Back from the dead... with conviction?

So here I am, back from the dead, blogging once more. It has been almost

2 years since I posted anything new on this blog. I added a few articles below that I wrote a few months ago and posted on Facebook, but other than that, this is the first conscious injection. A lot has changed in my life since those early posts... I'm living in Vancouver now, free and strange and new and more independent than I've ever been. I have endured a lot of mental and emotional strain over the past 10 months in particular, and am feeling faster and better and stronger than ever, and grateful for the hard lessons I've learned.

But I can't deny that life is still a struggle sometimes... I don't know if it's because of my age and the fact that I am trying to figure out so many aspects of my life all at once, but it seems that so much is changing so frequently, in the world at large and in my own world, that I am definitely noticing a lack of stability. Total stability can be nice and comfortable, but not always the best garden to grow in. I have learned to enjoy the change sometimes. It signals something new and possibly better coming down the line, new discoveries about myself and the world and even other people.

I have this feeling... of being suspended in mid-air, as if floating in the middle of a giant wire sphere of interconnecting rings, watching this universe spin wildly around me, each ring representing an aspect of my life, past, present and future. All the while I am sort of disconnected from these events, yet I am feeling acutely the firing of every synapse. Any concept or question of "truth" is entirely intangible, beyond my grasp and frustrating, as is the question "Is this the right way to go?"

So I sit at a crossroads. I care passionately about a lot of things, but in the end, I have ONE major passion in life and TWO methods of pursuing that passion that would truly make me happy, and I am struggling to figure out which direction to head in. At the same time, I keep hoping that as the days pass, things will fall into place, more information will be revealed to me and I will be given a sign or have an intuitive feeling as to which direction to go.

My natural inclination towards being a deeply compassionate humanitarian and speaking out against social injustice has always been my true passion in life. I have pursued this passion through different avenues, but at this point in my life, I know that very soon I will want to buckle down and set my sights on something bigger, something I can put my whole heart and soul in to, something that will affect other people's lives and the world at large in a positive way.

So at the very least, I can define what my passion in life is, which is a thing some people struggle their whole lives to do, and for that tiny but significant gift I am very grateful. But now I am stuck at this point of decision. I know that when I pour my energy into something, I can be wildly successful. When I set my mind to something, I push through until the end and I take major risks to get there. I have the energy and determination to make it happen, but the only frustration is that I can't quite decide what to put that energy into...

On the one hand... I want to read, write and educate people about issues that are important to the survival and well-being of our species and the entire planet as a whole. I want to be involved in methods of affecting real change on a social and political level on a global scale. I want to work in the field and literally get my hands dirty in the effort to support those who are suffering. Following this path, I could go to UBC to study International Relations, which I would love to do and will only take me 2 years since I already have a bachelor's, and then I would complete a Masters in Toronto in about a year. Once I had my Masters, I could then work for the UN or pretty much any government organization or NGO that my little heart desired, with the right ambition and dedication. Even better, I could do something independently and start my own little world of change, growing upward from there. I could get into journalism, write books, work from the inside out to affect real change on a policy level. All of these things would inspire me and make me happy...

Then on the other hand... the second love of mine is filmmaking, specifically documentaries. At this point in the game, I have a BFA in film production and a nugget of experience under my belt, but so much indecision as to how, where and when to pursue a career in documentary filmmaking, and more importantly, if that's really what I want to do, if that will make me the most happy. I mean, I am currently working in television and am gaining more experience and meeting many people in the film and TV industry, and given time I could pursue this passion with everything I have and be successful in my efforts. I could have the freedom to be creative with my thoughts and innovative in my approach to the genre, and at the same time educate people and bring awareness to important issues, through a medium that reaches wide audiences from many different backgrounds, another possible 'dream come true' for me.

I suppose it comes down the fact that right now I just can't seem to decide what I want to pour my energy into. I am admittedly fearful of making the "wrong" decision, as if this decision is the only one I'll ever be able to make in my life and that once I decide, I will be past the point of no return. It seems silly, but that fear lingers, because either one of these methods of pursuing my passion are going to take a lot of my time and energy, and I worry that I will pick the wrong one and pour years of blood, sweat, tears and money into it and then wish I hadn't made that decision, and even worse, have to start all over again. Is that crazy?? I mean, I could change my mind in 5 years and want something entirely different, I do have that option, but I don't want that to happen. I guess that's just a pretty accurate reflection of who I am; I just want a clean cut answer.

We talk so much about the "future" and how we want things to be "then" or what we have to change in the present to make our ideals of the future a tangible reality. But in order to reach the future, we have to support those in the present, in a different way then we are doing now; our attitudes need adjusting. I worry that in our obssession with global warming, ecological disaster and alternative energy, all in an effort to protect our future and the future of the earth, we may be forgetting about the people who are suffering right now. I recently attended a lecture given by Stephen Lewis, about Canada's foreign aid policy and it's affect on children. He spoke of Canadian contribution and how, out of every country in the G8, our contribution to foreign aid has actually declined instead of increased, as it was supposed to. He described a lot of horrible things he had seen and experienced, and it moved me to tears right there in the lecture hall, but more than anything it renewed my dedication to get deeply involved in the careful and committed healing of people and this planet.

