I didn't think I would turn back to blogging again. My livejournal feels like a neglected child that I dressed in hipster clothing before it was cool, still with the connotation of following those I admired, hoping for geeky acceptance among my peers. Nevertheless, here I am, on a blog that I set out to be neglected in the first place back in 2004, just so that I could personally comment on a friend's blog (because that's what was required in the early days of blogger/blogspot.) The poor thing; if blogs were my children, I would call social services on myself.
Anyway, to get to the bulk of why I resolved to start up again: I am taking a class this semester entitled, "Media, Family, and Human Development," and we are required to blog twice a week about our media experiences and our analysis of those experiences. I almost have a feeling of guilt, that I was "compelled to" blog. Blogging is in no way a commandment, so by all accounts a feeling of guilt really doesn't make sense. Well, there is one reason. I had drafted a post over break, and debated whether I would post it. Since it was 2 a.m. and I was confined to my own thoughts for too long in an abandoned, snowy Provo, I decided not to post it. Nevertheless, knowing that I could have started again upon my own volition, knowing that I could have brought out my bag of thoughts to share with no one in particular on no particular evening but did not, upset me slightly. Apparently I'm more of a closet hipster than I ever thought possible.
In thinking about popular opinion, peer acceptance, and the desirability to be cool before cool, cool, or not cool for the sake of being unique, I thought about class today. In Preparation for Marriage (SFL 223, not the religion course), my teacher stated something interesting today. He said that there are two types of people at BYU. Upon hearing the beginnings of a marriage discussion, there are those who smile (perhaps giggle, and take out paper and pen for notes), and there are those that are "eye-rollers" (perhaps accompanied by scoffs and mocking.) He asked us to evaluate ourselves on which we were, and, if we were "eye-rollers," to think about why we allowed ourselves to be enrolled in the class. I must admit, I've been on both sides of the fence. I probably consider myself more of a closet-smiler, fearing that if I actually admitted that I liked marriage talks, I would be admitting also that I actually want to be a stay-at-home mom and think that's the best and most important job in the world. You would think that BYU students would commonly hold that opinion, but we are no strangers from feeling like we can't want to be that anymore. We have to want to be defined as something else first, and then a mother second, because it's just not cool. It seems like it is stereotypical, and you are less-desired in dating if that is your ultimate priority. Sure, we all have different interests, but no matter how noble they are, is it so bad that that's not our first priority? Is it so bad to admit being a part of the stereotypical mainstream here? I want to work with non-profit organizations, hospitals, or the military in helping families. That is a worthy goal, but I would sacrifice not being in that profession for a great deal of time (years) if I had my own future family, no matter when I became a wife and a mother.
Over the weekend I saw A Walk to Remember and How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. Thinking back on those movies, no matter how much of a good or bad girl the female lead is, a common theme to them and many chick flick movies is that the girl has to be obstinately against wanting to be in a relationship and reject the guy in some way. She has to be abrasive. The guy has to act like a hot-shot jerk. They have to both mislead or lie. They have to fight, cry, and realize they had made horrible mistakes before they can have their happily ever after. Does Hollywood really believe this process has to happen for successful relationships to happen? The characters had different personality traits, but the same process happened. Perhaps regular relationships would be considered boring from a Hollywood standpoint, but as someone that watched too much TV growing up, could others like me be slightly ingrained with the notion that we have to act in opposition to what we want because it is too mainstream, not cool, or not exciting enough?
No comments:
Post a Comment