So Beautiful…

Once again, music gives me reason for pause. I was listening to Spotify and a song that I’ve always liked came one and I immediately recalled when I first heard it and the chuckle it gave me as the lyrics were quite interesting. Lil Lady was just a tyke at the time, but I remember her smiling; moreso at the melody than the lyrics in their entirety; however, I remember her saying, “you’re so beautiful, but oh so boring…” which are a part of the lyrics.

As I listened to it again today, I thought about the weight of truth the song holds. We’re conditioned to believe that beauty makes one interesting and/or attractive, but truth be told, there are so many attractive people that are just as bland and boring as a sterile white room.

I remember a boy I went to high school with who was rather attractive, athletically built, and well-dressed, but he was not the brightest star in the sky. I hadn’t coined the phrase then that I do know, but he rates as a “Himbo”; the male version of a Bimbo. In my lifes travels, I’ve come across quite a few men who fit into this category and it reconfirms why I established the “10 Minute Rule”. What is that you might ask, well, my lovies, I’m here to tell you.

The “10 Minute Rule” is me to finding a man attractive, size him up, and then he’s got 10 minutes to get and sustain my interest. Fortunately, I’m no longer single, but back in the day and actually, it still holds true just for social interaction that the rule applies. I have a very short attention span with men because all too often their egos confuse them into thinking they’re far more interesting than they really are or some woman allowed him to believe his game could and would work with ALL women. In addition, I want a man to see me as more than just a “pretty face”, so his conversation cannot revolve around my looks or body; especially because I KNOW I’m so much more than that anyway.

As the parent of a rather beautiful chlid, I instilled in her that she is more than the sum of her parts and she’s more than a pretty face. I’ve always taught her that looks may get her in the door, but her brains will keep her there. I’ve further taught her that she’s better off being pretty smart, than pretty dumb; fortnately she took heed and has excelled in life for the combination of both, but she gives more time and attention to being smart.

It’s my hope that we can put more emphasis on things that actually mean something and stop settling for the superficial and topical. I know it’s not going to be an easy task with all the boolshyte messages and images we see and hear in the media, but I can and will remain hopeful.

Here’s the song So Beautiful
I was listening to this conversation
Noticing my daydream stimulated me more
I was crumbling with anticipation
You’d better send me home before I tumble down to the floor

You’re so beautiful but oh so boring
I’m wondering what am I doing here
So beautiful but oh so boring, I’m wondering
If anyone out there really cares
About the curlers in your hair
My little golden baby, where have all your birds flown now?

Something’s glistening in my imagination
Motorvatin’ something close to breaking the law
Wait a mo’ before you take me down to the station
I’ve never known a one who’d make me suicidal before

She was so beautiful but oh so boring
I’m wondering what was I doing there
So beautiful but oh so boring, I’m wondering
If anyone out there really cares
About the colour of your hair
My little golden baby, where have all your birds flown now?

That is all!

Real and funny conversation with co-worker

The following is an Instant Message conversation I had with a co-worker post having overheard some of his lunch conversation regarding the comment Rush Limbaugh made.

ME: Hi! So, am I a slut?

CW: nice way to start off the morning…first of all, I think women need to take back the word so that it isn’t so negative. Male sluts are heroes. 2) a slut is a sexually promiscuous woman; sleeping around. From what I know of you, that is not you.

ME: No, I am certainly not that. In fact, I was teasing you as I overheard some of your conversation during lunch yesterday and that’s what prompted the message. Sadly, men fail to realize that sex is typically a hetrosexual act that they too participate in, so if they’re sleeping around with a woman who’s sleeping around, they’re equally promiscuous; sluts, and should be equally tagged as such. However, you and I know that there is no true equality and women will always be greater of the two evils. I am sexually liberated in thought and limited practice and feel that women should be and allowed to be free of such negative labeling, but again, this is a male dominated and driven society, which prides itself on demeaning anyone who does not live in conformance to what they deem is appropriate, even though they make themselves hypocrites in the process. If someone wants to deem me a slut, whore, or whatever for my liberal views on sex and the practice thereof, is fine because people will say what they want regardless of what they know for fact or conjecture. Sex within the confines of a relationship is no better or worse than sex outside of one; save for the labeling. But if one has had several relationships over the course of their lives, that tends to equate to sex with each partner, so could that not also deem one a slut or promiscuous? The whole thing should be something that has no merit to politicians. Contraception is necessary for both pregnancy protection and health maintenance. If they’re going to deem contraception immoral for lack of better word and an unnecessary coverage through insurance, then Cialis and it’s counterparts; should likewise not be covered. ED does not prevent a man from urinating; it prevents adequate sexual performance and sex is NOT a health condition. As you can tell, this discussion can go on for days and become rather convoluted.

CW: I was wondering what prompted the question. You were eavesdropping. I like that makes me wonder who else eavesdrops on our lunch conversations

ME: You were louder than you might have thought you were talking

CW: I think if they have a problem with it, they should just write in the insurance contract that they do cover contraception, but not for sluts. Of course, using the conservative definition of ‘an unmarried, sexually active woman.’

ME: riiiight! that’s gonna work

CW: c’mon. if you want to discriminate, then just spell out your discrimination

ME: so that’s tantamount to saying married woman can get contraceptives, but their engaged or in a relationship counterparts can’t.

CW: isn’t that what Georgetown is saying?

ME: semantics will always be used or at least considered, but it’s all bullsh*t

CW: actually, Georgetown, being Catholic, may not want to cover contraceptives at all

ME: well, men on boy sex doesn’t require contraceptives anyway

CW: pills are also much safer than hangers

ME: they are, but STDs can still occur. Sadly, many don’t realize that some are passed orally

CW: true. I agree with you on these principles, but I don’t think the Gubment should be telling insurance companies what they must and must not cover. If you don’t like the insurance, don’t buy it
ME: LOL @ gubment. And you’re right; they should not, but they line the pockets of some of the gubment folk, so they’ll tow the line with them. Not buying the insurance isn’t that easy because we all need coverage and tend to have to opt for the health plan the company we work for provides.

End of conversation. 

My co-worker and I often engage in social discuss where we bounce thoughts and ideas off each other and it’s interesting to have captured this one in writing.  So, what are YOUR thoughts?

That is all!