So now I'm a married woman. Not like my daily life has changed, but my weekly life may have some minor modifications. Like I will need to call SO's parents or talk to them when he calls. I will need to attend functions in SO's family etc. Normal family stuff, but not normal unmarried stuff. After spending a week with SO's family and getting to know them, I'm not worried about that part any more. There was a time when I worried that I would not be able to be a good daughter-in-law cause I no longer have the 'will to adjust'. But turns out that not only do I have it, I'm quite willing to demonstrate it. I'm not sure how much that had to do with it being SO's family. I would do as much for any friend's family and any set of elders. I guess at the end of the day, I'm happy that I'm still the nice person that I used to be. The person that I thought had changed.
I have changed though, the insecurities I had about SO 3 years ago are not the insecurities I have now. There was a time when I was sure that he would find someone that he loved more and therefore, would leave me. That's not it anymore. He may find someone else that he loves me, and he may leave me... but strangely, it doesn't worry me as much as it did. Now instead, the worries are about living harmoniously with someone who's quite different.
What I find weirdest about my reactions are the remarkable anti-climax of getting married. It's like now all hope is out of the window and it's SO for life. Not like I don't want that, but when he really pisses me off, I can no longer think of the knight in shining armour who will sweep me off my feet and away from the insensitivity of SO. Don't get me wrong, I do want to be with SO for life... but see what I mean by the anti-climax? Nothing changes after marriage and the things that irritated me before, continue to irritate me. Likewise for him I'm sure. And since we've been together for so long, there's no 'newlywed glow' either. But hey, that's the down side of knowing someone well before you marry them. It's quite funny, SO and I were staying with his relatives and he showed little inclination to do stuff with me, i.e. go for walks with me or go out when I was going out etc. It's normal for him and after he did it a couple of times, I stopped getting seriously upset. But not so his mother. There was a time when my father-in-law was going to the nearest town and asked me to go along, to see it. I promptly agreed and asked SO, who said no. Then when it got time to leave, he was patiently putting his shoes on. Upon careful and subtle questioning, turns out his mother commanded that he comes along as well :) I was quite amused.
So now, being a vetran of marriage, I'm all ready to meet the in-laws in their multitudes knowing that I will not disgrace them, my parents, or myself.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Stuck with You
So I think I finally have an answer to why love marriages are better than arranged marriages. Cause you've only yourself to blame if you're 'stuck with someone you don't love or even like'. Every girl I know (and I mostly know Indian girls) has faced the 'marriage' question from the minute she finishes studying. Several of them have found their own men and married them, but those that have not got married till quite late or not at all... get the 'arranged' treatment. They're educated and independent and yet worlds of parental pressure put them in this situation.
The situation of meeting guys and contemplating spending the rest of their lives with them. I think I've mentioned this before, but one friend of mine refused to meet guys because turning them down after meeting them would make it personal, whereas refusing the arranged marriage route is a matter of principal. She has unfortunately succumbed to meeting guys... and is now turning them down - personally.
And these are the girls who have the luxury of meeting guys at their own convenience. So for one of these, you probably have about 20 that meet guys at their parents schedule. And after meeting about 20-30 guys, you probably figure 'hey, he's seems nice, no BO, can't be all bad what?'
It's not very different for guys. One man I know who's a nice guy, not a stunner but a really nice person went through this. In his late 20s his mother (father had passed away a few years earlier) convinced him that it was time. He looked and he looked and found that he couldn't have a sane conversation with majority of them. After a while, he found one that he could talk to for more than 5 minutes and agreed to marry her. The enormity of what he'd done struck him shortly after the engagement. Now they're married and are the kind of couple that snipe at each other. Given their social context, divorce is almost out of the question. The only upside is no children yet.
You sometimes see arranged marriages that work out wonderfully and love marriages that fail horribly. I sometimes look at SO and wonder if it would have been easier with a guy from a more similar social background. But then I figure, a lot of it is about making an effort. You need to make that effort whatever the lead up to the marriage was. But with the 'love' part of it, at least some bond already exists.
Stuck on you as opposed to stuck with you?
The situation of meeting guys and contemplating spending the rest of their lives with them. I think I've mentioned this before, but one friend of mine refused to meet guys because turning them down after meeting them would make it personal, whereas refusing the arranged marriage route is a matter of principal. She has unfortunately succumbed to meeting guys... and is now turning them down - personally.
And these are the girls who have the luxury of meeting guys at their own convenience. So for one of these, you probably have about 20 that meet guys at their parents schedule. And after meeting about 20-30 guys, you probably figure 'hey, he's seems nice, no BO, can't be all bad what?'
It's not very different for guys. One man I know who's a nice guy, not a stunner but a really nice person went through this. In his late 20s his mother (father had passed away a few years earlier) convinced him that it was time. He looked and he looked and found that he couldn't have a sane conversation with majority of them. After a while, he found one that he could talk to for more than 5 minutes and agreed to marry her. The enormity of what he'd done struck him shortly after the engagement. Now they're married and are the kind of couple that snipe at each other. Given their social context, divorce is almost out of the question. The only upside is no children yet.
You sometimes see arranged marriages that work out wonderfully and love marriages that fail horribly. I sometimes look at SO and wonder if it would have been easier with a guy from a more similar social background. But then I figure, a lot of it is about making an effort. You need to make that effort whatever the lead up to the marriage was. But with the 'love' part of it, at least some bond already exists.
Stuck on you as opposed to stuck with you?
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Well did you evah!
Of late I've been reading more and more blogs. Hopping from one blog I like to a blog that person likes etc. Typically people write about themselves and their lives. And typically, their love life forms an important part of the blog. Be it Mommy Blogs which go on about their families or single women blogs that go on about their social lives.
I've hinted at it here and there but just to put it out there... I'm getting married in a few weeks. To SO, a man I've known for 6 years now. A man who is very different from me and quite different from what I believed I wanted in a man. Even now... sometimes it makes little sense that we are together. We don't really like the same stuff. We like movies, but different kinds, we like food but different kinds etc. Our tastes are different and our thoughts are different.
In these 6 years there have been times when I didn't know what was going on anymore. Heck, in the last 1 year there have been times when I didn't know what was going on. And yet, I'm getting married in less than a month. To SO.
When I was a kid, my mother used to sing a rhyme to me 'There was a little girl, who had a little curl, right in the middle of her forehead. When she was good, she was very very good, but when she was bad, she was horrid.' Being a little girl with curly hair... I took it slightly to heart. But I was not horrid.
Sometimes I feel like SO and I are like that. When we're good, we're good. And when we're bad, I'm horrid. Sometimes the whole 'getting married' part freaks me out. I keep telling myself that it's actually exciting... but somehow. I guess a lot of it has to do with having a wedding in the 'form' that I really didn't want. I wanted to wear a simple saree, get a registered wedding and have lunch. I didn't want to do the 'bride' thing because I'm well past that point in my life.
