johnnynotsid

It is for the summer, and it's an experiment that I am thinking of making into a group or something of the sort. I want other people to take part in it in their own unique way and maybe even cure some of the buzznet drama as a long-term result. I've already spoken to about eleven or so people, a considerable majority of whom have expressed interest in taking part. It's pretty elaborate and with exams next week, I am not ready to REALLY set things in motion. However, I am looking for people who are interested, especially people who really love creating and/or admiring art and who are not afraid of maybe getting a little personal (not in a creepy way). The good news is, if you do end up taking part, there are pretty much no obligations or strings attached. I'm really looking for people who like to be a little adventurous and artists of all sorts. And you can quit at any time, I'm not going to be trying to pressure you or anything.

So anyways, if you're interested, I'll talk to you about it. Anybody who I choose to divulge my full idea to are, as I said, not obligated to take part or do anything for me. It's totally up to you. However, I do ask that if I explain my project to you, PLEASE keep what I tell you to yourself until I am ready to announce and start it.

And if you already know about it, I have no problem with you making it known that you are "in the know" and can voice your approval or disapproval, just please don't reveal any specifics of it when you do.

I know I'm being a bit weird, but I'm actually extremely excited about this and I don't want anything to go wrong! This could turn out to be a really fun and illuminating project and I think I could from it produce some of my best writing. And I think a lot of people could reveal a great amount of talent and/or potential if they took part. Seriously, I am looking to this with so much anticipation, I can't believe it (I am actually more excited about this than my school year ending: true story). So yeah.

When I was little, I wondered if I was the only person in the world.

Don't smirk. I mean it literally.

You see, the world to me was just so unbelievable and large and strange when I was young that so much seemed impossible. When you're small, everything is relative and you're sheltered. You're confined. Your parents protect you, you have learned only a little, your short little legs can't take you the distances that the energy of your childhood seems to go.

I was never a particularly sheltered kid. My parents early on let me make mistakes, learn things, see things. They'd answer almost any question I put to them. I knew the facts of life at age five and I knew the stories of the Bible at age four. I knew by age seven that my father was a Republican and my mother was a Democrat. I also knew who Monica Lewinsky was.

Nevertheless, until about the age of eight, I had carried the suspicion that the world was made up of devices that were designed for me (It probably did not help that whenever I stopped paying attention to things, my parents referred to it as "Wendy's World"). It wasn't just the usual spoiled-child syndrome. It just seemed strange to me that in this world I lived in, people had done things and I was not there. Or I did not exist. Already I was trying to grasp the concept of not existing. And while I have since come to accept completely that I am not the only person on this Earth, I am still no nearer to imagining that I don't exist than I was nine years ago. It had also occurred to me that perhaps that this world didn't exist at all. And that everyone was imagining it all. Just a dream.

I was a strange child.

From an early age I knew I was different. My Mother says she knew when she was pregnant. That also may have contributed to this idea.

Every person on Earth, I believe, no matter what their lifestyle, beliefs, age, experience, intelligence or wisdom, feels a certain  barrier between themselves and the rest of the world. It's not alienation or negativity. The feeling can be almost non-existant. But it is still there. I noticed it young as well.

So we all feel this way, I believe. And I think that deep down, we all have some idea that the people and things around us are not completely....... let me think of a word.... real? Existant? Physical? We don't feel like this is EXACTLY where we truly exist. That we are not limited or tied to this realm of consciousness. That perhaps it's not even where we really are.

When I was young, I also thought maybe I made the whole world up. Not ina conscious way, but subconsciously.

There is always a resurfacing, sibconscious part of ourselves that doubts this reality.

It's self-centerredness in its purest form, no doubt, but it can't be helped. It is human nature.

It is my belief that this part of us is what constantly influences the actions we regret or which contradict our very values.

Like, when we do something mean. Maybe we truly do not want to be mean, or do mean things. Yet we consciously go through with something that goes against that. Or when we procrastinate and leave things until later. Or when we're just plain lazy.

It does not even have to be a bad thing that is influenced by this section of our minds. Whenever we take a risk, for instance.

