Things Dr. Roman Taught Me

Being an opinionated, intelligent and articulate woman, even in this day and age, is not something that's encouraged. I have a feeling that a lot of this is due to generational shifts where it was presumed that women had a place and a slot to belong to in society.

I suppose that some people didn’t get the memo that the Constitution was actually amended once upon a time to protect the rights of women. But I digress.

I went to an all-women’s college, and the underlying theme of feminism was prominent along with leadership roles of women. Around the time I started, there was a study that identified a weakness of girls in math and sciences, and that boys were typically pushed to go into those careers. I thought it was hogwash, but then again, I was in an all-women’s college. To me, there was no question of who was a leader. We were encouraged to speak up and debate and have it be healthy and energizing and supportive as well. As with human nature, it didn’t always go like that, but I did manage to enter the work force as a confident young woman who was not afraid to speak up or keep up with the boys (which I later did see first-hand in investment banking, but I’ll get to that later).

Dr. Roman was one of my English literature professors, and a common theme in many of the works she chose were women-focused, such as reading Charlotte Bronte, the Odyssey but focusing on Penelope’s role while Odysseus was out nailing the sirens while on the open seas, and having a better understanding of mythology in popular culture. Yet, I’ll never forget when a young woman in class made sort of a bitter comment about feminism, and said, “I don’t know what woman had the idea to open her big mouth. But I would have been perfectly happy staying at home and taking care of the house.”

To which Dr. Roman looked at all of us, shook her head solemnly and said, “Oh no.” The response got a laugh from the classroom. She told us that feminism wasn’t just about staying at home or working full-time or choosing a career over family or vice versa (though again, I will point out, I’ve seen that happen in the working world). No, she told us, feminism was that women could be whatever or whoever they wanted to be. So contrary to popular belief, if a woman wanted to be a stay-at-home mom, or wanted to have an outside career, she did not need to be penalized for it by other women. In fact, feminism made that choice possible.

I never forgot that.

Yet, I see the struggle first-hand with women against women, especially in social media settings. It’s made people more vocal with a larger soapbox from which to preach, but also has an underlying notion of negativity and even violence infiltrating these threads.

I think about how Dr. Roman defined feminism, and it’s something I hold to a high standard of how I conduct myself. Yes, it makes me angry when I see a perfectly able woman go on maternity leave, and then come back to find her job chopped up between three analysts, just so in a few months they can let her go. It makes me upset when a woman with an opinion who may be running for public office is accused of being “too male,” and yet when she displays emotion, “isn’t ‘fit’ to be President” or whatever office she may be running for. It’s a double-standard, and yet, most women do the same things themselves within their own population.

I’ve had my own problems with differing views of feminism, those contrary to my own. I guess when I see a woman working at H00ters or Hawaiian Tropic Zone, I see two things going on: one is that these women are adults and if they want to flaunt themselves to make a buck, more power to them. The other is that they are kind of exploiting men with bank accounts who spend a lot of money objectifying women. Yes, I could get upset about the objectification. But on the flip side, if these women were not drugged or exploited to do get jobs there, I see no problem with it. Plus, these places also hire men, so it’s not an issue to me.

Yet, I’ve been called out for not being “feminist enough” for simply disagreeing with viewpoints of what feminism could and should be. I’ve been harassed because I pick and choose my battles as far as women’s rights go. In an ideal world, of course I’d like to see women on an identical pay scale for men in equivalent roles and no glass ceilings. I’d also like to see women not be penalized by their own gender and the male aristocracy for taking time off to be with their families or wanting to balance their work-family. I don’t see anyone calling men out for taking time to be with their children when they are little.

It’s only become more prominent with social media tools such as Twitter. In fact, I was recently chastised by someone I considered a very good friend of mine outside of these forums, because she felt I was not taking her side enough in little Twitter wars. Yet, someone who is a proponent of free speech is penalizing me for simply not keeping up with whoever is her enemy this week, I felt this was a cop out for simply feeling under attack. I also have it on authority that she took this behavior with other mutual friends. Let me just state that this was not an isolated incident. It was cold and calculated.

It’s just Twitter, sure, but at the end of the day, if this person is cognizant of my social interactions in an open forum that’s free for anyone, chances are they are disapproving of my social interactions outside of them as well. And if I need to censor myself for fear of being attacked by this person, that kind of takes the fun out of these forums, right?