Now I just have to figure out which toolbox to work from.

One thing is for sure. Our world is changing so fast it's hard to keep up to the tangible reality of it all, let alone the enormous subliminal expectations that come along with everything we are exposed to on a daily basis. We are living in a time unlike anything recorded in history, a time in which ideologies, information and media are produced and passed around at lightning speed, and our lives are mostly a focus on doing rather than being. (But more on that later.)

I guess every girl just needs to find her own way, and make sure that she leaves a trail of bread crumbs, or better yet pebbles, so she can navigate her way home when she gets lost.

Change is upon us (originally written April 25, 2008)

Do you ever have those periods of time when so many related issues pop up over the course of a day or two, somewhat out of the blue, that it seems like they must be connected somehow, strung together by a thin, silvery metaphysical thread? They carry you along in a way, they bring you mentally to a place you need to be, they show you something you need to see at that exact moment in time, as clearly as possible. The last 24 hours of my life have been like that, and it has caused me to reach a point of deep revelation that to some degree, I was silently aware of all along, and admittedly a bit terrified of.

It all began yesterday morning.

Well, that’s not entirely true. It had been popping up in a few tiny moments over the last week or so, though at the time I didn’t quite make the connection. During the past 2 weeks when I had stepped out to grab lunch a couple of times, I had gone to this deli in Gastown called The Social. (They make these amazing sandwiches on these huge, round discs of fresh baked bread, and they’re incredible.) There was a note on the chalkboard menu the last few times I’d been there, warning customers that the price of flour had shot up so high, the price of the sandwiches was going to go up soon to compensate for this. I noticed it and pondered why for a few moments, but mentally didn’t make a connection at the time to anything else.

So even though I noticed this issue with rising food costs and had raised an eyebrow to it, the real vortex that sucked me into the thought process that is now churning out this message began yesterday.

The receptionist at the studio where I work, a good friend of mine, was poking around on the internet, reading up on the latest global news (as she usually does), and she found this article on CBC that stated World Vision was cutting aid for 1.5 million people, because of the rising cost of food.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/04/23/worldvision-cut.html?ref=rss

Essentially World Vision will be forced to cut 1.5 million people from the 7.5 million it fed last year, a third of them children, because food has become so expensive. Why has it become so expensive? Because there’s a huge shortage of it, specifically food staples, like rice and wheat. Why is there a shortage, you ask? Because humans are selfish, narcissistic consumers. *ahem* But in other (nicer) words, “The rising cost of oil and fertilizer, more fields being used to produce corn for ethanol, drought in Australia and changing food consumption patterns have all contributed to the current crisis” [CBC.ca]. Rice production has declined because of low yield crops in Thailand, the world’s largest rice exporter, which in itself is a result of weather changes (read: global warming) and the long predicted backlash of "the U.S sponsored 'Green Revolution' in the 1960s and 70s that promoted the mono-culture craze. Cash crops like rice were grown with massive amounts of pesticides, fertilizers and water to support seeds developed for high yields while ignoring their nutritional value and their resistance to insects and blight. Agro-chemistry farming degrades the soil leading eventually to crop failure. That’s what has happened in Thailand. Insects keep developing resistance to pesticides." [Mike Carr]

"The hungry are resourceful, they'll do what they have to, but it's going to take human life, there's no question about that," World Vision Canada president Dave Toycen told CBC News on Wednesday. There’s no question? Really? So what we have here is a guaranteed, unnecessary loss of life, which in my view (or in a perfect world) should only ever be expected to happen in a situation like open war between countries.

It was terrible and alarming news, but what made it even more anxiety-causing and eye-opening was the next link she sent me, which stood out in such contrast to the CBC article – a link to the site for Sir Richard Branson’s very own private island. Only $24,000 per week per couple! Golly, what a deal!!

http://www.neckerisland.com/

At this point, I’m struggling to hold back what I’d really like to say about Richard Branson’s god damn island and the people who spend $24,000 to stay there instead of using that grotesque amount of money for something not so self-indulgent, self-centered and entirely fleeting. But I’ll hold it in. For now. Because the larger issues here are more worthy of my energy and focus.

