Throw it Away and Go Home: I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For.

Confusion never stops,

Closing walls and ticking clocks.
Gonna come back and take you home,
I could not stop that you now know.

Come out upon my seas,
Cursed missed opportunities.
Am I a part of the cure?
Or am I part of the disease?
You are, you are, you are.

~Coldplay

Before I get going on this post, I need to thank all the people I have stolen photographs from. It can be hard to chase down good photos. You cannot just tear a photo from anywhere you know.

Вот она

---

This is an old post I wrote quite a while ago. I am presenting it now as to clear out my old drafts and allow me move on to other projects on the blog. This post is presented in essence in its exact form from when I wrote it last December. Only slight modifications have been made to a few paragraphs. It may or may not contain current information.

What I write about here is by no means meant to be a new discovery, nor do I claim that the experiences related herein transcend in egregiousness that of other people. In truth, I am a bit hesitant to even use this post, as it seems pretty much just like a big complain and whine post. But, as stated in the first post on the blog, sometimes I just use this place as a catharsis center.

I begin with a prefacing story.

Back in 2012, I met this girl named Tex in a class I had. Her name is of course a code name and is short for the Textus Receptus. (I was writing a paper on the translation of the New Testament then). Now, this girl was not built to perform in the scholastic spectrum. Overall, she was a nice enough girl and had talents in other aspects of life, she just had no academic turgor. The poor girl possessed zero ability to stand in the pocket and deliver a pass. This ended up being a massive frustration since I wound up trying to help her get through the class we had together. However, she did not do homework on Saturdays, so this was naturally rather difficult. But, she did manage to pass the class. And then she let me know that she was not interested in having much contact with me.

It just so happened that as I was leaving town after this said semester that the song "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" by U2 came on the radio as I was crossing the city line. Sort of fitting.

I have climbed the highest mountains
I have run through the fields
Only to be with you
Only to be with you

I have run, I have crawled
I have scaled these city walls
These city walls
Only to be with you.

But I still haven't found
What I'm looking for
But I still haven't found
What I'm looking for

~U2

This relates to children's literature. In the book Days With Frog and Toad, the two main characters attempt to fly a kite. At one point the phrase "Throw it away and go home" is uttered. Sometimes even now I think of that phrase.

As of late I have actually become a rather large believer in throwing things away and moving on to other venues. Most of you know where I went to school. I started school there nine years ago. And I have to say I reached a point where I became rather disenchanted with the social paradigm in the surrounding city (not a unique story of course). My people were consistently socially abused there. And I didn't appreciate it. But many of them have moved far away from there and have had success. The Beast, Mr. Melmac, El Toque, The Mamma.....they all threw it away and went home--then marched on to glory (so to speak) somewhere else. The interesting thing is that most casual observers thought these people somehow "failed" because they never embraced (or were embraced in) the prevailing social folds of the P-town in the Pleasant Valley. But these aforementioned people all have gone on to graduate degrees and have perhaps (dare I say) transcended what there, my former locale, could ever offer them. (Note that this is not a commentary on my former school, but rather the social strata that existed in the surrounding regions).

Now the message here is not that I think that moving to Alaska* will somehow jump start my life and I will end up marrying a young accountant/veterinarian/singer/attorney/beauty queen (all in one) and then also discover an untapped oil reservoir in my backyard. I would be totally fine with the girl only having a few of those jobs, and the oil money is really overkill. I do not require much. 

However, I do think that, given opportunity, it can be clarifying to move to a new place and see some new faces. Now this is a dangerous statement, as I recently have been prompted by some to actually meet new people now. And surprise! They know the "perfect girl for me." If I had a dollar for every time someone has told me that phrase, oil money would be pocket change. And I pretty much have zero motivation to try anything social now that I seem to be the only person in the entire city that is over age 25, not married, and still going to school (Okay, a vast over generalization). Although I did meet a girl once while we were volunteering somewhere together and she gave me a ride in her BMW. So I do participate in social expenditures occasionally. Very occasionally, that is.