But at the root of it, I feel as though women are under attack by other women and if they are not immediately on their side, it’s seen as a liability. It’s only then I take solace in the words that Dr. Roman spoke about that day in class, when she enlightened by saying that women could be or do anything they wanted to be.

And isn’t that the very definition of feminism?

Who Killed The Radio Star?

Kinda like "Who shot J.R.?" but not as important.

As MTV celebrates its 30th Anniversary, I thought it would be fun to take a look at how video killed -- or at least changed -- the way we enjoy music.

MTV, formerly an initialism of Music Television, is an American network based in New York City that launched on August 1, 1981.  At one time, MTV had a profound impact on the music industry and pop culture.  Slogans such as "I want my MTV" and "MTV is here" became embedded in public thought, the concept of the VJ (video jockey) was popularized, the idea of a dedicated video-based outlet for music was introduced, and both artists and fans found a central location for concert events, news and promotion.  

On August 1, 1981, at 12:01 a.m., MTV launched with the words "Ladies and gentlemen, rock and roll,"spoken by John Lack, and played over footage of the first Space Shuttle launch countdown of Columbia (which took place earlier that year) and of the launch of Apollo 11. Those words were immediately followed by the original MTV theme song, a crunching classical tune composed by Jonathan Elias and John Petersen, playing over photos of the Apollo 11 moon landing, with the flag featuring MTV's logo changing various colors, textures, and designs. MTV producers Alan Goodman and Fred Seibert used this public domain footage as a conceit, associating MTV with the most famous moment in world television history.

The very first video that aired on MTV was "Video Killed the Radio Star" by The Buggles.  But if you think about it, isn't the more modern technology what really killed it?  I'm talking, turn-of-the-century stuff here?

Remember folks, when MTV first swept the nation with their all music, all the time idea, there was no internet. There were no iPods, no cell phones, and no tablets.  If you wanted music videos on demand, you had to sit in front of your television and watch what MTV showed, not necessarily the ones you wanted to see.  

But that doesn't mean that radio was dead then. If you wanted music in the car, at the office, at the beach, etc., you still needed your radio.  And it was like that for a good many years until fairly recent times. Just like advances in outer space have occurred, so too have advances in music and our access to it.

I want to make clear the fact that I was never an MTV junkie to begin with.  I love music, I didn't need to see the videos as much as I needed to hear the songs.  Not that I am not a visual person or didn't appreciate the mini epic movies that a lot of videos ended up becoming. I had friends who ran the channel 24/7 but I just never got into it.  So why would I start now?

All the reality and behind-the-music shows that air now are simply because MTV has no other choice.  In order for the network to stay afloat, they need to adapt to the changes in society and give people what they want, today. We can get music anywhere, any time. But for whatever reason, we can't get enough Jersey Shore. (I have never seen a single episode, or a single minute of an episode.)  

Despite the return of music video programming to MTV in March 2009 as AMTV -- an early morning block of music videos that aired from 3 a.m. to 9 a.m. on most weekdays -- MTV is not and has not been "music" television for a while.  And when people say they want their MTV, it doesn't mean what it used to.

Be Careful What You Wish For

Having a huge background in customer service related jobs (I used to be one of those "courtesy desk" gals at a supermarket when I was in college, and was a client service rep at one of my first jobs out of college), I do believe in the old adage "The Customer Is Always Right" but within reason.

I hate to admit it but when I was working the courtesy desk, if I had a "repeat offender" (a multiple-time complaining customer who just wanted to whine about the quality of the air she breathed, and would leave chicken in her car overnight expecting a refund for HER mistake), I would be less apt to help them than say, someone who was genuine in what they were asking -- not that they expected it per se, but it was a legit gripe like getting twice billed for the same thing.

For me, though, when I wronged as a consumer, look out! I take to the airwaves for anything. I am firm believer in the written word -- that is, in the right hands of course. There was one year for instance where I got a lot of free stuff simply for airing my grievances in letter form to CEOs of companies. Now, I know that the CEO of the chain of Best Westerns isn't going to care much about little me...but if a letter shows up on his desk, I like to think that the executive office takes it seriously and escalates it to the proper people. I've gotten free weeks at hotels, free flights, free months on my phone bill, gift cards, etc, simply by complaining about what I feel to be legit gripes to people who can take action.

I guess what companies do believe in is that the squeaky wheel will certainly get the grease.

Here's the thing though: when I would write my letters, I would take the high road, not implying I would take my business elsewhere, but that I would like to continue to do business with them, as it would hurt me more to not conduct business there.