After I left the office yesterday, mulling this over in my mind, I went to visit a dear friend of mine, Dr. Mike Carr. Mike has been a professor at both SFU and UBC, and is currently running for the Green Party in East Van while teaching at SFU. During my time at SFU I studied with Mike, and it was a life-changing experience. He taught me about bioregionalism,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioregionalism

and our class became so close that we took weekend trips away together, to cabins on various islands off the coast (Denman, Maine, Gambier), little rustic things with no running water, heat or electricity; it was one of the most amazing times of my life. One of the members or our class, Chris, was extremely well-read and passionate about bioregionalism, which is essentially the concept and practice of “living in place”; the idea that we live within a bioregion (usually defined by the nearest local watershed), and we don’t take more from the earth than we need or more than the land can sustain. Bioregional living is entirely self-sustainable and community-based, and I don’t mean fake “Capers Market” community, where no one ever really talks to one another or sits up on a pedestal because they buy organic food, but real, village-style community, where children and families live and work together to produce goods for the community as a whole. Basically, the complete opposite of consumerism and the majority of Western culture. Wow, that sounds totally bitchy and cynical, but hey, it’s true.

Anyways, Chris was really passionate about sustainable living, and during the time we were in class together, he was expecting a son. This seemed to make him even more focused on making real change for the world and his child, simply by changing himself and his way of life, and educating others along the way. So Chris and his wife bought a piece of land in Sechelt with another couple who run a retreat there, and they grow their own grains and make their own bread, among other things, and teach and preach bioregionalism, living “off the grid” as much as they possibly can. Some of you might be thinking that seems cliché and/or “hippie-ish”, but if you can put aside your immediate judgment, it’s really just a conscious choice that Chris and others like him have made because they take the plight of this planet seriously and want to practice what they believe in.

While I was visiting Mike, he told me that he had taken another class of his on a field trip to the retreat in Sechelt run by the couple that shares land with Chris and his family. A student of Mike’s made a video of that trip, and we watched it last night.

As I was watching the film, I started to really think about all of these things as a whole… I find we are so used to experiencing “the world” only within the realm of our own personal lives, that we so often don’t take the time to look upwards and outwards to see how all of these things are connected on a grander scale. Watching Chris teach Mike’s students about bioregionalism and showing them that it was entirely possible to live like that, I was struck by the realization of what we were really asking people to do…

I listened to Chris speak to them about the “myth of abundance”, the idea that we have so much food at our disposal, especially in North America, when in reality we don’t, because our methods of farming and harvesting are completely unsustainable and fully vulnerable to our own self-created and ever-worsening climate change problems. I watched them grinding grain for bread in Chris’ “Radical Grains” workshop, and I thought to myself, “God, that would take a hell of a lot of time in a day… to live like that day in and day out, making your own food, heat, water, living sustainably within a bioregion, without harming the earth somehow. How can we do that?” It resonated with me, because I realized that time itself is truly the most valuable commodity in the 21st century, and not because we’re all getting older and will eventually die, but because of what time actually represents. Time represents money, power and social status. Time represents material wealth, social advancement and the accumulation of material goods. Time is what we use to acquire all of these things – how on earth could I go to school, get a degree or two, work 12 – 16 hour days, climb the corporate ladder or any other current social or industrial system, make a name for myself, make enough money to buy a house, a car, summer property, a boat, a truck, RRSPs, if I’m spending most of my time just living sustainably? There are just not enough hours in the day. Ridiculously simple, but painfully true.

At that moment, everything suddenly came together in my brain… the rise in flour prices as part of my everyday existence going almost unnoticed, the articles about the global food crisis, Necker Island, Richard Branson, Mike Carr, bioregionalism, Chris and his family in Sechelt, waking up to the radio this morning to news coverage about the global food crisis.And in the middle of that simple hand-held video, I understood the biggest challenge that we face at this point as a society, the basic foundations of this chafing conflict between how we live now and how we must change.When we talk about living sustainably, we are asking people to choose between worlds.

It’s not even so much a choice about giving up material things or the really comfortable lives most of us live, (though that is a painful reality that many would prefer to avoid), but a choice about our values. Since the industrial revolution and the rampant spread of capitalism, people have been conditioned from birth to value certain things that require a lot of our time, which is why my generation lives such busy lives and experiences unprecedented levels of stress and social pressure starting at such a young age. We are taught to value money, power and influence. We are taught to value social status. We are taught to value levels of higher education (which I don’t argue with, but which is often used to obtain money, power and social influence). Not everyone lives their life entirely governed by these ideals, but the problem is, the biggest consumers and those that contribute enormously to the issues we face as a global community are usually the biggest perpetuators of this system of values, myself included (I have the guts to admit this). If we choose to live sustainably, we have to give up on a lot of those values, and I truly believe that is what scares people the most. Essentially, we are asking people to completely overhaul and dispose of a faulty ideology that has heavily influenced, if not dictated, our life choices from the day we were born.

On a larger scale, we’re asking the Richard Branson’s of the world to reevaluate and even actually alter their entire existence and their attitude towards mind-numbing extravagance, selfish pleasure and the whole freakin’ world around them.

Pretty big choice to make, right? And that’s the root of the problem. We are left not only with a gaping hole in our mental perception of the world and our place in it, but in order to even get there we have to cut the apron strings of that past ideology and free fall into the great unknown. It’s fucking terrifying, to tell you the truth.

