Tag Archives: Miscellaneous

by

Ladies and Gentlemen, Our Latest Covergirl!

I never wanted to be a model growing up. I never wanted to be an actress. I didn’t like fields where people would base their opinions on me based on looks or anything physical. My best asset is my wit, at least I think so. I’d rather be the clever girl than the pretty one. Prettiness can fade, but a certain level of cleverness will always be retained. Looks only take you so far; you need something in that little head of yours to really make it in whatever goes you have. Even models need a certain level of intelligence these days to create empires based in their images. You even have to credit Kim Kardashian (as much as we all kinda hate her) because she marketed herself and created this entire empire on nothing but looks and a sex tape.

I buy magazines. I admit a soft spot for Cosmo, because sometimes you need something brainless to sit and read. You learn interesting tidbits that you might get a great use out of in the real world. Like who would’ve known that you can order “roofie tester” coasters for when you go to a bar? I certainly didn’t and I appreciate the fantastic invention. Also it’s great to read those confession stories, because let’s be honest we all enjoy laughing at people. I even find myself seeing a funky make-up idea in there that I end up trying and looking terrible in because I lack any ability to do those girlie things. Sometimes I’ll buy magazines because I see the cover and say “I need that”. Usually I have this urge when it’s Game of Thrones related, and I have a Rolling Stone from over 10 years ago because it had Kurt Cobain on the cover and I do enjoy my Nirvana.

Then I hear about this latest covergirl. Sorry, I meant “coverboy”. Wait, is it “coverman”? I’ve got this: “coverterrorist”! I’d like to thank Rolling Stone for putting that terrorist on its cover. Seriously, it’s not every day you get to have the pleasure of being so disgusted at desperate attempts of stirring up controversy for the sake of sales. Or is it because the magazine is a dying medium and they needed a bump up? How about they make a Osama Bin Laden cover and talk about how he was misunderstood? I’m sure that would be an awesome read. I’m not sure critics are right about how this will validate him as a cult icon of teen angst and that everyone should go make bombs and kill innocent people because they don’t celebrate the same radical ideals as you. I’m absolutely sure that this is in incredibly poor taste. At first I thought they should donate the proceeds from their distasteful magazine to the One Fund. But then I decided that is almost like giving them blood money. No, they should do the world a favor and go with the Patriots model of “swap this magazine for one that is less evil”. Refund people’s money for running such a filthy edition, and reprint the entire thing with Jay-Z or Willie Nelson on the cover.

This is only part of the point. I don’t read Rolling Stone for human interest pieces, or in this case, Terrorist interest pieces. I read them for articles about music. Actually, that’s a lie. I don’t recall the last time I read a Rolling Stone magazine. I don’t even remember reading my decade or so old Kurt Cobain edition. I appreciate people using controversy in their publications. I find controversy to be thought-provoking and allows for a good debate. I think there’s a line you don’t cross though. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I think making victims of this horrible incident stare at one of the people responsible for their pain is completely disrespectful of this tragedy. We don’t want to pity him; we can honestly say we want his blood. You can feature him, but don’t try to make him out to be a misunderstood human being that is a victim of his circumstances. Plenty of people come from crappy circumstances don’t end up to be terrorists. Don’t defend him. We won’t pity him. Or maybe not show him and let him go away in oblivion because he no longer exists and shouldn’t be allowed to think he’s a martyr.

by

The Battle of “Shoulds”

I should be taking a nap. That’s the story of the past few days. The baby, still feeling a bit under the weather from the surgery and might be for a few more weeks, hasn’t been sleeping well. I missed Friday’s post for no other reason than “I should be taking a nap”, so I did. Today I realized I wanted to, but I really couldn’t let myself out of my own sense of obligation. The downside of working for money from home is you really sometimes can’t fight the temptation to just sleep instead of doing the work. Most days I fight it, and today I won.

With all this news over the George Zimmerman trial, I can’t help but to think that I should be writing a post about my thoughts on the matter. Since focusing my Hubpage on parenting, the blog is left to fend for itself. Usually I try to write about current events, but sometimes I can’t help but to rant about whatever I feel like ranting about on a given day. I keep fighting this battle of “shoulds”. Like, I should do some dishes and laundry while the baby is sleeping. But I chose the readers instead. Also, I choo chooo choo choose you, George Zimmerman.