Today, though, there are multiple channels to voice one's complaints, and not to mention one...the millions.

A few weeks ago, the mail-order online video rental company, Netflix, had some very bad PR when they announced they would be raising prices for their service. To be honest, I have never used the Netflix service. I can understand though the impact of raising prices to what their customer base may deem as unreasonable. Especially since there are many different ways to get these items for free or streaming for a fraction of the cost.

Yet, their vocal customers took to social media tools like Twitter to express their discontent. The vocal mob, though, didn't do much to distract Netflix. In fact, they are not coming out contrite saying, "OK OK we'll lower our prices, just come back." The fact is, Netflix must think they have a loyal enough customer base to justify raising prices.

Then I started to think about times I've publicly flogged a place I've patronized, only to get a response from their marketing department or customer service reps. It's funny, because they not only care but they do want to ensure the happiness of their base.

I once flogged McDonald's for forgetting to put sausage in my husband's sausage biscuit. Yeah, that happened. I then got upset at a Dunkin Donuts I was at because they kept screwing up my simple coffee order, and their marketing folks wanted to make sure everything was all right. I was making fun of a ferry ride I was on, saying their boats had not been updated since 2001 yet I was paying like quadruple the price I did back then. And they asked me if there was something that happened and how they could change it for the future (unless they drop their prices and/or get newer boats, I don't see them taking my advice to heart).

Mostly, though my newest outlet to use my voice as a means of consumer change is on Yelp. I know it's been around for awhile, but I just came around on it recently. Yes, I was slamming a service that I really wanted to change, and they never reached out to me. Yet, I gave not-so-favorable reviews and have gotten gift cards and an offer of free drinks for my "experience" at another place (though truth be told, I didn't leave THAT bad of a review, but I guess they want to make sure they get repeat customers).

I guess my point is, with the two-way feedback that is social media, consumer complaints are not only heard instantaneously practically, but they are dealt with so long as they are reasonable complaints so that they can get a favorable review.

And here I was, thinking that true customer service has gone out the window. True, we may get that gum-snapping bored-looking kid behind the counter who would rather play video games than help us...but the highers-up may be hearing something...and that might promote change on the front-end.

Organized Chaos

When I was a kid, I could guarantee that every around the holidays (where my birthday and Christmas falls conveniently together), someone would get me a day planner or organizer of some sorts.

These old dodo-like things were leather-bound, had a daily planner (where you could input your appointments) and a monthly calendar to effectively plan your life.

Even as a teenager, I had homework and places to be and things to do, I liked the rigidity of it, to plan things ahead. As I got older though, my life became predictable, boring almost. I clocked in at a 9-5 gig, my tasks didn't differentiate from one day to another. It seemed a waste of paper, trees, resources, etc to schedule anything. Especially with the advent of Microsoft Outlook and email applications that you could easily say "Hey, get on my calendar," was easier than calling ahead and trying to find a mutually convenient time to schedule something -- even a coffee! -- and deciding against it because it was too difficult.

I had to chuckle today, though, while reading the New York Times Sunday Styles section. Seems like paper calendars and day planners are fighting the extinction route, with the devotees having a tough time letting go of them even if they have a smartphone like a Blackberry or iPhone which were created for busy people like us.

Why, exactly, was I chuckling? Well, a few reasons actually. One was, I, too, had that dilemma, probably at my first "real" job, when I had a class on Time Management and they gave us the old school Franklin-Covey planners. Funny thing was, I had my own planner. To tell the truth, I'm surprised this place still exists, especially in this day and age with paper planners. I suppose there is still a market.

Anyway, my dilemma back then was the advent of Microsoft Outlook. After awhile, it didn't make a ton of sense for me to double-book, so to speak, by jotting down a meeting or a class when it pings me on my calendar. It had to though for a few reasons, namely because I didn't have a Blackberry for work at that time. When I did, it didn't make a ton of sense then.

The other thing I chuckled at was something I noticed the other day. I had to fill out some paperwork, yet another thing that I rarely do anymore since mostly everything is automated or online forms. I used to care about my handwriting. Yet since I can type pretty quickly, and I am usually behind a computer or on my phone, texting away, I feel like even handwriting is going the way of the pterodactyl. Heck, even a school in Indiana is no longer teaching cursive!