Apparently weddings aren't about the bride and groom, they're about family. Sure, of course they are! But without the bride and groom, would you have a wedding I say? Would you? And doesn't it matter that the bride and groom are comfortable? Don't you want them to be smiling for joy and not out of compulsion?
I tell myself that it'll all be fine and that on that day I'll be the glowing bride without much trouble. I think it'll have a lot to do with how SO is around that time. I'm going to need a lot of support because I really do not want to do the religious thing. My relationship with God is quite special and has nothing to do with visiting temples or celebrating festivals. According to me, God has already witnessed my wedding with SO. This ceremony that we are putting on is for all the various people that want to attend something. So... I'm going to need SO looking at me going 'Yes, I know this is not what you want and I understand that you're being good about this.'
It's stupid and childish but apparently now I want brownie points for getting married like this! Kya Kool Hai Hum!
I've hinted at it here and there but just to put it out there... I'm getting married in a few weeks. To SO, a man I've known for 6 years now. A man who is very different from me and quite different from what I believed I wanted in a man. Even now... sometimes it makes little sense that we are together. We don't really like the same stuff. We like movies, but different kinds, we like food but different kinds etc. Our tastes are different and our thoughts are different.
In these 6 years there have been times when I didn't know what was going on anymore. Heck, in the last 1 year there have been times when I didn't know what was going on. And yet, I'm getting married in less than a month. To SO.
When I was a kid, my mother used to sing a rhyme to me 'There was a little girl, who had a little curl, right in the middle of her forehead. When she was good, she was very very good, but when she was bad, she was horrid.' Being a little girl with curly hair... I took it slightly to heart. But I was not horrid.
Sometimes I feel like SO and I are like that. When we're good, we're good. And when we're bad, I'm horrid. Sometimes the whole 'getting married' part freaks me out. I keep telling myself that it's actually exciting... but somehow. I guess a lot of it has to do with having a wedding in the 'form' that I really didn't want. I wanted to wear a simple saree, get a registered wedding and have lunch. I didn't want to do the 'bride' thing because I'm well past that point in my life.
Apparently weddings aren't about the bride and groom, they're about family. Sure, of course they are! But without the bride and groom, would you have a wedding I say? Would you? And doesn't it matter that the bride and groom are comfortable? Don't you want them to be smiling for joy and not out of compulsion?
I tell myself that it'll all be fine and that on that day I'll be the glowing bride without much trouble. I think it'll have a lot to do with how SO is around that time. I'm going to need a lot of support because I really do not want to do the religious thing. My relationship with God is quite special and has nothing to do with visiting temples or celebrating festivals. According to me, God has already witnessed my wedding with SO. This ceremony that we are putting on is for all the various people that want to attend something. So... I'm going to need SO looking at me going 'Yes, I know this is not what you want and I understand that you're being good about this.'
It's stupid and childish but apparently now I want brownie points for getting married like this! Kya Kool Hai Hum!
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Right and ... Not Right
I'm not a very 'good' girl but somehow I find I'm very aware of my 'duty'. I don't do it most of the time but I'm definitely aware of it. At some level I may even say I have an exaggerated sense of duty. I know what my role as a daughter is. It's not to be subservient and obedient, but it is to be of support to my parents. I don't always do what they want but I try not to scare them too much. I try to make sure they don't worry about me too much and that they know they can call me whenever they need anything. I don't have a super-close, friends-friends, relationship, but I'm clear that they're my parents and I've a responsibility to them. After a bit of thought, I realise what I'm trying to say is that I see my filial duty is to do stuff to keep my parents happy while maintaining my identity.
And I'm ranting on because SO is refusing to visit his grand father, who just turned 80, because of ego. Maybe it's more than just ego. The visit involves spending the better part of the weekend travelling, by bus. I understand that it's uncomfortable and not something that you'd be jumping at. But it's something with low effort and high 'joy' potential. And I refuse to be an excuse.
And I'm ranting on because SO is refusing to visit his grand father, who just turned 80, because of ego. Maybe it's more than just ego. The visit involves spending the better part of the weekend travelling, by bus. I understand that it's uncomfortable and not something that you'd be jumping at. But it's something with low effort and high 'joy' potential. And I refuse to be an excuse.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Getting Lucky...
So this is one complicated post and if I get it all out in one shot, I'll be rather proud of myself. I've been reading the blog of a girl who's about 25. She's Indian and confesses to being sexually active. 25 is younger than me, but is it that much younger than me?
There was a time when I contemplated being sexually active, i.e. having sex with multiple partners and always thought that it woulnd't be an option for me. Body image issues. I've no idea what this girl looks like, but really that's not the point of this post. The point of this post is that she mentioned at some point, thinking of how long it's been since she 'got lucky'.
Thinking about it, 'getting lucky' is a term usually used by guys right? Cause they're the ones that get sex when they're lucky. Otherwise they get themselves... (digression, Pink has apparently sung a song called 'You and Your Hand'). The construct always has been that the guy has to work rather hard to get sex. Even when he's in a committed relationship with the girl. That is, committed but not married. The movies, books and stories revolve around how he as to woo her so that he can kiss her, any making out requires more effort and whether he will have sex or not, depends purely on the girl, and therefore on luck. Cause who knows what will make her say yes. Right? Even in India, typically guys don't expect sex from dates. At least, the ones I've met don't.
So... wouldn't it just ber her option? To go out, see if she meets a nice guy and 'hookup'? There was a brief window of singledom after I had experienced physical intimacy with a guy. I think part of the reason why 'they' make virginity an issue is cause once you start, you don't want to stop :) Sex and being intimate are very enjoyable if done right. You're young, hormones are raging, you're in good shape physically (again, a factor of being young, not fit) and you're in love or at least attracted. So in this period of no-guyness, I contemplated random hook-ups. Going out, getting slightly high, hitting on someone and taking them home. See, even typing that out now scares me and I'm not quite sure why.
Maybe it's cause I'm a snob and when I was going out (back then), I didn't have too much money to spend. So the people that I could hook-up with, wouldn't have been the people I would want to end up with. Maybe that's the key, I'm frighteningly romantic and a hook-up would have been much more in my fevered brain. Though I would rationally know that it was just about sex, I would have guilted myself and the other person into believing it was much more. Maybe it's good that I was poor back then :)
But even now, when I can afford several things, the idea of a hook-up is not very appealing. I know what it's like to be with someone. To be able to snuggle up to someone and be held. It's a rather yummy feeling in a way that has nothing to do with sex. Maybe my angst is that the real aim was intimacy and not sex. And that's not something that usually arises out of hook-ups.