The reason we do these things is because somewhere inside us, we think it doesn't matter because the world in which we do it is not real. It doesn't matter if I call that girl ugly. because I'm not really calling her ugly, she doesn't exist. This is all a dream.

You procrastinate because there is the thing in the back of your mind that encourages your impulses and laziness that perhaps it doesn't mater if you do the thing or not. It's not real.

Or when you take a risk. No matter how hesitant you might be to take that risk, what finally pushes you? It might not just be the possible reward, but also the possibility that you have nothing to lose. Because this world may not exist. There might not be any real consequences.

So where does this put us?

This feeling is almost if not totally impossible to control. And it can have good side affects or bad side affects. So what do we do? Is this idea your friend or foe? Or both?

We've often been told that the opposite of fear is courage. I do not believe this. Courage is the ability to overcome fear. The remedy. But not the opposite.

To me, this doubting of reality is the true opposite of fear. Wild abandon. No reservations. Like fear, it can be your friend or greatest enemy. It can not be controlled. It shows up at strange times. It is harder to detect and less familiar. But it exists. Instead of telling you to stop and not do something, it tells you to go for it. It can motivate you to do the most unfathomable things. This anti-realism is not the remedy like courage is. It can go hand in hand with fear, work with it, cause it, originate from it.

But while fear has its remedy in courage, what does this subconscious have as its remedy?

The internet is the incarnation of what we suspect this world to be. And like this world, so much is going on that we can't (and won't) see or control. It's more real than our minds suggest to us. And just like this reality, it's supposedly always expanding.

I would have smiled if it had not been as
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
It hurts more because
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
They took their bites without a word
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
The the brown paint of the door was not covered
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
All of two people sent their wishes
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
In those rushed halls there was little to none
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
No reassurance of what I looked forward to
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
I was as insignificant as ever
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
Even after it was announced no one heard
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me
Yesterday Julia got worse
I had not expected that to be
Happy Birthday to me
An inauspicious start to a dreaded fall
I had expected it to be
Happy Birthday to me

Why did I go?
I can't believe I went
I could have stayed home
But I wanted to take a chance

That it would not be
What I expected it to be

Was it all I expected it to be?
Now off the edgeof seventeen?
Well now I can no longer go along
To one of my favorite songs

Happy Birthday to me
Happy Birthday to me
Happy Birthday to Wendy
Happy Birthday to me

I don't expect Julia to live forever
But I don't want the dove to carry her away just yet
And I didn't want a bunch of fuss all around me
I just wanted some people to forget to forget

"I love talking about nothing, it's the only thing I know anything about"

"Every woman becomes her mother. That is her tragedy. No man ever becomes his mother. That is his."

"No man has enough wealth to buy back his past."

Brilliant statements from a brilliant man. Oscar Wilde.

"Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault. Those whofind beautiful meanings  in beautiful things are cultivated. For these there is hope. They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only beauty."

This is not a brilliant statement. There is nothing so depressing to hear or read than stupid words coming from a gifted mind.

The fact is that what is beautiful to person A is not beautiful to person B.  Does that  make  person  B corrupt and uncharming, just for deciding something someone else finds beautiful to be ugly?

Is it corrupt to disagree with someone?

Am I corrupt to find The Hills repulsive while others consider it an amazing show?

Now, it must be said that the context of this statement was in the Preface of a book Wilde wrote which he knew would be controversial. The book is called The Picture of Dorian Gray. He knew there would be outcry, because society then detested anything that did not conform to their standards of morality.

But did Wilde not live and write this very book into opposition of society's ideals and opinions? His right and courage to disagree and speak out through art?

The very best possible defense of his novel was also put in the preface:

"There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well-written, or badly written. That is all."

But he didn't let that statement speak. He clouded it with this contradiction: "Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault. Those who find beautiful meanings  in beautiful things are cultivated. For these there is hope. They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only beauty."

Rather, it is the person who looks for the ugliness, not the person who necessarily finds it (after all, you can find something unwittingly, as I did in this passage) who is corrupt.

