it.
I think this question can be broken down into two parts; the increase of the price of the modern wedding versus the increase of divorce and cohabitation.
A quick google search prompts this estimate from www.costofwedding.com:
“On average, US couples spend $24,066 for their wedding. However, the majority of couples spend between $18,050 and $30,083. This does not include cost for a honeymoon or engagement ring. “
That’s a down payment on a house. A very nice house.
A second quick google search prompts this estimate on the divorce rate: still hovering around 50%. It fluctuates above and below, but always around 50%.
An insightful quote from Jim, a character on the NBC hit-TV show “The Office”:
“Fifty percent of marriages end in divorce, so… it was her parents or my parents…”
And one more quick google search on Cohabitation:
“Among women aged 18-19, cohabitation was more common than marriage as a union form, with 11% of these women cohabitating and 5% married. For women aged 25-44, marriage was the dominant union type, with 62% currently married and 8% currently cohabitating…. Among men aged 25-44, 59% were currently married while only 10% were currently cohabitating.”(1)
Those are high numbers.
And what do they mean?
A large part of me wants to look at this and interpret the increasing exhorbitance in wedding spending as a facade people want to believe in. As a way for the wedding’s total dollar amount to measure up to a mathematical formula which means “Well, we spent XXX on the wedding, which means we are going to stay together for at least XX years …”
Then again, there is the idea that people truly want to believe that they are only going to get married once, so they might as well “do it right”. The best and the brightest for their one and only wedding day. I feel as if this self-selected group is not as large as they think they are … I would venture a guess that of most people getting married, most do not PLAN on getting divorced, but rather think they are of the small percentage that will remain married for what is truly “’til death do us part”. I fear however that most couples worry more about the wedding itself rather than about preparing for the marriage that is to come …. (digression. Sorry.)
And yet again, there is the thought process of forced attention: everyone is going to what may now best be termed as an “event” for YOU, and to celebrate YOU, and to look at YOU, and you want to prove to them that you are ______ (fill in the blank.) Wealthy, prosperous, healthy, skinny, extravagant, happy, etc., etc., etc. In that case I’d argue that the focus of the wedding is extremely lost ….. And yet I feel this option somehow fits best.
The value of marriage is constantly decreasing. (I speak societally, not individiually; I trust there are many individuals who value the sanctity of marriage as one-man-one-woman-til-death-do-we-part, but that is not the popular opinion these days). The prevalent idea is that we get married “for now”. We get married when we find someone we think we are in love with, not fully understanding what love truly is or what personal sacrifices we will be called to make that come with the territory, and we do this all with the knowledge that in 5-7 years if it doesn’t work out, we are free to move on and find the next husband, or the next wife. A new person for a new phase of life. A new person like a new haircut. That USA Network TV show “The Starter Wife” shocked me in a way it shouldn’t have: I didn’t realize people actually thought like that.
As this value of marriage decreases, I find it interesting that as my friend pointed out, the cost of marrying is itself skyrocketing to an unprecedented high. As I stated before, this really could indicate any number of things …. but I most strongly hold that it indicates a hole. A void. That somewhere in the lives of the engaged couple (or their parents!), there is some void in need of filling in the most American way possible; Retail Therapy. When in doubt, buy it. When depressed, buy it. When you can’t afford it, buy it. What better way to show how healthy you are!
Let’s get it all!
And this is where the rubber meets the road. What does that mean, for us? What does that mean for the small fraction of Americans who believe that marriage is for keeps, that it’s for all the marbles, that a man and a woman are deciding to love each other until death, real death, meaning that they will continue to love with actions and words through sickness and in health, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, UNTIL DEATH DO WE PART?
Keep living it. That’s what it means. Just keep living your values, hold fast to your beliefs, keep setting an example, find marriages worthy of imitating and imitate them. So many of us come from broken homes and broken marriages and we are products of that selfish desire for personal gratification …. but when will that cycle end? When we take control of ourselves and come to understand what love truly is, and begin to live it ourselves on a daily basis, regardless of whether we are in a relationship or not. It doesn’t take a spouse to show someone you love them.
Changing anything in this world begins with us.
This was an incredibly interesting article. I wish I had a better word than ‘interesting’. It was eye-opening, rather, that the female cultural shift in America has reached this point. This poor woman (and her mother, we find out) are both addicted to getting Liposuction done.
What a terrifying addiction.
What a belittling addiction.
“I would be perfect, if it wasn’t for this pinch of fat here on my thighs..”
Here is the final paragraph, if you don’t have time to read the whole article (though I recommend it to all women.) The final line is what struck me most, both as hopeful and as saddening:
“I make another appointment with Katz. He pinches my legs and says, “Nope. Nothing I can do about this. The fat is under the muscle. The only way to get rid of it is with cardio.” For a second, I don’t understand. What does he mean, “No”? But his refusal—the first I’ve heard over the course of four operations in a dozen years—gives me pause. The surgeries on my waistline solved a problem that had no other clear solution, but it’s startling to realize how accustomed I’ve become to throwing money and a cannula at my every body issue (an attitude I may have inherited from my mother, who, despite discouraging my own revisions, has a surgery count nearing the double digits). Now, after a few weeks of daily visits to the gym, my developing muscles remind me that change can be achieved by myself, all on my own—on this particular problem area, at least.”
What is the future of the health of America, and it’s women?