Archive for humor
March 11, 2010 at 8:03 am · Filed under humor, personal, random
as I wait for them to install.
I took this meme from D, of course.
If I were a month, I’d be March.
If I were a day of the week, I’d be Sunday.
If I were a time of day, I’d be afternoon when the sun is highest in the sky.
If I were a planet, I’d be lush and green, with seasons but a short winter and a long fall, lots of colors and beautiful weather, with just enough cloudy, rainy days to make you appreciate the beautiful ones.
If I were a sea animal, I’d be a dolphin.
If I were a direction, I’d be moving forward.
If I were a piece of furniture, I’d be my bed, it is the comfiest place on earth (and I am not the only person that agrees with this statement).
If I were a liquid, I’d be the ocean.
If I were a gemstone, I’d be chrysoberyl.
If I were a tree, I’d be a Live Oak.
If I were a tool, I’d not be.
If I were a flower, I’d be a Sunflower (one of my dearest friends and teachers described me as one and while it is not my favourite flower, I think her description was lovely and so I still cherish it to this day and like to think of myself as one).
If I were a kind of weather, I would sunny with a chance of meatballs.
If I were a musical instrument, I’d be a flute.
If I were a color, I’d be green (probably apple green).
If I were an emotion, I’d be butterflies.
If I were a fruit, I’d be a kiwi.
If I were a sound, I’d be running water.
If I were an element, I’d be fire-water.
If I were a car, I’d be a porsche.
If I were a food, I’d be chocolate covered strawberries.
If I were a place, I’d be a tropical island.
If I were a material, I’d be linen – looks good with anything, easy to dress up or down, hard to break but easy to get dirty and made for summer.
If I were a taste, I’d be expensive.
If I were a scent, I’d be a mix of Chanel No.5 & Drakkar.
If I were an object, I’d be a book.
If I were a body part, I’d be eye-lashes.
If I were a facial expression, I’d be a smile.
If I were a song, I’d be Taking The Long Way (Dixie Chicks – totally Texas and totally my life).
If I were a pair of shoes, I’d be these:
February 25, 2010 at 6:55 am · Filed under beauty, dating, humor, love, news, personal, politics, random, texas
So my lovely friend D wrote this post the other day that I thought was really interesting. Apparently she found it here, and I also loved that post too. So here I am playing along… on my not-so-personal-but-getting-to-be-rather-personal blog.
If you know me well, you know that all my tattoos have significant meaning to me but my piercings were done on a whim, i love physics (and philosophy), am a super liberal feminist but I totally use the “I’m a girl” card to get someone to change a tire or the oil for me even though I’m perfectly capable of doing both myself.
If you know me well, you know I am a sucker for romantic comedies, I live for chocolate and I have the willpower of a gnat when it comes to things I want.
If you know me well, you know I *love* cooking (seriously, I have a slight obsession with food), decorating (and redecorating) and arranging flowers. Seriously every once in a while I contemplate putting myself up for sale: “Fantastic housewife available to a good home. Will cook, decorate and keep a lovely home. Contingent on a large budget. (Let’s not lie, I’ve got expensive taste).” or you know changing careers to be an event planner… or wedding planner.
If you know me well, you know I’m so obsessive about my hair that I cut it myself because I don’t think anyone else can do as good a job, I love chai (the fake Starbuck’s kind even though it’s totally not right) and I hate running but love soccer.
If you know me well you know that despite being a jeans and t-shirt girl, I love love love dresses and skirts and makeup, and if you make it past the tattoos, piercings, sarcasm and cynicism, I am a hopeless romantic and I view the world in hearts, stars, rainbows and puppies.
If you know me well, you know that despite my self-professed geekdom I am really not that geeky. I mean I work in IT but I have never owned a gaming system, nor do I play computer games and for an extended period of time I thought WoW was just people spelling wow rather enthusiastically. Apparently one shelf of fantasy novels does not equate to actual geekdom.
If you know me well, you know I love playing sports but can’t watch them to save my life, I am in a serious long-term relationship with Grey’s Anatomy, I move cities like it’s my job (though Chicago does seem to be sticking pretty well so far) and I desperately miss Texas.
November 24, 2009 at 2:05 pm · Filed under dating, education, environment, family, feminism, gay rights, humor, love, personal, philosophy, random
So my friend, Deidre (of Decoybetty) was writing about the phenomenon of “relationship status” in a guest post she recently did called You’re A Lot More Than Your Relationship Status and I have to agree with her. I am constantly flabbergasted at all the people who define themselves as single, in a relationship, it’s complicated or whatever. We’re only in our 20’s, whether I’m dating someone or not really doesn’t define me.