So I have to think that those things are contributing to the automation of our culture, using more electronic means of scheduling such as Google calendars or iCal on your Mac or iPhone, and writing is obsolete. Whoda thought, right? But according to this article, it's a hard habit to break where people still like to manually write out their schedules. I suppose there is something admirable in jotting it down. However, I'm getting to the point where I'm cranky to even write out an appointment card at my dentist's office (You know, the one they send you a postcard to your home address a month or so prior to your scheduled visit?).

I have to admit that my iPhone has been great. I mean, we're pretty much attached at the hip, I might as well use it to my advantage besides Tweeting during a sporting event or texting my friends. I have a busy week anticipated, and I know this on Sunday night because I can bring up my calendar at home. The focal point of the article in the Times today was a woman who left her physical planner in her office one weekend, leaving her clueless as to what parties her children may have had to attend, any appointments she may have had or other life events. Which I find hilarious because we've become so regimented as a culture that we are lost without these guides. Yet, I'm just as bad, because I have to constantly look at my phone's calendar.

Sometimes, you know how you feel like you are forgetting something or you should be somewhere but can't figure it out? I know, for me, that if something doesn't show up on my iCal, that I am in the free and clear.

Yet, this organization can be chaotic at times with double-booking and having to schedule time with your family. I know, from working in investment banking, that some wives needed to make appointments to see their husbands. This is not just a rumor but a fact.

It's nice to see that there are those out there still holding on to what could be deemed as a dead technology (though paper calendars are hardly a "technology"), but sooner or later, I'd have to believe they'll come to the dark side once they've upgraded their phones.

Google+ Survival Guide

We have Google Earth, Google Reader, Gmail, Google News, Google Maps...What's next? Google Galaxy? It's looking that way. How about a social layer? Well, okay!

From the last few weeks, does this conversation sound familiar to you?

"Anyone have an invite to Google Plus?" (Editor's note: usually listed as Google +)

"Hey...can you give me an invite to Google +?" (Editor's note: usually when you find out a friend has a few)

Having an entrepreneurial spirit, and knowing several sole proprietors and small business owners in the New York City area, the question I often get, or maybe even a matter-of-fact statement is..."I don't get it." I used to get that about Twitter, but now the item I get questions on is Google Plus, or Google +.

I have to say, even I am overwhelmed with this new technology. But Google +, like many other social media, has its pitfalls yet has it's bonuses as well. Since it's been released and widely sought out, I have had time to look at it and play with it. Like many other tools, there is a learning curve, but there's also been a ton of literature out on it as well, so allow me to digest it for you.

**As a disclaimer, I took a step back from Facebook and even Twitter for a short time (but it's tougher for me to stay away from Twitter, for whatever reason) to try to understand it better and process it all.**

From a marketing standpoint, businesses have been using Twitter campaigns to get their company message out to the masses as well as interaction on Facebook pages. Google + is trying to take the guesswork and tediousness out of those elements. I mean, if you think about it, having to manage your Twitter account and Facebook page as not only a writer or casual user or even a business owner, it takes a lot of time. David All, the Chief Creative Officer at David All Group, says there are six things marketers need to know about Google +.

Two things out of this list that can hold for businesses and personal use are creating "circles" and the "hanging out" feature. Circles are similar to "groups" you can create in Facebook, but it's supposedly easier in Google +, as you can take more control over it. Another cool nifty aspect of Google + is the hang out feature, as you can actually now have video chats with up to 10 people at the same time. Since I am pretty Attention Deficit Disorder about this stuff, I doubt that would be helpful to me...but Facebook recently added a video chat layer with Skype. Apparently, this layer is synonymous with "jumping the shark." But of course, since I believe that blogging is a dying art form (as I'm blogging about it), video chats could be indeed the next wave of the future.

Mostly, a lot of what All brings up is common sense. I've said before that I took to Facebook like a fish to water since it was visually appealing and easy to use. Like Twitter, which had a larger learning curve for most people, Google + gives you what you want out of it.

All suggested that Google + may be too new to fully generate marketable content for businesses. After all, if you think about it, it took awhile for that to happen for Facebook. So for personal use, Craig Kannalley suggests starting small, by linking to friends and family first. This was easy since I am on most Gmail lists, so anyone who had my gmail account was able to reach out first. Similar to how Facebook started to work when you were able to reach out to people you didn't know but had common interests, Google + can provide the same cushion. The circles can be helpful in organizing your interests, and providing interesting content (which was another thing David All suggested, for engaging others in your circles). The common thread is to provide and filter interesting content to your masses.