So net result? At least I know that I've finally gotten lucky :) Poor SO, doesn't know fully what he's getting into.
There was a time when I contemplated being sexually active, i.e. having sex with multiple partners and always thought that it woulnd't be an option for me. Body image issues. I've no idea what this girl looks like, but really that's not the point of this post. The point of this post is that she mentioned at some point, thinking of how long it's been since she 'got lucky'.
Thinking about it, 'getting lucky' is a term usually used by guys right? Cause they're the ones that get sex when they're lucky. Otherwise they get themselves... (digression, Pink has apparently sung a song called 'You and Your Hand'). The construct always has been that the guy has to work rather hard to get sex. Even when he's in a committed relationship with the girl. That is, committed but not married. The movies, books and stories revolve around how he as to woo her so that he can kiss her, any making out requires more effort and whether he will have sex or not, depends purely on the girl, and therefore on luck. Cause who knows what will make her say yes. Right? Even in India, typically guys don't expect sex from dates. At least, the ones I've met don't.
So... wouldn't it just ber her option? To go out, see if she meets a nice guy and 'hookup'? There was a brief window of singledom after I had experienced physical intimacy with a guy. I think part of the reason why 'they' make virginity an issue is cause once you start, you don't want to stop :) Sex and being intimate are very enjoyable if done right. You're young, hormones are raging, you're in good shape physically (again, a factor of being young, not fit) and you're in love or at least attracted. So in this period of no-guyness, I contemplated random hook-ups. Going out, getting slightly high, hitting on someone and taking them home. See, even typing that out now scares me and I'm not quite sure why.
Maybe it's cause I'm a snob and when I was going out (back then), I didn't have too much money to spend. So the people that I could hook-up with, wouldn't have been the people I would want to end up with. Maybe that's the key, I'm frighteningly romantic and a hook-up would have been much more in my fevered brain. Though I would rationally know that it was just about sex, I would have guilted myself and the other person into believing it was much more. Maybe it's good that I was poor back then :)
But even now, when I can afford several things, the idea of a hook-up is not very appealing. I know what it's like to be with someone. To be able to snuggle up to someone and be held. It's a rather yummy feeling in a way that has nothing to do with sex. Maybe my angst is that the real aim was intimacy and not sex. And that's not something that usually arises out of hook-ups.
So net result? At least I know that I've finally gotten lucky :) Poor SO, doesn't know fully what he's getting into.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Lybrel
So, someone's made a pill which makes periods go away. And if you didn't know I was a girl before this, you certainly know now.
Yes, periods can go away completely. Sometimes I think it's great, sometimes not so much. The conflict is mainly because these are parts that work in crazy ways. And as several articles say, I too have a love-hate relationship with menstruation. I hate it's arrival, but I'm always glad that it does. Means that everything inside is working... more or less. If I could have it go away and still get pregnant when I want? Is that such a bad thing? See, I have my bad days each month, and sometimes I'm not sure if it's me or not. If something could make sure that I don't have any bad days that are not 'me', wouldn't it be a good thing?
Then I read this "Menstruation brings wisdom, she adds, and doesn’t get the reverence its due in our fast-paced society." Wisdom??? What kind of 'wisdom' does one get? That one is forced to bear discomfort for the privilege of being able to bear children?
I once read one of those 'men's rules' things which said 'how can you trust something that bleeds for 5 days but doesn't die?' I kind of agree. Now I know the science of it all, I know that several female mammals go through an estrous cycle... but to the unaware, it's weird right? It bleeds for 'x' amount of time. Then why doesn't it die? How weird it must be? But no, it's not weird... it's wisdom inducing!
And frankly, society is fast-paced. You don't get a time out for being a woman. If you mention your 'female problems' for time off... it's more likely that the interesting work will go to your male colleagues. You may even get questions about whether it's 'that time of month'. After all the hard work women do to make sure that their professional lives are not subject to their periods, I think it's just nasty to say that we shouldn't have the option of turning them off.
There are several reasons why I may choose not to, but my menstruation giving me 'wisdom' is not one of them!
Yes, periods can go away completely. Sometimes I think it's great, sometimes not so much. The conflict is mainly because these are parts that work in crazy ways. And as several articles say, I too have a love-hate relationship with menstruation. I hate it's arrival, but I'm always glad that it does. Means that everything inside is working... more or less. If I could have it go away and still get pregnant when I want? Is that such a bad thing? See, I have my bad days each month, and sometimes I'm not sure if it's me or not. If something could make sure that I don't have any bad days that are not 'me', wouldn't it be a good thing?
Then I read this "Menstruation brings wisdom, she adds, and doesn’t get the reverence its due in our fast-paced society." Wisdom??? What kind of 'wisdom' does one get? That one is forced to bear discomfort for the privilege of being able to bear children?
I once read one of those 'men's rules' things which said 'how can you trust something that bleeds for 5 days but doesn't die?' I kind of agree. Now I know the science of it all, I know that several female mammals go through an estrous cycle... but to the unaware, it's weird right? It bleeds for 'x' amount of time. Then why doesn't it die? How weird it must be? But no, it's not weird... it's wisdom inducing!
And frankly, society is fast-paced. You don't get a time out for being a woman. If you mention your 'female problems' for time off... it's more likely that the interesting work will go to your male colleagues. You may even get questions about whether it's 'that time of month'. After all the hard work women do to make sure that their professional lives are not subject to their periods, I think it's just nasty to say that we shouldn't have the option of turning them off.
There are several reasons why I may choose not to, but my menstruation giving me 'wisdom' is not one of them!
Friday, April 13, 2007
A Charmed Life... or Strike One
I'm still slightly new at my job. I enjoy it quite a bit now and had, about two months ago, suddenly come into a lot of power. In my giddiness about the power, I had begun a process, two months ago that I thought was correct. The process looped back to me early this week. I was still convinced it was correct. Yesterday, I asked some others a question and was met with a 'hell no!'
I'd used this process once before... in grave error it now appears. So far, that one has had no ill consequences... yet. I'm thinking that now I will be much more circumspect. But of the other instance, which was much more serious... when I found the error of my ways, I contacted the relevant people and got the relevant information. I was anticipating a tough fight and some serious back-pedalling on my part.
Magically though, it just went away. I'm thinking that this is because I've got three strikes. I see this as Strike 1. I had stuff like this at past jobs as well... three strikes or get out of jail free cards. After that, jail starts looking more and more probable. So here I am. Thanking my lucky stars and hoping that my remaining chances will be sparingly used.
I'd used this process once before... in grave error it now appears. So far, that one has had no ill consequences... yet. I'm thinking that now I will be much more circumspect. But of the other instance, which was much more serious... when I found the error of my ways, I contacted the relevant people and got the relevant information. I was anticipating a tough fight and some serious back-pedalling on my part.
