When "texting" first arrived on the scene, I gradually embraced the idea. At first I typed everything out using an excruciatingly slow method, scrolling through each letter individually, until my sons introduced me to predictive text. It was very confusing at first. As I typed the word "good", the word appearing on my phone began with "i - n - n ... what the heck?! I finally took the leap of faith needed to let the phone figure out what I was trying to say. Now that I am somewhat of an expert, (ha,ha)* I am still amused by which words pop up first. What novice would ever guess that typing the word "look" would result in the word "Konk" (and alphabetized, no less)?
Just when I think I have it figured out, though, my phone does something more disconcerting. It has started to replace words with numbers. I have no idea what I did to cause this anomaly, nor what I must do to fix it. Probably at some point I pressed a button signaling my desire for this to happen. "I'm going to the store at noon today" translates into "I.m going 86 the store 28 noon today." Before I correct it, "call me when you get home" comes out as "call me 9436 you get good". Essentially, gibberish. I've joked with friends that we should try to decipher messages that we've sent each other without proofreading.
As if that's not enough to worry about, there's a new challenge in my conversations brought about by the advent of the keyboard phone. If I'm texting someone with that capability I can't type fast enough to keep up with them.
Sample conversation:
Friend: "What are you up to?"
Me: "Getting ready to do some errands. How about you?"
Friend: "Yes, me too. Do you have time for coffee later?"
Me: (madly typing) "Yes, but I'm not sure when I'll be.....
Friend: ...their text coming in before I can finish mine.....
Well, with time, I've become more proficient at texting and have managed to work out some of the kinks. I almost never send a text now without quickly proofreading it first. If I expect to have a pretty long conversation with a keyboard phone user I warn them to allow a delay for my responses so our conversation stays in sync.
The main reason for today's discussion, however, is an appeal to all fellow "texters" to come up with some words to replace those used by the younger generation. My three most urgent needs are alternatives for "ha, ha"* (see above), OMG, and lol. Don't misunderstand me; I have no problem with people my age using these terms. It's just that if I use any of these expressions when texting my kids or their contemporaries I get the uneasy feeling that I am trying to be "cool". For example, the other day I very reluctantly texted the term "OMG" to one of my sons because I was in a such a hurry. Typing my usual "OMGosh", would have involved an extremely time-consuming combination of scrolling, spaces and backspaces. Even before I had finished chiding myself for using the term, a text came in from my son. With the refreshing honesty that I expect from all of my boys, his text said simply "please don't say omg". Of course this made me lol. When using the term "lol" for a lack of an appropriate substitute, I feel like I am a mere belly-button ring away from turning into that mother whom everyone criticizes for acting like a teenager. Therefore, I feel we need some "grown up" ways to express certain expressions via text and even through e-mail for that matter. I have tried using one "ha" but that looks like I just forgot to type the second "ha". Instead of lol, I once typed "very funny" but that sounded like sarcasm!!
Anyway, I'm counting on some great suggestions from anyone reading today. The only problem I foresee is that once we come up with some alternatives, we have to use them consistently enough that they become a part of general texting parlance. I can text "ctm" to my heart's content, but unless people know that I mean "chuckling to myself" my crusade will be all for naught.
Copyright 2011 KKR
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
letter to the editor
In an attempt to preserve my sanity, several months ago I pledged to stop reading the editorials in our community newspaper. The pompous drivel of certain contributors had become unbearable. Alas, some issues, such as the environment, religion, and politics draw me in like a moth to the flame. The other day I tried to scan the editorial page while squinting to avoid seeing anything provocative, but to no avail. The name of one particularly prolific writer caught my eye and against my better judgment, I began to read.
To avoid confusion, we'll call this man Thing 1. Thing 1 was responding to a letter in the previous week's paper written by a man we will call Thing 2. Thing 2 was concerned about the attempts of some members of Congress to water down (pardon the pun) the Clean Air/Clean Water Act and the potential effect this could have on global warming.
*(I give full credit to Dr. Seuss for use of the names Thing 1 and Thing 2)
Let me stress that global warming is not the main issue here. The issue is civil discourse.
To provide a context, here are a few excerpts from Thing 1's letter..... "if carbon dioxide is a pollutant, does that mean all of us are polluters when we exhale? Will we need permits (to breathe)?" The idea that we would have to stop breathing to combat global warming, while undeniably hilarious, defies logic.