One thing that bothers me is that when talking about the trial, you only hear George Zimmerman referred to as “Zimmerman” while Trayvon Martin is referred to by his first and last name. I don’t like uneven-ness. I don’t like the double standard, hell even Ted Bundy gets both his names uttered when being spoken about. And I would rather hang out with George Zimmerman than I would Ted Bundy. That’s a minor pet peeve in the whole scenario. Another thing I would like to point out, at the risk of getting readers mad at me, is that I don’t think that George Zimmerman is a racist. Do I think he’s guilty of trying to play a hero and chased after a guy he profiled as a criminal because of what he looked like? Absolutely. If I were walking down the street wearing a hoodie, I can safely say that I wouldn’t have been pursued as a criminal since my translucently pale skin would glow in the dark, giving away the fact I’m a white girl in a hoodie and we’re innocent and never do anything wrong. This isn’t about racism in America, I would even dare to say that this isn’t even about racial profiling in America. This is about a moron that wanted to be in the newspapers as the hero of the day for solving the slew of petty crime in his neighborhood. Well, at least he got his wish of being in the newspapers.

The issue at hand, unfortunately, isn’t really about someone who looks white killing an African-American child. I say really because it is a tragedy and it should be made to light that a kid died. But let’s blame the real culprit here: the law itself. This law needs to be changed, because who’s the next person that is going to get killed and have someone go “well I was just defending myself, he looked dangerous”? It’s similar to the gun debate: it’s not the guns that kill people, it’s the crazy people who are allowed to carry them that do. This law gives people a blank check to do this and walk away with their hands being clean. Next thing you know, Aaron Hernandez is going to say that “Odin Lloyd was going to kill me so I killed him in Florida and used a private jet to get the body up here. According to Stand Your Ground laws, this is perfectly acceptable!” People should be outraged that this guy got a blank check to kill someone. Maybe he should have stayed in his car. Maybe he should have followed him in his car while waiting for the police to properly handle the situation. Maybe Trayvon Martin shouldn’t have fought George Zimmerman. Maybe we should think for a moment what would happen if Trayvon Martin had killed George Zimmerman and gotten away with it because of this law. Maybe we should think about the outrage that would come out of that: “A black thug killed innocent neighborhood watchman who was trying to protect his community”. Maybe we should consider these points. This… this is the Battle of the “shoulds”.

by

When Beer and God Collide

I’m not a beer drinker. I’m more of a wine fiend myself, a nice delicious good Merlot preferably.  After two years of not touching a drink, I swore that the minute I stop providing my son’s milk, I was going to go to the store and buy a nice bottle for myself. Then when I got home, I will proceed to drink the entire thing. No, I won’t waste any time with a glass. The bottle will be plenty, then I will take some aspirin and down a gallon of water and go to bed. The trick is to hydrate to avoid the hangover. Truth. Not exactly though, I don’t have the luxury of just downing a whole bottle of wine since I need to be fully functioning for my boys. That, and I’m at a point in my life where I think that getting completely drunk not the type of thing I find appropriate for me. But this isn’t about a love of wine.

I wonder if anyone really thinks about God or anything about religion while drinking. When I chose a beverage, I can’t say that religion has any influence on my beverage choice. I know some religions don’t approve of alcohol or its consumption. That’s perfectly okay. But I never considered the two being mutually exclusive. Does God have a favorite beer? I’d like to ask him. If he did, I bet he would be a local brewery sort. Maybe God would even make his own at his own distillery in Heaven. Silly me, if God wanted beer he wouldn’t make it; he’d snap his magic God fingers and BOOM! The most perfect beer would appear. I bet it’d taste pretty awesome too. Maybe it would even taste like… wait for it… heaven. (Too much?)

That whole paragraph sounds a little ridiculous, doesn’t it? The idea of mixing religion and beer. That’s exactly how ridiculous I found the whole Sam Adams beer debate. I see where the commercial was going. Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence, so what better beer to celebrate the holiday than theirs. Why not hammer it home by using the words of the document to pull at our patriotic heartstrings. If I love freedom, I should love Sam Adams beer. Plus, it’s a state grown brewery, bonus points right? The revolution started here in Massachusetts folks. Maybe they shouldn’t have used the part where it talks about the Creator and omit it. But they are a private company and I thought we’re not supposed to be telling them what to do? I don’t feel offended by this. I don’t think I should declare what people find offensive, though I can say I don’t get it. I don’t understand why God should be mentioned in a beer commercial. I don’t understand the big controversy. I think people are starting to drum up “the war against Christians” because they’re running out of examples of this since it’s not Christmas season. Shame on us for only attacking the Christians and their religions. They are the victims in everything. They never were the victims in the Crusades and World War II. Oh… wait.

The point is simple. It’s a commercial. I think I need to repeat myself. It’s a commercial. There’s no big conspiracy to bring down the Pope. There’s no conspiracy to bring down Christianity at its core of beliefs. There is a conspiracy to sell beer, however, so watch out for that. Maybe even sell mediocre beer. What if another beer company used God in their commercials, wouldn’t there be an uproar of implications of targeting children because God loves kids and so does beer? What if the commercials used another religion in their purposes to sell beer? Where would the outrages be there? I think there’s enough going on the in the world where we should worry about that and not whether or not a commercial referenced God properly. Next you’ll see beer commercials promoting guns, and we’ll see what the real slippery slope is. Also, I doubt God would want to be a part of selling alcohol for the purposes of drunken debauchery. I think that’s against the Bible.

by

And Now, We’re back.

I left you all with a cliffhanger last week. I’m happy to report that so far, even though it was a roller-coaster week, everything seems to have been successful. Although we had one trip to the doctors and another call, things went well considering. The nights were the most difficult, as he’s a stomach sleeper which is probably very painful considering the placement of the surgery. Also the medicines may have upset his stomach. All this would be verified if the poor baby could say more than “hi” and “baba”. Tomorrow, the catheter and stitches will hopefully be out and healed and everything can go back to normal. It was a rough week, but we  had great support and helpers, so we lived.

Now, back to business.

This ordeal made me appreciate my husband more. We bickered, which was uncommon for us, but when you’re in a stressful situation like that with very little sleep, you’re bound to have a few little snippy moments. We’re a strong couple, and at the end of the day we had each others’ back and we knew it. This solidified my belief that we’re a great team, and I believe that lesser couples would be in divorce court after something like that.

During this time, we ended up watching “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World”. I’m not a romantic by any means, but this movie really made me think about relationships and marriage. That, and it made me think about the end of the world. Would it hurt being hit by a meteor or would we just instantly be incinerated and that’s that? Anyways, I got off point there. Maybe a basis of marriage shouldn’t be just a love and admiration for someone. I think that you should look at your partner and decide “if I’m faced with an impending apocalypse, is that the person I want to die next to?” Sure, this seems a little bit macabre to think about, but I think it’s an important question to ask yourself. Also, would you kill that person if they got bit by a zombie before or after they turn? Would this person properly help defend you if zombies were trying to eat your face? Important questions when you’re faced with a shiny diamond in  your face methinks.

I’m okay with that idea. I can safely say that my husband would fend off a horde of zombies for me. More importantly, I can say with full confidence that he’s a perfect person to be my partner and to die next to if an asteroid was coming to kill humanity. This is the person who is my partner in life, my partner with the kids, and most importantly my partner in crime. If you can smile at the person after a bad day, and really think to yourself that person is the one I want to face an apocalypse with, then you’re not doing to bad. You shouldn’t settle for less than that, and anything less should be unacceptable.

by

And Tomorrow is Another Day

My post was missing on Friday due to being at a pre-op appointment for my baby son. Likewise, my posts for the next week might also disappear as I’ll be busy tending to the needs of my poor innocent child. I thank all that have wished us luck, hopefully we won’t need it. As far as surgeries go, this one is pretty routine and as far as medical staff we’re seeing among the best. It’s assuring that people have given us kind words to help us be a little bit stronger because no matter how routine the surgery is supposed to be, in life anything can happen. It’s those kind words that will carry us into tomorrow with that much more of a positive attitude. It’s that positive attitude that will make it a little easier to stomach seeing your 9-month-old baby attached to machines and IV’s. You don’t want to see your child in pain at any age, it’s just a bit more rough seeing a baby like that.