Magically though, it just went away. I'm thinking that this is because I've got three strikes. I see this as Strike 1. I had stuff like this at past jobs as well... three strikes or get out of jail free cards. After that, jail starts looking more and more probable. So here I am. Thanking my lucky stars and hoping that my remaining chances will be sparingly used.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
The important things
So... as I'd said, the challenge of 2007 is navigating new relationships. Increasingly, when new relationships emerge, old ones are tested. When you are faced with a whole new family, you understand what your family actually is. What it means to you, and what you mean to it. You realise that all the times when you've been the 'good' girl pay off when it's time for family to rise to your occasion.
And I begin to wonder, what is really important? The ties we are born with, we grow up and into. The ties we choose to make, what does it take to keep those strong? In the old times when people didn't choose their own lifemates, the ties were pretty much like family. Some slightly distant family connection that you grow into. Maybe it's slightly more complicated in that girls grow up muted in any case. So it's not like they were very vocal in their parent's house and had to ensure that they weren't too vocal in their in-laws place. They faded into one background, and then into the next... till they had their own children. Super cynical what?
But stepping out of the sepia... in this day and age, what does it take? At what point do you stop saying 'your family' 'my family'? Can you ever? What role does each 'partner' play to make sure that it's a smooth move?
And I begin to wonder, what is really important? The ties we are born with, we grow up and into. The ties we choose to make, what does it take to keep those strong? In the old times when people didn't choose their own lifemates, the ties were pretty much like family. Some slightly distant family connection that you grow into. Maybe it's slightly more complicated in that girls grow up muted in any case. So it's not like they were very vocal in their parent's house and had to ensure that they weren't too vocal in their in-laws place. They faded into one background, and then into the next... till they had their own children. Super cynical what?
But stepping out of the sepia... in this day and age, what does it take? At what point do you stop saying 'your family' 'my family'? Can you ever? What role does each 'partner' play to make sure that it's a smooth move?
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Women and Cliques
I'm guessing it's not a 'woman' thing but it always appears to be that way to me. It has always appeared to me that boys are more laissez faire about groups. You can belong if you want to, you don't have to subscribe to some code, and they don't try to exclude. With girls and subsequently women... it's always seemed a bit complicated.
If you don't start the clique, you can only become a member if the majority want you and the 'owner' isn't opposed to you. If the owner likes you, you're in and fully a part of it. They invite you to all their meetings and invite your opinion on a lot of stuff. If the owner doesn't like you, you're a fringe member. Does it matter? Probably not to anything but ego. Just that people you genuinely like may be a part of that clique and you'll never be more than a fringe member.
Maybe I'm just being hypersensitive :)
If you don't start the clique, you can only become a member if the majority want you and the 'owner' isn't opposed to you. If the owner likes you, you're in and fully a part of it. They invite you to all their meetings and invite your opinion on a lot of stuff. If the owner doesn't like you, you're a fringe member. Does it matter? Probably not to anything but ego. Just that people you genuinely like may be a part of that clique and you'll never be more than a fringe member.
Maybe I'm just being hypersensitive :)
Friday, February 23, 2007
Equality in Tennis
When I was in school we once had a 'debate' on whether men and women were equal. Then, one of my classmates made the point that women only play 3 sets in Tennis and men play 5. Little surprise that when Wimbledon (amongst other tennis tournaments) has decided to make prize money equal for men and women, that this argument arises again.
What I'm not sure about is, are women uncapable of playing 5 sets? Is that it? Or is it just that in the good old days of tennis, when people did other stuff apart from playing tennis, stamina was lower. For instance, nowadays, sportspeople train every single day. So I think a woman tennis player would be able to play a 5 set match. Whether it would have the same power and intensity as a men's game is different.
There were also arguments about advertising revenue, men's matches bring in more. Another argument was that women players also play doubles and make more money but all these are specious in this day an age.
Interestingly, none of the women players offered to play a 5 set match... is this because they don't want to or because they don't think they need to? They play by the rules and entertain the audiences as thoroughly as the men do... you have to agree if you've seen the 'Steffi will you marry me' video.
More interestingly in the world of Golf, Annika Sorensen tried to play in the PGA as opposed to the LPGA and gave up. She actually admitted defeat. So does that mean that differential prize money in Golf is fine but not in Tennis?
Strangely, I'm wracking my brain to think of another game that men and women play where the women are as famous as the men... maybe like Badminton, Squash, Table Tennis etc... Help?
What I'm not sure about is, are women uncapable of playing 5 sets? Is that it? Or is it just that in the good old days of tennis, when people did other stuff apart from playing tennis, stamina was lower. For instance, nowadays, sportspeople train every single day. So I think a woman tennis player would be able to play a 5 set match. Whether it would have the same power and intensity as a men's game is different.
There were also arguments about advertising revenue, men's matches bring in more. Another argument was that women players also play doubles and make more money but all these are specious in this day an age.
Interestingly, none of the women players offered to play a 5 set match... is this because they don't want to or because they don't think they need to? They play by the rules and entertain the audiences as thoroughly as the men do... you have to agree if you've seen the 'Steffi will you marry me' video.
More interestingly in the world of Golf, Annika Sorensen tried to play in the PGA as opposed to the LPGA and gave up. She actually admitted defeat. So does that mean that differential prize money in Golf is fine but not in Tennis?
Strangely, I'm wracking my brain to think of another game that men and women play where the women are as famous as the men... maybe like Badminton, Squash, Table Tennis etc... Help?
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Amazingly PdO!
See, I joined blogger because I believed that it was free and fun. Rediff had blogs but they got boring and were linked to an email account... and now Google's doing the same!
Why on earth should I link my public, anonymous blog with my personal email account? No reason, so I created an anonymous account that I will probably never use. I believe Gmail doesn't have an account time out process, so what the heck.
But what I really wanted to blog about was that there are reports that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are fighting because Brad was looking at pictures online of Jennifer Anniston's new nose! That's just wrong on sooo many levels! I mean hello!!!
So who do you think made the most money out of that story? The 'friend' that broke the story? I certainly hope so.
Wow, so if I become famous, will someone release a story of how my dog got jealous because I was looking at pictures of the dog that I almost bought?
Why on earth should I link my public, anonymous blog with my personal email account? No reason, so I created an anonymous account that I will probably never use. I believe Gmail doesn't have an account time out process, so what the heck.
But what I really wanted to blog about was that there are reports that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are fighting because Brad was looking at pictures online of Jennifer Anniston's new nose! That's just wrong on sooo many levels! I mean hello!!!
So who do you think made the most money out of that story? The 'friend' that broke the story? I certainly hope so.
Wow, so if I become famous, will someone release a story of how my dog got jealous because I was looking at pictures of the dog that I almost bought?
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Would you believe two more things?