Along those lines, I believe that my handlers have scheduled my next social expenditure for roughly May 14, 2016. Once this is approved on Leap Day next year, more details will be forthcoming. Consider arranging your schedules. Please do not wear lime green or yellow to the festivities, as it will clash horribly with the decor. Besides, white people do not look good in yellow.

For what it's worth.

As has been the common trend, my escapades with Miss BMW came to naught rather quickly once she realized that I was "strange."At first, she just took my inability to converse normally with someone of the opposite gender to indicate that I was not fluent at the language. This facade was quickly lifted.

Who knows, maybe some single woman out there is seeking for a curmudgeon/hermit/crazy with a vast amount of books on "Applications of Partial Differential Equations," "Lebesgue Measure and Stochastics," and "Homological Algebra." Perhaps one of you will have a night vision in relation to her. She can be the girl of your dreams. Literally. Maybe she will even let you ride in her BMW. Or her Honda. As long as she is not wearing yellow or lime green.

*To be clear, I have no current plans to move to Alaska.

The Curse.

This post was written in March of this year. I am posting it now because it has become more relevant to events in the near future. I know that a number of you claim to cheer for a different team and that this post will probably incite you to approach the pulpit with an announcement of your affinities. Good luck with that. 

As some of you are aware, I follow college football to a certain degree. I follow one team in particular. This team is in fact one of only two teams I follow in college football, so I would not consider myself a watcher of college (or pro for that matter) football. The other team I follow really deserves as little mention as possible here. So most of this post is about one team in particular. Some of you are going to try to guess which team it is, which will be rather amusing. Certain people have the ability to read between the lines. Others have not been as successful.

In order to perpetuate the code name charade, I am going to refer to the team I principally follow as "Victor Mattingly University" (VMU). Many of you actually attended this university, and its true identity will become clear to those that know any of the basic storyline I address below. I am going to refer to VMU's rival as "The Other Team" (TOT, or The Tots). The Tots is not a Napoleon Dynamite reference, although it could be. If you are unaware who Napoleon Dynamite is, you may be better off in life. But, he is played by a graduate of VMU. Hopefully no one will get lost in the metaphor. That would be about as good as getting a roundhouse kick to the face from someone wearing American Flag pants.

The topic I will be addressing today is the Curse of VMU's football team. Why are they cursed you might ask? I honestly blame a man whom I will call MH. Now MH is famous for some good things and he is also (in)famous for some bad things. His name is only slightly veiled, since he is actually slightly famous.

A little bit of back story is in order. Most of this stuff is pretty well known. MH was the starting QB for VMU for three years, during which he became the winningest QB to ever play for the Victor Mattingly University Ligers. I missed most of his career, as I was elsewhere. So I am skipping his first two seasons and all that 4th and 18 stuff. This brings us to the scene of his final home game. It was the first time in ten years that VMU had worn true Royal blue, not just the "Darkest Shade."

This person is wearing True Royal Blue

After losing to the Tots the year prior, MH came out and beat those Tots in overtime. I was there. I saw him win it. I saw him beat the Tots in overtime. This is something too few have witnessed as of late. Since that day, VMU has not beaten the Tots in football. And I think it is because of the MH Curse.

THE CURSE. The Awful MH curse. 
 
Probably none of this needs rehashing, but after winning the game, MH told the media

"I don't like the [Tots]. In fact, I hate them. I hate everything about them. I hate their program, their fans. I hate everything."

Naturally, the Tots did not like this. But, I am not going to rehash any more of this story. The further reaching aftermath is what I am interested in. Since that day, I think that VMU has been cursed. Different people will point to different sources of this curse. I claim no specific source of the jinx, however here are the results of the curse:

