Guy friends who catch feelings

Alright so tonight I would like to express my feelings towards "guy friends who catch feelings."  I've had quite a few close guy friends in my life because let's face it, sometimes girls are annoying. Sometimes a girl just wants to play video games or build campfires or do stupid idiotic things without having to listen to drama the whole time. Plus, it's nice to have a few dudes there to stand up for you like your big brother when you need them.
However, somewhere along the lines, guys have a tendency to forget the whole brother/sister relationship that once was and they get this crazy idea that their best girl friends will one day be their GIRLFRIENDS. Let me say from experience that the world is not a typical rom-com and usually if a girl has always hung out with you in her pjs and stuffs her face with junk food and farts in your presence, she is friend zoning you. She doesn't even have to be that way either though. If she ever uses the word "friend" or "pal" or "bud" with you she is using it to purposely friend zone you.
Now I'm sure there are some relationships that stem from best friendships but never in my life have I wanted to date one of my guy friends unless I initially had feelings for them.
The worst part of the confused guy friend is when they become delusional and think that you two have "hooked up" or even have come close for that matter. They continue to tell all their friends that you two have totally slept together. Lying about getting with a girl doesn't make you cool; it makes you delusional, and I feel sorry that you have to make up fake stories about getting laid. What is the deal with that? Does that make a man feel manlier? So annoying.
The sad thing is that this situation has happened to me several times. It's like it's impossible to have a friend of the opposite sex.

Late night eureka moments

Well it's 3:00 am and I've been lying in my bed in the dark for the past 3 hours.  I don't know what's causing me to think so depressingly lately but now I can't sleep because of it.  So here I am, eating peanut butter and marshmallow fluff with a fork and pondering my life's most questionable attributes.
I used to always wonder why everyone said that divorce screwed up the kids in some way because I never felt "screwed up."  After my parents divorced, my brother had a period of depression, my sister was struck with high anxiety, and I seemed to go on like it never happened.  This is true for the most part.  I never could find anything to blame the divorce on but I think I just had a Eureka moment.
I have always known and been aware of my problems with commitment.  I pine after things for so long that they seem unattainable and then as soon as I get them I freak out and don't want them anymore.  A small example is every boyfriend I've ever had.  I would say I got "uninterested" but honestly my mind would turn every good trait of a guy I liked into a terrible annoyance and then I would end it quickly and without hesitation.  A larger scale example is my study abroad opportunity.  I've been talking about spending a year in France for the past 4 years and now that it's actually becoming real, I'm turning away.  My mind keeps bringing every negative point about going to France and highlighting them so big and bold that they overshadow any good, happy, or exciting thought.  I don't want to go at all anymore and I wish I could end the arrangements quickly and without hesitation.  Aside from the two examples given, this kind of thing is a recurrence.  I cannot get myself to commit to anything or anyone, no matter how much I actually wanted them before it got "real."'
So I realized that where my brother got the depression problem and my sister got the anxiety problem, I got the "forever alone and unsatisfied with every decision" problem.  I mean how could I trust any situation or person after seeing the way my mum was treated in her first marriage?
(However, I'm not pointing the finger of blame on anyone for my commitment issues; I just think if anything helped form these issues, the divorce would be it.)

"I cannot function with less than ten hours."

For all the people who know me well, they know that I've got a small addiction to sleeping.  For example, a phrase that I've said several times in my life is, "I cannot function with less than ten hours."

And the funny thing is if I could get my ass out of bed before I hit the ten hour mark, I could function just fine.  I've had to do so for work and class and whatnot.  However if there's nothing telling me to "get the hell up" I will sleep until it's dark outside.  Honestly, I hate this part of me because I hate wasted time and sleeping only wastes precious hours that you could have used to do something productive, but in my head when my alarm goes off (at noon) I can't think of anything more productive than to sleep.