I will keep my readers posted both here and on my Hubpage. I hope someone was able to read my story that needed it, because I learned that this condition isn’t very discussed on forums for support. (My Hubpage link is on the sidebar, where I explain the condition.) Maybe it’s embarrassing, or just not as common as I’m told it is. But maybe I reached a few people who needed the support. At least I can bring that to the table now and after this situation.

I hope you all have a good week and a Happy Fourth. People fought for our country’s freedom so we could set of explosives while getting drunk and going to the hospital as a result of the mix. Don’t be stupid kids. I’ll see you when he’s all healed and happy. Thank you again for all the kindness.

by

And Then Comes Marriage

Rumor has it, the Supreme Court will rule on gay marriage today. I wanted to get ahead of this with a reiteration of my prediction in hopes that I’m correct. This will be a 2 parter, if the decision does come in after I post this for a reaction piece. All eyes of people that care will be watching for this ruling, that either way will upset a mass ton of people.

I believe in people who love each other should be able to get married. Back when marriage was just a conversation between myself and my husband, I didn’t understand why we should get married. What makes me so special that I can marry whomever I want, but other people can’t. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that “I won’t get married until everyone can get married”, because I think that’s a cop-out people use so they don’t have to get married. I didn’t understand why it’s necessary for me to get married. I’ve been married for nearly 2 years, and I still don’t really understand. Nothing has changed between us in our relationship, except that now we’re legally bound together until we pay a large price to divorce and I had to change my last name. (Why is divorce so expensive? Because it’s worth it.) That doesn’t take away from people who idealize a process like marriage as something in their dreams.

417711_10150588848513107_1129203482_nBut on that token, shouldn’t every American be allowed that dream? This picture is hilarious, but it’s true. Last time I spoke about this, I pointed out that just a few decades ago I wouldn’t have been allowed to marry my husband since he isn’t a White male. Now today, it’s essentially the same fight. Legally, what’s the big deal? I accept that people have moral oppositions to this as a result of religious beliefs. But I recall that religion shouldn’t  have a bearing on legal matters. We live in a land of law with religion, not religious law. No one is asking you to get married to a partner of the same gender, we’re simply asking that you leave people’s bedroom alone.

My theory is that the Supreme Court will legalize it, using the grounds of the Supreme Court legalized interracial marriage in 1967 stating that “anti-miscegenation” laws were unconstitutional. Telling someone they couldn’t marry another person was unconstitutional, and marriage is a right we have as humans. I end with this quote on interracial marriage and slyly point out that the justice never specified “man” or “woman” in the decision, he simply said “person”. Granted he was only speaking about race, but I can hope. From Wikipedia:

Chief Justice Earl Warren‘s opinion for the unanimous court held that:

“ Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
by

Go Get Your Special Vote On.

Tomorrow in Massachusetts, we have a special election on who to replace the “Turd”. Wait, or was he the “D”? I’m not sure, South Park never really specified so I get confused. Either way, John Kerry has the highly coveted and non-controversial title of “Secretary of State”, leaving us with another special election. Last time this happened, Republican Scott Brown upset the favorite Democrat Martha Coakley. Will there be a repeat upset of Gomez over Markey? The excitement is brewing, I can’t wait to see that hockey game. Wait, I’m confused again. It’s an election, not a sporting event. Or… is it?

I kid. But who do we vote for? I watch the commercials and pegged Markey as an early winner, only based on the fact that the majority of people are easily swayed by television and I’ve only really seen Markey on TV. But his hair bothers me, he reminds me of Donald Trump. I don’t think I want to vote for him because of his hair. Then… then I saw a Gabriel Gomez commercial mocking Markey and I admit I laughed pretty hard at it. After seeing that commercial, the answer seems so simple. Go Gomez!

But seriously, I do go to Wikipedia to spell out the stances people have on issues because no one else seems to want to tell me what’s going on. I know, politicians flip-flop all the time but I want a basis here. So I look at Gomez’s positions, and he seems very similar to Scott Brown. Okay, I voted for Scott Brown so that might not be a bad place to start. Then, I look at Markey. Nothing.  What does he stand for? His ads just tell me he is a guy who’s served in Washington, D.C for way too many years where nothing got done and that Gabriel Gomez is a terrible person by using half soundbites for his purpose. Okay, I’m a Democrat and according to the rules of today I should stand behind Markey because “he’s my peeps”. I’m not sure I can. I’m not sure of anything political really.

