As a Korean American living in the United States, I come into contact with a lot of Korean immigrants. Some came recently or at their late teen years, while others came much earlier, like at the peak of their childhood, and sometimes much earlier than that. One of my friends came here about a decade earlier with her older sisters.
Her eldest sister had been contributing to this society for years. She went to school, got good grades, worked and spent money, and was striving for the American dream just like the rest of us. Even after she was uprooted from all she had ever known and was forced to integrate into a society she had been thrust into without a choice. But she did what she could to support her family and become a productive member of the United States.
Four years she spent learning a trade and contributing beneficially to the university she went to. Four long, hard years after many earlier long, hard years. But then, when she graduated, she learned she couldn't get her degree because she wasn't a citizen of the United States.
Then recently, when she learned that, since she was younger than 30, thanks to a new law or whatever (I don't know the details), she could now become a CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES, she cried with joy.
-to be edited-
25 June 2012
18 June 2012
Divorce Ain't So Bad
It's common knowledge that divorce rates are increasing all over the world. And most people are alarmed by this. I usually just brush it off. Sometimes, I even rejoice a little.
Divorce isn't a bad thing, in my opinion. But that may just be because I've always harbored a desire for my own parents to divorce. Divorce is a way to get out of a bad thing. It's a way for one to be happier in one's life. It's the breaking of a union between two people, like... endothermic chemical reactions (I have chemistry regents on the brain. My bad.)! Energy must be put into this process and then, the bond breaks. Look, there is nothing wrong with endothermic reactions, and there is nothing wrong with divorce.
I rejoice in the fact that marriages aren't 100% permanent. If divorce ever becomes illegal, I'm never marrying. That's not to say that I want a divorce. If I get married, it'll be to a person and for a life that I know I'll never want to leave. But it's nice to know that if things get rough, I have an escape plan. And I know, that sounds lazy, and kind of wrong. But what I'm talking about by when things get rough isn't if we get into an argument. It isn't if we're short on money and struggling. It's if he becomes an abuser. Or breaks my trust to a point of no return. Or if we both simply fall out of love with no hope of ever falling back.
The divorce rate is higher, not only because people are marrying for the wrong reasons or because they are intoxicated by lust rather than love, but also because now that it's more widely acceptable and accessible, people who hadn't gotten divorces because of religious beliefs or societal restrictions, money problems or etc, are getting it. People who were abused see a way to get out. People who no longer love each other, who have been betrayed and can't see getting their trust back. People who want out.
They deserve happiness. They deserve to be happier than they are in that marriage that is just holding them back from that happiness. What's wrong with divorcing if it'll just make both parties happier? What's wrong with divorce. Period... or question mark! ?
Sure, divorce is bad for the kids, if there are kids. But so is staying in a relationship you're clearly not satisfied in. These kids grow up thinking it's okay to stay in something that doesn't make them happy. Don't you want your kids to be happy? And sometimes there's more psychological ramifications for the kids if you stay with a partner that isn't good for you. Like, the yelling. The screaming. The beating. Whatever. It's bad for not only you, but the kids. I am positive that my childhood would've been happier, and that I wouldn't have been in a bad place, mentally, for the majority of my life, had my parents divorced or never married in the first place (Sure, I wouldn't be alive, but let's not get into that just yet.). Even if that meant I had to live in a cardboard box because we wouldn't have been able to afford living accommodations without a second income. But my parents stayed together, no matter how much I wished and prayed they wouldn't, because that's just what they were raised to believe.
I think back then, that divorce was so rare because the men were the only ones with power. And they had a lot. They had the power to do almost anything they wanted with little to no retribution. They picked their brides, for the most part. They had affairs. They beat their women. Many could go about acting as if their wife was just a servant and sex slave. Why would they want a divorce?
Many of these women were stuck in these loveless, degrading, terrible marriages. Or at least marriages they would've been happier not being in. If divorce wasn't so socially unacceptable, if it wasn't so expensive or almost impossible to achieve, the divorce rates then would probably be as high as it is now... except for the fact that these women needed these husbands for the money and privileges and rights, they wouldn't have been able to get otherwise.