Thing 1 further laments "that radical environmentalism is killing our economy." Call me a cockeyed optimist, but are a healthy economy and a healthy environment mutually exclusive? In addition, why does he feel the need to disparage Thing 2's desire to pass on a liveable planet to our children? This kind of thinking makes my brain hurt.
I suddenly came up with a novel idea. People writing an editorial could not only use common sense, they could treat those with whom they disagree respectfully. Lose the sarcasm. Take the high road. I, for one, would be more receptive to what they have to say under those conditions. Unfortunately, it's naive to think that everyone is motivated by this utopian ideal. I think some people just want to stir things up.
(And yes, I realize that I too would have to behave accordingly. For the purposes of today's post, however, sarcasm is essential.)
The editorial page of our local paper is beginning to resemble the 60 Minutes segment “Point – Counterpoint” with Shana Alexander and James J. Kilpatrick. For those too young to remember it, Wikipedia explains:
To avoid confusion, we'll call this man Thing 1. Thing 1 was responding to a letter in the previous week's paper written by a man we will call Thing 2. Thing 2 was concerned about the attempts of some members of Congress to water down (pardon the pun) the Clean Air/Clean Water Act and the potential effect this could have on global warming.
*(I give full credit to Dr. Seuss for use of the names Thing 1 and Thing 2)
Let me stress that global warming is not the main issue here. The issue is civil discourse.
To provide a context, here are a few excerpts from Thing 1's letter..... "if carbon dioxide is a pollutant, does that mean all of us are polluters when we exhale? Will we need permits (to breathe)?" The idea that we would have to stop breathing to combat global warming, while undeniably hilarious, defies logic.
Thing 1 further laments "that radical environmentalism is killing our economy." Call me a cockeyed optimist, but are a healthy economy and a healthy environment mutually exclusive? In addition, why does he feel the need to disparage Thing 2's desire to pass on a liveable planet to our children? This kind of thinking makes my brain hurt.
I suddenly came up with a novel idea. People writing an editorial could not only use common sense, they could treat those with whom they disagree respectfully. Lose the sarcasm. Take the high road. I, for one, would be more receptive to what they have to say under those conditions. Unfortunately, it's naive to think that everyone is motivated by this utopian ideal. I think some people just want to stir things up.
(And yes, I realize that I too would have to behave accordingly. For the purposes of today's post, however, sarcasm is essential.)
The editorial page of our local paper is beginning to resemble the 60 Minutes segment “Point – Counterpoint” with Shana Alexander and James J. Kilpatrick. For those too young to remember it, Wikipedia explains:
"For most of the 1970s, the program (60 Minutes) included the Point/Counterpoint segment in which a liberal and a conservative commentator would debate a particular issue. This originally featured James J. Kilpatrick representing the conservative side and Nicholas von Hoffman for the liberal, with Shana Alexander taking over for von Hoffman after he departed in 1974. Point/Counterpoint was also lampooned by the NBC comedy series Saturday Night Live, which featured Jane Curtin and Dan Aykroyd as debaters, with Aykroyd typically beginning his remarks with, "Jane, you ignorant slut".
The interesting thing is that Shana Alexander's niece, Hannah Bentley is quoted as saying "her aunt........ and Kilpatrick were good friends off camera". This kind of civility is what we have lost in the last several years but I think we can recapture it. Let's agree to disagree, but when we're done, part with a handshake.
Copyright 2011 KKR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/60_Minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7S_XWuKpHc&feature=related
Monday, February 14, 2011
❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
♥♥❤❤❤❥❥❥❥❥❥♡♡♡❥❥❥❥❥❥❤❤❤♥♥
Friday, February 11, 2011
Do you have our frequent shopper card?
It started out innocently enough. I think my first "frequent shopper card" was for a wonderful sandwich cart parked outside the Lowe's that I used to frequent. Before Home Depot sprouted up a mere 5 minutes from where I live, I was forced to drive about 20 minutes away to Lowe's for my home improvement needs. The sandwich cart outside the store was called Dominic's and they lured me in with the aroma of sausage, mushroom and onion sandwiches sautéing on their grill. The yummy food served by the personable man doing the cooking was enough to turn me into a repeat customer.
That's when it happened. As I paid for my sandwich, he asked if I had a frequent diner card. He explained that after my card had been punched a certain number of times I would be eligible for a free sandwich. Now you'd have to be crazy to turn down that offer, right? He gave me my first "punch" and I threw the card in the black hole otherwise known as my purse. The next time I bought a sandwich at Dominic's, I couldn't find the card, but the owner assured me that this was no problem. He just gave me a stamp on a new card that could be combined with the first after I found it. He obviously didn't know who he was dealing with, assuming that I would find the first card. As luck would have it, I did manage to round up the four cards I had accumulated and he stapled them together. When I reached my goal of a free sandwich it was every bit as satisfying as I had imagined it would be. Then..... he gave me a new card.