But if certainty is any comfort, I know this much is true. We can not co-exist in two separate worlds that will not survive the other. The system that capitalism and consumerism depends on and the system that human, plant and animal life depends on to live sustainably, absolutely can not function side by side, no matter how many lights we turn off or cars we quit driving. We have to choose, and we have to choose soon, without exception. It’s like Mike said in his speech at the Green Party forum, quoting the Hopi Indians: “We are the people we have been waiting for”. Though it would be nice to shrug it off and leave it for the next few generations to deal with, there is no one coming down the road after us that will be that much better or more capable of making change than we are. And frankly, there’s really no time left to mull it over.

Now, I know my good friend (and fellow passionate humanitarian and activist), Tara, might read this and say, “Katie, we need more positivity in these discussions. We need to know more about what we can do to make change and to feel like there’s not just constant negativity with these issues”, and I agree completely.

The purpose of this note is not to make people feel like the world is a big, terrible place with no hope for the future, but rather to make progress by encouraging people to really get to the guts of this issue, to the heart of the matter, if you will, to dig as deep as we can go to the spaces and places within us that hold these truths, the truths that we often deeply fear, to really find out if making this kind of change is something that we really, truly, honestly are willing to do.

If we can face head on this one major question, the question of choosing between worlds, if we can stand in the middle of that fear we all carry of the great unknown, of a society that is unlike anything we exist in presently, then we can see plainly in the light of day the hard truth about the society we have all created, and the truth within ourselves and the choices we make every day as individuals, because in the end, it is the recognition of that truth and the decisions we make following that recognition and understanding that will dictate whether or not we will be able to make these changes we so desperately need to make.

Because like it or not, ready or not, change is upon us…

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/the-food-crisis-begins-to-bite-815437.html

It is time to choose. And in a way, that’s kind of exciting.

We are legend... but not as we wish to be.

On Saturday night, I settled in with a handful of friends to watch the film "I Am Legend" for the first time. I'd heard from a lot of people that this film was really good, so I was looking forward to it. I was worried that it might be gratuitously violent, and I avoid films like that at all costs. However, my good friend Sasha warned me that it wasn't really that violent, just "really, really scary". Yes, I'm a movie wimp, I'll admit it. However, that wasn't what struck me most about this film... something ran a little deeper and I felt the need to write about it.

As we were watching it, I wondered why a film like "I Am Legend" was appealing to me. I think because it has that eerie, lonesome, post-apocalyptic feel to it, which has always interested me... I find it fascinating to imagine what the world would be like if these events (or more realistic ones) ever actually happened, and to see how filmmakers would depict this world on screen. Call me twisted, but I also like to occasionally ponder just how far and deep the human heart can go, to the extent of the most isolating feelings of utter despair and loneliness that one human being could possibly withstand.

I found the opening of the film to be beautifully, morbidly haunting. I mentioned to the people I was watching it with that I thought it was interesting how the designers had allowed Mother Nature to make such a serious comeback after only 5 years - the grass was actually growing up through the concrete, there were wild animals running all around the city, all very encouraging stuff... the kind of stuff that makes you feel like our little planet could survive anything, and that Mother Earth will eventually just shake us off like an unwanted pest. However this is, of course, merely a cinematic illusion.

Movies appeal to people because of the deep emotions that they can stir within us, in any number of ways. The reason "I Am Legend" is so appealing on so many levels is because it caters to one of our major fantasies as a society (and I stress the word "fantasy"): that we will, as a species, manage to somehow heroically overcome the end of the world as we know it, in a blaze of glory and passion just as Will Smith does in "I Am Legend", and that the earth will spring back to life and heal herself and flourish once more. This movie in particular, and movies that are similar to this (Armageddon, The Day After Tomorrow, etc.), sort of allow us to drift off into la-la land and feel comforted, safe and secure about our future; they allow us to feel the way we really want to feel - invincible and strong - even though Hollywood and the real world are millions of miles apart. They allow us to believe that nature will indeed be able to overcome the extensive, severe (and in some cases irreparable) damage we have done to her, and that we really can save ourselves, if we just keep the faith, and struggle ever onwards.

But I beg to differ.