Now that women and men are more equal (but not completely equal, yet) in some places, women don't need husbands nearly as much as they used to. And men never needed wives in the first place. Men don't have the power to do what they want without having to face at least some consequences, and women don't either. But also, both genders have the ability to escape emotional and physical abuse. They have the ability to get out of a loveless marriage that is going nowhere. That's just holding them back.
They aren't, as divorcees, as looked down upon as they used to be (although, they still kind of are). It's there. That pearly golden gate disguised as divorce that calls out to many dissatisfied spouses.
While true that this increase in divorces and this easier accessibility to it probably causes some marriages that could be 'saved' to instead be... well, divorced, the pros outweigh the cons. And just because a marriage is saved doesn't mean the people involved are happier. Nor happier than they would've been as divorcees.
Marriage doesn't guarantee happiness (but neither does divorce).
In my opinion, marriage is a flawed institution, as most things are.
My inspiration came from this article :
http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/12/115-year-old-turtles-divorce-after-36-years-of-marriage/
(P.S. This is referring to the Western society, mostly)
Divorce isn't a bad thing, in my opinion. But that may just be because I've always harbored a desire for my own parents to divorce. Divorce is a way to get out of a bad thing. It's a way for one to be happier in one's life. It's the breaking of a union between two people, like... endothermic chemical reactions (I have chemistry regents on the brain. My bad.)! Energy must be put into this process and then, the bond breaks. Look, there is nothing wrong with endothermic reactions, and there is nothing wrong with divorce.
I rejoice in the fact that marriages aren't 100% permanent. If divorce ever becomes illegal, I'm never marrying. That's not to say that I want a divorce. If I get married, it'll be to a person and for a life that I know I'll never want to leave. But it's nice to know that if things get rough, I have an escape plan. And I know, that sounds lazy, and kind of wrong. But what I'm talking about by when things get rough isn't if we get into an argument. It isn't if we're short on money and struggling. It's if he becomes an abuser. Or breaks my trust to a point of no return. Or if we both simply fall out of love with no hope of ever falling back.
The divorce rate is higher, not only because people are marrying for the wrong reasons or because they are intoxicated by lust rather than love, but also because now that it's more widely acceptable and accessible, people who hadn't gotten divorces because of religious beliefs or societal restrictions, money problems or etc, are getting it. People who were abused see a way to get out. People who no longer love each other, who have been betrayed and can't see getting their trust back. People who want out.
They deserve happiness. They deserve to be happier than they are in that marriage that is just holding them back from that happiness. What's wrong with divorcing if it'll just make both parties happier? What's wrong with divorce. Period... or question mark! ?
Sure, divorce is bad for the kids, if there are kids. But so is staying in a relationship you're clearly not satisfied in. These kids grow up thinking it's okay to stay in something that doesn't make them happy. Don't you want your kids to be happy? And sometimes there's more psychological ramifications for the kids if you stay with a partner that isn't good for you. Like, the yelling. The screaming. The beating. Whatever. It's bad for not only you, but the kids. I am positive that my childhood would've been happier, and that I wouldn't have been in a bad place, mentally, for the majority of my life, had my parents divorced or never married in the first place (Sure, I wouldn't be alive, but let's not get into that just yet.). Even if that meant I had to live in a cardboard box because we wouldn't have been able to afford living accommodations without a second income. But my parents stayed together, no matter how much I wished and prayed they wouldn't, because that's just what they were raised to believe.
I think back then, that divorce was so rare because the men were the only ones with power. And they had a lot. They had the power to do almost anything they wanted with little to no retribution. They picked their brides, for the most part. They had affairs. They beat their women. Many could go about acting as if their wife was just a servant and sex slave. Why would they want a divorce?
 |
| Unless it's like King Henry VII when he just wanted bride after bride. |
Many of these women were stuck in these loveless, degrading, terrible marriages. Or at least marriages they would've been happier not being in. If divorce wasn't so socially unacceptable, if it wasn't so expensive or almost impossible to achieve, the divorce rates then would probably be as high as it is now... except for the fact that these women needed these husbands for the money and privileges and rights, they wouldn't have been able to get otherwise.
Now that women and men are more equal (but not completely equal, yet) in some places, women don't need husbands nearly as much as they used to. And men never needed wives in the first place. Men don't have the power to do what they want without having to face at least some consequences, and women don't either. But also, both genders have the ability to escape emotional and physical abuse. They have the ability to get out of a loveless marriage that is going nowhere. That's just holding them back.
They aren't, as divorcees, as looked down upon as they used to be (although, they still kind of are). It's there. That pearly golden gate disguised as divorce that calls out to many dissatisfied spouses.
 |
| COME TO ME!!! |
While true that this increase in divorces and this easier accessibility to it probably causes some marriages that could be 'saved' to instead be... well, divorced, the pros outweigh the cons. And just because a marriage is saved doesn't mean the people involved are happier. Nor happier than they would've been as divorcees.
Marriage doesn't guarantee happiness (but neither does divorce).
In my opinion, marriage is a flawed institution, as most things are.
My inspiration came from this article :
http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/12/115-year-old-turtles-divorce-after-36-years-of-marriage/
(P.S. This is referring to the Western society, mostly)
16 June 2012
What Makes Me a Woman
My vagina.
Not my love of shoes. Not my caring nature. Not the roundness of my boobs or the slimness of my waist. Not the weakness of my muscles nor the intelligence, or lack thereof, in my brain. Not my tendency to cringe at certain levels of grossness, nor the amount of times I cry. It's not my preference of men that makes me a female.
I'm no less of a female because I don't want children. I'm no less of a female if I was really good at sports. If I could win an arm wrestle with a man, it doesn't mean I'm not a woman (and he's no less of a man if he had lost). And just because I'm comfortable farting in public does not make me any less of a woman (although I don't because I have to be sensible to other people's... sensibilities).
There's no certain rules or requirements to be a certain gender, other than one we can't really control. Whether we have the proper sexual organs. Sometimes we have both, which makes us both genders. And maybe there's someone out there with neither, which probably makes them none of those.
I'm a female because I have a vagina.
And what makes a male a male?
His dick.
Not because he is strong. Nor because he 'can't' control his sex drive. He's not male because he has abs. Nor is his intelligence or stoicism the reason he is male.
He is male because he has a dick.
My inspiration came from this article :
http://feministing.com/2012/06/14/the-olympic-games-are-obsessed-with-policing-femininity/
Not my love of shoes. Not my caring nature. Not the roundness of my boobs or the slimness of my waist. Not the weakness of my muscles nor the intelligence, or lack thereof, in my brain. Not my tendency to cringe at certain levels of grossness, nor the amount of times I cry. It's not my preference of men that makes me a female.
I'm no less of a female because I don't want children. I'm no less of a female if I was really good at sports. If I could win an arm wrestle with a man, it doesn't mean I'm not a woman (and he's no less of a man if he had lost). And just because I'm comfortable farting in public does not make me any less of a woman (although I don't because I have to be sensible to other people's... sensibilities).
There's no certain rules or requirements to be a certain gender, other than one we can't really control. Whether we have the proper sexual organs. Sometimes we have both, which makes us both genders. And maybe there's someone out there with neither, which probably makes them none of those.
I'm a female because I have a vagina.
And what makes a male a male?
His dick.
Not because he is strong. Nor because he 'can't' control his sex drive. He's not male because he has abs. Nor is his intelligence or stoicism the reason he is male.
He is male because he has a dick.
My inspiration came from this article :
http://feministing.com/2012/06/14/the-olympic-games-are-obsessed-with-policing-femininity/
14 June 2012
No Abortions for Military Rape Victims
Let's all agree that abortion for raped women should be accessible and affordable to all. Even my highly conservative and religious friends, and even my mother!, agree on this. But, you're entitled to your own opinion...
Anyways, guess what. Not only is it not affordable for many raped women, it is extremely hard to get for women serving in the military. It is very costly, not covered by their health insurance, and can be extremely dangerous, especially if they're stationed in places like Afghanistan where health care isn't very advanced. And some places, abortion is inaccessible because it's illegal or highly, more highly than here, discouraged there. These are military women. Soldiers. And it's estimated that hundreds, and probably more, get raped every year by fellow soldiers.
Even if this article isn't exactly about the rape of soldiers by soldiers, let me address that these 'heroes', these men that are 'serving' our country and who we look up to are raping their fellow soldiers who are risking their lives to serve our country. War, fighting, death is bad enough, but then we throw in the trauma of rape and the inability to feel safe among their fellow workers. How horrible is that situation? Okay. I'm done.
I think abortion should be accessible for everyone. And it somewhat is, in the United States. Sure, us women have to face discrimination, and a lot of times, it costs too much. And we also have to take into account that some doctors LIE to us to prevent us from getting abortions, but at least it's accessible... kind of.
Why shouldn't it be as accessible, if not more, to the women who are 'serving' the country. They are serving the government for as little as $18,000 a year. They deserve, if not from us then from at least the government who they are serving, as many rights as the people who live in the United States. The government should pay for abortion, whatever the reason, including if the woman was raped. They should give it to these women without question.
And let's not even get into how hard it is to be pregnant and a mother in the military.
There's this story mentioned in the article about a young woman who was stationed in Korea. She was raped and unable to get an abortion. Eventually she was fired, even though she was going to be a career soldier, and had a miscarriage. No women, no person, should have to face that.
The Republican Senators are stopping the accessibility of abortion to women who were raped from happening.
Sources :
Article - http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/shaheen-amendment-military-rape-abortio
Anyways, guess what. Not only is it not affordable for many raped women, it is extremely hard to get for women serving in the military. It is very costly, not covered by their health insurance, and can be extremely dangerous, especially if they're stationed in places like Afghanistan where health care isn't very advanced. And some places, abortion is inaccessible because it's illegal or highly, more highly than here, discouraged there. These are military women. Soldiers. And it's estimated that hundreds, and probably more, get raped every year by fellow soldiers.
Even if this article isn't exactly about the rape of soldiers by soldiers, let me address that these 'heroes', these men that are 'serving' our country and who we look up to are raping their fellow soldiers who are risking their lives to serve our country. War, fighting, death is bad enough, but then we throw in the trauma of rape and the inability to feel safe among their fellow workers. How horrible is that situation? Okay. I'm done.
I think abortion should be accessible for everyone. And it somewhat is, in the United States. Sure, us women have to face discrimination, and a lot of times, it costs too much. And we also have to take into account that some doctors LIE to us to prevent us from getting abortions, but at least it's accessible... kind of.
Why shouldn't it be as accessible, if not more, to the women who are 'serving' the country. They are serving the government for as little as $18,000 a year. They deserve, if not from us then from at least the government who they are serving, as many rights as the people who live in the United States. The government should pay for abortion, whatever the reason, including if the woman was raped. They should give it to these women without question.
And let's not even get into how hard it is to be pregnant and a mother in the military.
There's this story mentioned in the article about a young woman who was stationed in Korea. She was raped and unable to get an abortion. Eventually she was fired, even though she was going to be a career soldier, and had a miscarriage. No women, no person, should have to face that.
The Republican Senators are stopping the accessibility of abortion to women who were raped from happening.
Sources :
Article - http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/shaheen-amendment-military-rape-abortio
06 June 2012
My Apologies to Miley Cyrus
I am sorry, Miley Cyrus, even if I know you probably don't give a shit.
I am sorry that I had judged you as everyone else had, although admittedly not nearly as much as my peers. I am sorry I thought you were a bit of a whore and an attention-seeker. And maybe you are. Maybe not. But there's nothing wrong with that.
You're right. It's who you are. And as a liberal and equal opportunist, I'm ashamed to say that I had let society sway my views. Although I had first felt a bit of disdain for you while I was still in my conservative-ish/easily influenced youth, my opinion of you had still not changed much as I grew. Partially because I never really thought of you. But, I'm sorry, for all it's worth.