• No wins against the Tots since the MH win.
• An awful 44 point loss against the Tots on their return to VMU's stadium. I was at that game and the only way to describe what I witnessed is "Black Magic." I mean, there really is no other way to describe what I saw.
• No wins when wearing true royal blue (They did win a bowl game the MH year while wearing true royal blue, so I guess you sort of can count that. But not really). 
• A key player being taken away in an ambulance when wearing true royal blue.
• A key player breaking his leg when wearing true royal blue. 
• No wins in overtime since the MH win in overtime (Currently 0-3).
• No QB since MH has started a season as the #1 guy and gone on to play any sort of meaningful minutes in a bowl game victory.
• General QB instability. Broken backs and broken ribs. Five stars turns into five thumbs down.  
• General mass injury strikes the team. This is an ankle biting curse.
• Losses to teams VMU had not lost to since before anyone even knew who Walter Modale was. (Okay, well no one knows who he is anyway, but you get the point.)
• Recruits getting in trouble with the law.
• The Tots begin wearing big boy pants on a new playground.

I think that the curse has even spilled over onto the basketball team to some degree.*

• Again, more losses to the Tots.
• Freak injuries to starters. Last season. This season. 
• Four years ago, we had the number 1 RPI in the country, but......
• Even when we have an incredible season, it ends on a slightly low note when our center gets suspended. And then we just happen to come up against the one team in the tournament that has four starters 6'10" or taller. And then to add insult to injury our point guard cuts his chin on a slippery court. 
• If I have to see one more food hoarding commercial I probably am going to flip. Especially that one with the guy eating mac and cheese from a bucket. Maybe these commercials will continue even if we won a national championship.
• The fish stop biting and I wander in the Sahara. 

How could the MH curse not be real?

Personally, I think that a lot of this transcends any sort of causality by current coaches or players. You may disagree. All I want to know is how to end the curse. What type of reconciliation needs to be made? I already know that redemption does not come from enduring 20 years of pagan proclamations over the pulpit and by the campfire. Been there, done that. What do we need to burn to atone? How will the debt be paid? What will it take? We need to find a solution. Please comment with suggestions if you desire.

*I wrote this post right after a bad basketball loss to a so-so team. The basketball team did get a pretty big win last season, so this is at least a positive sign. And I think that the horizon does look better for basketball. We finally have a few more Mr. Rogers type people. Football......there is still a big question mark for me. 

Delaying Marriage (Part 3)

I cannot turn to see those eyes
As apologies may rise
I must be strong and stay an unbeliever
And love the sound of you walking away
Mascara bleeds into my eye
I'm not cold
I am old
At least as old as you are
As you walk away
~Franz Ferdinand (The Band, not The Man)

I'll stop the world and melt with you
You've seen the difference and it's getting better all the time
There's nothing you and I won't do
I'll stop the world and melt with you

~Modern English 

Left a girl in West Virginia
Up there where that green grass grows
Yes I did
Got a girl in Cincinatti
Waitin' where the Ohio River flows
Oh, girl
I'm a ramblin' man.
Don't give your heart to a ramblin' man.
~Waylon Jennings

I quote three songs above because this is a longer post and you might need two or three songs to carry you through. And, as always, they have meaning as it relates to the given topic.

If we can all get the end of this post without being offended, it will probably be a miracle. The LRSH might get burned to the ground. The kicked dog bites. Please also remember that if you think I am talking about you, in all likelihood I am not. Let's not become too paranoid now. I have very little contact with the world or any of you. It has been years since I have even seen some of the people that read this blog. Hence it is rather unlikely that I actually would write about most of you on the blog. As always, I am not trying to call anyone to repentance. This blog is ultimately about me--and me alone.

Some have asked me if this whole blog is just an enumeration of excuses as to why I have not yet crossed the threshold of matrimony. See what you want to see I guess. It does not take away from the validity of logical argument.

This will make better sense later on.

I have already addressed in a post on March 26, 2015 some of the numeric aspects of the question of rising marriage age. Today I am going to focus on the claim that single adults are actively "delaying" getting married.

First off, let me openly admit that single adults are consciously delaying marriage. I have even done so myself. I was more socially active as a younger young single adult (i.e. 18 years of age). There were a few girls I could have very actively pursued marriage with.* And goodness, we could have been all booed up and gone through all of those beloved "hard times" that proponents of dirt young marriage love.** Or I could have served a mission. Non, je ne regrette rien.