If you want to know if I’m single or taken, you should ask because that’s not who I am. If you ask me who I am, I’d still say I’m a renegade physicist even though I haven’t done physics in years. I’d say that I’m a confused 26-year old grad student trying to figure out her consulting gig the best she can and get to where she wants to go on that crazy corporate ladder. I’d say I have a very serious relationship with Grey’s Anatomy and that I could dance all night long. I’d say that I have a penchant for wearing ties but I’ve recently discovered that wearing dresses and fitted clothing is awesome since I’ve worked really hard to get in shape. I’d also say that I love soccer even though I think I suck at it and that I’ll keep going to ballroom classes until I can some day afford to compete (at least as an amateur). I’d say that I’ve had my heart broken but that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in love and fairy tales and happily ever after. I’d say that I believe the best in people and am constantly disappointed when I get let down but I never learn that lesson and I like myself for always giving people the benefit of the doubt. I’d say that I am thoughtful and a fierce friend which are the characteristics that I value most in my friends too.
Here’s the thing, none of what I’ve described above has anything to do with whether I’m in a relationship or not. And perhaps I am a little more fierce about some bits more than others because of the fact that I very recently got my heart broken but I don’t define myself as single. I just happen to not be dating anyone, it is not a defining characteristic of my personality or even remotely who I am. In fact even when I was dating I never thought of myself as being not single. It’s just not something that I identify with. I am my own person and I would hope my partner would be as well. Perhaps when we’ve spent half our lives together I may start to consider my relationship as a defining characteristic of myself but at the moment I think my friends and my family have far more influence on who I am today than anyone I have ever dated has.
I mean I’d say I’m a feminist because I grew up with extremely strong matriarchs in my family and going to a women’s college just ingrained that further in me. I’m a cross-culture kid and I often forget this because at 26 it’s pretty much just who I am and I don’t even think about it anymore. The person I am today is made up of the environment I was brought up in, which was the huge sprawling metropolis of Houston, Texas. It’s in the Bengali that my family speaks at home and the way we flip in and out of this weird mixture between Bengali and English; as if everyone speaks both even though we live in the US. It’s in the conversations with my friends where I talk about how marriage is a “patriarchal construct” and this is “normal” because we went to a women’s college.
Quite frankly the excuse that society puts so much pressure on this is a cop out to me because aren’t we a part of society? I mean I don’t believe that who I do or do not date is really anyone’s business but my own. If I want you to know I’ll tell you, trust me. It’s pretty similar to how I feel about people asking whether I date girls or boys. If I wanted you to know, I’d tell you. I mean I don’t understand why people have this desire to be defined by whether they are in a relationship or not. Actually that’s pretty similar to how I felt in college about everyone making a big deal of coming out. I mean yes I understand it can be an empowering experience and all but there is so much more to who I am than who I date. At this point in my life I define who I am and no one else. Sure there are people who have touched my life and changed me but I’d say that my friends who I’ve known for 8+ years have probably had a more significant impact than any relationship I’ve been in.
I hear so often how we hate how the world views people who are single as if there is a stigma attached. Well, folks, we are part of society, it’s up to us to change it. If you don’t want your relationship status to be a defining characteristic then don’t let it be. I don’t talk about mine. I rarely ever have. I mean recently I was with someone long enough where I did start talking about things in we’s but I’m not there anymore and I’m ok with that. Am I going to let it define who I am? No, certainly not.
So do you like physics? Have you ever watched the sunrise over a river? Can you quote “the little prince”? Do you love 80’s music? Can you two-step (cause I might just fall in love with you in that case)? Who are you? Because I’m sure it’s more than just “single” or “in a relationship” or “married” or “it’s complicated”. At least I certainly hope so.
April 2, 2009 at 6:35 am · Filed under beauty, chicago, dating, economy, humor, news
Because otherwise you might want to cry. Especially with the way the economy is these days.
This morning I logged in to the New York Times website, which is a typical first glance before I start my work day routine for me. And I almost started laughing because I saw as one of the pictures in their “Picturing the Recession” segment was a photo of a store that I have passed by on my way to work quite often. In fact I found the sign in that photograph that says “RECESSION FLOWER PRICES $1.00/stem” so amusing that just a week ago I had taken a photo of it on my phone and sent it to a friend of mine because we were just talking about buying flowers for a birthday party. And what girl doesn’t love to get flowers? They’re just so beautiful. At any rate, I know many of the recession photos are quite sad but personally I like things like these because they make me chuckle.
Here’s the photo I sent my friend:
recession flowers
March 18, 2009 at 9:30 am · Filed under dating, humor, love, movies, random
Ok, so I haven’t read the book. I’m only judging the movie… currently. I may read the book because while I liked the movie as being your typical “chick-flick-feel-good-everything-turns-out-great-in-the-end” kind of movie, I take issue with the entire concept of a book and/or movie that feels the need to tell women “he’s just not that into you”. That being said I do love your typical chick flick so needless to say I did enjoy the film even though I do have some critiques of the premise. Warning: there are spoilers ahead – not big ones but if you haven’t seen the movie and don’t want to know anything about it, don’t read this post.