The end (or near end) of the real world, the world as you and I know it now, as opposed to the Hollywood world of "I Am Legend", will be much less flashy and romanticized. It will not culminate in a mass evacuation of Manhattan, as a deadly and unstoppable virus wreaks havoc upon millions of citizens. No, nature will not overcome concrete and reclaim the planet for her own as it was in the beginning of time, not as long as we rule this earth the way we do. Rather, the end will creep in quietly, slowly, as it is doing now, and we will largely ignore it for years to come, as we have for years past; in fact, we may not even have the mental capability to fully comprehend just how quickly devastation will be arriving at our door. The "apocalypse" of the 21st century will not star Will Smith, and there will be no computer graphics or dramatic rescue scenes - a virus that causes human beings to turn into blood thirsty non-human creatures of the night will most likely NOT be the cause of the end of our little world. No, it will be much less impressive with a lot less show and a lot less humour, which makes it seem rather pathetic that so many of us are still ignorant to these pressing issues. It's as if we need to be hit in the head with a brick before we look up and really accept the truth about that slow-moving but deadly snail that is creeping ever closer to us. We are so accustomed to "instant" everything - instant communication, instant results, instant food, instant coffee, instant LIFE - but the reality is, the effects of our misbehaviour on this planet are not happening "instantly" at all (which is kind of a sick joke played by nature); no, they are building up stone by stone, compounding over time, moving in slowly, but absolutely still promising to crush us eventually, no matter how slow the changes occur.

We would really like to believe that we are heroes or that we can be, that these horrible, predicted events (viral, ecological or otherwise) won't actually come to pass, while movies like this feed that illusion. I have to admit, it's gloriously indulgent to watch a movie like "I Am Legend" (which I did enjoy as a film), and feel inspired by the human spirit and imagine that we can overcome anything, against all odds. But this way of thinking can be so dangerous, because truthfully, it's foundations are made of sand.

The truth is, we are bringing about this end ourselves and have been ushering it in for years; it is moving in slowly, ever so slowly so that we might not even truly realize it until it is much too late. There are so many discussions and so much information being passed around in this century about global warming, and yet, much of our individual lives remain unchanged. David Suzuki wrote an article recently for "Common Ground", a small independent newspaper here in Vancouver, and it spoke so clearly and poignantly that I've included some of it here:

**************************************************************
From the article, "Kilroy was here", by David Suzuki*"

[...] it seems that we've entered a new epoch: a period of geological time usually reserved for distinguishing between massive periods of change on the planet. In this case, we've moved from the era that geologists call the Holocene, which has been this relatively stable period since the last ice age 10 to 12,000 years ago, to the Anthropocene, a time when human activities have become the dominating force of change on the planet.Changing epochs is not like changing your socks. In scientific terms, this is a big deal. Epochs tend to be delineated by periods of upheaval. Think ice ages and mass extinctions. When Nobel Prize-winning chemist Dr. Paul Krutzen brought up the idea back in 2000 and again in 2002, it was still considered pretty radical and somewhat impetuous for our little species to have its own epoch.But a team of scientists writing in a new paper in the journal GSA Today, published by the Geological Society of America, now argues that it's becoming increasingly difficult to deny humanity's growing influence on a planetary scale. In their paper, they examine the case for change and conclude that it's time to accept the obvious; we are in the Anthropocene.According to the researchers, just about every natural process on the planet now bears a human signature. For example, if you look at the soils, humans are now the dominant force behind changes to physical sedimentation. Dramatic increases in erosion from agriculture, road and urban development and dams have pushed people to be the largest producer of sediment by an order of magnitude over nature.If you look at life on the planet, human activities are causing the extinction of many species, possibly leading to a "major extinction event" that rivals others, such as the demise of the dinosaurs. Humans are also rapidly replacing vast areas of natural vegetation with agricultural crops. As the researchers point out, "These effects are permanent, as future evolution will take place from surviving (and frequently anthropogenically relocated) stocks."So, there you have it – the case for the Anthropocene. We've done it. We've written our name on the wall. We're the king of the hill, lord of the sandbox. We're now the most powerful force of change on the planet, so much so that we actually get our own epoch. A pretty big responsibility for a naked ape that emerged on the plains of Africa only 150,000 years ago.So what now, little human? What now?"

*************************************************************

Yes indeed... in our own special way, we ARE legend. But not as we wish to be... not even close.

For my friend...

I have to make this post in memory of my friend and ex-boyfriend, Nick Schilbach. Nick recently passed away about 3 weeks ago, having suffered with Leukemia for 2 years. His death came as a complete and total shock to me, since I had no idea he was even sick. I didn't know how to handle it. Nick and I were together right after I graduated from high school, and we were very close. Though we only dated for a few months, if often felt like we were kindred spirits. After we broke up, we lost touch, seeing each other only a handful of times between then and now, and only shortly before his death did I hear from him in an email sent to a group of people which was later forwarded to me, about the tragic accident that caused the death of another mutual friend of ours, Cale Caputo.

The strangest thing was that over the two weeks leading up to his death, I had consciously been thinking of him and how I could get back in touch with him, track him down and see him again, hang out and rekindle our friendship. When I learned of his death, I didn't believe it. I just couldn't accept that he could be gone before I even had the chance to talk to him again, just one last time, and tell him I missed him and hoped he was doing great. I was definitely in denial, even after some time had passed....

Right after I heard of his death, I didn't know what to do with myself. I found myself thinking of it constantly, people at work noticed something was wrong with me....I stayed up late Googling his name and devouring every piece of information or scrap of posted message or blog entries that I could find by him or about him, anything and everything that contained his name I was desperate to read or look at. More than anything, I wanted to see his picture. I tore apart my photo albums, looking for the pictures I still know I have somewhere, of him and I together so long ago...I called and emailed friends who knew him, asking for pictures, information, anything about him and how everything had happened...when was he diagnosed with Leukemia? Why hadn't anyone told me? How had he handled it? How exactly did he leave this world? I never did get to see his face again until the day of his memorial. It was like I needed anything and everything I could get my hands on just to survive the day, to feel like he was still alive, still real, still in the world, because I never got to say goodbye, never got to know his life as he got older, how he was, what he had done with himself, what he was doing in school, if he had fallen in love....a huge piece of his existence was missing in my mind....I was left only with the memories we had made at the age of 17, and it just wasn't enough for me.

No, I didn't handle his death well at all, and only now am I starting to be able to deal with it in some sane way. At his service I bawled like an infant, remembering how much fun we used to have together, and the moments of intimacy we shared. When someone dies whom you've been close with on a more intimate level than just friendship, it is a very strange and difficult thing to handle. This was my first experience with it. I feel like a piece of my youth is lost forever now...the only other person who shared that time with me, and those specific moments, and knew what it was like to experience me in that way at that age...that person is gone forever. I am the only one who can carry on those memories for us now. It is an overwhelming sense of loneliness and despair that comes over me, whenever I think of it.

I want anyone who reads this to know that there is nothing worse than realizing someone is gone, permanently, forever, not just on vacation, or moving away, but gone, dead, no more smiles and no more words, before you can let them know how much you loved them. If there is someone on your mind, get in touch with them, because you never know what can and will happen before it's too late. I learned the hardest way, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Right before his death, the universe was trying to tell me something important, and I procrastinated because I had other things on my mind. At first I hated myself for it, but I knew that would only drive me into a deeper depression, so I resigned myself to the dull ache that deep regret brings.

Nick was only 21 when he passed on, much too young to die, and so senselessly, too. He was an amazing person, loving and romantic, caring and generous, and so smart, always wanting to know more, to learn more, to be as involved and informed as possible about everything that really mattered, particularly the politics of this great country, Canada. He is greatly missed.

You know when you read in the paper or hear on the news that someone has died tragically, and people always say, "He was such a great person" or "She was such an angel"? I always wondered why it was that we never heard of the really annoying or cruel or obnoxious or inhumane people in the world dying tragically. I always used to say that just once I would like to hear of someone's tragic death that was followed by the comment "Well, actually, he was kind of a prick."

Well....Nick was never that guy. He really was the kindest person. I don't think I ever heard him say anything negative about anyone, the whole time I knew him. He really cared passionately about so many things, especially music and politics. I always respected him for that. He had the biggest heart, and if there is some kind of heaven somewhere, he'll be there.

Wherever you are Nick, I love you, and I hope you're happy and free.

Unforgiving expectations

Ok, I have a giant vial of truth serum in my hand and I need someone other than me to drink it, right NOW.

I'm cruising online, checking out what other people out there are saying about Third Wave Feminism. Generally, it's pretty general; nothing too proactive, no one really doing anything too major or making any bold statements about the dire state of feminism, yada, yada, yada...

UNTIL. Until I come across a particular article, an interview with two authors of a book known as Manifesta: Young Women, Feminism, and the Future. I read on with curiousity and ended up being disappointed and rather pissed off by the time I got done. The book was written by Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards in 2000, and is supposed to be some major feminist overhaul of the state of feminism from the 5 years previous to the publishing of the book.

The interview is a bit lengthy, so it gave me a lot to digest. Right off the top, however, I realized that these two women, who apparently "both got their start at Ms. magazine", were the perfect specimens to dissect, to really analyze and take a good look at what was so utterly WRONG and lacking in third wave feminism, and in our fucked up whitey mainstream culture in general.

First of all, they essentially describe the modern form of feminism, or "Third Wave Feminism", as being a struggle between two supposed complete binary opposites: Second Wave feminists interested in issues like politics, culture, women other than American white women, and economics, while the younger, more modern feminists are more interested in....wait for it....sex. Yep. Sex. Sure, they care about important "stuff" like the second-wavers do, but they also want to "reclaim their femininity".

THIS is exactly what I am talking about here, people. THIS is the bullshit that some specific so-called third wave feminists are spouting, making the rest of us look bad. Apparently, the big issue is sex, sex, sex. What the fuck is "reclaiming your femininity", anyways? (Not only that, but the idea of "reclaiming" anything is a lame-ass, self-help, new age catch phrase that has been used to describe and promote everything from femininity to racial slurs to gratuitous materialism.) Well, according to the Richards and Baumgardner interview, it basically means co-opting what men have already defined as feminine and pretending it's your own. Yay!!!