So come tomorrow, what do I do? Do I vote for Gomez? Do I vote for Markey? Do I even bother voting and stay home and eat junk food while watching Criminal Minds I have DVR’ed on every channel that plays it? Does it even really matter who I vote for? Which one is less likely to be bought off to the highest bidder? I’m not entirely sure, I might suck it up and vote for Gomez because I like someone who says “just because I don’t believe it in, doesn’t mean it should be illegal”. Maybe I should pass, because who says he’ll keep that stand when actually put into office. What this comes down to is “which one of these people has my interests and the interests of Massachusetts in mind” when we vote tomorrow. Do we give a guy a chance, or do we allow a guy that’s failed us before stay there to fail us? (I’m basing this solely on the fact that neither party has done anything in our benefit.) I’m not sure, but I might say “screw it” and see if some new blood changes things. Then watch him lose re-election because he didn’t vote the way the party wanted him to so no one funded his re-election campaign because heaven forbid someone was actually watching out for the people they promised to help.

by

And I’ve Done It Again

I’ve spent over a year mulling over my next publication. Would I finish my plays and put them in a collection? Or would I go back and compile all the miscellaneous writings from over the years that I could come across and put them in a collection of short stories and poetry? I decided on the latter, and I’m happy to say that I have complete it and it is posted. I regret that a short story I had written didn’t make the cut in this edition, mostly because I felt I was running out of time in my self-inflicted deadline to edit it properly. Next time it will be there, and I will be proud.

This takes me to my second e-book. Kindle publishing is a fantastic tool for writers trying to find their way in the writing world. It has gotten even better with their new “create your own cover” program. If you notice, now “Teagan” also has an actual cover now, which I’m more proud of than I was when I created my short story collection cover. The title of it is “Wondering What I Was Thinking: Short Story and Poetry Collection”. I doesn’t appear when you click the link on the side bar, so if you’re interested in purchasing it, just click the “see more from this author” link underneath “Teagan”. This collection is also $0.99 on Kindle e-books.

I have to say that I’m proud of it. It took more courage to publish that one than “Teagan”, because this one is more raw and personal. I reread it for a year, wondering if I should or not. I did anyways, because that’s what writing is all about. Some works were written in high school and the rest over a 10-year-period. It’s not a complete collection of everything, I have other pieces that didn’t make the cut for various reasons. Mostly, because they didn’t seem to fit in with this collection’s “vibe”. It doesn’t take away from my pride in the project, I think it gives me more to look forward to and an additional push to keep going with it. I do appreciate my supporters and the buyers of “Teagan”, because I have to say that if I didn’t sell anyone I wouldn’t have the courage to try again. So, thank you for that and the kind words of support. I’d also like to thank my blog and Hubpages viewers that have also given me the confidence to keep going. You guys also helped push me and I’m deeply grateful for you all.

by

Politics and Hypocrisy: A Joint Proposition?

I can’t understand politicians sometimes. Okay, it’s not just sometimes. Maybe it’s not the politicians’ fault. Maybe the blame falls entirely with the political process and ideals. Are they really flip-floppers or is it just that the stances they stand up for just contradict each other? This isn’t going to be a debate about whether or not certain topics are right or wrong, this isn’t about political parties or propaganda telling you that one set of beliefs are better than another. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever as long as they respect that in you. And having some factual evidence other than “because it’s a Democrat/Republican” view, because that really pisses me off. Nothing is right just because it goes with the party you register for, the whole “Party” system is a sham and shouldn’t exist because people don’t want to educate themselves on issues and not the letter next to a person’s name. (I still stand by what I said at election time too: get rid of the (R/D) next to the person’s name on the ballot and make people either chose on merit, or go in blind and kick themselves for “voting wrong” later. If you can’t be bothered to educate yourself before stepping into that poll box, you had it coming. This also isn’t a Sarah Palin bashing post, she just happens to be the example I used because I saw her in the news over the weekend give a speech.