In the 6 months that this was going on I began to get offers of frequent shopper cards from all my usual haunts; the organic bread shop, Office Depot, Panera, Dick's, two local grocery stores, book stores, the discount hairdresser. Its novelty began to fade when I realized that the frequent shopper program was a double-edged sword. Sure I might receive a free haircut or loaf of bread at the end of my quest, but how hard would I have to work for it? The pile of cards I had amassed had grown big enough to need it's own little draw-string carrying case. Then, when the clerk asked for my frequent shopper card she/he would have to wait a few seconds too many while I rifled through the pile apologetically. I eventually learned to plan ahead. Before heading into the store, I would dig out the appropriate card and have it ready in my pocket.
The ordeal has become such a burden that I have decided to purge all the cards from my drawstring bag. The thing is, I am one stamp away from a free sandwich at Panera and two punches away from a loaf of bread at the organic bread store. Come to think of it, I may still have credit for a free haircut somewhere. As difficult as it will be, my plan is to cash in on the two or three free things that I have earned and when the proprietors try to give me a new card, I will resolutely say "no thanks" despite their judgmental stares.
Copyright 2011 KKR
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
where have you been, ms. kakiehokie?
I am now learning the hard lessons of the novice blogger. First of all, don't begin your blog by posting every day. Inevitably the number of ideas floating around in your head will ebb and flow and posting twice a week will seem much more sensible. If you are lucky enough to have any followers, you risk disappointing them. Then the day might come when you log onto your blog only to find that one of those little follower icons is conspicuously absent. I don't want to put pressure on any of you, but that would be devastating!!
The last week presented some time management challenges to me. Of course there was the Super Bowl, which we will not talk about. In addition, on Super Bowl Sunday, the coil in my oven burned up and I am attempting to fix it myself. I have the part in hand and have been told that it is relatively easy to replace. (normally, a sure sign that you should call an expert) I keep forgetting that the oven is broken, though, and turn the burner on several times a day to heat up coffee water. I then yell at myself under my breath for forgetting. Last night I bought all the ingredients for chicken pot pie and then remembered that I had no way of baking it. And no, a nine inch pie does not fit in the toaster oven.
Add to this mix, some extra driving to pick up and deliver my son from college and you have the recipe for a neglected blog. When I first began posting, I told my dad I would never apologize for missing a day because it seems so lame to do so. I am now faced with a dilemma. I can't apologize for not having written since 2/4/11, but I want everyone to keep the faith. So, while there may now be fewer postings, I vow to make up for the deficit by delivering a better quality product.
Umm..... this is not an apology, though, just an explanation.
Copyright 2011 KKR
The last week presented some time management challenges to me. Of course there was the Super Bowl, which we will not talk about. In addition, on Super Bowl Sunday, the coil in my oven burned up and I am attempting to fix it myself. I have the part in hand and have been told that it is relatively easy to replace. (normally, a sure sign that you should call an expert) I keep forgetting that the oven is broken, though, and turn the burner on several times a day to heat up coffee water. I then yell at myself under my breath for forgetting. Last night I bought all the ingredients for chicken pot pie and then remembered that I had no way of baking it. And no, a nine inch pie does not fit in the toaster oven.
Add to this mix, some extra driving to pick up and deliver my son from college and you have the recipe for a neglected blog. When I first began posting, I told my dad I would never apologize for missing a day because it seems so lame to do so. I am now faced with a dilemma. I can't apologize for not having written since 2/4/11, but I want everyone to keep the faith. So, while there may now be fewer postings, I vow to make up for the deficit by delivering a better quality product.
Umm..... this is not an apology, though, just an explanation.
Copyright 2011 KKR
Friday, February 4, 2011
Adam and Eve
Ok, I'm going out on a politically incorrect limb here, but there is a fundamental difference between men and women. In fact, at times I wonder why men and women spend time together at all, because their styles of communicating couldn't be more incompatible.
Having raised 3 sons, like a suburban Jane Goodall, I've had the opportunity to live with and study the male of the species in its natural habitat for 28 years. Everyone talks about boys being more boisterous than girls, but the more striking difference is in how they communicate.
