Pass the Superficial

July 17, 2011

Initially, my idea was to write about “getting past the superficial when I (you/we) like everything else about a person but the package.” Yet, as I thought about it more and more, I came to the realization that I am shallow. So, whenever I get over my shallowness, I’ll write that blog. In the meantime, I need to sink into the realization that the external package matters to me. Sadly, it matters enough that I have willingly passed up riveting conversation to look a handsome man in the face while he talked about nothing … literally.
Now, if I were honest with myself I’d admit that good, riveting, enthralling conversation is a much bigger turn-on than good looks. Yet, I’m still shallow as a brook, and simultaneous deeper than … well … the ocean. I cannot tolerate the idea of me being in a real relationship with someone that I am just moderately attracted to because he has good-convo nor can I be in a relationship with someone who is astronomically beautiful but dumber than whatever is dumber than a box of rocks. 
With all of this said, I’ll tell you a “story.” I was recently conversing with this guy, with his dazzling, sparkling eyes that took his attractiveness up 5 notches, but he lacked a great deal of intellectual acumen. He was fun to talk to, a great distraction. But, he would text message me in horridly spelled “English” and expect me to know what he meant then liken it to him being from another region (the Midwest). 
DUDE! I’m from freakin’ Ohio, that’s the Midwest too; as a matter of fact, my family is from Alabama and Georgia, I understand slang and the different ways that people from different regions speak. You, my dear, just do not make sense.
To be fair, I didn’t actually say this but this is what I thought as he would spin these metaphors that made no sense and blame their nonsensical nature on other things. Yet, he was attractive (those dazzling eyes were awesome) and usually fun to talk to. So, I continued to converse with him. (Sidenote: Thank heavens he didn’t say “conversate,” I abhor that ‘word.’) Then, after maybe 3 weeks max of regular/semi-regular conversations, he says he wants to be in a relationship with me.
Really? Me? I’m shallow. I’m finicky. I nitpick. And I’m shallow. Why would you want to be in a relationship with me? Why is a few weeks conversation enough for you to know that you want to be my beau? 
Okay, I know that shallow is mentioned twice and finicky and nitpicking may as well be the same thing. Further, those aren’t really good reasons for him to not want to be in a relationship with me since I am beautiful, have a sense of humor, intelligent, kind, open, and an all around great person. 
So, what’d I do? Not something to prove that I’m an “all around great person.”
I suddenly became very busy … busy not answering his text messages or calls. I know, I know, I should have been more mature and told him straight out that I did not want him to be my beau or I only want to be friends, as soon as he threw out the whole ‘more to the relationship’ type stuff. But, I didn’t. Thankfully, I didn’t string him along for too long (it was maybe a couple of days). I told him that I wanted to be friends AKA I don’t think I can be in a relationship with you because I’m too superficial to pass up on some things for the possibility of greater things.
Now, I don’t think I’ll be alone forever or anything dire like that because I’m particular. Yet, as long as I’m seeking I’d like to get past the superficial but all I’m thinking is ‘it ain’t gonna happen.’ Instead, I’m just going to say, whoever deals with me, at some point, is going to get served a meal with a side of superficial.
Blog Sponsored by: Society for Superficial Singles
not a real organization

November 15, 2009

November 15, 2009

Sometime last week, my brother and I were talking about how it would be messed up to live in a movie and have the city we live in destroyed. We were watching Transformers II: Rise of the Fallen. So, ironically, today and yesterday I logged into Yahoo and discovered that they created a list they titled “The Worst Places to Live.”

I’ll just give you a run-down (if you want to see the pictures click the link.)

  1. Tokyo
  2. Los Angeles
  3. New York
  4. Washington D.C.
  5. Paris
  6. San Francisco
  7. London
  8. Las Vegas
  9. London
  10. Baltimore

I’ll just say it: if life were a movie it would suck to live in the United States. Although they chose Tokyo as the number one spot, what does Godzilla have on every potential natural disaster that destroys LA, NYC, San Francisco, Washington D.C., and basically any large city in the US.

I’d say that England comes in second. Do you really want the zombies from 28 days later chasing you?

Question: Am I the only person to notice this: You have to be in good running condition to live in a movie. Shia LaBeouf ran about one mile dragging Megan Fox in a war zone between the Transformers & the US Military! And the zombies in 28 weeks later chased the main character into the water and were still trying to get him as his motor boat chopped them into pieces.

I’m just saying … you can’t be fat and live in a movie! You’ll be the second person to die (after the All-American, African American football player and his hot African American cheerleader girlfriend – think Scream).

That’s my opinion about something, for the day. What do you think? What city would you not want to live in, if your life were a movie? What city do you not want to live in, without your life being a movie? What do you think about all of the movies without fat people where everyone gets killed?

Hello world!

November 15, 2009

I think I will leave this how it is. Maybe see how many, “hello’s” I get back. So, say “Hello” to me, and let’s enjoy the things that I have an opinion about.

%d bloggers like this: