Comic book nerd

Yes, I readily admit to being a bit of a comic book nerd, but only the classics such as the old Donald Duck, Goofy, Archie, High and Lois, Beetle Bailey, Hagar the Horrible, Garfield and an old Swedish cartoon named Lilla Fridolf (Little Fridolf). Oh, and let's not forget the old Scooby Doo comic books that I used to get delightfully scared of when I was a child. All of those ghosts that kept appearing wherever they went. Delightful!

The word old keeps appearing here and I'm only on my fourth sentence. I think it's safe to say that I only like vintage comic books, not current ones. Even though a lot of the old comic books are still in production, they're just not the same as they used be. For one thing the graphics have changed, they've become too precise.

Secondly, it's only natural that sooner or later the creative fountain will run dry after a character has been around half a century. There are only so many things that can happen to a character in a comic before the writers start to run out of material.

I always loved Donald Duck, but I never liked the object of his affection, Daisy. She always rubbed me the wrong way me with her abnormally long eyelashes, her gigantic high-heeled shoes and that large bow on the middle of her head. She was often rather crabby and sulky too.

Donald Duck however is still my ultimate favourite. He's so wonderfully flawed, the way he vacillates between cheerfulness and determination to irritation or outrage when things don't go his way. Despite my annoyance at Daisy, my favourite comic strip was always when she at Donald got romantic, and the illustrators had used a lot of soft colours such as pink, purple and midnight blue.

Hey Joe Blow, nice to meet you.

If I ever met the King of Sweden, I think we'd have a real problem on our hands, since I would refuse to address him as 'Your Highness' and supposedly that's some sort of offense. I would extend the same politeness as when I meet Joe Blow. No more, no less. I will not, nor will I ever, bow to royalty. Were James Stewart to come to live, and I actually met him, I think I'd rather bow to him. Or J.D Salinger and Astrid Lindgren. These people truly deserve to be bowed to. Adulation and privileges of this degree should be earned, not inherited.

For me, the question of putting an end to the system of monarchy isn't a matter of money. A lot of people who are pro-monarchy think that we anti-monarchist are mainly opposed to it because of the costs that the royal family mean to the tax payers. It isn't really about that. It's a relatively small sum apparently. Naturally it would do a lot more good were it spent on education or health care, but let's put that issue aside. For me it's about the equal value of all people, regardless of ancestry. It's absurd to bestow these privileges on people who have done nothing do earn them other than have a claim to a certain last name. How can we claim to have a free, equal society and still maintain this absurdity?

Some people use the tired, old tradition argument. 'We have to maintain this nice, old tradition, it's noble and fine and even a little romantic'. That argument doesn't really fly either though. There are many traditions out there, some not so wonderful. Slavery used to be a tradition in the South in the U.S, does that mean it should never have been abolished, since it was a tradition? Just because something is a tradition, we don't need to maintain it, not if it's degrading to certain people.

As for a royal family being a noble, fine tradition, it's not really if you think about what it's based upon. It's based on the premises that these people are superior to you. How can you play along with this farce?

And let's not forget that the royal family cannot be punished for any crime. For instance, they can push that posh Mercedes up to 220 km/hr and get away with it. Now does that sound like something that belongs in a democratic society?

It really ticks me off when I hear old, mossy royalists belch out statements like 'A princess should never a man of the people, he doesn't have royal blood!' It just amazes me that some people still think this way.

In the blink of an eye

With all the Winter Olympics hoopla, I've noticed something while reading about it in the newspapers: Athletes are only loved as long as they're winning the medals.
In Sweden, certain female athletes in the biathlon event were predicted to be a sure bet for a medal of some sort, perhaps even the gold. Unfortunately they're not doing so well, at least not in comparison to what their fellow countrymen were expecting. So, what happens...

The adulation turns to "Awww...she's washed out...she won't win a medal."
People have basically given up on her already.

Do we need to have superheroes to believe in? Amazing athletes who can accomplish what most of us could only dream of. And when they fail, people are so disappointed, because perhaps they somehow identify with these competitors, and when they fail, it's as if they themselves have failed too. Their defeat brings disgrace and shame over an entire country. Man, it can't be easy being a professional athlete. Imagine having all that anticipation and hope placed upon your shoulders. Then if you don't live up to it, the public is quick to turn on you.
I just find it fascinating how quickly the public's view can change. Sports enthusiasts are a fickle bunch aren't they.

In the blink of an eye.

More thoughts on marriage

I continued pondering the issue of marriage and the emphasis on how important it is in certain cultures for a women to be married by a certain age. Let's put aside the fact that it's insulting to women and a rather degrading view of what women are like, since we don't really need a man to support us financially, and we don't need to have a husband to define ourselves. This has already been said a thousand times before, of course there are still people out there to whom this needs to said, but that is not the point I want to make here.