The biggest piece of advice is to not treat Google + like Facebook. Christine Trapolino suggests that if you don't follow people you don't already know, you're going to get bored. How many times have I suggested that Facebook has jumped the shark by seeing the same filter of friends administering the same content or similar thoughts over and over again? I can get that from Twitter during a sporting event, as an example. And in a more digestible fashion.

While you love your friends and family, chances are, you might get a little bored with the trappings of it. Trapolino says if you engage with users you don't already know, you are getting a fresh perspective on passions or things you might not have even thought about.

Lastly, this Mashable column has it pretty much laid out in its aptly titled "Google Plus Guide" by Ben Parr. It's taken all the guesswork out of Google + and has given it to you in lay terms.

Most of all, Google + doesn't seem to be going anywhere, so I am not quick to discount it just yet. I mean, if I'm taking a Facebook vacation in order to understand it better, chances are it's going to be something I might grow to like better, kind of like when I liked Facebook better than MySpace, now Twitter in some ways better than Facebook.

Atheists Believe (In Something)

This will probably be the first and last time you might ever see me discussing my political or religious beliefs in this forum. Basically, I've had enough with thinking I need to change people's minds or whatever, because that's not my job. I think what I think, and I'm comfortable with that thought process and the steps that led me there. So I don't feel the need to discuss it unless people ask me, then I'm happy to provide whatever they want to know.

Anyway, my co-blogger Dee over at our sister blog Just Being Dee asked a question: If Not God, Then What? Now, unless she has other people in her life she considers a "sister" who is an atheist (ha ha), I believe she was referring to me and my belief system, or lack thereof as she says. Now, I'm not offended or upset by it, it's an honest question. When I started to respond to her post, though, I felt like many atheists need to spend a lot of time setting the record straight.

So I'll just throw it out there: I am a liberal, free thinking atheist. Yeah, there I said it. I'm not ashamed of it, nor do I hide this fact. This was a decision of several years of rational and critical thinking, even having been raised by a quasi-Catholic mother (though she's not practicing, and leans towards more agnostic thoughts now). The other side of my family are devout conservative Southern Baptists.

When I was in college, as many would attest I considered myself a feminist but also a conservative. People would often ask me how I could balance the two. Honestly, it wasn't hard. I was always more fiscally conservative, plus I was from New Jersey, which is a typically liberal leaning state, so even if there was a Republican governor, they supported some of my social beliefs like women's health and basic human rights. As I got older though, my social beliefs started to trump my fiscal leanings in the sense that they became more important to me. So that's why I tend to identify with more liberal thoughts now.

But my relationship with the Christian version of g-d is not that complicated, actually. I used to go to church every now and then. I read The Bible (which as an English major, I see as a fine piece of literature). I was told to believe in g-d so I did. But as I grew up, there were a lot of conflicting thoughts in my head, and even though I attended an all-women's Catholic college, I came to the conclusion that I was an atheist.

This decision was nothing to do with being flippant like "There IS NO GOD!!!" when something happens like a natural disaster or seeing suffering in the world if g-d is supposed to be "good," etc.

I consider myself a rational, critical and free thinker. Most atheists do. But when Dee questions what do they believe in, I have to chuckle because atheists do believe in something, actually very many different things.

Some atheists believe in evolution. (Editor's note: I was just told there is a faction called "naturalists," who knew?) I call it personally the "cycle of life," as all living breathing elements expire at some point. They eat things to survive, and then have to "fight it out" in nature so as not to cease to exist.

Now some folks (I'm looking at you, Christine O'Donnell) will ask "Well why aren't monkeys still evolving?" when people bring up the evolution theory. Guess what? Humans still evolve and still are. There's scientific evidence that humans are phasing out wisdom teeth in future generations. And it takes millions of years to get to that point. Plus monkeys are still evolving. It took us millions of years to get to where we are, so it will take millions of years to keep that progress.

I'm not going to say it's perfect but there's certainly more evidence pointing towards supporting a rational evolutionary process for not just humankind but animals as well. But it's just that: a theory. We don't know what came first: the chicken or the egg. But for people who point to g-d as the creator, my question is...well, who created g-d, then?

Atheists do have belief systems, they are just not theist or religious-based. For me, I believe, for lack of a better term, in the circle of life, but also in respect for other life forms. Respect for the Earth. Thinking and knowing that the world is bigger than just "me." There seems to be a faction that can't understand how we can be so comforted without having a "supreme being" way of thinking to save us. Well, I believe we have one life to live, I don't believe in the afterlife, I personally believe we are all worm food after we perish. It sounds scientific and cold, but this isn't sugar-coating, to me, what I think we all are once we leave this life.

