I find it both funny and sad that one tweet tonight on Twitter states: "This is as close to a lesbian couple as we'll ever get on NBC PrimeTime. #PeterPanLive." Of course, Peter Pan is not meant to be a lesbian and has always been played by a woman on the stage, but there's some truth to the tweet, for anyone starved for lesbian subtext in mainstream media.

Lesbian subtext (for me, at least) does not cheapen something or make it about sex. It just means that for those of us from a certain generation, growing up scared and isolated because of how we felt and who we couldn't talk to about those feelings, we had to make do with a very limited representation (in books, music, movies and tv) of who we were. As recently as the early 90s lesbians were still featured as villains, if they were featured at all on a tv show (see "Good Night, Dear Heart," Quantum Leap.)

Despite what the far right likes to think (and say) Hollywood is not really that gay friendly. Gays and lesbians are rarely the center of any show, unless it's a comedy or they are a recurring character on a drama. To say that featuring GLBTQ people on tv is somehow an "agenda" is to cry foul...representing reality is not making a political statement.

Though I often think no lesbian representation at all on tv is better than the train wreck/dreck that was The L Word, I still long for at least one or two solid storylines (on any show, really) moving beyond dated stereotypes.

I also think if a much younger me were watching "Peter Pan Live" tonight she would find some subtext in it, because of the innocence between the two leads not in spite of it...


That's just one reason this article drew my attention:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-rudolph/peter-pan-my-first-lesbian-role-model_b_6259296.html?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000054

via findyourfeet.com

More than one website has a pie chart showing that personal communication is broken down this way: 7 percent speaking, 38 tone and 55 body language. This makes perfect sense to me and sometimes not in a good way. Some charts are labelled "effective communication;" others (interestingly enough) are titled "believability."

For better or worse, I tend to be talkative (more than I'd like to be) but when I'm around this one person, let's call her X, I pretty much shut down. I am not proud of this nor do I think it's the proper way to react, but there it is. 

She is genuinely a nice person, but still...I get the sense that she'd rather talk to anyone else but me. Her words are always pleasant, but her tone can verge on icy and her body language even more so (can body language be icy?)


That "please stay away from me" vibe has gotten stronger in time, not less and it's so bad sometimes I either feel like fleeing or I shut up completely. It's very hard having to be around someone you are convinced doesn't like you, more so when they don't know you feel this way. Sometimes (emotional self-defense, fear you'll start babbling away in the midst of all that silence, whatever) you can retreat into yourself feeling frustrated, wishing you could change how they feel about you, but knowing it's absolutely pointless to even go there.


This article has some good advice on how to be okay with being disliked:


http://tinybuddha.com/blog/10-reasons-to-be-okay-with-being-disliked/

Below follows one of the best articles I've ever read on the topic of being single and facing the very real possibility of never finding true love. It strikes me as both odd and funny that even in the 21st century people who never get married can still get treated as though they are to be pitied or, worse, "damaged goods."

"Some people never find the love of their lives. And live to tell about it." is a couple of years old, but it's still rather fascinating and definitely relevant:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/some-people-never-find-the-love-of-their-lives-and-live-to-tell-about-it/2012/01/13/gIQAB0S43Q_story.html

Some of the parts that really stand out:

The hope is for a constant companion who will bear intimate witness to our lives. Who will heighten our joy and ease our suffering. Who will be our designated collaborator and caretaker, sparing us the effort of constantly fending for ourselves.

And we’re promised as much. There is a lid for every pot, they say. Someone for everyone.

This part particularly resonates, especially because people (even those who barely know you) feel free (without provocation) to comment on your state of not being married:

And when we meet someone who hasn’t married by 40 or 50, we want an explanation. So, we assign one: He’s a commitment-phobe. She’s too picky. They all have “issues.” Because if there was no reason, it could happen to any of us — and that’s not a prospect we’re eager to confront.

Braitman, the blogger, knows people assume it’s somehow her fault, and they’re quick to try to fix the problem. “Everyone’s weighed in on it,” she says. “ ‘You should wear your clothes tight. You should not have short hair. You should dress more like a girl.’ I think I’ve heard everything.”


At the time the Washington Post linked this online, comments reached over 700, many of which are interesting and some of which are very comforting.

If I only loved people who loved me back, I probably wouldn't have much love in my life. It's kind of like my faith. There are days I don't feel any real reason to believe in God. So many horrible things happen to good people every single day and children suffer terribly, children (!) who haven't been on this earth long enough to bring on any of their own troubles.

Then I see something incredibly small and (seemingly impossible) like a squirrel make it across the street fine and perfectly intact and I feel Him. I can't get mad at something I can't see and I can't get upset because the world is so cruel. Maybe we wouldn't have free will if we were constantly being protected or saved by a Higher Being.

Sometimes I try not to think about any of this because if I think too much, I feel like I chip away each day at faith. And like lots and lots of people, I feel like, sometimes, faith is all there is...

Faith isn't easy, of course, and it cannot be forced. I went through a long period in my life when I was angry at God, mistaking my anger with organized religion with Him and desperately trying to detach whenever possible.

The thing is, though, you either believe or you don't. Just like you can't make yourself love someone, you can't make yourself believe something you don't. That's one reason why Pascal's Wager always drove me crazy.

Another reason is this:
 
In fact, according to many of these progressive religionists, God has more respect for sincere atheists who fearlessly proclaim their non-belief than he does for insincere "believers" who pretend to have faith because it's easier and safer and they don't want to rock the boat. According to these progressives, honest atheism is actually the safer bet. The weaselly hypocrisy of Pascal's Wager is more likely to get up God's nose.

read more here

Believing in God because there's something in it for you (besides peace of mind and comfort) is just as maddening as being a "good" person because you don't want to go to Hell. You should do something good because it's the right thing to do, not because there's a reward at the end.

I just started this novel. It has such a weird cover and is even weirder inside...but the good kind of weird. You read it more for the writing itself (it's terrific!) than the plot or even the characters.

For a sneak peek:


http://www.amazon.com/About-Girl-Joanne-Horniman-ebook/dp/B006O3ODMI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1417540574&sr=8-3&keywords=about+a+girl+kindle#reader_B006O3ODMI