Miley Cyrus, I commend you for being open about what you believe, despite how others tried to mold you into. For being the person you are, even if no one seems to like it. For becoming the person you want to be, rather than the one everyone else wants you to be.
I wish you the best in your endeavors, including your recent engagement, even if I discourage it. But as many things in the world, just because someone discourages something doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. So for your sake, and your fiance's, I hope that, even if it doesn't last or even if it does, it's not a mistake.
But... I'm still not a fan of your music... Awesome voice though!
I am sorry that I had judged you as everyone else had, although admittedly not nearly as much as my peers. I am sorry I thought you were a bit of a whore and an attention-seeker. And maybe you are. Maybe not. But there's nothing wrong with that.
You're right. It's who you are. And as a liberal and equal opportunist, I'm ashamed to say that I had let society sway my views. Although I had first felt a bit of disdain for you while I was still in my conservative-ish/easily influenced youth, my opinion of you had still not changed much as I grew. Partially because I never really thought of you. But, I'm sorry, for all it's worth.
Miley Cyrus, I commend you for being open about what you believe, despite how others tried to mold you into. For being the person you are, even if no one seems to like it. For becoming the person you want to be, rather than the one everyone else wants you to be.
I wish you the best in your endeavors, including your recent engagement, even if I discourage it. But as many things in the world, just because someone discourages something doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. So for your sake, and your fiance's, I hope that, even if it doesn't last or even if it does, it's not a mistake.
But... I'm still not a fan of your music... Awesome voice though!
04 June 2012
I Want a Wife
Let me just start out by saying, I am straight. Yup. Straight. Sure,
there are times when I appreciate the beauty of a woman's body.
Her silhouette. The curves and straights of it all. The way it works. I have an artistic
mind and I have been caught staring at women's butts as I fantasized
about the best way to sketch them out on paper. Women have such lovely bodies.
But as a straight woman, I have no desire to kiss the soft, plush lips of another woman, or feel her slender, delicate fingers skid across my clitoris. And I know it sounds like I do, but just writing that has slightly grossed me out. It would've grossed me out more, as I am straight, but I'm not as affected by things as I used to be.
So anyways, if I had to have a spouse, I'd want a wife. Not one of them wage-earning, modern feminist types either, but the meek, traditional one. Yup. I do not want a husband who would expect from me a smidgen of what I would expect from my wife. I'd like a wife and maybe a beau on the side as well, and she can have one too, because I do want some cock in my life.
But generally, I want that traditional wife who'll serve me up some yum yum when I get home from work. I want that wife who'll clean the house and do the laundry. Who, if we had children (which I'd maybe, maybe consider if I didn't do the birthing or the majority of the taking care of), would be the one to get them ready for school and watch over them, wipe their asses and generally take care of them.
Yup. That's what I'd want if I had to choose.
(Ehh... here's me kind of apologizing/explaining myself again. As an equal opportunist, I don't find anything wrong with wanting to be, and then becoming, the traditional wife. I just don't want to be one. But if you did, good luck. I wish you the best.)
But as a straight woman, I have no desire to kiss the soft, plush lips of another woman, or feel her slender, delicate fingers skid across my clitoris. And I know it sounds like I do, but just writing that has slightly grossed me out. It would've grossed me out more, as I am straight, but I'm not as affected by things as I used to be.
So anyways, if I had to have a spouse, I'd want a wife. Not one of them wage-earning, modern feminist types either, but the meek, traditional one. Yup. I do not want a husband who would expect from me a smidgen of what I would expect from my wife. I'd like a wife and maybe a beau on the side as well, and she can have one too, because I do want some cock in my life.
But generally, I want that traditional wife who'll serve me up some yum yum when I get home from work. I want that wife who'll clean the house and do the laundry. Who, if we had children (which I'd maybe, maybe consider if I didn't do the birthing or the majority of the taking care of), would be the one to get them ready for school and watch over them, wipe their asses and generally take care of them.
Yup. That's what I'd want if I had to choose.