I've looked up online causes of oversleeping just to see if maybe there was a good reason behind it.  Immediately I learned online that I had cancer.  After I shook that one off I read that depression, stress, substance abuse, and sleep apnea are common causes of oversleeping.  Seriously so unhelpful.  I was hoping to find some disorder or addiction that's not harmful but very common and had a cool name like dormiromania, but all I found was "Zoë, you may be depressed and you should probably drink less wine." This is why I hate the internet.

After much pondering I thought that maybe I just love my dreams.  I mean I have some of the weirdest/craziest/kickass-est dreams sometimes and they feel so real that maybe I just wanna stay in there for a while longer and check out what happens?  Coming from a Fall Out Boy lyric, "I need more dreams and less life."  They probably mean it in a more depressing, emo way but whatever.  It's like the movies, only I'm the star sooo what could be better? 

But in conclusion I've found nothing out from today's brain-picking other than sleep is my one true love and I don't need a reason for that.

Down-time is only a good thing when you're exhausted

So today was like every other day this Summer.  I woke up, ate something, showered, took Rex out (my room mate's dog) and then sat there bored for about thirty minutes.  I took out money from my rent fund to go grocery shopping, promising myself that I'd replace it with the tips that I made at work tonight, lied around some more and then got ready for work. However, when I got to work around 5:30, my manager told me to go home because they were overstaffed.  So I got back in my car and drove the same 20 minute drive on the Lloyd back to my apartment.  That has been my day so far.  Why is this significant?  Well, it wouldn't be for a normal person.
I got to thinking while I was driving home in my stuffy, hot work uniform about how badly I just wanted to work.  Then I asked myself why it mattered so much.  Most college students would be overjoyed to have a Friday night off, but not me.  My response to "why" is that I was bored.  I was dreadfully BORED in my little dog-scented apartment.  I had already watched enough movies and Netflix and read enough novels to get my fix for laziness. So my rebuttal was "go do something, it's Friday night."  I quickly responded that I have no one to hang out with and no money to spend.  Then that made me think even harder about my current situation.  A) I have several friends living in Evansville so I don't know why I tell myself I have no one to hang out with.  B) You don't NEED money to do things.
Why do I insist that my life is so unsatisfying and vapid?
I have been blaming last summer's emptiness on the fact that it was spent in Vincennes.  I thought that living in Evansville would make this summer more interesting and less depressing, but I honestly can't escape it.  I've realized that Vincennes is not what was boring me (although it helped) but just my life in general. I always complain about how much I hate school and work but in reality, I actually like it.  I've said the phrase, "I hate responsibility" several dozen times but actually I think I love responsibility.  I like having checklists to check off.  I like having something to do at all times, and I never truly recognized that until my car ride home from work today.  Down-time is only a good thing when you're exhausted; otherwise its just another wasted hour or two.
In conclusion,  I've decided that I dislike summer months.  Sure I get more sleep but who can compare sleep to daily brain-stimulation that you get with school?  I should've taken a summer class.
 
    

The thoughts and concerns of a future French student

I'm studying abroad in France next year.  I'm leaving the United States on September 7th and won't be returning until June 30.  I'll be attending Université d'Aix Marseilles (which is in the South).  I'm incredibly excited, however there are more emotions that I'd like to elaborate on.

I know that unless you have studied abroad/are going to study abroad/ have been in another country for an extended period of time, you probably think I'm being dramatic or ridiculous or negative, but I have more anxieties about this adventure than anything.

Firstly, I'm going to be gone for TEN MONTHS.  "But Zoë, that's not even a year. Why are you freaking out?"  My response is- this is going to be ten months spent ALONE.  I'm going alone.  I literally know no one.  Everyone speaks another language (which I can speak, but not comfortably).  Even if I could fluently speak French, I wouldn't make any friends.  I am seriously so terrible at being social.  All the friends I have now were made because they were friends of another friend.  I'm awkward and shy and nervous and this is all going to blow up in my face when I get to France because I'm literally going to be alone.  And sad.

