Post 112: Catching Flies

I think this phrase is not particularly accurate. Not that I have spent much time trying to catch flies, and if I were, it wouldn't be with honey or vinegar it would be one of those fly strips. I mean, let's face it, sure the flies will go to honey, but as sticky as it is, it might not actually trap them unless they land in it.

The same way just being nice to people might attract them to you, but it won't actually guarantee their continued presence in your life. Not to say that it would be better to be sour to people. However, there is more to keeping friends than just being nice.

Actually, I read an article that says being nice all the time can actually hurt you. Not in the 'people might take advantage of you' kind of way, but in a people find it annoying and tiresome. The article recommends that for every four good deeds you reach around and slap someone in the back of the head. Not literally, I suppose, but...who knows.

Still, it makes sense. People finding it off-putting when they are around people who are always happy or cheerful, seems like the same would be true if they were around someone who was always nice and sweet but never anything else.

If changed to 'attracting' flies with honey it might make more sense. But even then it is a little sketchy. If someone genuinely wants to attract people, they obviously will be nicer to them.

However, what works even more accurately is -

'You attract more flies with B.S. than with honey'. While literally it makes sense, metaphorically it also rings a little true.

Telling someone what they want to hear as opposed to just being nice, will more than likely get them to come by easier.

Like, 'you are such a great singer' sounds a lot better than, 'it wasn't bad, but I think you should probably do something else'. However, it could hurt them more in the long run.

Anyway, I like the phrase and there are moments where it does make sense. But, other than moments where someone is being annoying or rude to someone else, wherein they know exactly what they are doing, it serves no real purpose.

Post 111: How To: Survive Week One.

So, I started a diet a few weeks ago. As many others who have dieted know, the first week is the hardest as you get used to the shift in your diet: from normal foods, comfort foods, and sometimes junk foods to healthy foods.

My mom and I have done lots of different diets and I have had family do a variety of diets. The one that has been the most beneficial and had the most impact, I've found, is the South Beach Diet. The first two weeks are by far the most extreme. 

The first two weeks is no fruit, no starches, no sugar. Basically, it is vegetables and meat. However, one thing that doesn't go away is cheese. Though, it is still limited. It also has morning and afternoon snacks. Anyway, this post isn't about the South Beach Diet (http://www.southbeachdiet.com/) it is about surviving week 1 of a diet, any diet. 

The three biggest tips I can give:

1. Start a blog/journal/diary. 
2. Don't sweat the small stuff. 
3. One weigh or no weigh. 

It is helpful to start a blog/journal/diary. Each one will have a different purpose depending on which is best for you. Journals are good as a way of keeping track of what you ate, drank, or did (like exercising). Diaries are more of a narrative. You keep track of things still, but when you talk more about other things as well like how you are feeling and things like that. Blogs can be a combination of the two, but is really best for support. There are a lot of people out there who are doing them who you can support and you will find that people will support you as well. 

Don't sweat the small stuff is a very important lesson to learn. I have seen people throw away a diet because they cheated in that first week. It is important overall, but especially in that first week, not to let cheating become a reason to quit. If you cheat once or twice, don't just give up on the diet. Don't throw the towel in. Think of it like learning a skill, just because you stumbled or struggle doesn't mean you should just give up. It is better to cheat once and awhile than give up on the diet completely. 

One weigh or no weigh is something that I think might work for some people more than others. I think that for the first week, stay off the scales entirely or only weigh yourself at the beginning. The first week, I think it is important that you focus on how you feel. Some people feel like they lose a lot of weight during that first week, even when they only lose 2 pounds. After the first week I think it is important to remember this as well. Losing weight in healthy weigh is only a few pounds a week, so checking more than once a month can be discouraging. Overall, I actually don't check the scale at all. I think this helps me because I am not doing the diet because I want to be a specific weight. The main reason I am doing it is because I want to be healthier and feel healthier. 

I think that looking at the numbers too much can detract from that. And week 1, when you are still at the beginning, and not truly committed yet it is easy to be disheartened when you are craving things the most and not seeing results yet. 

So, that is my advice. 