One is the official Indian Oscar entry... the other was human greed. Can they get less related? They're not supposed to be related either.
Human greed I encounter every so often, but I encounter with amazing regularity from auto drivers. I'm not sure what it is, whether they receive some sort of training or they size people up and decide that some of us deserve to pay more. Every so often I feel like reading them the 'it's my money!' lecture and it's usually cause they ask some exorbitant amount for a trip. Typically I protest and some of them try to brazen it out, and others actually act like they're being honest. Or maybe they think they are being honest. Recently I was told that the guy's meter didn't work and wasn't what he was asking reasonable? I was too shocked to reason it out so didn't even respond to his request for a counter offer. Then I thought about it and figured I should have told him to check his meter and tell me the reading. Then when we got to the destination, he should tell me the reading again. Xkm into Rs. 6 per km is what I should have paid him. I got another auto though, who used the meter and got me to my destination without any fighting. Took only correct money, which was only half what the first auto driver wanted. It's the second sort of auto driver, who is also quite plentiful, that restores my faith in humanity.
I call this human greed because there's an attitude going around these days which is 'so what if I didn't earn it, you can affod it'.
About Rang De Basanti. Sure, it was a good movie, but if you think about it, it was rather silly, no? I felt for all the characters, quite a bit, till they decided to kill the dude. At that point they lost me. It grew rapidly more fantastic and I lost interest. Lagaan on the other hand was brilliant. But that wasn't the point. The point was that in 2006 there were several other Hindi movies that were great. For instance, my personal choice for an Oscar entry is Omkara. It is an India that foreigners would believe. It is a simple movie, a short movie, with relevant songs and good performances.
Even Lage Raho Munnabhai would have been a good entry. I've not seen the movie, but nobody has anything bad to say about it... except that the first one was funnier. In which case, the first one should have been entered :) But seriously, another movie with good performances and a moral.
Heck, they might even have nominated Dor! Nagesh Kukunoor has been in India making movies for almost a decade. His movies aren't brilliant, but they're definitely stirring. Besides he has that certain something. An Indian who tried America and returned home to make movies about the 'real' India. Don't tell me the committee won't love that!
So there you go, two more things!
Human greed I encounter every so often, but I encounter with amazing regularity from auto drivers. I'm not sure what it is, whether they receive some sort of training or they size people up and decide that some of us deserve to pay more. Every so often I feel like reading them the 'it's my money!' lecture and it's usually cause they ask some exorbitant amount for a trip. Typically I protest and some of them try to brazen it out, and others actually act like they're being honest. Or maybe they think they are being honest. Recently I was told that the guy's meter didn't work and wasn't what he was asking reasonable? I was too shocked to reason it out so didn't even respond to his request for a counter offer. Then I thought about it and figured I should have told him to check his meter and tell me the reading. Then when we got to the destination, he should tell me the reading again. Xkm into Rs. 6 per km is what I should have paid him. I got another auto though, who used the meter and got me to my destination without any fighting. Took only correct money, which was only half what the first auto driver wanted. It's the second sort of auto driver, who is also quite plentiful, that restores my faith in humanity.
I call this human greed because there's an attitude going around these days which is 'so what if I didn't earn it, you can affod it'.
About Rang De Basanti. Sure, it was a good movie, but if you think about it, it was rather silly, no? I felt for all the characters, quite a bit, till they decided to kill the dude. At that point they lost me. It grew rapidly more fantastic and I lost interest. Lagaan on the other hand was brilliant. But that wasn't the point. The point was that in 2006 there were several other Hindi movies that were great. For instance, my personal choice for an Oscar entry is Omkara. It is an India that foreigners would believe. It is a simple movie, a short movie, with relevant songs and good performances.
Even Lage Raho Munnabhai would have been a good entry. I've not seen the movie, but nobody has anything bad to say about it... except that the first one was funnier. In which case, the first one should have been entered :) But seriously, another movie with good performances and a moral.
Heck, they might even have nominated Dor! Nagesh Kukunoor has been in India making movies for almost a decade. His movies aren't brilliant, but they're definitely stirring. Besides he has that certain something. An Indian who tried America and returned home to make movies about the 'real' India. Don't tell me the committee won't love that!
So there you go, two more things!
Friday, January 12, 2007
Two things
One is serious and one is funny... so I'll start with the funny.
The new Lenovo ad for the face recognition feature has Saif come home all bearded and matted hair. His wife refuses to recognise him, but his computer does. If that isn't strange enough, he has a beard and matted hair, but his chest is still hair free :)
The other thing is the Cisco v. Mac iPhone debate. Cisco owns the iPhone trademark now as it bought the company that registered it. Recently Apple announced the launch of its iPhone. Now there will be some legal wrangling. If we accept the facts at face value, Cisco wins, cause it already owns the mark. But Apple (who's being a bit childish about this by calling Cisco's suit 'silly') has a series of 'i' products. The iBook and the iMac are older than the iPhone. If this case isn't settled out of court, the arguments will be interesting. In 2000, would 'iPhone' automatically have been associated with Apple? If it would, did the company that registered it do so because they wanted to sell the mark to Apple at some time? Does it matter?
It's interesting to think what can be done now... say I register trademarks like 'iClock' and 'iView' and some years down the line Apple decides to sell watches and sunglasses. Can I charge them? Would it matter if I didn't sell any products using these marks?
I'm intrigued... I may ponder on this some more.
The new Lenovo ad for the face recognition feature has Saif come home all bearded and matted hair. His wife refuses to recognise him, but his computer does. If that isn't strange enough, he has a beard and matted hair, but his chest is still hair free :)
The other thing is the Cisco v. Mac iPhone debate. Cisco owns the iPhone trademark now as it bought the company that registered it. Recently Apple announced the launch of its iPhone. Now there will be some legal wrangling. If we accept the facts at face value, Cisco wins, cause it already owns the mark. But Apple (who's being a bit childish about this by calling Cisco's suit 'silly') has a series of 'i' products. The iBook and the iMac are older than the iPhone. If this case isn't settled out of court, the arguments will be interesting. In 2000, would 'iPhone' automatically have been associated with Apple? If it would, did the company that registered it do so because they wanted to sell the mark to Apple at some time? Does it matter?
It's interesting to think what can be done now... say I register trademarks like 'iClock' and 'iView' and some years down the line Apple decides to sell watches and sunglasses. Can I charge them? Would it matter if I didn't sell any products using these marks?
I'm intrigued... I may ponder on this some more.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
What was it?
Ah yes... Happy New Year!
Another year is done and another set of experiences have been collected. Did I learn much? I'm not sure. I changed jobs but kept the friends. I'm in the same house... but will change it one way or the other. 2006 was... a year I guess. It wasn't as exciting as 2005, when I came back from studying and got a new job that I was excited about and when I met new people and made a lot of new friends.
