What the fuck is so hard to understand? Did you not learn to count? I see you are wearing the school's sweatpants, so this can indicate one of two things to me: you are a sibling of someone slightly more intelligent or university really is letting everyone in these days. My guess is the latter. I suppose there is one more probable explanation besides you being a complete fucktard. You could be a self-centered cunt.
But what? There is more than one of your kind? Of four express isles at Safeway, how does each one have someone with more than 15 items?
15 is far too many, in my opinion. I think it should be 9. Or, 5 even. Maybe we could have one isle 5, one isle 9, and two isles 15. I think that would make a great compromise between the word "express" and efficiency in terms of use of personnel. I also think that tills at such stations should count how many items there are and when it gets to the limit you are told to either go put back what hasn't been scanned, or take you stuff to another line. That way, we are actually enforcing the rules that have been set out for efficiency.
Now I know, it's a few minutes extra that I stand in line to buy my lettuce and carrots, what's the big deal? Really, it's not the time. It's the emergence of the worst "me" generation in history that chokes me and the lack of respect people have for other people.
A fine example of this is a survey that was conducted in the 50s and then again a few years ago. The study was looking at prestige associated with occupations. People were asked to give a score out of 100 for the prestige of each job listed. Doctor sits at the top of the 50s and the 00s list, while shoe shiner sits at the bottom of both. The interesting part wasn't the position of the jobs that was interesting, but the actual score assigned. In the 1950s, being a doctor was given a score of 97 while shoe shiner was given a score of 84. The 00s had the doctor rated as 88 while the shoe shiner was at 46.
I don't think that the change score that the shoe shiner profession received is all that surprising (I don't even know a shoe shiner these days, but my parents probably know the person from their town that shined shoes). I think the most interesting thing is the fall in the perception of doctors' prestige and the relatively high score of shoe shiners in the 1950s. Why has a scale of prestige dropped so much? Why did people used to think that shining shoes was almost as prestigious of a job as we now find being a doctor, which currently tops the list? I think it's due to a lack of respect for the fellow man (and women).
[side topic quickly: why is it an issue to call general persons "man"? In French, "ils" could mean group of boys or a group of boys or girls. I don't struggle with that concept, nor should I struggle with the word man having dual meaning in context as either a single man or a mixture of man and woman. At no point has "man" ever stood for solely the female gender, just like in the romance languages. "Elles" is specifically a group of all girls. I just don't understand why people get their panties in a knot over it.]
The respect for other people is replaced by egocentric ideas of superiority. Where is one's modesty these days? I know I am preaching to the choir with those few that read this blog, but there are a lot of people that are head-down self-centered fucktards. Take, for example, anyone who wants to get into medicine.
Medicine requires an immense amount of volunteering to get an interview. Often one or two groups isn't enough. Of course, med hopefuls know this and sign up for all sorts of groups and causes. Most of them never put in the time required to make it a success (since they've joined so many). I can think of numerous examples of people that have signed up for more than 10 groups around campus. One particular example is young man currently in medicine at Queens. He had all sorts of volunteering/extracurricular "experience" but the one he was most involved in was the "Triathlon Club". Sure, it's a club, you don't have to do everything. He went once a week to swim. Once a fucking week. Yeah, that's going to show well if/when you race with the club. I am sure they are happy to have you and your lazy ass. This is the same person that told me my guitar sucked because of its backing but it turns out his chord repertoire was limited to G, C, A, and E chords. Considering how much time he spent "practicing" I am sure it went on his med application. Could he play? No better than I can with my feet (no, seriously. I can play a G, E and A with my feet).
What's my point with all this? Here's a person so blinded by their desire to do medicine, that they are letting all sorts of groups down. He has a perception of greatness in everything he does, even if it's not up to much compared to others around him. If anyone asks you about getting into medicine, you can tell them that it's not about being smart, giving, or achievement. It's about fucking as many people in the ass, stomping on as many feelings as you can, and putting yourself as the most important thing.