I have employment that takes time that I otherwise could be hunting for a wife. I could quit school and work full time to find a spouse. Yet I am not quite sure I would want to marry a girl who was attracted to such mediocrity.

Nevertheless, I have long learned that it is considered better to be a darn fool and married than it is to be wise and damned. The only problem is that I am also a darn fool.

In all seriousness, I think there are single adults that do actively and inappropriately delay getting married. Hence this topic is oft addressed with some concern. Personally, I have not seen great evidence of this delay occurring, but I do live in a bubble. The issue arises, however, when we begin to think this problem is endemic among the never married. Perhaps I am just out of touch in this regard. Please also remember the topic of last week: Just because people in general society delay marriage for "wicked" reasons does not mean those from the local community are doing such.

Stories and Parables.
Here is a story. I had an associate that once considered quitting school because he was unmarried. He reasoned that if he quit school, he would find a spouse. He is now married with a kid. (Note that this is different than being married to a kid, as righteous as that has been considered at times). How did he find his wife? He went to graduate school. I guess it was a good thing he did not quit school.

My point here is that one needs to get married "when the time is right." It has never been my time. Sometimes I have had to make the decision that the time was not right. I live pretty comfortably with this. It has nothing to do with "lacking faith"*** or a desire to just have fun and avoid responsibility.

In Matthew 13 there are two parables that here are relevant: The Parable of the Treasure in a Field and The Parable of the Pearl of Great Price. In the parable of the treasure, a man discovers a treasure in a field and wisely sells all that he hath to obtain the field. In the pearl of great price parable, a pearl merchant seeks at length for a pearl and, having found such, wisely sells all that he hath to obtain the pearl. Note the one slight difference between the two parables. In the first, the man discovers the treasure in a field. It just happened. There is no mention of him digging every field until he found treasure. It just happened and when the opportunity came to obtain the treasure he took it. Understand that some people just find their ostensible alibi to heaven in a field.

However in the second parable, the pearl merchant looked for a long time for the pearl. That was what he sought, and he knew when he found it. His pursuit was not to just crank the lever at the K-mart and pull out a cheap plastic ring for a quarter. Do not show how ignorant you are about pearl shopping by thinking it is that easy. How silly it would have been for someone to question the merchant about delaying finding the pearl of great price. How inappropriate it would be to suggest that the only reason why the pearl merchant had to look for such a long time is because he lacked faith to find the pearl.

Neither method of obtaining the desired treasure was better. But the perceptive person can see the difference in the two discoveries. And note that neither 'finder' really chose his path. It just happened. Their only real duty was to be in the right place and act when the opportunity was there.

These treasure finders were ultimately subject to the timing of something larger than themselves. "Timing" is a theme I hear about often. People love to talk about "trusting in God's timing." (A true principle). But then these same people flip right around and ask me with a chiding tone why (in essence) God's timing was not 4 years ago for me. [Scoff].

Where is my Horse or my Vampy? Where's my Macintosh? Answer those questions and I will tell when my time is. Not everyone lives the starry-eyed fairytale, gazing up at the constellations. (I of course realize that few people actually have a fairytale marriage. That's why it's so odd that we promote such as reality).

I live among a good number of unmarried people. Pretty much every week I must make the following decision about a single person: "Is this single person a bad soul that needs to be reprimanded, or a good soul who needs someone to support them?" Consider asking yourself that question when necessary. For me personally, I find that giving the latter answer in the majority of cases brings both parties to a better and more meaningful sphere of existence. Please also make sure that you have a proper understanding of what it means to give support. Read a few of the words of President Henry B. Eyring, who was married at age 29. He understands what it means to be a meaningful mentor. If you think your life, purpose, and calling revolves around reprimanding others from your supposed moral high ground, you live a pitiful existence. You, sir, can go to the back of the line.

Education affects marriage age. 

It should be pretty obvious that a higher percentage of people in their twenties are obtaining more education than was common place 40 years ago. And there is pretty good evidence that educated people get married later in life (Why is that.....?). Maybe this means that we should stop encouraging education. It probably would lead to lower median marriage ages, which is all half of us care about any way.  And before we start to raise the "you can get married and go to school" flag, let me interject with this: "I know." Lots of people do this. It is just like how you can be in the US Navy and be married. Or how you can train for a marathon and be married. But there are few people who hear the music of The Bull--and that is why education has an effect. Whether we want to come out and admit it or not, education is only glamorous to most people once they marry it and start benefiting from the pay checks. But until then, they would rather avoid the dedication and drive it takes to truly succeed in school. Hot tubbing with the guy who has no plans is much more fun. This is why I have had people tell me to "forget graduate school and get married!" [Scoff].

But whoa, whoa, whoa you cry! "We all care about school" you say. Riiiiiiight. To quote Eliza Doolittle, "Don't tell me--show me." Until people stop bearing their testimony on Sunday about the "distractions" and evils of academics, I will continue to find it hard to believe that we actually value education. Until people stop dropping out of school to get married, I will find it hard to believe we value education. If you can be married and go to school, show me.**** Until someone asks me about school and actually cares what I have to say, I will find it hard to believe we value education. (That's in memory of el cortito). There are people in this world (righteous people even!) who would give everything they have to obtain an education that you affluent bubble heads are faking your way through. You can big talk all you want about first world problems, but that's the pump-action truth. 

I think of G.H. I think of K.J.H. I think of Y.U.B. People who are desperate to have the financial resources to obtain a college education. People whom you would see in the shadows if you could turn your head for two seconds away from the halcyon rays of the Pollyanna and pearls existence. These are souls who know true trial. How could I possibly see these people and feel like I could stand tall knowing I threw away an opportunity that these people fought for two decades to have a chance at? This gives a whole new meaning to casting pearls before swine. Big whoop if you still have a pearl in your hand. You just threw the whole rest of the necklace into a pile of hog dung.

But I digress.

This play of education on marriage rates has even been reflected in the marriages of the presidents of the LDS Church. There are of course many other factors in play here,***** but there is a strong correlation between those presidents of the Church who were well educated and those who married later in life. 

When you block for those who also served a mission as a young man, every college graduate who went on to become president of the Church married after age 26. I will ignore Lorenzo Snow (attended college in the 1830s!), who was first married at age 30, due to the fact that he did not technically "graduate" from college. There is another president of the Church who married at age 30. I will let you figure out who he is. But none of you were alive when he died. Unless you are 116. (If you are 116, please do not get married. You will cause the average marriage age to go up since your dating range is 103.669 to 120.905). 

Conclusion
This rant has become too long, so I am going to stop here. But I think "we" (a euphemism for "some people out there.") need to realize that marriage is not something I just go out and buy at the store. (I think I have said that about ten times now). 

• Marriage is a personal decision that someone else needs to consent to.  
• Repeated goading of single people to get married is what leads to weirdo men proposing after the second date. 
• And please stop comparing missionary service to dating. It's not the same. 
• Don't foolishly think that you can get unmarried people to "stop being single" by just commanding them in a stern manner. Being single is not something I need to repent of.  Take off the astronomy jacket.  
• If it took you getting married to figure out that family and marriage were important, that speaks volumes about you, not me. Don't think you have a corner on all that is good in life just because you got married at some approved age. 

As always, I cannot address all aspects of this topic of "delaying marriage." I have said an extremely small portion of what I could say. Maybe you have a different view on this subject. Please comment below if you desire. No one ever really comments, so I always wonder how many people I have offended. Yet they just keep coming back each week for another desultory philippic and harangue from beneath.  I know that I am radicalized on topics such as this. However I feel that public apathy is the reason that people get away with sloppy sociology. 

---

*Although they would have been unwise to reciprocate such pursuits. Opinion. 

** If you got married "young," please understand I have no problem with that. You got married when the opportunity was correct for you. 