Atheists are spiritual! I know, it can seem contradictory, but it goes towards the whole "world is bigger than me" thought process. Over at Columbus Circle, an Atheists group hands out pamphlets, and I just asked them flat out if an Atheist could also think of themselves as "spiritual." They looked taken aback, like they hadn't thought of it deeply themselves.

I chimed in and said, "You know, it depends on how you think of 'spiritual.' I'm not talking about having 'faith' but mostly to me spirituality can be part of a belief process and thinking that the world is bigger than me, having respect for all thinking, breathing life forms, etc."

Then I saw the light bulbs go off. One man told me, "I'm a vegan because I can't imagine hurting an animal or participating in that brutal industry, so I consider myself spiritual too." While I eat meat, I don't eat veal for ethical reasons. I also won't buy things as a consumer that I disagree with their practices. So that's my own version of spirituality.

I often categorize myself as "spiritual, not religious," simply because I don't want to upset my family members who are all deeply Christian based. But the fact is, you can be a good person and have respect for all breathing life forms and have a belief system, even if it isn't in the "biblical sense." And yes, that term was intentional.

More wars have been started as a result of religion and lack of respect for other belief systems. This is has been proved countless amounts of time. I'm not even talking about wars with other countries, but even wars within ourselves. Now, I know that this is a blanket statement, and I'm certainly not saying that ALL religions are like that. But I love how a Christian-based thought process will call out another religion for being "extremist" when there are plenty of extremists in Christianity too. It goes both ways.

As an atheist, I respect human rights, especially those who want religious freedom, as an example. I know, it sounds contradictory, but as I said above, it's not up to me to try to change people's minds. There's a lot of circular reasoning there and often defers to a g-d no one has seen. That's great for you, but for me, I've come to the conclusion that religion has done more harm than good.

But when it has to determine a war or killing others simply in the name of g-d is what I don't get. I mean, isn't g-d supposed to be an omnipresent peaceful being? Yet, there is a natural selection (for lack of a better term) for humans to engage in aggression. At the same time, we'll hear about holy wars.

To this atheist (and many others), it's a foregone conclusion that some religions' imaginary friends have caused more harm than good. And trust me -- it's not just outside us, our country has been just as bad with that historically. Even now, my favorite pastor Fred Phelps spends more time spreading around messages of hate and disgust, while being a "Christian." Most Christians I know don't waste their time worrying about marriage equality or telling people they are going to burn in Hell because they disapprove of their lives. But this guy does with a huge platform. Atheists are generally accepting of everyone...just not hateful people.

Lastly, Atheists are scientists. I think that's sort of funny to describe me as one, because I sucked at math and science as a student. But it's the only way to discuss rational thinking that comes to a conclusion. Charles Darwin constructed a theory of evolution. It's stood a test of time, although like many theories it has a lot of open ends and questions. But for the most part, it's answered many questions.

Atheists are good people! It blows my mind how many people think if you are an atheist, you are automatically a goth-music loving, vampire-looking, devil-worshiping freak. Uh, no! (Well, except the goth music part. I do love goth). I'm probably one of the most normal, down-to-earth people you would ever meet with a rational thought process who can see the bigger picture. We help old ladies cross the street, we check on our elderly neighbors in heat waves, we give up our seats on the bus or train to pregnant ladies or disabled folks. We're not all heathens. As long as we don't discuss religion, I'm sure we'll have more in common than you think...

So, Dee, I know this was a long answer to your simple question, but I feel like I need to set the record straight about how I came to this conclusion about my life. I'm very comfortable with this, and I didn't write this to be flippant or offend anyone. I just hope that you can embrace my way of thinking with respect, as I respect yours and others!

Unplug & Reconnect: The Challenge

Put the phone down. Get off the computer. Stop looking at your blackberry.

As the "better half" in a relationship (well, that's how my husband refers to me), there's always a period of disconnect when he needs to be on the computer, or I am on my phone. Heck, I know that when we go out to dinner or go watch a baseball game somewhere, I am constantly checking updates on my phone.

I could easily be TALKING to him. I could listen to his concerns or just hear what's going on his head. Well, my husband isn't much of a talker, but that's besides the point. The point is, he could be saying something to me, and I'll be going through the motions and checking my Twitter feed or checking into Foursquare when we go into an establishment.