Why is it such a "me" generation? Well, we come from a time when our parents gave us all sorts of things growing up, we have the internet so we can do what we want when we want, and we are told that we are the most important person. Maybe this could be blamed for that decrease in love these days. People can say they love each other, and I guess it's how you define it. My definition is long, but one of the requirements is selflessness. When in love, you are willing to give up parts of your life to help the other person succeed in theirs. Parents, in the act of loving their children, often give up social events, time, hobbies and money for their children. If a child needs to move somewhere for school, sports, or surgery, the parents will often move the whole family. These days, we are told not to pick up and move for people. We shouldn't "chase" people. We aren't suppose to pick a school based on being closer to someone, we aren't suppose to pick a career path based on wanting to spend time with a single person. We can, but our parents and friends frown upon it. There will always be a "what you could have done" hanging over your head. That's not what life, love and respect are all about.
We should respect people who have found more in their life than just themselves. There are more feelings associated with life than being a high achieving, wealthy, well respected and a powerful member of society, and yet I feel that those are the only things that most people want these days. I've reached a point where I know I probably won't do anything spectacular or influential in my life (even though it'd be cool to do). I'm going to be an average tax payer that probably has a nice little suburban family that enjoys summer time BBQing and a beer in the sunshine. I hope to have a few good friends (and obviously a wife, with the kids and all), and some enjoyable hobbies. I hope I can give up on dreams and be completely happy with my life and the people around me. I hope I can go to the grocery store and not stand in the express isle behind someone with 23 fucking items.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Posted by
Reid
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Communist hippie bastard. Fabulous rant, though. I love how you had a subrant on man/men/woman/women.
So basically, you're saying that you would be just as content living a typical life as you would be living an atypical (supertypical?) life? Your arguments about respect and selflessness support this opinion.
What would you say to the notion that society is benefited by the occasional selfish person - the kind of person who takes 20 items into a 15 line? I mean, if not for these folk, we wouldn't necessarily have doctors or entrepreneurs or other people who could benefit society in someway by first benefiting his/herself.
Interesting points, Johnny. I don't know if I could say just as happy to the typical/atypical because there are a lot of factors. Love over gold is obvious, but if love and gold is an option, then why not? It all depends on how I obtain the gold, I suppose. But not everyone can have an atypical life.
My major point is that there is nothing wrong with having a typical life, but if having an atypical life means that you have to intentionally neglect rules, perform unethical acts or trample on someone, there is something wrong. I think we are bred to be concerned with the glory of the atypical life and that we end up missing the joys of everyday, typical life. Or, even worse, we hurt other people in our pursuit of the atypical life. Why should someone who follows the rules, cares about other people and wants to see everyone live comfortably be at the back of the line to everyone scurrying to have the atypical? Why should someone get to break the rules (23 instead of 15 items) for their own personal benefit? Why should people be accepted into medicine for showing numerous volunteer groups that they never attended the meetings of because they either didn't have time or didn't care to go. These groups rely on people showing up and doing their part, so by signing up the person is only hurting the group for their own benefit. Does owning a guitar give them the right to the recognition of being a guitar player? Doesn't that take away from the achievement of other people that have worked hard at their art? Saying your a "triathlete" because you went to a club takes away from the hard training that triathletes do. These, in some ways, are disrespectful to other people. That may sound odd, but I think you agree. You would never introduce yourself as a studio engineer. You may put it on an application, but you would say you've recorded 4 albums. You probably would say you're working on one. Why? Because you know how much work goes into an album and you don't want to deceive others just for your own benefit. That's where these people differ. They degrade the work you do by claiming to be able to do it...even if they can't.
Summarizing: Far too many people are so determined to achieve the atypical life for themselves that they will harm people that don't harm them. They shouldn't be so afraid of the "typical" life that they are willing to do this. I think the typical life should be more embraced and respected than it currently is. Let the atypical life be for the atypical and the lucky.
Now, do we really need doctors and entrepreneurs that lie? No. The standards med schools currently have are based on the competitiveness. There are people that are far more involved in groups but don't have as many groups listed that won't get into medicine. Some of these people would probably make fantastic doctors. They aren't getting the chance because they are honest. This isn't to say that honest people don't get into medicine right now, because they do. But these honest people are truly atypical and fully deserve the medicine profession. The current average required for a medicine interview is 3.79. You need volunteer experience with more than 3 groups and need to be a part of at least one sports team. In the early 90s, you needed over 3.3 to get in. Further back you can find years where people with 2.8 GPA had gotten in. Although I think it is good that they have higher academic standards now, I think it goes to show how ridiculously competitive it has gotten. I think a lot of this is due to the increased emphasis on the importance of living an atypical life and putting yourself first in order to get there. This doesn't mean that we are producing a bunch of better doctors. If anything we are producing more self-centered, arrogant people.