Post 110: WYCLF - Veronica Mars

There are lines everywhere. I don't mean lines at amusement parks. I don't mean geometric lines. I mean, lines in the sand, lines dividing two things under two different labels. The difference between being a strong character and a mean character, for example.

Most of the time, I like Veronica. She is strong and independent. She takes care of her friends and genuinely seems to empathize with her clients. However, there are a few times where she goes too far.

She talks a lot about how she was treated at the school. Her back story is a pretty classic, girl was popular something happens, girl is no longer popular so her "friends" turn on her. She says she cannot pretend that nothing happened and she is mad at them for what they did. However, she seems to lump together all the students in her school with the ones that turned on her.

The only friend she really has is someone who is new to the school.

And she is kind of rude to everyone else. A girl who she doesn't even really know comes to her after her dog goes missing and Veronica blows her off. She not only blows her off but does it in a really mean way. She later helps her, but she was still mean.

On her first day of University in her Criminology class, the Professor sets up have a game. The point of the game is a murder mystery, like Clue, but without the board. Everyone gets a card with their back story and everyone goes around and interviews people to figure it out.

The TA holds the current record for the fastest time to solve it.

Veronica Googles the game and finds the answer. She then mocks the TA for taking so long. She didn't really prove anything. She didn't show herself to be that smart. Anyone could have Googled it. She also ruined it for everyone. This was supposed to be a fun activity for everyone to do, not just to introduce them to the course but to get them to talk to each other.

What she did ended the game after only 5 minutes. She didn't break the rules, but she did violate the spirit of the game. Like using a Dictionary while playing Scrabble or mouthing the word during Charades.

Her then turning around and mocking the TA was horrible, because he actually put in the effort to get the answer by playing the game. I mean, she acts very superior. But I can't help but wonder, would she have been able to solve it as fast if she hadn't looked it up? He copped some attitude about her reading instead of playing, so I get why she would be annoyed at him, but, really, it wasn't the place to be reading to begin with. If she was finished she could have told the Professor or done something else, but reading a magazine gave off the impression she didn't really care about the class at all. It was almost like she was daring him or the Professor to say something so she could throw it back in their face.

And she was actually wrong. She said she knew who solved it, but she didn't. It was either a man or a woman, and she didn't know which. She counted on either the Professor or TA giving it away. If the professor had said 'their' instead of 'his', then she wouldn't have known.

There are several other moments where she crosses the line. This got me thinking about her as a character. I don't think I could be friends with her if she was a real person. She seems sort of two-faced.

She realized that she was perceived negatively, but she didn't seem to think she actually was doing anything wrong.

Anyway, the point I'm making is that in the 3 seasons the four or five moments where she crosses the line between stubborn and strong-willed into being right out mean really have an effect on how her character is seen.

Her character was always kind of witchy (with a b) from that first moment she crossed the line on.

I think this kind of speaks to the point that there are some lines you can't really come back from once you cross them. 

For example, if you start off being mean to someone, you never really get their trust back.

And that sometimes when writing female characters, there is a difference between strong and independent and rude and arrogant.

Like the difference between CJ and Mandy from West Wing.

Post 109: Soon is not Soon Enough

How soon is soon and is it soon enough to keep me from freaking out?

"I'll be there soon." "See you soon."I'll get back to you soon."

When? When is soon? Is soon a week from now? A month from now? A day? Ten minutes? How soon is soon?

And will I stop freaking out until I know? No. I won't.

Guess what! The semester is past the half way point. The end is near. Which is both very sad and exciting. I have really enjoyed my classes, even Latin has been better than I thought it would be. 

Those who have seen my earlier posts might recall one of my classes from this semester causing me to have a slight spazz attack. Creative Writing: Fiction. It was the portfolio. It threw me. It made me unbelievably nervous. 

What if I didn't get it in? What would that mean? Would it mean anything? 

Well, I've done it to myself again. 

Creative Writing: Poetry.

I'm so excited. I submitted my portfolio and the professor said I would hear back from him soon. I'm assuming that means that it will be once the submission deadline passes next month. However, in the meantime, I'm going to continue to freak out. 

Since, I am on my phone currently. I am going to keep this short.

I'll post again soon.

Post 108: Story Cubes: Rolls 3 & 4

So, just a refresher as to what this series is all about: I have a small bag of dice (9 dice total) that all have random pictures on each side. I am going to roll them twice and try to come up with a story synopsis that encompasses, most if not all of them. 

I have already rolled it twice in a previous post, so this will be rolls 3 and 4. 

Here we go:

Roll 3:

A key, a cane, a fish, a moon, a sleeping face, a lock, a smiling face, a tree, and a turtle. 

The combination of the turtle and fish could be interpreted as an underwater setting. The moon and sleeping face combined with the turtle and fish make me think of a girl who when she goes to sleep dreams of being underwater. Or, perhaps, is enchanted so that at night she changes into a mermaid, or into a human from a mermaid. The lock and key with the smiling face can be combined together to show that she is on a quest, she finishes the quest and gets a happy ending. The tree, which looks similar to a Christmas tree, could reflect the time of year as December. The cane could be an older relative, perhaps a grandparent, that advises her.

If we put that all together:

Human by day and mermaid by night, Asherah is different from the rest of her family. She dreams of a world where creatures of the land and sea live in harmony. After sneaking out on land one day, she meets her grandmother who made her home in a grotto. Her grandmother tells her that she decided to stay on land after falling in love with a land walker. She explains to Asherah that she had a child with the human, and that is why Asherah is unique. Asherah makes it her mission to find her grandfather and, hopefully, find out how the dispute between the two sides began. 

Roll 4:

A scale, a castle, a sheep, a wand, a shooting star, masks of Thalia and Melpomene (comedy and tragedy), an apple, an arrow, and an evil shadow. 

The castle and wand can be put together as the setting as a medieval time where magic exists. The sheep could be taken as the main character being Shepard. The arrow and apple could represent an archery contest. The shooting star could be a wish. The scales of good and evil mixed with the evil shadow behind a person could be an internal struggle inside the main character between good and evil. The masks could indicate the genre as Drama.

If we put that all together:

Dyson, a Shepard, who dreams of a better life spends his nights watching his family's flock and wishing on stars. One day, after hearing about an archery contest taking place at the palace, he wishes for better archery skills to win. The wish comes true and the prize is the Princess's hand in marriage. Shortly after the wedding, the king passes away and the kingdom shifts under Dyson's control. As he discovers how much power he has, it starts to go to his head. Will Dyson lose himself to the temptation of power? What will happen to the kingdom  under his control?

Post 107: Revolving Door of Men

That sounds like a really provocative title. Or just a very strange one. This post will be an internal debate between myself and myself, over a fictional character's love life. Whose to say who will win such an equally matched debate?


On the one side, I will be arguing the commonly held opinion that the main character should have ended up with one of the three men in her life. On the other side, I will argue that none of them were really right for her, so it was better she didn't end up with any of them.

The character: Lorelai (Rory) Gilmore. Men: Dean, Jess, and Logan. (Not including any of the potential love interests that didn't make it to boyfriend status: like Tristan or Marty).

She should have ended up with Dean. He was kind to her. He always loved her, even after getting married. Two out of the three times they broke up, it was only because he felt insecure and didn't think he was good enough for her. This showed how much he thought of her. He was also more supportive than either of her other two love's and he got along with her mother.

She should not have ended up with Dean because even though he loved her his insecurities lead to them breaking up twice. And the main reason he didn't think he was good enough for her, was because he kind of wasn't. He didn't go to college, or he did but then dropped out, he talked about going and then suggested he couldn't go to class and then it didn't come up. He married someone else, who he didn't love. He cheated on his wife, multiple times. And even though he told Rory that he would have left his wife if she hadn't found out about the fair, he had shown no indications of that so I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't have. He bailed on Rory twice. He used his little sister to try and break her and her boyfriend up. Meanwhile, she was a straight-A student who got into all three Ivy league Universities she applied to. She wanted to be a journalist and see the world. He wanted to get married and have a kid. There is nothing wrong with what he wanted to do, but he would have either held her back or they would have broken up because he would get too paranoid about her not being home all the time.