It is amazing that Oscar Wilde failed to find the obviously more truthful and clear wording of what he meant. Then again, the man was under an extreme amount of pressure, thanks to society zeroing in and trying to prosecute him for his lifestyle and identity. But still, how does a genius like Oscar Wilde make such an error?

What does that tell you about the danger of public constraints and society's standards and their effect on the human person?

The statement:
"Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault. Those who find beautiful meanings  in beautiful things are cultivated. For these there is hope. They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only beauty."

This is a contradiction to individualism because something that's beautiful to one person is ugly to someone else.

He could have easily said something that is more true. But he seemed extremely  wrapped up in defending his novel and livelihood because the way he lived his life was rejected by society, so he made a rather contradictory statement under the pressure society put on him with their hatred and ignorance. What does that tell us about the negative effects of social norms and the public's obsession with forcing people to follow them and persecuting those who don't?

The human race can be the very destruction of its own brilliance

I've officially crossed the line into where real problems begin
I've spoken to people afflicted and they said "You win"
This is not about the darkest of which compose my life
But of something of less importance, but enough to make me cry

So already my stomach was wrenching when I found out he'd be gone
For that thing that wasn't big, but which I'd been counting on
I'm hesitant now to go through with the one delight I'd been planning
Thinking about what she'll think when hardly anyone will be attending

I think I would much rather skip the day
Though I usually never feel this way
I am not the type to disregard this time
Or to reject the attention that's supposed to be mine

It's just I know that very few people will be there
I'd just feel embarrassed that they won't know or care
It will be that much closer to time running out
And I expose missteps I can do nothing about

So yes this looming dread contradicts
The spirit of the event which I now wish to resist
But I am not getting older in a way which makes me fade
This is the type meant to be an upgrade

Though I know there are things I can't help
For some issues I can't help but blame myself

If only I'd spoken more and paid more attention
If only I was normal and gave more assention
If only my ears were not occuppied
In such a way that makes it hard to confide
If only I had listened more and picked up the phone
If only I took less pleasure in being left alone
If only I had not put it all off until later
And considered the importance of this to be greater

But I didn't
No I didn't

It never bothered me much anyway
But now I look towards that accursed day in May
The countdown has now descended to three
Time will continue to conquer me

The edge I spoke of before
Sits at a canyon a hundred miles or more
Of this abyss there one thing I know only
That my very first jump will very lonely

I stand over it whether here or there
Whether in those halls or in this chair
And there will be silence because no one will hear
With luck my echo will deign to appear

She has a green and silver tank
Plastic sits at her nostrils
She gave me a ruby ring
We're all so sick of the hospitals
There were no scissors used
Another tear in my unraveling life
There was this newly woven thread
And it was cut out with money's knife
And my triumphs slip through my fingers
My mother paints in France as my father works at home
And I read books I love again
I explain the Teapot Dome
In my spare time I make puzzles
Some of my interests and some of my studies
I came home, clicked the screen, and wrote the words
Where are all my distant buddies?
This morning they talked of things often lost
And how they may rain on another dimension
He got to enjoy a face so similar
Without enduring her similar tension
And those screams turned down
So they do not reach their ears
From that there is so much to feel
And yet I do not have many years
Some days ago there was a flood of tears
None were cried by me
But by those who laugh so much more
With summer as all they see
There are tissues in my hand
In a portion of the day
When I act so scared
And play a character from another play
And what is wrong with me?
Something is so very off
The worst so far has come
But I have not cried enough
I'm not impatient for it
I'm a solid statue on the ledge
It's just seven days from seventeen
When I've stepped off the edge

~ Wendy

The blog I posted the other day about sexual harassment got me thinking for a while about double standards. So I'd like to share some of my least favorite ones.

1) Sluts. This one is pretty standard, actually. You all know which one I am talking about and it goes without saying. If a girl likes sex, she's a slut . If a dude does, he's a player.