Wow, I have, like, been waiting for this, for like, so long! Now I can go out and, like, keep on perpetuating, like, negative stereotypes based on, like, male fantasy and desire, but pretend that it's, like, FOR ME and BY ME, because I am, like, totally "reclaiming" it. Good lord....save us all.

Fuck "reclaim"!! How about "reinvent"? What the fuck happened to that? Did everyone just leave that poor little word behind? Hello ladies, not everyone who is female is "feminine" according to your fucking guidelines, and not even half of them want to be the "feminine" you claim is so empowering. What about bull dykes in leather? Think they wanna totally, like, reclaim their femininity? By perpetuating this idea that there is ONE femininity and ONE kind of female, you are pigeon-holing every other woman out there in the world who is not, and has no desire to be, that "kind of female". How about....maybe....just maybe....COMPLETELY doing away with the whole issue of defining what feminine is?? There's a concept, although admittedly an extremely hard one to grasp and actually bring to fruition.

Now, don't get me wrong. I realize I come off very harsh sometimes. I'm ok with that. But don't take it the wrong way. The article had some good things to say, at some points. But I'm not here to talk about that, because that's not my concern. My concern is the next generation. My concern is my younger sister, an 18 year old female living in the 21st century, being subjected to all of these third wave idiots and the ideas they're forming based on looking at my little sister's generation. (Thankfully, however, my little sister is nothing like a Barbie and is quite unique and intelligent, not valuing shit like thinness or image...she was one of the lucky ones, like me, lucky to have such a strong mother...) but I digress....

This was the worst part:

"In our chapter on girlie culture, "Barbie vs. the Menstrual Kit," we argue that young women's primary expression these days is a joy and ownership of sexuality, and that's a form of power, a type of energy. "

K, great. Sounds good.....NO!! It sounds fucking AWFUL!! Why?? Why does this keep happening? Why are we again defining ourselves via sexuality, and pretending it's empowering? It's NOT!! Sexuality is NOT empowering when it is based solely on male desire, male fantasy, and male-created stereotypes of women and their bodies. THIS is supposed to be a young girl's primary form of expression??? In case you haven't noticed, girls are starting to have sex younger and younger, before their little bodies are even mature enough to handle the physical action of sex itself. Sex is bombarding females from an extremely young age, creating unforgiving expectations of what men desire and what women should live up to, and it's only getting worse as time goes on. Worst of all, it makes girls think that being nonchalant about sex and sexuality is cool, hip and modern, and allows for no value or appreciation of themselves, their other life interests besides sex, and their personal feelings about sex. Giving in to these expectations that have been perpetuated for centuries is not empowerment. It's weakness in the guise of "reclaiming our femininity". We are not doing things our own way, we're doing things their way, and we're not fooling anyone, especially not men.

If you really want sexuality to be about joy and ownership, then learn to respect how powerful sex is, and what a major effect it can and does have on people's lives. All too often now I find that sex is trivialised, it's made out to seem like it's so much less than it is, so much less significant, or important, or complicated as hell. Like that fucking TV show "Sex and the City", which, for the record, I despise for that reason, (and also the awful writing and the corny, stiff delivery of cheeseball dialogue).

Young women and girls should be taught that forms of expression can be sexual, but they don't always have to be. And sometimes, they just shouldn't. In fact, if it's for someone else's benefit, following someone else's expectations, and let's face it, most of the time it is, we should be discouraging it. I don't want to limit myself to only being able to express myself through sexuality.

How about the TV lesbian epidemic? Can it get much worse than that? The only gay men you see on television are either on decorating shows or shows that are specifically about gay men. But lesbians!! They got at least one fucking lesbian character on every damn TV show out there right now. Lesbians are so much more socially acceptable, and why? Because men are so comfortable with lesbians! Hell, they love those darn, little lesbians! It's just another way of making women feel like they're "in on it", they've been accepted into the prestigious "men only" club; they're still subservient to these men, and providing them with their desires with little to no regard for themselves, but hell!! If they feel wanted and included, they can just forget all about that. But more on that later.....

I appreciate you letting me rant.

Argentina and Anorexia

What the fuck is going on with the world today? This shit is out of control. I'm flipping through a copy of AdBusters magazine and within the first 3 pages there's a story about the out of control obsession that apparently the whole country of Argentina has with body image and thin women. According to AdBusters, Argentina is second in the world only to Japan for out of control anorexia and bulimia rates. Japan?? Seriously? Wow. Where the hell have I been?

Oh, hold onto your size 000 pants, sisters, cuz it gets worse!! The article actually reveals that there are so many high-end snotty ass clothing stores in Argentina which refuse to sell anything above a woman's size 6 US that the government is now enforcing $100, 000 fines on businesses that won't sell or produce clothing that is over a size 6. It has actually become a legitimate law. What made me almost puke on myself was the quote they had nabbed straight from Karl Lagerfeld's mouth, who told The Telegraph that he designs fashions "for slim, slender people", because "those who are undisciplined become fat. There is something distasteful about their inability to control themselves. To be thin takes control and rigor". Control and rigor? Are you shitting me? Has this guy lost his fucking mind? What is this, a Nazi regime? For christ's sake, the guy sounds like Hitler, lecturing to the masses of women out there who might be eating a slice of four-cheese pizza, and actually ENJOYING IT, that they are "undisciplined" and apparently not worthy of wearing his clothing.