The main highlights of 2006 for me are the various sometimes vicious fights I had with SO. In the five and something years that we've been together, I've fought with him a lot but something about the last few months was more horrible. I'm not sure what it is, maybe it's the distance. 2007 promises that the distance will end and hopefully that'll make all the trauma go away. Hopefully.
What is it with relationships? Maybe it's an Indian thing about 'nibhao'fying relationships. Living up to all the duties that each relationship entails. Friendships are easy that way, you decide what the duties are. Family ties are much more difficult. Finding a fine balance between what you want to do and what you need to do, unless you actually want to do what you need to. And then there's the family you choose. So do you decide what the duties there are? Or do you transplant the duties from your blood family and hope that the new one expects the same? Less is great, more... requires girding of the loins I guess.
I think that's what 2007 will be about for me. Charting and mapping new relationships and understanding what I need to do with them.
Another year is done and another set of experiences have been collected. Did I learn much? I'm not sure. I changed jobs but kept the friends. I'm in the same house... but will change it one way or the other. 2006 was... a year I guess. It wasn't as exciting as 2005, when I came back from studying and got a new job that I was excited about and when I met new people and made a lot of new friends.
The main highlights of 2006 for me are the various sometimes vicious fights I had with SO. In the five and something years that we've been together, I've fought with him a lot but something about the last few months was more horrible. I'm not sure what it is, maybe it's the distance. 2007 promises that the distance will end and hopefully that'll make all the trauma go away. Hopefully.
What is it with relationships? Maybe it's an Indian thing about 'nibhao'fying relationships. Living up to all the duties that each relationship entails. Friendships are easy that way, you decide what the duties are. Family ties are much more difficult. Finding a fine balance between what you want to do and what you need to do, unless you actually want to do what you need to. And then there's the family you choose. So do you decide what the duties there are? Or do you transplant the duties from your blood family and hope that the new one expects the same? Less is great, more... requires girding of the loins I guess.
I think that's what 2007 will be about for me. Charting and mapping new relationships and understanding what I need to do with them.
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Blood and Relatives
I figure the closer they are, the more likely they are to make your blood boil. My parents were over today, with my brother who lives in the States. Something about seeing me and all the relatives/family friends in this area. It was going ok till my mother said something which set my blood steaming.
Over the years I've realised that I get intensely angry very fast but very few things get me that angry. My family though can set me off like a shot. SO is another one and with him the outcome is usually thorough as well.
So there we were, sitting in my flat and I brought up the removal of a piece of woodwork which my parents had installed when they bought this flat. They really like it and probably feel sentimental about it. All fine, but I live here now and the more I look at it, the less I want it. I just want a normal wall there, that I can paint any colour I want and hang stuff on etc. So again I brought it up and my mother's suggested that I remove the stuff that's inside it to see if I can really do without it. If I can, apparently 'it's a matter of a day's work to remove that and give me a wall'. Give me a wall???
I've been a hanger on, I agree. I've not appeared financially responsible and a lot of stuff like that but I'm getting much better at it. I find the more I discuss finances with my mother, the more it seems like I can't manage by myself. The sad thing is, this is their flat. I don't feel like making a change without their approval but when they say stuff like this, I just want to move. Right now I'm so angry that I'm planning to move out after I get married. Just leave this place to them and find a place that I can do almost what I want with.
Parents and children... they're completely unwilling to accept that we can move on with our lives, even move on without them. Sometimes I think that would be easier, but I know that I owe them a hell of a lot. I wish they wouldn't see it as buying a right to my life though...
I wish there was an easier way.
Over the years I've realised that I get intensely angry very fast but very few things get me that angry. My family though can set me off like a shot. SO is another one and with him the outcome is usually thorough as well.
So there we were, sitting in my flat and I brought up the removal of a piece of woodwork which my parents had installed when they bought this flat. They really like it and probably feel sentimental about it. All fine, but I live here now and the more I look at it, the less I want it. I just want a normal wall there, that I can paint any colour I want and hang stuff on etc. So again I brought it up and my mother's suggested that I remove the stuff that's inside it to see if I can really do without it. If I can, apparently 'it's a matter of a day's work to remove that and give me a wall'. Give me a wall???
I've been a hanger on, I agree. I've not appeared financially responsible and a lot of stuff like that but I'm getting much better at it. I find the more I discuss finances with my mother, the more it seems like I can't manage by myself. The sad thing is, this is their flat. I don't feel like making a change without their approval but when they say stuff like this, I just want to move. Right now I'm so angry that I'm planning to move out after I get married. Just leave this place to them and find a place that I can do almost what I want with.
Parents and children... they're completely unwilling to accept that we can move on with our lives, even move on without them. Sometimes I think that would be easier, but I know that I owe them a hell of a lot. I wish they wouldn't see it as buying a right to my life though...
I wish there was an easier way.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Tongue Tied
I suddenly realised that visitors make my shy :) Please don't go away people, but I hope that nobody expects much from me.
I was just talking to a friend (it's his birthday) and the conversation went around to the new Titan Fastrack watch ad. It involves a collection of watches (CW) in a circle being approached by a solitary watch (SW). SW in a masculine voice says numerous x's. CW in a shrill female voice says 'y' (or my friend would have me believe 'why'). I always thought this ad related to procreation and CW was insisting only on a Y chromosome. My friend on the other hand, believes that the numerous 'xs' utterred are supposed to be 'sex' and CW is actually asking why. It's plausible... but I'm not convinced. It may be that both of us are reading way too much into the ad, but I prefer to see it as a sexist ad that makes little sense. Surely there are easier ways to convey that Titan has new watches for men and women? Maybe it's the same ad agency that came up with 'From 9 to 5 I'm not your fairer or weaker sex', probably believing that it as liberal.
I was just talking to a friend (it's his birthday) and the conversation went around to the new Titan Fastrack watch ad. It involves a collection of watches (CW) in a circle being approached by a solitary watch (SW). SW in a masculine voice says numerous x's. CW in a shrill female voice says 'y' (or my friend would have me believe 'why'). I always thought this ad related to procreation and CW was insisting only on a Y chromosome. My friend on the other hand, believes that the numerous 'xs' utterred are supposed to be 'sex' and CW is actually asking why. It's plausible... but I'm not convinced. It may be that both of us are reading way too much into the ad, but I prefer to see it as a sexist ad that makes little sense. Surely there are easier ways to convey that Titan has new watches for men and women? Maybe it's the same ad agency that came up with 'From 9 to 5 I'm not your fairer or weaker sex', probably believing that it as liberal.