Women LOVE to talk. Men DO NOT. This probably causes as much conflict in a relationship as money. In what could prove to be a major breakthrough in couples counseling, it occurs to me that women should not feel slighted when the men in their lives don't listen. This behavior should be treated as we would any idiosyncrasy. Once we acknowledge that men have little control over it, then it's easier not to be offended by it.
"My husband doesn't listen to me!" becomes "oh, isn't that endearing, he's not listening again."
Observe men and women talking to each other sometime and notice their styles. First of all, a woman's story will generally take at least 10 minutes, but a man's "listening tolerance" only lasts for about 3. If the man happens to be watching television, then you must lower that tolerance to the length of a commercial.
When I have a "fun" story to tell one of my sons, I've learned to make sure they are willing to listen to the whole thing before I begin. It's helpful to prepare them for the length of time needed to stop what they are doing and feign interest. The only problem with this is that I am doing the women in their lives a great disservice, unless the women have been made aware of the policy and, more importantly, are willing to accept it.
In order to protect their identities, I will not reveal my source, but I know a man who actually begins to walk away during conversations with his wife. This is his nonverbal clue that he is done listening. While she could take this as a personal affront and even be tempted to force him to finish the "conversation", the more powerful option is to laugh it off, knowing that she inadvertently broke the 3 minute rule.
When my sons used to come home from friends' houses we would engage in conversations similar to the following:
Me: "So, "did John decide who he is taking to Homecoming?"
Son: "I don't know, we didn't talk about that".
Me: "Did you hear that Dan's family is going away for spring break?"
Son: "No, we didn't talk about that"
Me: "Do you have any plans for the weekend?"
Son:"Not yet........
On the flip side, I once gave a friend's daughter (in the same grade as my son) a ride home and I found out more information in that 10 minute ride than I had from my son in a month.
It's common knowledge that women thrive on communication, whereas men communicate through actions. I suspect that more serious discussions between men take place on the basketball court or golf course than anywhere else. Therefore, I'd like to suggest that whenever possible, women save lingering conversation for their female friends, but if they want to talk with their sons or significant others, they should join them in the driveway for a game of "Around the World".
Copyright 2011 K.K.R.
Having raised 3 sons, like a suburban Jane Goodall, I've had the opportunity to live with and study the male of the species in its natural habitat for 28 years. Everyone talks about boys being more boisterous than girls, but the more striking difference is in how they communicate.
Women LOVE to talk. Men DO NOT. This probably causes as much conflict in a relationship as money. In what could prove to be a major breakthrough in couples counseling, it occurs to me that women should not feel slighted when the men in their lives don't listen. This behavior should be treated as we would any idiosyncrasy. Once we acknowledge that men have little control over it, then it's easier not to be offended by it.
"My husband doesn't listen to me!" becomes "oh, isn't that endearing, he's not listening again."
Observe men and women talking to each other sometime and notice their styles. First of all, a woman's story will generally take at least 10 minutes, but a man's "listening tolerance" only lasts for about 3. If the man happens to be watching television, then you must lower that tolerance to the length of a commercial.
When I have a "fun" story to tell one of my sons, I've learned to make sure they are willing to listen to the whole thing before I begin. It's helpful to prepare them for the length of time needed to stop what they are doing and feign interest. The only problem with this is that I am doing the women in their lives a great disservice, unless the women have been made aware of the policy and, more importantly, are willing to accept it.
In order to protect their identities, I will not reveal my source, but I know a man who actually begins to walk away during conversations with his wife. This is his nonverbal clue that he is done listening. While she could take this as a personal affront and even be tempted to force him to finish the "conversation", the more powerful option is to laugh it off, knowing that she inadvertently broke the 3 minute rule.
When my sons used to come home from friends' houses we would engage in conversations similar to the following:
Me: "So, "did John decide who he is taking to Homecoming?"
Son: "I don't know, we didn't talk about that".
Me: "Did you hear that Dan's family is going away for spring break?"
Son: "No, we didn't talk about that"
Me: "Do you have any plans for the weekend?"
Son:"Not yet........
On the flip side, I once gave a friend's daughter (in the same grade as my son) a ride home and I found out more information in that 10 minute ride than I had from my son in a month.
It's common knowledge that women thrive on communication, whereas men communicate through actions. I suspect that more serious discussions between men take place on the basketball court or golf course than anywhere else. Therefore, I'd like to suggest that whenever possible, women save lingering conversation for their female friends, but if they want to talk with their sons or significant others, they should join them in the driveway for a game of "Around the World".
Copyright 2011 K.K.R.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)