She should have ended up with Jess. He loved her. They had a lot of the same interests. He was kind to her. They had really good chemistry together. Even though she was with Dean he still went out of his way for her. He even came back several times in the show and said he still loved her. He was the one in the end that helped her see straight and helped snap her back to her old self after she dropped out of Yale.

He was horribly rude to her mother and, basically, everyone else in town. He was a partier and even though he was smart, maybe even as smart as she was, he ditched so many classes he didn't even graduate high school. And the only reason that he did things for her, the only reason that he was nice when she was with Dean, was to steal her from Dean. He literally told her that the only reason he participated in the town events was to win her over and that now that they were together he had no reason to go anymore. He then bailed on her for prom and left town without giving her any notice. When he showed up again he avoided her, told her he loved her and then bailed again. He didn't take her feelings into consideration, he only tried to force his own on her. He did seem to mature through the final seasons, however, he still has things he needs to do in order to get himself and his life in order. If she were to end up with any of the three, he seems like the best in the later seasons, but not for a  few more years after the show.

She should have ended up with Logan. He was like a mix of Dean and Jess. He was nice like Dean, but he was adventurous and smart like Jess. He loved her. He changed to try to be with her. He was supportive of her and encouraged her to live her life to the fullest.


And he was also a jerk. Perhaps even worse than Jess because he was two-faced. This was most thoroughly demonstrated when he first officially met Rory's grandparents and he stole something from them. He sat around joking with them then stole something that had value to them. The maid was almost fired, possibly to be arrested as well, because of his actions but it wasn't until Rory's mother demanded he hand it over that he gave it back. Rory didn't say anything either. She knew he had it and that a woman was about to be fired for his actions, but said nothing. He was a poor influence on her. He was the one she stole a boat with. He was the one that led to her dropping out of Yale. He is the one that got her into trouble on multiple occasions. He let her drop everything she had ever wanted and he supported her only in the sense that he did nothing at all. He didn't try to help her. Plus, he cheated on her. They were taking some time apart and he slept with or "fooled around" with at least four women. (If you have seen Friends, you will know about the "we were on a break!" plot, which is also used here.)  He later started to act like a jerk after losing a large amount of money. He went partying and went to Vegas instead of being a mature adult and dealing with it. The only reason she forgave him for this is because he injured himself. He didn't actually learn a lesson, she was just so scared of losing him that she felt guilty he almost died when they were fighting. In the end, he gave her an ultimatum, "marry me or we're through", on her graduation day. So, he broke up with her on what was supposed to be one of the happiest days of her life. And only shortly after he basically proved that he was still as reckless and haphazard with his life and other people's money as he had ever been. 

It was good that she didn't end up with any of the guys because on multiple occasions she let a guy lead her away from her dreams. In the very first episode, she wants to back out of going to Chilton so she has more of a chance to be with a guy, a guy she had ONE conversation with (literally, one. He says sorry she is leaving and that he noticed her around, and she is ready to throw away something she'd been working like crazy for). This same guy is the one who later pulls her into having an affair with him, even though he was only recently married. She then tries to DEFEND what he did, because he was "her's". She dated other people since and treated him horribly, he moved on and got married but he was "her's".

She treats Dean horribly because of Jess. She gets into her most serious fights with her mother of Dean. She becomes a homewrecker and ruins her reputation in town because of Dean. She is partially responsible for Jess crashing his car into a store front, hurting herself and ruining the storefront. She ditches school because of Jess. She misses her mother's graduation because of Jess. She drops out of Yale because of things that happened with Logan. She steals a boat with Logan. She jumps of a high place because Logan asks her to. She treats her friend badly because of Logan. She lies to her closest friends because of Marty, a guy she wasn't even dating.

In the entire show from the time she turned 16, she was never really single for very long.She needs to go and live, and be single for awhile. Even when she was single, there were always guys around who wanted to be with her (Marty, for example). It will be good for her to be unattached during the time after the show when she goes to travel the world and write about everything she sees. She can learn to be more independent so when the right guy comes along (whether he be a previous love interest or a new one) she can be in a relationship with them without sacrificing what she has worked so hard for.

Post 106: Rain, Rain Go Away

The rain has been crazy here lately. It is very stormy outside. The winds are a-howling, the trees are a-swaying, and the temperature is dropping. The time is coming. It is almost winter. Soon, the rain will give way to snow. Am I looking forward to that? Yes and no.

I like the snow. Snowball fights and snow angels are both fun activities for the snow. However, it doesn't really snow that much here. Not really, anyway. When I visit my family in New York, it isn't a lot of snow if you can see over the piles of it. People still leave their houses after four - five feet of snow. Here if there is a foot people start getting panicky.

So, it isn't really a lot of snow to work with. Also, it tends to melt during the day and then become ice. Ice isn't as fun. And it means the snow is not really building up and that it isn't readily available when I'm willing to freeze my toes off.

So, do I like snow? Yes.

But I don't like the cold. And I would like the snow to have a use. I sound very practical sometimes, thinking about the value of having a use. However, not everything needs a use or to serve a purpose, but it doesn't have one or the other it better be warm or it better be really pleasant to look at.

I liked the rain last Wednesday. I went to Fright Nights and it bucketed down. Which might not sound like a huge amount of fun, but the rain drove a lot of people home. So, there was really short lines for everything. I think the longest my friends and I ever had to wait was about 20 minutes for one of the Haunted Houses. Some of which we just walked right into. We managed to get through like four or five rides and ALL the houses.

We had friends go the next night, which was rain free, and they only made it through two and waited hours to go through. So, rain was on our side for that.

It was so cold, though. I was freezing by the time I got home.

Still, while the rain was nice then, it isn't any more. Now it is more of a hindrance than a help. And who wants to walk home on a grey, cold rainy day. Anyone? Probably not.

I miss Summer. I won't as much when it gets here and the temperature reaches scorching, but right now I miss it.

Post 105: What Big Picture? The Purge

Let me start off by saying I haven't watched this movie or its sequel. I have a big problem with the movie's premise.

Essentially, according to the trailer and description, the movie is set in a universe like our own, except that every year there is an annual 'Purge' where for 12 hours all crime is legal. During this 12 hours, the country/town/world (I actually don't know what scale the purge is on) falls into chaos.

The main premise of this movie seems to be: the only thing keeping people from turning into thieves, murderers, and rapists is fear of punishment.

This raises a lot of questions for me, both about the movie and about what that would actually mean.

Some of the questions I have:

1. If this was an annual thing, wouldn't stores have really good security? And wouldn't people have a whole heck of a lot of security features on their house?
2. If it is legal for 12 hours and illegal again after, can people be persecuted and/or prosecuted for things that they did during that time once they are illegal again? What if they committed assault during the 12 hours, but then the person died after the 12 hours were up? What about people who committed theft? It is illegal to possess stolen property, so even if it was legal to steal it, it would be illegal to own it.
3. Is this like the Hunger Games, where there is really only a loose explanation of why they are doing this and everyone just accepts it?
4. If this is more than just a city, is the 12 hours different depending on the time zone?
5. If people do steal from work or don't show up to work or hit their boss while it isn't a crime, can they be fired for their actions later?
6. What about religion? Just because murder is suddenly legal, doesn't suddenly mean that there aren't religious or moral reasons not to do it. So, does this proposed place not have religions?
7. If people do turn into murders just like that, then why don't people just lock themselves in a panic room for 12 hours? I mean, is that one person they sort of want dead really worth risking being killed themselves?
8. Why are people suddenly hurting people? I mean, I feel like theft would be a much bigger issue than assault or murder.
9. Just because it is legal, doesn't mean it is okay. There aren't laws against having affairs or insulting people, but that doesn't make them right. So, are people really just like 'oh, cool murder is legal now; let's go kill that co-worker who was annoying me'? And I mean, what about after? Are their coworkers just going to go back to work and be like "oh yeah, you murdered an entire family of people, but its cool because it was during the purge so can I borrow a stapler?" 
10. Doesn't the idea that it is only the consequences that matter suggest that the people in this place would do all the same things if they thought that they wouldn't be caught? So, it isn't really even the laws that were stopping them to begin with.

