(no subject)

I woke up with a raging headache this morning and I also forgot to turn on the kettle to make tea the first time around.
I think it will be a good day for interaction with customers.

shiksa love

When bosses attempt to bond with me I tend to wonder what their actual motive is and makes me rather uncomfortable and nervous like a pet that knows it is going to the vet. I want to race back and forth and making whimpering noises. I can't do this at work. There are already enough customers doing that. I did maintain the upper hand when I made fun of my boss for liking Journey. Hee! Journey. I told him, "where I grew up the sort of people who enjoyed Journey drove Irocs or Trans ams and lived behind the SeaBreeze Gas station." He tends to ask a lot of questions about one's personal life. I just keep it vague. "I like books, drinks and people with green card issues."
I had an okay sandwich today but the bread was too gluey. When I would take a bite it would sort of stick to my teeth which is rather odd. I think their bread is too sweet. It said it was a prosciutto sandwich but wasn't. It was more like a cheap deli ham. There is a difference between plain old ham and the sexy cured meat that is prosciutto. I found some books to lust after. I had a customer today who was a classic Southern lady. She had big blond hair that was like blonde candy floss, her make up was a bit much for the day-time but very well put together, she had a lovely spring/summer outfit on that was many shades of pink and enough jewelry to put DeBeers to shame. She had on this one diamond ring that was so damn big it was insane. It was like a marble. It was close to what Liz Taylor used to own. Yes it was that big. Oh it was one sexy rock. It wasn't cloudy either. It looked to be of good quality and oh my it was glam. I helped an older lady (late fifties/early sixties) find some books that were about a Shiksa's guide to dating Jewish men. It seems the lady is dating a Jewish guy. I gave her a few pieces of advice based on my experiences. I made her laugh so hard she nearly had to get her inhaler out. I also told her what a friend said about Jewish husbands. That made her ears perk up.

After all that entertainment Mr. Jenner met up with me and we went and looked at wedding bands.
It took a bit of work to get to the Jewelry shop because there was roadwork on the freeway, but we made it. It took about five minutes to pick out the rings and I even had my engagement ring cleaned. Mine ended up costing less than Mr. Jenners choice. They are very simple yellow gold bands. Quite pretty. I also looked at pearls and sapphires. I do love looking at jewelry. I am mad on pearls now. I have rich fantasies about having an opera length mikimoto pearl necklace. I would also like the Taj Mahal. *snorts*

I suspect this evening will be rather quiet. I am too lazy to leave the house I think.

ramble ramble

Tomorrow is the big ol' Pride Parade. For some reason in Seattle the pride parade makes me think of a kid with hippie parents attempting to rebel. I love "teh gays". If we want to talk about pride why not address the issue of a little self-pride and do something about the meth epidemic currently making its way through the gay community. But we shouldn't be too maudlin tonight. Why not discuss the fact that there are people getting their panties in a twist just because a couple of people want to register for kitchen-aid mixers and share health insurance. Marriage has evolved through the ages and so it is time we evolve a little more. Did you know it was a fairly quaint Victorian notion born in the 19th century that people might consider marrying for love? Before then the idea was to marry for the good of the clan and that it was a nice aside if the two people fell in love over time. In many European cultures it was considered poor form to be too in love with your spouse and if you were a member of the aristocracy you were to have the good sense to save your love for someone else and that one should consider marriage this legal arrangement just that: one of business. People would marry, unite for the purpose of land, political alliance and to bear heirs to carry on this alliance. The poor folk, (most of us peasants) had a slight luxury in marrying someone they might actually know and most likely grew up knowing. Girls were married off to older men not so much because their parents were mean and evil people but they wanted to make sure their daughters had a stable existence and wouldn't starve. So anyone who says marriage is about one thing should know it means different things in different periods. Marriage began to change a little more in the 17th and 18th century. First there were the various colonies being set up where the common man could make his way and not be so dependent upon someone else for his position. He didn't have to wait so long to be married. Then there was the rise of the industrial age which forced more girls out of the home and into jobs that exposed them to more of the outside world and they too could make more choices about their marriage. Two people could decide on their own that they wanted to co-habitate. In the early colonial period of America how people decided to marry was when a child was on the way. There was a noticabely high record of people marrying and children being born shortly afterward. (My Grandmother's obstetrician apparently said that the first child could come at any time and the rest take nine months. hee.)
I suppose this kind of puts a few kinks in the notion of "the sanctity of marriage" that some talk about. I just don't see how one can say that with a straight face when there are people who do treat marrying as a casual affair that can be discarded lightly. Ms. Spears I think of friends who have been together for such a long period of time and they can't legally unite. Then I know of people who last 5 months at their marriage. What gives? I think it is high time we sorted things out a bit.
First of all any religion doesn't have to recognize a marriage. That is fine and dandy. In fact I know my church wouldn't recognize a number of heterosexual marriages based on how certain people defined their marriage. There should be two distinct legal unions in this country. One recognized by the government for tax, medical and legal purposes. This would apply to everyone. No matter who you are. Then if you wish to have your union recognized by the religion of your choice you would go forth and have that done.
This is what marriage truly is now. Two people who love each other who wish to be legally recognized as one unit (so to speak) who have say over each other's medical wishes, whose combined income and taxes are noted by the federal government, who might be the legal guardians/parents of any children and can annoy family and friends with overly long christmas newsletters. That is it. If you need a religious emphasis that involves more paperwork, pre-marital counseling, unity candles, peculiar rituals, and possibly archaic ideas, so be it. Go for it if you can get it. But no one should try and define who is good enough to get married and who isn't.
It isn't like gay people are trying to convert young people like some Mormon missionaries. It isn't as if allowing gay people to marry will cause the great ruin of civilization. All it will mean is that there will be a nice boost in how much money the wedding industry is making. (like those bitches aren't making enough as it is)
Sure some will get divorced. Some will end in annulment; after all the human race is involved so some will fuck it up royally and marry many times over. Yet some will get hitched, maybe raise some kids with dumb names like Madison, argue over who left their socks lying around and generally be a boring married couple like millions of others. It seems like a reasonable request to me.