2)The girl is even more of a slut when she gets pregnant and she has to bear this burden because she made the choice to take that risk. Ok, sure, but it's still not fair. The guy she had sex with made that choice as well, but NOTHING forces him to deal with the consequences. He can blow it off. She can't, unless she has an abortion: a psychologically and possibly physically damaging operation which will forever taint her in the eyes of some as a murderer which she feels necessary to take because her pregnancy could possibly destroy her life (though it's still considered by society to be "the easy way out" or, even in the words of some pro-choice,  "convenient").  Notice the problem here? Guys can and often do blow off any responsibility in this struggle with little to no consequences. They are not forced to deal with the types of things women have to go through. They can get away and blow it off easily. There is nothing that physically ties them to this situation. This is not me hating on men. That's just the truth. I'm not saying men are bad and will do that. I'm not saying they are incapable of emotional binds to the mother of their children, but they have the choice to ignore them.

3)Also, so often with unplanned pregnancies, if the guy sticks around, people have the tendency to act like the guy is a saint for doing so. He's not. Sure, the choice to leave is hard to resist and it takes a lot of strength to see that through, but that's what should be expected. He's wonderful for doing so, but she's just pregnant. This implies two things: 1) That all men are naturally so awful, disgusting, sefish, irresponsible, cowardly and ethically bankrupt that only the really really special ones can be expected to treat you right. 2) That the woman's own sacrifice is not as deserving of admiration because they're just supposed to have kids anyway and 3) That fatherhood is so insignificant that it's really more of a rare perk to having a child than major threads in the fabric of raising children and parenting.

4) The Lines of Sexist Speech.

Here's all you need to know about women: Women are crazy, men are stupid. And the main reason women are crazy is that men are stupid. It's not the only reason, but it's a big one.  And by the way, if you don't think men are stupid, check the newspaper. Ninety-nine percent of all the truly horrifying shit going on in this worldwas initiated, established, perpetuated, enabled or continued by men........ the male disease, it's called being full of shit."



That passage comes from a book with two sections on the two sexes. One on men, one on women. The one on women is not really all that judgemental about them. None of the things aboutwomen are really opinions. They're facts. It's basically a laundry list of  all the things we have to put up with. It's six and a half pages. But the things on men are major generalizations and opinons and the usual man complaints: Repression of feelings, over-sexed, full of shit, mostly useless, testosterone making them be agressive to people unlike them, always need to be in control, overly competitive, root of all evil being what fathers do to their sons, etc. They're repeatedly referred to as "poor, stupid fucks."

That sort of commentary is usually expected of women. And those women are often assumed to be a number of things: man-hating, lesbian, rejected, ugly, etc. But that was not written by a woman like that. It was not even written by a woman.

It was a man. A white, straight, successful American man of seventy-one years who has millions of people buying his books and spending hundreds of dollars just to hear/watch him talk. He is a widower who was married to his wife for thirty-four years.

His name is George Carlin. The passage I copied out is from his best-selling book When Will Jesus Bring The Pork Chops?

Oh, but nooooo it couldn't be a man! Men think too well of themselves! Only a woman can come up with that many negative statements on dudes. Well, wrong on both counts, aren't we? A dude wrote it.

Moving on, let's forget that a man wrote it. Let's not assume a woman wrote it. Let's just look at the content.

That's some insanely sexist shit. Backwards misogynism!

BUT PEOPLE LOVE IT. You all were probably giggling when you read it. Maybe even howling with laughter, nodding along, or applauding (my parents' response). I was.

But think about it for a second.

Women are manipulating and mentally stunted creatures. Their actions are a constant source of pain, tragedy, idleness, trouble and unrest. They are obsessed with the easiest way to get a man's money and drive him insane and besides that, only care about their own vanity and gossiping about people. They pretend to care and try to trap people into doing what they want. They truly hate their male counterparts and see them only as sources of income. They corrupt the entire world with their selfish actions. It is unfortunate that men have to deal with them.

What did you think of that? I'm willing to bet if a person were to say stuff like that, you'd be outraged.

But think for a second. Really, that was the same thing as George Carlin's comments on men. You just substitute a few things. Men become women. Sex becomes money. Agression becomes manipulation. Penis size becomes vanity. You're still accusing one of the gender groups of hating the opposite sex, you're still accusing them of being selfish, you're still saying they're stupid, you're still saying they're the source of most of the world's problems.