*** It is rare that I directly talk about religious principles here, but there seems to be confusion about what faith is. Faith is not a magic coin that buys whatever you want. Faith is hope or belief in something that is founded upon true principles. Occasionally I run into people who seem to think that if I just have enough faith, I could be married. But there is no "truth" that states that all men will be married by age 22. Faith in that concept would in fact be false and without root. Understand that faith is many times manifest by action, not by result. Too often I hear people say that single people must "lack faith" because they are unmarried. No. This is lack of a result. True it is that some single people also lack action. But that is not how it is for most of us. I know that the "faith to get married" is a true concept. However we oft times seem to confuse it with a magic coin, thinking that all a single person needs to do is put the coin in the machine and boom! A marriage shoots out of the slot! These are the alibi in the backyard type of people.

**** I understand that there obviously comes a point in every person's life where he or she needs to terminate his or her attainment of formal education. Not everyone has the time or resources to obtain a PhD or go to medical school. Moreover, there are obvious decisions regarding parenthood and marriage that in some situations clearly trump formal education. However, for those of my generation, insofar as you have the resources to complete an undergraduate college degree, you should maybe do so. For me, that is the end of the matter. If we are going to continue to spout the "you can be married and go to college" mantra, it needs to be adhered to. (Or does it only apply to men?) Even my great-grandmother (born 100 years ago this August) obtained a 4-year college degree. Again, not everyone has resources or opportunity to do such. But if you do have the resources, why in the world do you think it is okay to float by in life? Some of you have gone backwards. You will have less education than those three generations prior. Again, this is not for lack of opportunity. You have planted an oak tree and called it an orchard. No matter how large the oak grows, the rest of the acreage lies fallow. This is a harsh, yet ultimately telling depiction. Be careful in noting here that I am not indicating that you need to have a college degree to be a good parent.  Every situation is different. However, I do think we need to change our local culture in regard to education. Note, I am speaking in generalities here. If you have your own story, then that is perfectly okay. I am not trying to shame or judge you. But, as a general observation, we have gone backwards in some regard. I will leave it at that.

*****However I have no idea what those factors would be.  

Delaying Marriage (Part 2)

It's getting to the point where I'm no fun anymore.
I am sorry.
Sometimes it hurts so badly I must cry out loud.
I am yours, you are mine, you are what you are
You make it hard.
Remember what we've said and done and felt about each other,
Oh, babe have mercy.
Don't let the past remind us of what we are not now
I am not dreaming,
I am yours, you are mine, you are what you are
You make it hard.

¡Que linda! Me acuerdo a Cuba
La reina de la Mar Caribe
Quiero sólo visitarle allí
Y que triste que no puedo. ¡Vaya!
O Va! O Va!

[#418 on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time]

~Crosby, Stills, & Nash 

 

Last week was a bit of a rambling collection of various thoughts. I originally wrote most of that during a rather arduous Math 675 lecture last semester. It was the type of class that you showed up to and just sort of listened. The book was translated from German and was extremely hard to follow. Furthermore, the topic really had nothing to do with my thesis  and the class usually devolved into some discussion about typos or mistranslations in the text. Hence the reason I faded in and out and ultimately ended up writing a steam of conscience diatribe.

One really important theme that I am going to introduce here is the difference between "general society" and my "local society." General Society is very accepting of a large variety of lifestyles that run counter to the traditional lifestyles of the past. This is especially true in relation to marital considerations. Local Society is wholly not accepting of lifestyles other than their own. Much like Tevye the Dairyman, these are the champions of "tradition." I am in hopes that you are familiar with the distinction I am alluding to here. Perhaps you place yourself in one of these Societies. Finding myself as a citizen of both Societies, I must at times reconcile their disparate views. The result of such a compromise of opinions has at times led to me standing separate from both the General and the Local.

Tevye the Dairyman

If you have not figured it out by now, marriage is a trending topic in both General Society and Local Society. Hence the reason I formally introduce the two; they both vie to be the voice in marital matters, and the subsequent confluence of such Societies induces a collision of conflicting conclusions. If we are to speak of delaying marriage, it is critical that we understand the view from both Societies on such delays.