Second- I have this other fear of what it will be like when I return home.  There's a saying that's like "The worst thing about distance is not knowing whether or not they'll miss you or forget about you."  This is my entire thought process when thinking about study abroad.  I have this terrible feeling that I'm going to get back to USI and no one will know who I am in my sorority (which is very likely, considering there will be a new pledge class that's never heard my name before) and that every friend I had before I left will have new friends that inadvertently "took my place."  This sounds SO dumb, I know, but isn't everyone afraid of being forgotten?  Isn't everyone afraid of coming home and there being NO open arms to welcome you back? I am very aware that the world does not revolve around Zoë Cardinal-Wyant, and therefore everyone's lives will continue without me and I'll soon be a thing of the past.

Another fear is basically the fear of being homesick.  I'm usually pretty content with being away from home but I've never been so far away that it's not a possibility to just go home.  I've only been REALLY homesick maybe twice in my life and I know that it is one of the worst feelings.  I know I can skype as much as I want and eventually SOMEONE will visit me in France, but that's not being home.  I'm afraid of what I'll miss out on at home.  There will be really exciting things that I wish I could be there for.  Also what if something tragic(God forbid) happens at home?  I won't be there to console or morn or anything like that.  Maybe I worry too much, but lately that's all I can do.

Clearly I'm just entirely nervous and scared.  Honestly though, who wouldn't be?  This is a big deal, for me at least.  I know that once I'm there and in the groove of things I'll enjoy it but for now I'm just trying to NOT hyperventilate every time someone brings up France.

I also know that this is an amazing experience that most people do not get to have and I'm very lucky to have this opportunity.....but reciting that sentence to me every time I say that I'm nervous does NOT make me feel better...more guilty for being nervous, I guess.

So everyone do me a favor and do not bring up my study abroad unless it's important.  This including but not limited to: "Oh my god I can't believe you're leaving me" or "You won't be there for this or that" unless you'd like me to throw up my lunch onto your shoes...but thank you for everyone's support thus far.  I really do appreciate/ need it.  Let's just live in the moment.

From Sacks to Sex

Recently I had to write a research paper for my History class over any topic I desired.  Literally anything.  Since I'm basically interested in two things, France and fashion, and I've already written plenty of papers over France by force, I chose to explore women's fashion.  I wanted to know how we got to where we are today, trend wise.  I also got an A on this paper, the only points being deducted for not having page numbers.  Not to toot my own horn, but I'm proud and I think the topic is interesting so I decided to post it for everyone to read. Enjoy.

Women’s Fashion throughout History:  From Sacks to Sex

            How is a woman defined in today’s society?  Most people would agree that a woman is a fragile yet fierce, sexy yet elegant, and yielding yet obstinate being.  She is the bringer of life, the consoler of hearts and the strength of many.  Women have come a long way in society since the beginning of time.  The woman was once the passive member of the home who complied with every order of the man.  Today, a woman can hold her own.  A woman can be sexy and fierce and unyielding without the judgment of man and with acceptance from society.  One aspect of the woman that has expressed her character throughout history is her clothes.  From the conservative and shapeless wardrobe of the medieval age to the suggestive and tight-fitting trends today, there have been many changes to the way a woman presents herself. 

            Women have always been referred to as the delicate sex.  With their smaller frames and softer outer shell, this is an understandable conception.  In most cases when someone obtains something that is fragile, he or she will try to protect it or keep it safe.  This is more or less the point of view towards women in earlier times.  Men saw women as weak, but also precious and something that should be contained.  This is what began the traditional wardrobe of the woman.  Women were always covered from head to toe.  In the medieval era of the 1300’s, women dressed in sack-like garments.  All was covered and there was no shape or figure to the body.  There was no hope for women’s fashion at that time whereas the men’s dress was created to enhance the beauty of their bodies to promote masculinity.  The original expressive aim of female dress was modesty and this is still practiced in some cultures and religions today.[1]  However, women could not flaunt their curves or even their skin up until the fourteenth century.