But why is it ok to say that stuff about men, but when it comes to women, it's intolerable?

Ok, sure, there is more discomfort these days when a woman trashes men the way George Carlin did. But it's nothing compared to the outrage inspired by Jerry Falwell's statements on feminism. And it's even more welcomed if you make it funny. Look at The Vagina Monologues.

But Wendy, so much of what they say about men is true! Look around you!

Thats really relative.

A very wise hip-hop artist once made this statement on women:

" This is not a hoe in the sense of havin a pussy
But a pussy havin no God Damn sense"

Translation: She's not a whore because she's a woman, she's a whore because she's devoid of anything mentally to offer, so she uses her body

Basically, you're not low because you're a woman, you're low because you're low.

Well, the same thing  should be said about men. I have met (slightly) more good guys than assholes in my life. They're not all like that.

Why should such abuse be tolerated? Why do we acept it?

And I hate to admit it, but there are a lot of manipulative women out there. There are a lot of chicks who use sex to get what they want. Sorry. We're not all like that. In fact, the idea of flashing cleavage to get what you want is repulsive to almost every woman I've ever met.

Ok. Now there is a group of people, a few of whom who do seem to freely shit on and stereotype women. This is not to be offensive to anyone. But some people who identify with a certain clasification do seem to spew misogynistic crap with more ease than the rest of us.

I mean women.

Women can spew someof the most chauvanistic crap on Earth. I won't get too into it. But you want an example? Go to the Miley Cyrus tag pages and read some of the comments on the top news items. So many of those comments make my skin crawl, and almost all were uttered by girls.

Why is it chicks can so easily get away with blatant sexism thes days. It used to be men who got to do it. Because men controlled everything, including the information available to people, so they got away with eons of woman-hate.

But these days? All sorts of information, view points and ideas are available to us. Yet still slandering and generalizing of the opposite sex, negative jokes against them are still looked on with an accepting eye. The rules have changed, but theyre stil pretty bad.

Women can be sexist.
Men can only be sexist towards other men. Or it's not "decent" or "intelligent" Society in general whill abhor men making statements from  men like,  "Women  are  stupid and  manipulative"

We shouldn't  be  accepting  to those sorts of ideas from men OR women.

Sure, it's not quite as bad. At least with this arrangement, these can't become laws like "adulterous men should be stoned to death" or something. But it's still a double standard.

Worst part is? Men seem to take it. They don't get in a fit over media that says things like, "Men are dumb apes."

Let's pretend for a second that maybe, ok, just maybe, women are the intellectually superior species. Does that make it ok to say that men are stupid?!

Not any more than it makes it ok to say women are weak since men generate more upper body muscle naturally.

But the fact is, we're not. The male brain is larger, and since they use a lower percentage of it than we do, it pretty much evens out.

Most men are stupid. So are most women. That's because most people are stupid. It has nothing to do with gender.

Are we different? Hell yes.

My problem  I guess  with all this is that as a society, we still refuse to see people as individual human beings. That's because we're lazy and don't want to take the time. But when it starts to play on our impulses and affect our reasoning and actions, it's even worse.

The hole world will go to Hell because of it.

Part 2 will be coming soon.

Today at school, a boy drew a picture of a penis on the back of the shirt of another boy.

The guy he did it to (as far as I know) is not gay. He is not thought to be. He is popular, friendly. The two of them are friends. When everybody  found out about it in History Class today, they laughed. So did the teacher. And while at one point the kid with the penis on his shirt did take a wet towel and rearrange his shirt to try and wash it off, he didn't seem to be that upset. It was the focus of that period, BP (I won't use his real name) and the penis drawing on his shirt. It was such a joke that when one girl in our class went to do the afternoon announcements, one of the kids asked her to say "Don't forget to tell BP you like his shirt." She did so. Everyone laughed.

Now, I don't really think BP was hurt by this trick. He might have been hiding it, but I cant be sure and I am not going to make assumptions. But something struck me on the ride home today.