Sometimes I consider watching, just to see if any of these questions are answered. However, I keep coming back to the fact that this just seems like such a disturbing idea to me. 

Post 104: Pet Peeves Series - Unspoken Changes of Plans

"Let's meet at noon instead of 11." "We'll be home closer to 8 than 7." "I can't give you a ride."

All good things to actually say, rather than assume someone knows. This might go a little past pet peeve level. But, it depends on the situation too.

Recently I made plans to meet a couple people for one of my classes to study. One of them canceled, which was fine. The other didn't. So, I showed up at the time we were set to meet. When I got there I waited. And waited. Ten minutes after the time we were supposed to meet, I sent her a message asking where she was. Ten minutes later I got a text that said she was at the mall, that she had to pick something up but would be at school soon. 

Basically, she decided to change her plans and not tell me. I would have been totally fine with meeting later. I could have blogged, I could have gotten coffee, etc. But instead, I rushed to get a table so we would have a place to work. And I waited there instead of getting food so we didn't lose the table. 

It was only half hour really that went to waste. But it still annoys me that she didn't just tell me. 

This came up again not that long ago. My step-sister and I each have a night where we are supposed to make dinner. 

So, I expect to make dinner and usually ask about a time to have it ready. 

Of course, plans change and suddenly no one will be home for dinner, only one person, dinner will be later, someone is running late, etc. But I don't get told. 

Which is frustrating. When you spend an hour cooking dinner even though you have other stuff to do, only to realize you will be the only person home. It is really frustrating. 

I kind of get that sometimes people don't want to say that plans have changed. Especially if they promised to do something for someone, but then can't, but it is better to tell them rather than to just not do it. 

I can adapt to change, I can't deal with making plans and then having people flake out.  

Post 103: What Big Picture?: Hogwarts' Houses

Over thinking, a term used when someone gets nit-picky about the details. Often used when someone loses focus on the big picture when watching a movie, book, or TV show. Basically, they start getting a little too hung up on the fact that reality doesn't always hold a place in works of fiction.

This will be a series where I do just that.

Starting with Harry Potter's famous houses: Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin.

Here are some of the main traits associated with each house:

Gryffindor - individualistic, daring, desire for fame, adventurous. 
Ex. Thor would probably be a Gryffindor.

Hufflepuff - practical, humble, loyal, risk averse. 
Ex. Spiderman would probably be a Hufflepuff.

Ravenclaw - wise, curious, creative, fair. 
Ex. Bruce Banner (not Hulk-Banner) would probably be a Ravenclaw.

Slytherin -  cunning, confrontational, traditional, group-oriented. 
Ex. Natasha (Black Widow) would probably be a Slytherin.

Now, what is my problem with the Houses? I actually have four problems with them.

1.) What's the point?
2.) More harm than good.
3.) Why isn't this setting off red flags?
4.) Stereotyping.

What's the point? It seems very clear that students are divided into houses based on their personality. But, what is the point of that? They still take all the same classes so it isn't like they are being divided to give them the best education. If they were divided and given different classes or at least classes in different styles to best address what they want to learn or how they learn then I would understand it.

However, this does not seem to be the case. So, dividing them by personality seems to serve no purpose.

More harm that good. Separating them into houses by personality means that they get very limited interaction with people who are different than them. Outside of classes, they never really had to work with people that were different. They are even separated for meals. Which means that they are not being properly prepared for when they leave school and have to work in an environment where they might be surrounded by people with different values, ideas, and personalities.

Red flags. I suppose this could be tied in with the first one. However, one thing that annoys me is something that came up in the first book/movie. Ron: "There wasn't a witch or wizard that went bad that wasn't in Slytherin". So, basically, everyone who has ever gone bad - was in one house. And no one stopped and said, 'hm, maybe we should do something about this?' (In the books, this isn't the case but seems to still be the case that like 90% of those who went bad were in Slytherin).