I looked this guy up online, and I've also seen photos of him in The Vancouver Sun, and he looks like a fucking Oompa Loompa. In fact, he looks like the Face of Death to the world of female pleasure and self-esteem, the Embodiment of the Utter and Total Loss of Any Sanity or Realistic Attitude towards the rest of the world, particularly females. His clothes make him look like he just stepped out a bad episode of a shitty cartoon rendition of the movie The Matrix. Who the fuck is this guy to tell me I have no self-control and that I'm too fuckin fat to wear his clothes? Yo buddy, you're ugly, and just because you haven't been laid since the bicentennial doesn't give you the right to make women the world over feel like shit about themselves. AND when the fuck did it become socially acceptable to call women who are larger than a size six "fat" in PUBLIC? I mean, people hint at it, gossip about it, talk about it, and so on and so forth, but for someone to come out and actually say what Karl Lagerfeld had the nerve to say, to a source of mass media, is the first of its kind, as far as I know personally. Which is why it struck me as basically a Declaration of War between the world of fashion and misogyny (they go hand in hand of course) and the rest of us normal women out here, who don't give a fuck about Karl Lagerfeld's clothing, but do give a fuck about his arrogant and misogynistic preachings that make us all wanna hit him over the head with a two-by-four.

What is really happening here is this: We are seeing, for the first time, the slow-motion reveal of the ugly Quasimodo face of the fashion industry as its mask is subtly slid off for all the world to see, the slimy, textured truth hidden beneath all of its glamourous MAC makeup, its grotesquely sickening stench covered up by Clinique Happy! perfume, eau du toilette, don't forget! Well, the mask is wearing off and so is the scent, thanks to gems like Karl Lagerfeld. Let's make this very clear, ladies: his statement is not about fashion in any way. He is essentially admitting to something we've always known, but that the world of fashion has never wanted to openly admit before, and that is this: The fashion industry is not about clothing. The fashion industry is about controlling the minds of people, particularly women, and making them feel as awful about themselves as possible in order to make them more vulnerable to feel-good advertising and bull-shit promotion, which equals money, money, money for those on the top of the food chain (or should I say starvation chain?). Fashion is not about appearances anymore, and girls, beauty ain't coming from the inside now. We are openly being molded into beings, not just on the outside with clothes and jewelry and over-priced cosmetics, but ON THE INSIDE. ON THE INSIDE!! Can anyone hear me!? My personality, who I am, whether or not I have worth as a human being, whether or not I am self-disciplined is now entirely decided by whether or not I wear a size fucking 6. And the grossest part is, THEY'RE OPENLY ADMITTING TO IT. They have so many women so brainwashed and empty that they don't even need to hide it anymore. What. The. Fuck. Is. Going. On. Here. **WARNING** WARNING** HIT THE EJECT BUTTON NOW! GET THE FUCK OUT WHILE YOU CAN! Basically, Kaptain Karl Lagerfeld is helming the Great Ship Soul Moulder, and we need to be that big, giant SIZE 12 iceberg, that tears the fuck out of his bow and sinks his asshole Nazi fashion regime.

Sometimes I am so utterly disgusted by the world and its ignorant inhabitants that I feel that there is just no disgust left in me to dispense upon these brainwashed and brainwashing motherfuckers. Which brings me to my next question.....stay tuned....

First Vial of Truth

So here we are. Blogging. Something I swore I would never do. And that's because I thought, and still do to a large degree, that blogging is a somewhat narcissistic waste of time, since a lot of people blogging out there are just wasting space talking about what they ate for breakfast or quoting song lyrics to share with all the rest of us the even more compelling experience of their little heart breaking over some boy or girl or what have you. Not only that, but it pisses me off that so many people seem to think their life is so important they need to advertise and discuss it on the "information super highway" (dorky), so everyone can know all about them. Plus, blogging is just way too trendy for me. I'm not that hip. I don't like sushi, I don't do Photoshop, I don't own a digital camera, and I don't send people endless streams of photos of myself and my other cool friends, drunk as hell at some random bar.

Either way, here I am. Call me a fuckin hypocrit, that's ok. But really, this blog is motivated by a desire to not necessarily have anything particularly important to say, and yet at the same time, address some certain topics that are in fact pretty important. Like...the lost concept of 3rd wave feminism. And also to rant and bitch about things that I think a lot of people can relate to. No mundane details about my life, no stories about Rice Krispies or ex-boyfriends. Just straight up top-of-the-head truth serum. A perfect reflection of my super dorky, contradictory, and brutally honest personality. Enjoy.