If it had been a girl who had gotten a penis drawn on her shirt, then there would be much less laughter. If BP had been gay, things would have been much different.

Despite my school being Catholic, gay-bashing is not tolerated. While a huge amount of Pro-life propaganda is posted everywhere we look and stressed in most of our religion classes, the other hot-bed social issue that garners much attention tied to religious groups including the Catholic Church, homosexuality, is not stressed much at all. In fact, I can remember every time it has been discussed by a faculty member in a instructional way.

1. Freshmen year in Catholic Faith Class it was brushed upon when we discussed sex. My teacher said that gay sex was considered sinful mostly because marriage is a union between a man and a woman, and since the church says extramarital sex is sinful, homosexual intercourse is considered sinful
2. Freshmen year. Teenstar (sex ed) class. We had an assembly with the school priest, and he brushed upon homosexuality when "instructing" us on sex (because Catholic Priests are so experienced in that area). He mentioned one time when he freaked out and purposely did not hold the door for this guy at a church because he found out the guy was gay and said he was extremely ashamed of himself for it. At that point I was extremely pleased by this story to know our Priest did not condone gay-bashing and considered it "far more shameful than the sin of homosexual intercours". Then he went on to say that homosexuals were really unhappy people. I didn't like that. So I raised my hand and mentioned our family friend John, who I've known since I was seven, who came out of the closet when I was nine and ever since then has been far more happy and is all around a pleasant, successful, happy human being who enjoys a committed relationship with his boyfriend. The priest backpedaled like nuts and told a story of a gay guy he knew who converted to christianity without knowing being gay was considered sinful and lived with his partner until someone showed him those passages in Corinthians and Leviticus condemning sodomy and the gay guy just went "Oh, Ok, I didn't know" and just dump his boyfriend. (I didn't believe it considering converts tend to be the most pious of christians and so the guy couldn't have gotten that far without knowing that. That and anyone above the age of six knows the Christian views on homosexuality. So how he could have missed that is beyond me.)
3. Sophomore year. Brief mention in Morality. Our teacher asked "What kind of kissing would be sinful?" Someone said "Kissing someone of the same sex" and she nodded.
4. This year when I did that project on homosexuality. I condemned gay bashing in that. My teacher (a former nun) loved it and mentioned how "Being prejudiced against anyone, whether it be based on their skin color, their race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexuality is un-christian. We should be a Christ unto everyone."
5. This year in English. Someone brought up the subject and my teacher said, "The idea is to hate the sin, not the sinner"
6. This year doing my day of silence. I had a sign to show my teachers before each class. Several of them said things like, "Cool" and "Good for you."

So yeah, harassment based on sexuality is NOT tolerated at our school. And if there was any indication that it was due to that, there would be serious issues.

Anyways, this whole incident with the  penis drawing started making me think of the line of harassment and play. Because, if you think about it, drawing a penis on somebody's shirt where everyone can see it  could easily qualify as harassment. First of all, it's vandalization of personal property. Second, it's of a sexual nature.

So why was this accepted? Was it because BP did not fit the usual category of victims, being a straight male? Was it because he and the guy who did it were friends? Was it because of his rather easy-going reaction?

It strikes me that if a friend of mine drew a penis on my shirt, and I acted as chill as BP did, I'd still have teachers making inquiries in private to see I was "hiding my feelings." Why do I think that? Because one day at the beginning of freshmen year I had a friend of mine write "Vagina" on my leg as a joke. When teachers found out about it, they kept asking me stuff. Even when I told them I had no problem with it, they'd still ask, "Are you sure?"

Now, my own episode could also partially be blamed on the fact that it was a male friend who wrote the word. But then again, it couldn't. If a girl had drawn or written something like that on my person or clothing, I'm sure I'd still get questions about it. It would be girl-on-girl 'Mean Girls' styled bullying then.

Now, I'm not saying there should be a fuss about BP's experience. Probably it was a just a joke and he thinks it's hilarious and no real harm was done. But even so, it seems odd to me that there still wouldn't have been some questions posed to him, some reprimand toward the kid that drew it.It seems even odder that the joke would have been allowed to be played out further on the announcements.