For one, I’d like to believe that we are not that stupid. It’s not like women truly don’t know when a man “is just not into” them. Sometimes people choose to believe things that are irrational. And let’s face it women aren’t the only ones. Walking out of that film my friend and I were thinking the exact same thing: why isn’t there a book/movie called “she’s just not that into you”? Honestly to be so presumptuous as to think that the female population actually needs a book called “he’s just not that into you” really bothers me. Personally, I’d like to give us a bit more credit because the female population of the world is honestly not that stupid. In fact, I’d say we are better at reading cues than our male counterparts.
Now one of the issues I had with the movie was that what it seems the premise would be is that we are not the exception but rather the rule. So if a man isn’t calling you back or whatever that he’s just not that into you. Granted I think that’s just common sense but that’s neither here nor there. But what I found to baffling is that everyone found some sort of happy ending. And really, most of the women ended up being the exception and not the rule, which I thought was rather sad if this movie was supposed to be “different”. Or perhaps, I just need to lower my expectations.
I have to say one of my favourite parts of the movie was when Drew Barrymore goes off on a rant about how dating these days is just so confusing because there’s myspace, email, twitter, texting, your work phone, your cell phone and your home phone, if you still have one of those. Technology really has made dating a completely different game and she did leave off my most favourite form of confusion which would be facebook. I find that technology can just make dating far more difficult than it really needs to be. I also find that being able to “stalk” your crush online to be a bit tricky to handle because I mean what is the dating etiquette of when to contact the person you’re interested and how or why.
On a completely unrelated sidenote, I just realized that Holi (the Hindu festival of colors) was on my birthday this year and I totally missed it. What a bummer. That would’ve been the best way to celebrate my birthday ever. (Not that my birthday wasn’t great, it was the best one in my recollection so far).
February 22, 2009 at 12:32 pm · Filed under beauty, fashion, humor, news, random
I have a tendency to flip through my Sunday T Magazine a bit quickly because I should really be doing homework and not reading the paper for fun – especially not the style magazine of all things but I very rarely can resist. It is my favourite part of the Sunday paper, I just adore looking at all the beautiful clothes and new styles but I often find that I don’t see many articles that truly catch my attention (I’m more a science section fan in that regard).
So imagine my surprise when I found the article “Butch Fatale” and my delight when I saw the fabulous outline of Rachel Maddow. As a member of the queer community it is always a pleasant surprise to see any such thing put in to the news. Especially into T Magazine, I mean that’s a pretty great place to be. It’s interesting because the article speaks of how lesbians very often overlooked in the gay community and for that matter pretty much everywhere else. I mean there are always more than enough lesbian stereotypes to go around the table but if anyone should ask what would image would you conjure of a “hot” lesbian, I don’t think anyone could answer it. There are just too many differing views. And honestly with lipstick lesbians running about how do you even know if they’re gay? But Daphne Merkin makes a great assessment when she said that the lesbians finally have a real icon to turn to in Rachel Maddow. Maddow has captured the hearts of gays & straights, men & women… in fact, I’d say she’s bewitched pretty much anyone who leans a touch left. I’d say that’s score one for the girls that so very often get overlooked. I mean who wouldn’t want to be funny, smart, well-respected and a bit of a wallflower if you could be like Rachel Maddow? I certainly would. In the words of Daphne Merkin, I am offically a fan that “Lesbian Glamour Steps Out of the Closet” in the form of Rachel Maddow.
My next fabulous find of the morning was a piece on the absolutely classic, timeless packaging of Chanel No. 5. Perhaps it is simply because No. 5 happens to be one of my all time favourite fragrances or perhaps it is because there are certain packages that I just adore (Chanel No. 5 being one of them) that I love taking a look at how it came about. I mean I think Gabrielle Chanel was one of the most forward thinking women of her time to be able to come up with such timeless classics. I mean to understand how to imprint something into one’s memory in that way takes talent that very few people have. I always tend to relate these things to the only other thing that I think has such a timeless quality and that is the little blue box of Tiffany & Co. I know being part of the queer community that this may sound a bit like a pipe dream but I have always said whoever gets me a little blue box or a little red box (Cartier, of course) will have my hand. While I may not be entirely serious about it since I do believe in spending the rest of your life with the person you love, not just anyone that gets you the ring of your dreams but it would definitely make me think twice before refusing should it not come from the person I was hoping. Granted this is all theoretical since I am nowhere near decisions like that but I think the fact that so many of my very near and dear college friends are getting married that it does make it stand out a bit more. Not to mention in the midst of the recession things like engagement rings and Chanel just cheer up the spirits a bit. At least they do for me.
September 24, 2008 at 4:55 pm · Filed under humor, politics
I think this pretty much sums up my feelings on the economic crisis and subsidizing the banks.