Friday, December 01, 2006
Feminism
It's interesting how many feathers this word ruffles. Some people get angry at being called feminist, some love it, some... don't care either way. My education gave me a lot of exposure to feminism. In my college, it was fashionable, it was elite and it was sometimes rabid. I for one, found the theory somewhat interesting, but overwhelming. I found the rabidity... silly. The excessively rabid feminists are the ones who say all men are... well not fit to live basically. For fun I've said stuff like that myself. But then what makes us different from guys who talk about women being chained to the kitchen?
Of the various guys I know, their attitudes towards women in general is different from their attitude towards a particular woman. Depending on who that woman is, the sensitivity is different. I've often been called 'one of the guys' and participated in many a risque conversation. Actually participated, without getting offended.
My friends may well be 'guy' guys when there are no girls around and by this I mean they may talk about women as being meant to stay at home, in the kitchen or not able to change light bulbs or punctures or whatever. But they're good people. Who interact with other people without taking their gender into account.
I guess that's what it is all about to me. I refuse to be judged based on my gender.
Of the various guys I know, their attitudes towards women in general is different from their attitude towards a particular woman. Depending on who that woman is, the sensitivity is different. I've often been called 'one of the guys' and participated in many a risque conversation. Actually participated, without getting offended.
My friends may well be 'guy' guys when there are no girls around and by this I mean they may talk about women as being meant to stay at home, in the kitchen or not able to change light bulbs or punctures or whatever. But they're good people. Who interact with other people without taking their gender into account.
I guess that's what it is all about to me. I refuse to be judged based on my gender.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
The Satisfied Mobius Strip!
 Your movie star name: Chips Rajagopal Your fashion designer name is Aarathi Brussels Your socialite name is Baby Bombay Your fly girl / guy name is A Che Your detective name is Horse Sophia Your barfly name is Biscuits Rusty Nail Your soap opera name is Raman Your rock star name is Dark Chocolate Thought Your Star Wars name is Aarleo Cheana Your punk rock band name is The Satisfied Mobius Strip |
Abhiwarya? or Aishekh?
I just found out the Rediff has decided to dub the Aishwariya Rai - Abhishekh Bachchan 'relationship' Abhiwarya, along the lines of TomKat and Brangelina. I didn't think they were actually seeing each other. Not that I really care at all, just that I don't much like Aishwarya Rai. Don't think she's much of an actor. Still everybody deserves someone right?
Abhishekh Bachchan? I thought he was really cute. Loved his interviews with Simi Garewal, seemed like a fun guy. Thought he deserved better than Aishwarya. Thought Rani Mukherjee was a good choice. They actually shared quite a bit of chemistry in Bunty or Babli. So... that was it I thought. He makes movies with Aishwarya, he does poojas with Aishwarya... so what? They want to get married... so what?
Then I find that there's more. Like a family negotiation for a year almost. Both families have agreed, reports say. But this new movie Dhoom2, in which Aishwarya kisses Hrithik and wears skimpy clothes has upset the Bachchan clan. Abhishekh didn't like the kiss and his family didn't like the clothes. But he goes around kissing women all the time no? One can imagine his mother asking him, 'Uska image bilkul theekh tha, phir yeh sab karne ki kya zaroorat thi? Sab jante hai ki woh achchi dikhti hai to phir ye chote chote kapde kyun pehna usne?' I mean!
I thought it would be easy to be born into a family like that. Sure there's paparazzi but surely the're liberal right? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they're a traditional Indian family that insist on Bahus being Bahus. They may be excited and excitable young ladies, but after marriage, they take care of the house and children. So what if they are talented and capable in their own right? So what if they have dreams and ambitions?
And then there's Abhishekh. Is it ok for him to have his fiance give up things which are important to her so that she can 'fit in' to his family? Would he draw the line somewhere? What if his wife (whoever she is) wants to continue working when she has children? Would he say it's her choice, I'll stay home with the children? Maybe he's so well brought up that the ambitious girls stay away from him, knowing that when it comes to a choice like this, they will lose.
I know I wouldn't take it. Even if my most favourite hero professed his undying love for me. I guess I'm quite glad that I'm born to a life where I can choose a partner without fear or favour.
And as for Abhiwarya... I prefer IceShake!
Abhishekh Bachchan? I thought he was really cute. Loved his interviews with Simi Garewal, seemed like a fun guy. Thought he deserved better than Aishwarya. Thought Rani Mukherjee was a good choice. They actually shared quite a bit of chemistry in Bunty or Babli. So... that was it I thought. He makes movies with Aishwarya, he does poojas with Aishwarya... so what? They want to get married... so what?
Then I find that there's more. Like a family negotiation for a year almost. Both families have agreed, reports say. But this new movie Dhoom2, in which Aishwarya kisses Hrithik and wears skimpy clothes has upset the Bachchan clan. Abhishekh didn't like the kiss and his family didn't like the clothes. But he goes around kissing women all the time no? One can imagine his mother asking him, 'Uska image bilkul theekh tha, phir yeh sab karne ki kya zaroorat thi? Sab jante hai ki woh achchi dikhti hai to phir ye chote chote kapde kyun pehna usne?' I mean!
I thought it would be easy to be born into a family like that. Sure there's paparazzi but surely the're liberal right? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they're a traditional Indian family that insist on Bahus being Bahus. They may be excited and excitable young ladies, but after marriage, they take care of the house and children. So what if they are talented and capable in their own right? So what if they have dreams and ambitions?
And then there's Abhishekh. Is it ok for him to have his fiance give up things which are important to her so that she can 'fit in' to his family? Would he draw the line somewhere? What if his wife (whoever she is) wants to continue working when she has children? Would he say it's her choice, I'll stay home with the children? Maybe he's so well brought up that the ambitious girls stay away from him, knowing that when it comes to a choice like this, they will lose.
I know I wouldn't take it. Even if my most favourite hero professed his undying love for me. I guess I'm quite glad that I'm born to a life where I can choose a partner without fear or favour.
And as for Abhiwarya... I prefer IceShake!
Monday, November 27, 2006
A New Voice
I went quiet some time ago mainly because I was leaving a job and office... and moving to a new one. It was quite hard, given that at my old job I did a lot of stuff pretty much by myself and had to properly hand it all over... and that I really liked the team there. The handover wasn't 100% smooth, but it was not bad I believe. There was one issue that came up about two weeks ago that had me a bit worried, but it wasn't a failure to perform a task, it was a failure to record performance. As crucial, but less traumatic.
Then came moving to a new organisation, learning about the organisation, fitting in... it took some time. From not knowing anybody to actually having a lunch group, it's been interesting. These are fun people as well... just that I've to get to know them :)
I met one of my old colleagues last weekend. He was a colleague at my first job, then a friend, then a colleague again, and now just a friend. At some ways, in the job I just left, I felt he was one of my hurdles. He was smart and hard working and all that, but so was I. And he was in my path upwards, and unlikely to move out of there. I guess when I was recruited, I thought my role was important. Soon I learnt that it wasn't that important so wanted to do something that really contributed to the company. I started doing that but it was rather boring... and to get the interesting work, I'd have had to fight quite hard. And there was a hell of a commute to and from work.