For entrepreneurs, the scenario is a bit different. Those that provide a valuable product/service will succeed on their own merit and deservedly so. This doesn't mean that they put their benefit in front of other people.
Take the studio for example. We won't charge someone $1K for a shitty product just because we want it the studio to succeed or because we want the money to live an atypical lifestyle. Hell, we haven't charged anyone any money yet because we have respect for them and what they are getting as a product.
Does society benefit? I don't think so. We need all sorts of people to do all sorts of jobs, but I don't see why people can't hold respect for people and professions without taking money and status into account.
I spot a your instead of you're. Fuck.
I like how your summary was as long as the original comment. I also missed the incorrect your/you're.
I agree with what you're saying about things like med school that rely on ultra-competitiveness. If they were to start accepting people based solely on academic merit, however, do you think it would be any better? I mean, at least now you know the people who really want to go to med school are the ones doing it because they turn into these self-centred beasts and put in all this extra "work" to get accepted. If they stopped looking at extra-curricular activities, you might have applicants who just sort of want a med degree and are only doing it because they're smart.
I'm somewhat drunk and I don't really know where this is going, so it's probably best if I stop now.
I had a good conversation with Kevin tonight about apostrophe precedence and how words such as "it's" are counter-intuitive. The possessive of "it" is "its", when it should be "it's", but that is already assigned to the contraction of "it is". Fucking English.
Haha, I guess I didn't make the summary part clear. It meant for that to be a summary of the atypical/typical bit which was only a paragraph. I then moved on with the next paragraph with "Now,..." as in to address the new topic of having folks of this nature becoming doctors.
I don't think that physicians should be picked solely on their academic merit for the reason that physicians should be well rounded. That said, it is one of the fairest ways to rank people in a competitive environment. The question isn't so much what should we look at in making a good physician but more "Why have standards increased greatly?" Probably because more people want to be doctors, so more competition. Now why do more people want to be doctors? Probably because they feel that other professions are lesser and they have been told the jobs that they want are the well respected, well paid jobs such as doctor or lawyer.
How many people in elementary school wanted to be a doctor? How many of them actually knew what a doctor does? All they knew is that their parents said that was a good job to have and that it would make lots of money. When I was growing up, I wanted to be a commercial airline pilot flying 747-400s. I also wanted to be a brick layer because it looked cool. Then the stage from Jr. High through high school, I had no idea what I wanted to be. By grade 12, I figured I could do dentistry. Why? Because school was easy, there was a private industry side to in, and I would be able to work with hands and interact with people. If I were applying 10 years ago, I might have gotten in and would probably do be doing that. But is that what I really want to do? If I did, I would probably study a lot harder and do a lot more volunteering, not because those are the characteristics of what make a good dentist, but that's what has to be done to get in these days.
Anyway, that got a little off topic, but what I'm getting at is that I haven't held any sort of "I want to be ____" for any period of time. I can and have changed my mind on what I want to do every couple of years. Some people, however, have known that they've "wanted" to be a doctor since they were young. This makes no sense that anyone knew at the elementary level. But because they've always said that and thought nothing else, they are unbelievably determined to get there, regardless of how self-centered they have to be.
I don't even think this relates to the original topic anymore and it's too late to care. Meh.
Wow... between the blog and the comments, this is far too much ranting for me to read in just one sitting.
However, I felt the need to comment on the use of 'isle' versus 'aisle'. Is it an express island? Or an express lane?
Just checking - keep up the outstanding blogging! Are you home for the summer?
Thanks Kim. As you know, my spelling is the shits. It's always sad because Iknow it's wrong when I type it, but I am too lazy to look it up. What gives? I should be home of the summer, you?
I'll be back home the fourth week of April, the last week in May, and for the Stampede in July... I'm not working at all starting mid-April until mid-September, just studying for professional exams. Awesome times...