So this should set up the story line where as a society we are more "connected" than ever, but then when it comes to our deeply personal relationships, we may be further away on some marks conversely. As an example, I conduct a lot of personal affairs on my iPhone and it was recently stolen. I had to replace it, but it was stressful that I would have my personal information out there for someone to see if they were able to hack into my phone.

And on the other hand, those of us who are super highly connected to our jobs rarely have a day off. While technology has made some task-oriented roles "easier," the amount of stress it has added to our lives is tenfold, twentyfold, I would even guess.

The fact is, even on our days off when we are supposed to be relaxing, there's always something to be connected to and it's rarely a personal relationship. In fact, it's mostly our personal relationships that get hurt as a result of this connectivity.

Enter Unplug & Reconnect, an initiative to (as their website states) "help us find a balance between our technology-laden, multitasking selves and our creative, emotional and spiritual needs — to benefit from one while sustaining the other." Now, I will admit that it's a bit ironic to launch an initiative to break away from your technology habits and have a supporting Facebook and Twitter account to go along with it! But as U&R's (in the "short hand") mission statement suggests, it isn't saying to break away from technology entirely, just take a break from it. Take a break, reconnect with your family, loved-ones, and friends, and not depend on technology so much. It causes a buffer, and there's a certain disconnect with having it around, even if you are using it to connect with family and friends.

It sounds easy, right? Yet, when I bring up an idea of doing a technology "cleanse" for a bit, I get a lot of jokes about "Oh, I don't think I can do that!" I'm not saying it will be easy, but it will cause you think outside of the box for building existing relationships, and making them stronger, then technology can balance out the rest.

My husband probably won't like that I'm saying this, but I'm willing to take the plunge and disconnect or rather "Unplug" from technology. The irony is, my husband and I met through social media, and we both blog. For both of us to truly unplug from it all, it will be a challenge! But then again, we did an elimination diet back in January when we eschewed dairy, wheat, gluten, soy, shellfish, caffeine, nuts, sugar and basically anything fun for three weeks. I was DYING by about week two, he took to it like a fish to water. Perhaps I will be the one with the bigger technology withdrawal problem!

It's not deprivation, either one of those detoxes whether it's dietary or technology-driven, but rather has you build on your strength from within and not disconnect emotionally or physically.

Are you up for the challenge? Take a look at U&R's blog post on Managing Stress (calling it an addiction, even!). I'm hoping to take a look into decommissioning my technology addiction for at least a weekend, especially when I do this food detox again, and plan a full report when I return!

To Like Or Not To Like: That Is The Question!

I was perusing my Facebook profile last night and I couldn't believe the number of connections I racked up in "likes"!  From restaurants and stores, to athletes and other public figures, my "likes" were more than I had ever dreamed possible.

And so, I started deleting some of them.  First off, to be connected to so many pages and people is not always a good thing. I know Facebook is a networking tool, but you never know who's really on the other end of the things we "like".  Secondly, many of the things I liked I have blocked from my News Feed because their posts are kinda annoying, which made me ask myself, "How much could I really like it?"

The other thing that bothers me about the whole like thing is that administrators incorrectly categorize the pages they create, which makes for a messy profile to a perfectionist like me.  How does "molten chocolate cake" fall under my activities section?  I know eating it is an activity, but come on...the actual cake itself?

Whether it's "becoming a fan" of a page (which was Facebook's old name for this feature) or "liking" something, now you don't even need to find it on Facebook to do so.  Pretty much anywhere on the web, you will find a "Like" button that will, as long as you're logged into your Facebook account, make you like either the link or the actual thing on your Facebook profile.  When you like a link, it appears in your friends' News Feeds, so that they may click on it and view it and/or like it as well.

Coop Dee Ville is guilty as well.  We have a Facebook page that we ask all of our readers to like.  We even have a link to it here on our blog.  And we also have a "Tweet" button for you to share our posts on Twitter as well. Many of you may be hesitant to click.  You have to be careful nowadays and know the tricks and secrets to liking things. Otherwise, you may assist in the spread of spam and viruses to your Facebook friends. So here's a little story followed by some precautionary steps you can take to protect your Facebook account and your computer...

The other day I clicked on a friend's link because I was curious as to what the picture displayed was, and next thing I know, it appears on my wall as me "liking" it. Now suddenly, I am connected to this link that I never even viewed and still have no idea what it was about. (Needless to say, I don't know what the picture was either!)