Back to the main point. Over the weekend, they gave a snippet of her speech saying “the government is getting way too big and intruding into parts of our lives they shouldn’t be. I agree, the government is involved in our lives more than it should be. Turns out, that’s all we agree on. (I’ll get to that in a minute.) Who decides what line is “too intrusive”? What we eat? Who we love? What control do we have over our bodies and which does the government have right to? It’s all a bit confusing.

She believes abortion and gay marriage should not be legal. Wouldn’t those be intrusive and personal decisions that the government is overreaching into? What makes those intrusions less important than Mayor Bloomberg say, banning a Big Gulp? What’s that line? Because you can’t have it both ways. There’s no harm in letting people marry the person they love. And abortion is wrong because you’re playing God and murdering a living being? Then why is the death penalty acceptable? You’re playing God with that living being.

The moral of the story is political positions lack complete logical thought to me. Maybe it’s just me and I don’t fully understand the positions these political parties take. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and consider that I’m missing an important link here. But I think that the problem with politics is that these contradictory ideals makes them seem hypocritical.

by

Why Do We Even Bother?

Every time I read the news or watch a news program, I’m guaranteed to have more questions than answers. Usually not always questions like “oh why does that even matter?” or “I don’t get what they are trying to say”. Usually they involve more of “seriously?” or “why?”. Is it a result of inadequate reporting on every news outlet? (I specify every because I want no misconceptions of what I mean, because I always point out that I think that they are all shams.) No wonder satirical news websites and television shows do so well: because we figure if we’re going to laugh at the regular news, might as well have one that is purposely trying to be funny. Or… is it that we live in a world that is so “shot to hell” that the news really is that terrible all the time.

First point, arming “rebels” or the “other guys” in Syria. (As always, I preface this commentary with I’m not a political or war genius, but these are questions the everyman/everywoman should be asking.) If there’s something we probably should have learned by now, it’s that training and arming “rebels” anywhere is a terrible idea. Why? I point out about Osama and the Soviet War in Afghanistan. Sure, we didn’t train them but we sent money and weapons to help them. And we all know that worked out well in our advantage 30 years later… oh, wait. It didn’t. It’s a hard position to be in, because there are innocent people caught in the middle of this but what would happen if we went in and fought a war? Those innocent people are really going to be harmed no matter which way this table turns. And how do we even know who the good guys are? Are there even any good guys to help? Or are we just going to flip a coin to decide which side is “less bad”.

And then there’s the IRS thing. As if there’s not enough actual problems with them, now they need to make more scandals up? I saw a news report about how the IRS are getting semi-automatic guns and being trained how to use them. “That’s a terrible idea” it was said. “Why do we want an organization that’s targeting the conservatives to have weapons? Oh, they keep having accidents with those weapons. I don’t get it.” I don’t get it either. It’s okay an everyday person to have any gun they want without training, but let’s not give a gun to a Federal Employee and train them so they don’t do something stupid with it. Have you seen how some people react when they get their taxes done? I’d want a gun if I were an accountant or IRS agent. Let’s stick to what they actually did wrong and get them on that. You really don’t need to make something up to make it known they did a terrible thing. Maybe next we shouldn’t allow a President to have a gun because “why does he need one?” Though, I suppose with there still being people out there who thing Obama is a sleeper terrorist, they probably don’t want him to have a gun either. Welcome to America, where they will fight for Gun Rights for everyone because it’s a constitutional right,  but not the IRS.

On a final note, I would like to thank the Supreme Court for announcing that a big company cannot patent my highly sought after ginger/alcoholic genes. I know, it’s a heartbreak to everyone that wanted access to my awesomeness. It’s really more of a surprise that the Supreme Court had to rule on whether or not my genetic makeup could be used by a big company to profit from while I get nothing but “stabby stabbies” by doctors for an obscene amount of money. Really? What next, they can take my eggs and patent them. Oh, I know… they can make me take an ultrasound on my own dime for a medical procedure they have no business being involved in to begin with… oh.. wait.

Happy Friday Readers, and enjoy your weekend. And make sure you get the men in your life a videogame or some other gadget to make them happy for Father’s Day, they really hate ties.