First of all, I must say that you and I could only be related. My problem is that the express checkout at "Sack and Save" is usually filled with people with a shopping cart of stuff. Mind you, people who choose "Sack and Save" perhaps aren't the most high class people, but they feel they are entitled to everything. This certainly is more pronounced among Americans than Canadians, though Canadian Generation Y's tend to have a similar view of entitlement.
About the whole "I want to be a ___" topic, I don't really think people are being entirely truthful when they make those statements. Hell, I have second thoughts daily about coming to UNT, what if I went back home and pursued a more legitimate career etc. I could, but thats not neccessarily what I want either. Frankly I'm pretty fucking aimless, and I'm starting to be disillusioned by those who claim to have it all sorted out. I'm confident that people who "know" what they "want" to do fall into two categories: a) people with no choice in the matter, who fucked up and don't really have any other option (best examples are artists and musicians, who while "talented", certainly don't have the work ethic to have any sort of success) and b) those who have had their career drilled into their mind since they were young, and don't consider anything else seriously enough.
What most definitely is lacking today is a punishment for people with the self-centered "I'm entitled to everything I want" attitude. Wouldn't it be nice if at the grocery store, you got your hand cut off for not counting your items, or telling a poorly worded joke and acting smug when you're misunderstood. Wouldn't it be nice if speeders ALWAYS were punished. Wouldn't it be nice if the fucktard who intentionally steps to the front of the line to ask a question to the person at the desk was hung from the roof by his ankle, and everyone who he budded infront of got a swing at the pinata? Enough morbid hypotheticals, but seriously. There is no punishment for these self-absorbed people, in fact there's reward for it. In our parent's time, most people were spanked for that kind of behaviour. This is why people hung onto the bible and religion so much, because their message was about how to tolerate everyone in society. I'm willing to wager that our children's generation will look back on our generation's sense of entitlement in disgust, noting how it just made everyone into people that would do ANYTHING to get ahead, just like how our generation noted how our parents were so infatuated with success, but entirely disinclined to take the measures/sacrifices to gain it. Basically, people need to stomp infringing on the rights of others for their own personal gain. Simple Social Studies 30 curriculum there, too bad not enough people listened in class.
Damn eloquent-waxers. I don't have the stamina to read all these comments on my laptop. Can somebody print them off and mail them to me?
You and I are obviously brothers, Brett. It's interesting that you bring up punishment as the means to the goal. Although it plays a role, I think that expectations are more important. Take speeding, for example. They've increased the fines for speeding dramatically but most people still speed. In fact, I am willing to bet that the price of the ticket has little effect on people at this point. Why? Because the expectations that everyone must follow the speed limit aren't firmly entrenched. I have been passed on HWY 2 coming north from Lethbridge at 150km/h by a police car.
If I were punished for each and every time I exceeded the speed limit, I would certainly never speed. Even if I weren't punished for speeding every time but it was expected of me to not speed, I would be more inclined to follow the speed limit.
Emile Durkeim's thought on deviant behavior was:
"Today's deviance is tomorrow's accepted behavior". For example, using pirated software when we were in Jr. High was deviant. Even my first year of University, I was considered deviant because of the amount of pirated software I had. Now, it's completed accepted that most computers "come with" Photoshop. Many people download movies to watch and even more download music.
If we want to prevent pirating of software, the severity of punishment is not enough to stop most people. Now that it is no longer considered deviant, it will likely become the norm. With time, it is possible all of society will digress.
Was the state of conformity and rigidity originally formed through religion? Since we are constantly digressing, are we at the lowest point of all time? No, probably the highest. But how does this cycle rebuild?
Punishment list (mind you, only would appear in a dictatorship):
Illegal Downloading:
Music - Stapes Removed
Movies - Cones Removed
Software - First two fingers removed, both hands
Pornography - Genitals Removed
They only seem radical because these crimes weren't punished initially. Way to be government! It came with the times, however. People were file sharing since computer-computer connections were being made. This in approximately 1990-92, when we were arguing over the validity of the GST.
I don't actually agree with them, but in an ideal world, all crimes would have the same sentence, it's just our prison system isn't prepared to hold everyone who's ever committed a crime for life.
Post a Comment