My point is that this view of marriage, where it's almost a business transaction, is an insult to the institution of marriage, and to true love.

It may very well be so that when the institution of marriage was first created, it was to be a practical, business-like arrangement. I'm not brushed up on my history enough to knows this. It is true that in the past, it was hard to be a single woman and make a living for yourself, since it was a patriarchal society. That is unfortunately still the case, but come on...let's be honest here, in today's modern society women can fend for themselves, if she lives in a developed country where she is able to get a job and perhaps even a career. So, that eliminates the argument that women need men to support them financially.

As far as women needing men to define themselves, well...that's just sad.
I can't stand it when people judge women over 25 for being single, as if there's something terribly wrong with them.

'Oh dear, what will happen to Jane...she's 29 and not married!'

Incredibly insulting and very shallow. Yes, it is shallow to regard marriage as something one must do in order to be a whole person.

The point is, marriage is supposed to be about love and commitment, not about desperation or money or doing what is socially correct, and it should always be about love and sharing your life with someone. To use it for other purposes feels wrong. It should never be regarded as a must, or as a business arrangement. Arranged marriages to me always seemed like a disregard of love.

Just my opinion.

Trends - a desperate need to conform?

Aren't trends quite bizarre if you think about it? Imagine doing something or wearing something because somewhere out there someone decide that this should be the in-thing at the moment.

It is with horror that I'm seeing 80's trends rearing they're ugly heads again, like some old troll peeking out from underneath a dark bridge in a scary part of town. Flat, pointy suede boots, some so sharp that they might be used to stab somebody with, massive shoulder pads and, the absolute worst of all, those hideous, huge glasses that ought to be dead and buried back in the 80's. In fact, I'd come to the funeral, if for nothing else than to assure myself that they are really, truly gone.

Those glasses will forever remind of a scene from the movie Halloween where Michael Myers has just murdered someone who was wearing glasses like that, and is now himself donning those gorgeous things on top of a white sheet.

The past should never be revisited if it was horrible and tasteless to begin with. Perhaps though, my aversion towards the 80's fashion is because I can remember wearing some it, and once I have embraced and outgrown a trend, I can't get interested in it again.

Almost worse perhaps, are when activities become trendy. Doing something because you genuinely enjoy it is marvellous. Doing something simply because it is what everybody else is doing is not. Take golf for example. Playing golf because golf is associated with a certain socio-economic status is pathetic, and I don't care how much people claim to love golf because it's so much fun, the fact remains that some people play it because it still has that fancy label attached to it.

I'd be lying if I claimed never to have given into trends. Something that may appear horribly ugly when you first lay eyes on it will start to look less and less unappealing as time goes on. Suddenly you're used to seeing it and eventually, in some cases, you may even start to like it. I can honestly say though, that I've never given into doing certain things just because that's what was expected of me. For example, I never went out binge drinking as a teenager just because that's what the 'cool' kids were doing. I deliberately avoided using current slang expressions because I hated sounding like a brainless clone with no mind of her own. I didn't want to sound like everybody else because then I wouldn't be sounding like me. I wouldn't be true to myself, that I did know, despite my immaturity and lack of confidence.

Also, I never got the whole chewing gum thing and how that's supposed to make you look cool, chewing on a large piece of glob with a rubbery, sickening consistency. I only chew gum during take off and landing, and perhaps when I suspect that my breath is bad. I want to reach out and punch someone if I'm forced to listen to the sound of chewing gum being hysterically mangled between somebody's teeth. It sounds revolting and looks terrible.

Perhaps the saddest trend of all, at least in this cradle of conformity that I'm currently living in, is cynicism. In order to be accepted and to avoid ridicule, one should act as flippant and cynical as possible, and poke fun at anything even remotely sentimental. It's 'cool' to be sarcastic and act like you're totally unimpressed with everything and everyone.

Oh you cynical Swedes, shut up!

I thought they did a really creative, imaginative job with the opening ceremonies in Vancouver. However, some jaded Swedes didn't get it. There was talk of a fiasco and it being dull as hell, which is rather amusing and ironic since Swedes are famous for just that, being dull. Even if you don't like something, if somebody puts a lot of effort, time and money into creating something, then the classy thing to do is just to shut up and keep your negative opinions to yourself. That goes for everything in life, in my opinion. Yes, I am a Swede myself, at least by birth, but today I felt more Canadian than Swede and was proud of how they pulled off the opening ceremony. Go Vancouver!

Random reflection

It must have sucked big time to be a student at Bayside High in Saved by the Bell. Unless your name was Zack, Kelly, Slater, Jessie, Lisa or Screech, you never got to participate in any school plays, special projects or even answer questions during class. It was always just those 6 people who were in all the events. The whole school revolved around Zack Morris and his gang. The other students in the school must have been damaged for life.