My friend would be traumatised to hear that I think he was a hurdle, but maybe he knows. He joined that organisation about two years before me, and naturally had precedence. He was also naturally, doing better than me in terms of salary and position. But I felt at points that there was no room at his level. At points when I felt comfortable with my own abilities, my own skills and believed I could handle what he was handling, I knew that would never happen. Was it because of him, no. What happened to me was that I was in a grey zone. I felt I was as competent, but I was and would always have remained his junior. That as not something I was comfortable with and given all the other factors, it was pushing me out of there.
Maybe my point here is that in some senses, he was competition. Not just competition, but a rival who had a 2 year headstart. Honestly, when I joined I was happy to be his junior and go to him for responses, but eventually I outgrew that and my boss wasn't as useful or helpful. My friend was helpful, but very busy and... well I was as good wasn't I? Yet he was doing high profile work and I wasn't. He had his favourites and I was... on the fringes. He liked me, he liked my work, but I guess the grey zone worked for him as well. I was not a proper junior cause I had almost as much experience as him and I wasn't on-par cause I wasn't very old in the organisation.
His favourite though, was whom I've previously described as the 'hardest worker'. I think that was also an attitude she'd inherited from my friend. Paranoia in all its forms. Jealousy as well. As I said before, I'm happy to do my work and proceed with my life, without worrying about what other people are doing. I think it's a waste of energy to want to work harder than anybody else, I also know that I'm not capable of working more than a reasonable amount. At crunch times I'll work long hours, but it's not something I can or want to do every day. The 'hardest worker' types absolutely have to kill themselves working. It's either training or pure paranoia that somebody will overtake them.
I had this absolutely amazing conversation with a friend of mine recently. Friend from college who's single now and working very hard... and doing the same kind of work or at least willing to talk about it. I'd told my really close friends that I was afraid I was leaving my job because I've made mistakes. She asked if it was 'routine' mistakes and honestly I didn't know. I met her recently and discussed all of this. Turns out it's all the same and some of us obsess about it. Everybody makes mistakes, some of us take it personally. Some of us tell the world about our mistakes and feel terrible about the fixing process. Some of us believe that nobody else makes mistakes because we never hear them talk of it. And when I say mistakes, I mean things we consider hugely serious, but which are actually routine.
Her experience was very akin to mine. Making a major error and not knowing why you made the error. Losing confidence in your abilities for a while and then picking up the pieces. Knowing that we have to go on by ourselves because our bosses don't want to hear that they've to supervise us. And we do, we carry on but are always afraid of the next mistake. When I found out that it's not just me, I realised that looking over my shoulder is counter productive. I'm sure I'll make mistakes, but I've to trust myself. Mistakes might not even be errors of judgement, cause almost every boss I've had would overlook an error of judgement but not carelessness.
Wow! I just realised that I've always considered myself careless. When I was a child, I probably was. I made careless mistakes in maths tests, I lost stuff... Now, I still wouldn't call myself careful. Food for thought!
Then came moving to a new organisation, learning about the organisation, fitting in... it took some time. From not knowing anybody to actually having a lunch group, it's been interesting. These are fun people as well... just that I've to get to know them :)
I met one of my old colleagues last weekend. He was a colleague at my first job, then a friend, then a colleague again, and now just a friend. At some ways, in the job I just left, I felt he was one of my hurdles. He was smart and hard working and all that, but so was I. And he was in my path upwards, and unlikely to move out of there. I guess when I was recruited, I thought my role was important. Soon I learnt that it wasn't that important so wanted to do something that really contributed to the company. I started doing that but it was rather boring... and to get the interesting work, I'd have had to fight quite hard. And there was a hell of a commute to and from work.
My friend would be traumatised to hear that I think he was a hurdle, but maybe he knows. He joined that organisation about two years before me, and naturally had precedence. He was also naturally, doing better than me in terms of salary and position. But I felt at points that there was no room at his level. At points when I felt comfortable with my own abilities, my own skills and believed I could handle what he was handling, I knew that would never happen. Was it because of him, no. What happened to me was that I was in a grey zone. I felt I was as competent, but I was and would always have remained his junior. That as not something I was comfortable with and given all the other factors, it was pushing me out of there.
Maybe my point here is that in some senses, he was competition. Not just competition, but a rival who had a 2 year headstart. Honestly, when I joined I was happy to be his junior and go to him for responses, but eventually I outgrew that and my boss wasn't as useful or helpful. My friend was helpful, but very busy and... well I was as good wasn't I? Yet he was doing high profile work and I wasn't. He had his favourites and I was... on the fringes. He liked me, he liked my work, but I guess the grey zone worked for him as well. I was not a proper junior cause I had almost as much experience as him and I wasn't on-par cause I wasn't very old in the organisation.
His favourite though, was whom I've previously described as the 'hardest worker'. I think that was also an attitude she'd inherited from my friend. Paranoia in all its forms. Jealousy as well. As I said before, I'm happy to do my work and proceed with my life, without worrying about what other people are doing. I think it's a waste of energy to want to work harder than anybody else, I also know that I'm not capable of working more than a reasonable amount. At crunch times I'll work long hours, but it's not something I can or want to do every day. The 'hardest worker' types absolutely have to kill themselves working. It's either training or pure paranoia that somebody will overtake them.
I had this absolutely amazing conversation with a friend of mine recently. Friend from college who's single now and working very hard... and doing the same kind of work or at least willing to talk about it. I'd told my really close friends that I was afraid I was leaving my job because I've made mistakes. She asked if it was 'routine' mistakes and honestly I didn't know. I met her recently and discussed all of this. Turns out it's all the same and some of us obsess about it. Everybody makes mistakes, some of us take it personally. Some of us tell the world about our mistakes and feel terrible about the fixing process. Some of us believe that nobody else makes mistakes because we never hear them talk of it. And when I say mistakes, I mean things we consider hugely serious, but which are actually routine.
Her experience was very akin to mine. Making a major error and not knowing why you made the error. Losing confidence in your abilities for a while and then picking up the pieces. Knowing that we have to go on by ourselves because our bosses don't want to hear that they've to supervise us. And we do, we carry on but are always afraid of the next mistake. When I found out that it's not just me, I realised that looking over my shoulder is counter productive. I'm sure I'll make mistakes, but I've to trust myself. Mistakes might not even be errors of judgement, cause almost every boss I've had would overlook an error of judgement but not carelessness.
Wow! I just realised that I've always considered myself careless. When I was a child, I probably was. I made careless mistakes in maths tests, I lost stuff... Now, I still wouldn't call myself careful. Food for thought!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)