            The fourteenth century marked the beginning of a revolution for women’s clothing.  Up until then, women could not show any skin or they would be basically shunned from society.  Women began showing more skin in the 1500’s however.  The lowering of the neckline instigated the potential new view of the woman.  She was no longer the precious being in which you protected.  She was now starting to show the sexy side of herself.  France referred to this change as “décolletage” or “selective exposer of the skin.”[2]  This décolletage aroused a new erotic view of women.  The idea of women as sexual figures sparked the change in women’s fashion forever.  

Now that the neckline had dropped, women’s clothing could be altered differently and was done in a less modest manner.  Although dresses were always the standard attire for women, they were not varied until the sixteenth century.  Dresses became popular in more than one variation after the male revolution of the middle ages.  This was the start of real “fashion” for women.  Two-pieced dresses were common as well as the petticoat and headdress.  Petticoats were basically an undergarment that women wore under their skirts which hung from the waist to the floor.  The headdresses were important, for they expressed the ongoing theme of modesty, even though the modesty had phased out into a lesser concentration.  The petticoat and veil were major defining female garments.  When long hair and head coverings were given up in the seventeenth century, the change was shockingly profound.[3]

      Women continued to dress in two pieced dresses with petticoats and low necklines throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.  The eighteenth century introduced the importance of the silhouette of the woman’s body.  Corsets and many more petticoats were worn to exaggerate the structure of the hourglass figure.  More color and design was put into play when designing a woman’s dress during this time period.[4]  Fashion became more prominent of an idea instead of just clothing.  Women were now dressing to flaunt their curves and womanly features rather than hiding and protecting them.  The late 1800’s brought forth a brand new idea for women’s dress:  trousers. 

Trousers for women in the late 1800’s were still socially unacceptable but were worn on occasion.  Pants were worn by low-class women.  These women included dancers, acrobats, actresses, singers, mine workers, fisherfolk, and agricultural laborers.  Women had begun to work men’s jobs during this time period but were considered low-class.  Other than being low-class, pants were unacceptable because they were viewed as soft-core pornography at the time.  The separation of a woman’s legs by a piece of fabric was only used for seductive purposes and therefore was socially intolerable.[5]  Although they were not widely worn, pants had begun to appear on some women which had unknowingly originated a new revolution for women’s fashion which took place in the twentieth century.

The 1900’s opened new doors for women in many aspects, fashion of course being one of them.  World War I gave the opportunity for women to work men’s jobs while their husbands were away.  This alone gave a new idea of women’s independence and freedoms.  Publicly working women wore skirts and factory working women wore pants.[6]  Only the women working in factories and other hidden jobs wore pants because they were still not entirely accepted by the public yet.  Meanwhile in France, women’s pants were an idea for designers’ inspiration.  Paul Poiret, a French fashion designer, designed a trend of “divided skirts” which led to his first women’s trouser design in 1913 referred to as harem pants.  Harem pants were wide-legged trousers that gathered up at the ankles, giving them the look of a skirt.  These were based off of costume designs and were to be worn with a long tunic.[7] 

Aside from the skirt-like pants of Poiret, another French designer had ideas of her own.  Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel had respect for the wearing of pants.  In fact, she often wore her husband’s suits around in comfort.  Coco had once said, “Fashion does not only exist in dresses.”[8] Chanel had visited Venice, Italy in the early 1900’s and was inspired by the pants worn by the gondola rowers.  These pants influenced her design of the wide-legged women’s trouser pants.[9]  This design exploded the likeliness of a woman’s ability to wear something other than a skirt.  In the 1930’s, pants were stylish but still shocking to wear.  It was acceptable to wear pants however for sports and activities like horseback riding which were designed also by Coco Chanel.  People still saw pants on women as unnatural and masculine but this did not prevent some women from wearing them.  Famous women like Marlene Dietrich and Katherine Hepburn wore pants on a regular basis.  This made the women’s pants into a trend.  In 1939, the first vogue was issued with women in pants playing sports pictured on the cover.[10]  Pajama pants were also widely acceptable for women and seen as a fashion staple in the 1930’s.[11]