So what's going on here? Stereotypes on the part of the faculty? Some unwritten rule on the subject of harassment? Run of the mill laxity? Or just a very indulgent sense of humor?

So today, for the first time, I drive my mom and I home from my school. The route includes a winding road with numerous hills that dip below sea level, two highways, drivers my age and other types of insane traffic.

So two minutes into the drive, my mom's cell rings. I ask her to turn it off because I'm in the midst of the busiest section of the route and it is distracting. I need her full attention so I don't mess up.

Does she turn it off? NO!

Her girlfriend is calling! She would rather talk to her girlfriend than make sure I'm secure on the road and driving well! Why pay attention to me? B calls!

And she puts the phone to her ear and starts yammering away. WHILE I'M ON ROUTE 60 no less. I keep motioning her to put the phone away and watch, but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm just being RIDICULOUS.

Did I mention I'm still learning to drive?

So I'm freaking out, but does she give a shit? NO. Her girlfriend wants to talk about her daughter.

And even after we reach home, guess what?

SHE IS STILL ON THE FUCKING PHONE.

SHE IS STILL TALKING.

BY THIS TIME I HAVE TRIED TO CATCH HER ATTENTION AT LEAST FIFTEEN TIMES. I AM RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER, GOING "MOM!"AND SHE STILL BLOWS ME OFF.

She opens the doorto thehouse, I go in, furious, and guess what? SHE STAYS OUTSIDE AND CONTINUES TO TALK TO HER FRIEND.

It does not occur to her to, I don't know, check on what her daughter, who just finished driving a rather perilous trip home, has to say to her? Or tell me how I did? Or ask me anything?

Finally, I banged on the front door, and she looks at me like I'm acting totally unreasonable. "WHA-AT?!"

Me: "I need to talk to you1!"

Mom: "I'm on the phone, what do you need to talk about?"

Me: "I need you to get off the phone as soon as possible!"

Mom: *rolls eyes* "Fine, I'll be right with you."

Finally, a few minutes later, she comes in all, "What is it? What is so important?"

Me: "I don't know, maybe after I asked you to put your phone away, you talked the entire time to whats-her-face when I was driving and needed your full attention?"

Mom: "I was talking to a friend who needed my  help!"

Me: "She could have waited!" (I know this too because she asked my mom if she needed her to call a little later after mom told her I was driving. Mom of course said she could talk) "I wasdriving on a route I had never done before in crazy traffic. I am the priority here! I asked you to put your phone away when it rang and you didn't! I kept asking you to hang up!"

Mom: *blinks* "Well I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were having that much trouble."

And she's still acting like I'm being totally weird about this.

Pardon me, but should it not be her natural instinct when her barely-experieced daughter gets behind the wheel on a perilous trip that she's driving for the first time to give said daughter her full attention and mae sure I don't drive into a ditch? Or when I ACTUALLY SAY TO HER "Please turn that off" when I'm behind the wheel to, I don't know, TURN OFF THE FUCKING PHONE? Maybe when we're driving on an insane street to watch. Or when the driver you're teaching says something to you, to pay some fucking attention? HER OWN DAUGHTER?

NO!

MY GIRLFRIEND CALLED. TALKING TO HER THIS INSTANT IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT THAN MY DAUGHTER LEARNING TO DRIVE AND OUR MUTUAL SAFETY.

SHE GETS MAD AT ME WHEN I LEAN TOO FAR FORWARD WHEN SHE'S DRIVING.

AND SHE IS THE ONE CONSTANTLY GIVING ME GRIEF ABOUT LEARNING TO DRIVE.

I am just so mad right now.

She cares more about her girlfriend that she has not seen in three months than she does about me.

I wouldn't be saying that if she had actually seemed ashamed about what she did when I confronted her. But the attitude she showed, like I was over-reacting and like that was a totally reasonable stunt she pulled, pretty much confirmed it to me.

Who gives a shit if I kill myself on Route 60? As long as she can talk to B.