Because of things like this, it is a good idea to check your profile every now and then to make sure there aren't any unwanted connections.  You may also want to create a list of all the pages you "like", as I have, and block that list from seeing any of your personal information, including photos and location.  Of course, when it comes to your friends' pages, you like them out of courtesy, even if you don't really "like" them, and you hope the favor is returned.  But you can be less cautious when it comes to those.

The City Mouse

I live in a city environment. I don't own a car (though I used to). When I do drive, it's long distances, and with the advent of Zipcar, Hertz Connect and MintCar, cars by the hour have gas and insurance figured in. (I can reserve these cars, by the way, by using my phone and it saved my sanity visiting California in the winter, by not needing to rent a car on a daily rate but an hourly rate).

It's hard for me to understand the plight of my friends and family, the "country mice," who depend on their cars for their livelihoods. Robert Moses was really heralded for making the motor vehicle the "future," especially by building the freeways and infrastructure in the Greater New York area.

Now it seems like our reliance on our cars (because, you know, try to tell an American (s)he can't have their car!) has caused a double-edged sword. Cars can't operate without gas, and we are reliant on gas from foreign sources. As long as we are a car-dependent culture, this vicious cycle isn't going to change.

So perhaps we need to change our way of traveling in order to maximize not only fuel-efficiency, but cost-effectiveness as well. For me, traffic and especially parking in cities, really annoyed me. They still do. I like trains, but the local systems (NJ Transit especially) just likes to raise prices and not improve service. They are also pricey.

Enter the Megabus! Megabus, or Boltbus, to be more precise.

These are more niche area buses, that go to major cities in a megalopolis area, such as travel within the Boston - Washington, D.C. corridor.

When I was a country mouse, I'd do these drives by myself. The drawbacks of course are that I would need to schedule my time around the departures...but it's almost like flying, but on the ground.

I was always a little wary about these "curbside" buses, but they have been proven to be a safe and reliable manner of travel. There have been several high profile accidents with what they call the "Chinatown buses" which also do curbside departures but are less regulated and aren't majority owned by larger transportation companies.

The bonus part? I can text, tweet and email while on the road. Score! These buses have been fitted with WiFi and power outlets, so when I arrive, my phone won't be dead...and I'll have caught up on my emails.

Then when we arrive, I can Yelp a lunch place and start in on the FUN!

I feel for my friends who have no choice but to drive. For me, the answer is simple because I have options to get around but who wants to drive to Washington from New York City? Seriously, I've done it, and it's overrated. Let someone else do it!

But I realize that it's changed my views on owning a car and how much I really need to drive. It would be totally different if I lived by, say, where my mom lives. While there is a new mini mall opening up that's within walking distance (though I guarantee most people in her housing development will choose to drive there), I can see a McDonald's, a Walgreen's and Shop Rite in the distance...yet there's no easy way to walk there.

Here, I can see McDonald's, Duane Reade, several restaurants, and Trader Joe's, and can walk easily within a five-minute radius. For me, it's worth not having a vehicle and being reliant on one either. I know some people can't live like that but I have the luxury of doing so.

And I totally don't get pump stress. That's just lovely.

Perhaps car sharing and no-frills bus travel might sound like it's a combination of futuristic but taking a step back in independent ownership. With the advent of higher gas prices, perhaps it's not a bad idea to change our overall habits for medium-distance travel in this country.

Oh, So Savvy. Oh, Miso Savvy

As if social networking apps such as Facebook, Twitter and Foursquare weren't enough, now it's even easier for everyone to know where you are...and...what you're watching?

Over the past two weeks, I've noticed a huge increase in posts on my Twitter timeline and Facebook news feed from Miso (gomiso.com), the "social TV platform that makes watching TV more fun".

Similar to Foursquare, where users share their location with friends while collecting points and virtual badges, Miso (not the soup) lets users "check-in" to TV shows and sporting events they are watching.  It even lets you choose the season and episode, which is especially useful when watching a recorded show, such as on your DVR or VCR. (Does anyone even own a VCR anymore?)

What's next, an app for food?  We can call it "APPetizer"! Imagine checking in to pizza or key lime pie! Pretty soon our Facebook and Twitter profiles will go something like, "Denise is at Applebee's via Foursquare", "eating boneless buffalo wings via APPetizer" and "watching The New York Mets via gomiso."

 And then we complain about our privacy...