Been locked in my garage most nights of late, trying to finish off some gifts I let sit too long. There's a desk for elder, a dollhouse for younger and a marble run for my nephew. I might keep the marble run, as I rather like it and his mother isn't speaking to me at the moment.
As a galoot (a word hand tool users often use to describe themselves) I find that I have a few advantages over the "Norm"als (power tool users) when it comes to working in the winter months. Not only does my shop need little in the way of power tools, I also don't need a heater. After the first ten minutes I generally don't need a jacket. Hard work warms me up enough.
The tree is up. I put on the lights, placed the angel at the top (I am the only one who can reach) and let the kids go. Younger made a little altar with the creche and a few other items. She did this without any prodding from Puff or me, and it looks quite nice.
Christmas concert was last night. Too many parents and grandparents crammed into the little gym to listen to their kids sing badly about- well, anything but the real meaning of Christmas, it seemed. Among the acts was some kind of live action Grinch and a skit called "Snoopy and the Red Baron." As I recall, that little segment was actually in the Charlie Brown Hallowe'en special.
By the way, ever wonder why kids are often so badly behaved? After seeing their parents last night, I don't.
Elder is continuing her reading of the Twilight series. As a result, I got roped into reading the last one: "Breaking Wind" or some such thing. It is badly written and tedious, and part of it is written from a male character's point of view. At least the character is referred to as male, however, after seeing his thoughts I'd have to say "No, not a male."
I find this quite often in books written by women. They can observe men, can represent our actions, but when they try to write our thoughts they are wrong. I have often noticed a difference between our genders. I have never met a man who claims to understand women. It leads to bar room conversations like this:
Man 1, (putting down his beer): "Women." He shrugs with upturned hands and a look of complete mystification on his face.
Man 2: I hear ya, bro'. I hear ya.
But I have met many women who claim to understand men. Years ago, there was a time when I had more female friends than males. I used to take part in discussions with them where they would say things like "You men don't understand us." This was true, and I would readily agree. But they would then go on to explain how they understood men perfectly. I even remember seeing some blond bonehead phone in talk-show host explaining how men are so easy to understand. The one example she gave of how easy it is for women to understand men is how woman find it so simple to seduce men.
Mmmm-kay. Ladies, allow to say something: seducing men is no challenge. From the case of homosexuals, it is apparent that even men can seduce men. It doesn't mean you understand us, or anything about us, beyond the fat that we like women.
The group of women who claimed to understand men includes, amazingly, every feminist I ever butted heads with back in the university days. This group of women have created a construct that is the necessary enabling condition for all their theories, heaped upon this construct every evil, every vice, everything they hate, and called it "patriarchy." They also imbued this construct patriarchy with will. The patriarchy "wants", it "desires", it has motivations, and its most prominent motivation is the subjection of women. They needed this group, because it justified their existence as a group. A feminist alliance to oppose the patriarchal one. It's as though men wearing hoods meet in selected graveyards throughout the world on the second new moon of the month to meet their leaders.
Leader: Is the subjection of women going according to plan?I must have missed the memos.
Man in hood: Yes, my master.
Or, back to more writing, and something a little less serious, take the Harry Potter series, which I loved. It, however, had a few glaring flaws. One of them was Harry himself, who was supposed to be an average boy, except he really didn't think like one. For instance, the male drive is overwhelmingly visual. What, then, did his first girlfriend look like? Her appearance should have been catalogued for the reader clearly, or there should have been at least one detail of her upon which he could fixate, not even hair, Rowling's favourite detail. Instead, we are given a single adjective: she was pretty. Wow. What a girl.
Or take the character of Hermione. By Rowling's own admission, Hermione is Rowling herself as a young girl. I would say, she is more of how girls that age saw themselves. She is smarter than the boys, wiser than the boys, more mature than the boys. She is always right. Rowling never misses a chance to show Hermione one up on the boys. Is this possible? maybe. Depends. However, what is unlikely is the boys' reaction to her. They do not find her incredibly annoying, at least not past the first book. As I said, this is how women see themselves, not how boys see them, and this book was written from the perspective of the boy.
I will say this for the last book of Twilight: it is pro life of a sort. Bella, the main character, absolutely refuses to abort her vampire/human hybrid baby, even though it puts her life in extreme danger.
That's it for now. Posting will be sporadic before, during and shortly after Christmas. Have a Merry one.