I'm not saying they should assume being in Slytherin makes a person bad, but perhaps they could have put in measures to prevent future Slytherins from going bad. Like maybe classes in tolerance or counselling. Maybe some sort of Muggle outreach. Because a lot of them have problems with Muggles, but really going to a school miles away from any and surrounding them with other people who think muggles are inferior isn't going to help them better accept them.

And I happened across Fanfiction that had a legitimate point about the problems that could come up in allowing Muggle-Born students into magic schools. And it was that because they have a stronger tie to the muggle world they are more likely to inadvertently expose magic. And, looking at Hogwarts curriculum, a lot of the things they are learning will only be helpful if they stay in the magical world.

How are potions or the historical wizards going to help them if they want to be a muggle lawyer?

So, there are some legitimate issues. But, at the same time, not teaching them how to control their magic is just as dangerous. But these are all issues that could be resolved if there were talks and discussions to help address these issues that some of the Slytherins have.

Stereotyping. There is a lot of stereotypes surrounding the houses. Especially in the idea that all Slytherins are villains and Gryffindors are heroes and Hufflepuffs are the "left overs" (even Harry didn't want to be a Hufflepuff).

Let us a take a moment to look at some of the horrible things Gryffindors have done: James' horrible bullying of Snape, the twins’ locking Montague in the Vanishing Cabinet (getting himself out almost proved fatal for him), Hermione hexing the DA parchment, Harry using a hex on Malfoy (without knowing what it would do, causing serious harm, and almost killing Malfoy).

Also, looking at the examples you may also see that separating people also means giving them an enemy. Gryffindors and Slytherins seem to hate each other. But does the school address this?

James bullied Snape. Hermione hit Malfoy. The twins tormented Montague. Harry hexed Malfoy.

A Gryffindor hurts a Slytherin: seems to be a re-occurring theme.  

But they're obviously hero-types. So, it gets overlooked. After Harry hexed Malfoy he got detention. Detention! He almost killed him. Hogwarts is essentially a school where students are not only allowed to carry weapons but encouraged to use them. There should be more classes on how to resolve issues without violence or magic. Especially for Slytherins and Gryffindors whose first instinct appears to be wiping out a wand when ever someone upsets them.

On the other hand, when ever something bad happens everyone looks at the Slytherin house. When the final battle came Slytherins were put on the spot. Like someone from another house couldn't have possibly caved in to the fear of dying? Like maybe the Slytherins didn't want to fight because it would mean fighting family or friends?

At some point, you have to think that they just get to the point where they give in. After being treated like they are destined to turn bad, they start believing it to.

Conclusion: Hogwarts needs to start using these houses to better the school and its students or it needs to get rid of the way they are sorted. Because as it is, they seem to be doing nothing good for anyone.

Post 102: Cheez-It's

I love Cheez-its. It's hard to explain why the infatuation runs so deep, but it does. I have tried cheese nips and other Cheez-it wanna-bes but they just aren't the same.

Why am I talking about these delicious cheese crackers? Because I just received some in the mail from my dad. He lives in the US where there seems to be a war against everything, except flavour. Which means they have Cheez-it's and Apple Jacks and good rice-A-Roni. 

I like Apple jacks and all but I can live without them Cheez-its on the other hand....

Well, let's just say that when I graduate and am making my pro-con list to decide whether to stay in canada or go back to the US they will make on the list. 

Anyway, it's weird that they aren't available here. In fact, the other day I was thinking about how weird it is so many products haven't made up into Canada.

Recently, Mountain Dew had a contest to see which of their flavours was going to come up. Because they didn't already have code red up here. Which was a shame because I liked code red.

It should be a point in favor of my good taste that code red was the winning flavour. It means that, I sometimes, like the same thing as the majority. So, we should have Cheez-it's in Canada.

Okay, the logic is a little fuzzy but it's late and I'm still sick.

I have heard rumours that they are available in a few select locations in Canada. I haven't seen them but I will keep looking.

Well, that's about as much cracker-related rambling as I can probably manage

So, best wishes all. Hope you're all healthy and happy.