(Ehh... here's me kind of apologizing/explaining myself again. As an equal opportunist, I don't find anything wrong with wanting to be, and then becoming, the traditional wife. I just don't want to be one. But if you did, good luck. I wish you the best.)
02 June 2012
Republican Wants to Hurl Acid On Democratic Women
This is so disturbing.
So the basic gist of this is that a Republican spokesman or official or whatever thought it'd be funny to say that they should hurl (not just throw, but hurl) acid on Democratic women for supporting an act that is supposed to give women the opportunity to get equal pay as their male counterparts. Let me just say that whether or not he said it in a joke, it is not funny to throw acid on anyone. I'd be the first one to laugh at insensitive, racist, or sexist jokes if they were truly funny and meant as jokes. But this. Just... wow.
Even before I knew that throwing acid on women for acting out against social norms/traditions/ or even to dare refuse a man's proposal was common, it was not funny. And now knowing this, it's still not funny. In fact, it's horrifying.
Do we really want people who think like this governing our country? People who would disregard the cruelty of others by tossing it off as a cruel joke? Would we want our sisters, mothers, daughters, nieces, cousins, etc to have to face this disdain and disrespect?
For daring to stand up for something they believed in, a Republican spokesman made a joke to hurl acid on Democratic women. (And they say they're not waging a war on women. Pssh.)
While true that the Democrats, even though they support the equal pay for equal work act, don't implement this ideal in their own salaries, it does not mean that the women should be thrown acid at. If this act was to be passed, I think the women in the Democratic party would get equal pay, too. And the study that showed that there was a pay gap when it came to gender did not include things like location of work, experience, etc. Which is important, because, let's face it. Men have been working in politics for longer than women. And one of the most important factors in determining one's wage is experience.
And even if they're not supporting this act within their own group, at least they're supporting it for people like you and me, while the Republicans don't support it at all.
So before you vote, think, who's best for me and the ones I care for?
Sources :
Article - http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/31/congresswomans-spokesman-hurl-some-acid-at-female-democratic-senators/
Acid Throwing - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_throwing
Study - http://nation.foxnews.com/senate-dems/2012/06/01/democratic-senators-don-t-believe-equal-pay-women
So the basic gist of this is that a Republican spokesman or official or whatever thought it'd be funny to say that they should hurl (not just throw, but hurl) acid on Democratic women for supporting an act that is supposed to give women the opportunity to get equal pay as their male counterparts. Let me just say that whether or not he said it in a joke, it is not funny to throw acid on anyone. I'd be the first one to laugh at insensitive, racist, or sexist jokes if they were truly funny and meant as jokes. But this. Just... wow.
Even before I knew that throwing acid on women for acting out against social norms/traditions/ or even to dare refuse a man's proposal was common, it was not funny. And now knowing this, it's still not funny. In fact, it's horrifying.
Do we really want people who think like this governing our country? People who would disregard the cruelty of others by tossing it off as a cruel joke? Would we want our sisters, mothers, daughters, nieces, cousins, etc to have to face this disdain and disrespect?
For daring to stand up for something they believed in, a Republican spokesman made a joke to hurl acid on Democratic women. (And they say they're not waging a war on women. Pssh.)
While true that the Democrats, even though they support the equal pay for equal work act, don't implement this ideal in their own salaries, it does not mean that the women should be thrown acid at. If this act was to be passed, I think the women in the Democratic party would get equal pay, too. And the study that showed that there was a pay gap when it came to gender did not include things like location of work, experience, etc. Which is important, because, let's face it. Men have been working in politics for longer than women. And one of the most important factors in determining one's wage is experience.
And even if they're not supporting this act within their own group, at least they're supporting it for people like you and me, while the Republicans don't support it at all.
So before you vote, think, who's best for me and the ones I care for?
Sources :
Article - http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/31/congresswomans-spokesman-hurl-some-acid-at-female-democratic-senators/
Acid Throwing - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_throwing
Study - http://nation.foxnews.com/senate-dems/2012/06/01/democratic-senators-don-t-believe-equal-pay-women
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)