After pants became a trend in the 1930’s, the designs and variations of them increased throughout the 1900’s.  The 1940’s gave more opportunities for women to work which made pants more acceptable to wear.  However in the 1950’s, pants were discouraged more because of the post-World War II feminine look.  Although they were discouraged, they were still accepted and worn.  Audrey Hepburn created the trend of high-waist cigarette and capri pants which continued into the 1960’s. The sixties was a decade of full social acceptance of women wearing pants.  Women could wear pants casually and in the workplace judge free and comfortably.

Now that women could freely wear pants as they pleased, designers created what seemed to be a new trend of women’s pants each decade.  The seventies are known for the bell bottomed flare trousers as seen in the Charlie’s Angels movies.  The eighties was a decade of tight fitting clothing on the bottom half.  Skinny jeans and cotton leggings were worn regularly by women during this time.  The nineties consisted of the “grunge” look which normally meant baggy or ripped jeans on women.  The 1990’s put forth a vibe of “I just rolled out of bed” from everyone and women were equally as grunge as the men.[12]  In the late 1990’s, two-thirds of the women in the United States wore pants several times a week.[13]  This was the conclusion of the women’s dress revolution.  Women were allowed to express their identities through their clothes however they pleased and it was socially acceptable.

  The turn of the century introduced low-rise, boot-leg, flare, and boyfriend style jeans for women.  By 2010, all types of jeans were basically designed and so now the trends are mainly repeats of the past trends.[14]  The twenty-first century also increased the sexuality of women in their attire.  Women seem to think along the lines of “less is more” when getting dressed in this day and age.  However, it is socially acceptable. 

 In conclusion, there is a noticeable difference in the way women present themselves today compared to how they did many centuries ago.  Women started off wearing sack-like dresses that covered every inch of their body and are currently wearing less and less daily.  Women can freely express their sexuality and character with the help of fashion.  Fashion can emphasize a woman’s elegant or feminine side as well as her sexy and independent side.  Every woman can thank the historical events and courageous women and men that began and concluded the revolution of women’s fashion, for now women have the ability to wear whatever they feel.

---

[1] Anne Hollander, Sex and Suits (New York: Knopf, 1994), 42

[2] Anne Hollander, Sex and Suits (New York: Knopf, 1994), 47

[3] Anne Hollander, Sex and Suits (New York: Knopf, 1994), 48

[4] Fashion Timeline. Vintage Fashion Guild. Accessed March 25, 2014. http://vintagefashionguild.org/fashion-timeline/

[5] Anne Hollander, Sex and Suits (New York: Knopf, 1994), 48

[6] Trousers for Women. Fashion Encyclopedia. Accessed March 18, 2014.  http://www.fashionencyclopedia.com

[7] Valerie Steele, Paris Fashion: A Cultural History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 36.

 

 

[8] Valerie Steele, Paris Fashion: A Cultural History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 12.

[9] Fashion rewind:  A brief history of trousers through the ages. Secret Closet.  Accessed November 24, 2014.  http://www.secretcloset.pk/

[10] Trousers for Women. Fashion Encyclopedia. Accessed March 18, 2014.  http://www.fashionencyclopedia.com

[11] Fashion rewind:  A brief history of trousers through the ages. Secret Closet.  Accessed November 24, 2014.  http://www.secretcloset.pk/

 

[12] Fashion rewind:  A brief history of trousers through the ages. Secret Closet.  Accessed November 24, 2014.  http://www.secretcloset.pk/

[13] Trousers for Women. Fashion Encyclopedia. Accessed March 18, 2014.  http://www.fashionencyclopedia.com

[14] Fashion rewind:  A brief history of trousers through the ages. Secret Closet.  Accessed November 24, 2014.  http://www.secretcloset.pk/

It's Never Worth It

Recently my older sister asked me if I was gay.  She genuinely wanted to know if I liked girls.  To answer the question, I'm straight.  People sometimes wonder if I'm gay because I don't date.  I decided to explain my reasons behind why I don't date in this blog to clear the air.  I'll sum it up in one sentence: It's not worth it.
I cannot stress this enough.  Dating is not worth everything it brings to the table.  There's a few positives of having a significant other; I'm aware of that. Sure, you have a date to every event.  You have someone to cuddle with when you need to be held.  You have someone who thinks you're beautiful no matter what (other than your mother).  However, there is at least double the amount of negatives.
Starting off, the first few weeks of "talking" before it's more serious are the worst few weeks anyone could endure.  Of course there's puppy love and butterflies but there's also the torment of, "does he even like me as much as I like him?" "Why isn't he texting me back?" or the best one, "He probably just wants to get laid."  The mental torture that your brain goes through during this iffy time is enough to cause several panic attacks in one day.  Personally, I can't stand the wondering.  I'm impatient.  I need to KNOW how you feel about me up front or I'm going to lose it, wondering about it.
Secondly, the first few weeks or so of actually being committed to each other is just as horrific.  MEETING THE PARENTS.  I for one can speak for all socially awkward noobs out there in saying that meeting the parents of someone you really like for the first time is one of the most horrendous experiences.  What do I wear?  How should I act?  Should I address them by their first names? I am probably the worst person with first impressions, hands down.  No matter what I can always count on embarrassing myself in some way or another.  Another terrible thing about the "honeymoon phase" is the actually getting to know what makes someone tick.  I mean, you'll get in your first fight over something because you're still unsure of how he'll react to things.  I can't handle that. I'M SORRY that your team lost.  It's a game.  Don't get butt hurt about it.  Oh, now you're mad that I told you not to get mad. Oh, okay.  
A third negative of dating is when you've been together for a while and you should know everything that will make him mad.  Now is the time where you're just petty with each other. "Sometimes I think you like my friends more than you like me.  Might as well date them" "OH MY GOD WHY DON'T YOU EVER LISTEN TO ME" or even the parenting vibe where they're like, "You really need to do your homework. It's due tomorrow."  Things of that nature are the most IRRITATING.  Hi, I've been dating you a while now soo you should probably trust me and stop being jealous of everything I do.  Also, nagging me does not make me feel more comfortable with you.  It makes me want to jump out a window.
Lastly, I cannot handle couples who can't go an hour without talking to each other.  Awhhhh he's your "better half" and you "don't know what you would do without him" how cute.  No.  Be your own person.  Have your own life. Enjoy alone time.  Create yourself into the person you want to be...ESPECIALLY before you try to shape another person's life to fit yours.  Along the same lines, make yourself happy.  I am a firm believer in putting yourself first. I know, I sound horrible and vain and self centered and heartless blah blah blah but this is MY life.  There is no possible way for me to always make everyone else happy and  I definitely cannot do that if I am not happy to begin with.
In summary, the hand holding and date nights might be fun but they do not outweigh the torment, irritation, aggravation, and potential humiliation that is dating.  All in all, it is not worth it.  It's NEVER worth it.  In the mean time, I'll be enjoying my time with my friends and myself.  I'll be finding myself.  I'll be happy and embarrassment free without the stress of wondering "does he still like me" or "am I good enough."
I'm good enough for myself and that's all that matters.  If a knight in shining armor wants to swoop up and try to change my mind, he can be my guest.  However he will most like just be a regular dude in a gray sweat suit.  The smoke and mirrors do not work on me, folks.