Let me add as a preface to all of this that I am not trying to made some sort of political advocation here. There are people from both Societies with views completely out of harmony with what I deem important, and there are also people from both Societies who present themselves with dignity. I just leave it at that. Furthermore, for sake of clarity and brevity I am going to use broad generalizations about both societies--generalization that probably are rarely the complete picture. This, however, should show us that perhaps we all lie on both sides of the line at times, we just do not realize it. Moreover, I am not trying to portray myself in the role of a victim. Let's be honest, I consider myself to be better than most of the world, so I seldom am too put out by untoward comments. Please also keep in mind that I am well aware of the fact that most people, married or otherwise, that I come in contact with manage to act in a completely civil and logical manner. If you are a normal married person minding your own business, what I say in here is not an attempt at criticizing you.

Now back to the subject matter.

To be plain, General Society and Local Society see marriage very differently.  Because of these differences, I have seen a certain level of "taking sides," where each body is pitted against the other. Today I am not going to focus on the actual collisions of these two Societies, but rather on one of the side effects.

As pertaining to marriage, the two aforementioned Societies have converged to their current positions rather rapidly. The foundation of the so called "traditional family" has been questioned repeatedly during this process. Due to this dissuasion by the General against what the Local Society usually considers the sole definition of a family, I have seem a marked effort from the Local to lay a line of demarcation between the traditional family and everything else. This has led to the rather odd occurrence at times of me being placed into a Society with whom I do not associate. I have even seen someone infer that if you are an unmarried male in the LDS Church and you do not have a family "of your own,"* you must be gay. Really? That's news to me. True it is that I know some men who are gay and also LDS. But I know an hundredfold more single men who are not gay. This reflects the general percentage-wise distributions of our society. Even jokes in the regard above are rather....inappropriate--whether you are "just in the grocery aisle" or not.

As a more subtle variation on the above theme, I have seen it inferred that somehow by not being married, I am attacking the traditional family. Or, at the very least, I do not get the importance of family. This is also a revelation to me. Now as I said, this theme is more subtle. It is also more prevalent than we care to realize. It is manifest in comments such as "Since I'm married, I understand the importance of (traditional) family" and "When you get a family [see *], you will understand how important ________ [fill in blank: marriage, children,....] is/are." More than once have I had the experience of someone sanctimoniously quoting an LDS General Authority on marriage as a way of shaming me or showing how they possess some sort of moral high ground that I have yet to conquer. Such comments are ofttimes not even said purposefully as an insult, but rather are just an appendage of the speaker's naïveté. Of course we will usually be better off by just ignoring things we deem offensive.  But let me give you a hint: Quoting a General Authority out of context as a way of shaming and belittling your audience is a rather poor method of motivation.

Why does Judy sing about clouds?

Since the title of this post deals with the delaying of marriage, I probably should actually address said topic. This post has up to this point been a bit heavier and dense than last week. Next week will be more like the first, with lots of low level jabs and much scoffing at hubristic pompiety. But today, we talked societies. That was the theme. So I will tie delaying marriage into that.

This really will not take long. Here is how it goes. Those in General Society delay marriage for many reasons that those in my Local Society do not. In fact, as was my thesis last week, I am not even sure that "delaying marriage" is the correct term to be using for most of the single people I know in my Local Society. I summarize as thus: Just because you read about "delaying" marriage in The New York Times or The Progressive does not mean you are well educated on the subject as it relates to the Local Society. Believe me. Look at the comments at the bottom of this article from the General Society on delaying marriage. These comments do not really look like anything I or my peers would espouse as our own views. Perhaps because I do not live in the "real world," I have entirely missed the boat here and there is in fact a large tide of single members of the Church purposefully trying to shirk marriage. But somehow that seems unlikely. Please feel free to relate below stories of persons you know who are purposefully dodging getting married. Mothers of opera loving daughters, this is your moment to shine.

Naturally, I am well aware of the several quotations from leaders of the LDS Church about "delaying marriage." I am not going to even address how many times I have had such attributions applied wholly out of context. I do not deal with radical quackery. Instead let me explain a concept that is important to understand in relation to what Church leaders teach. Sometimes we have a problem with mistaking a warning for an accusation. We must not confuse warning the caravan of the dangers of highway robbers with accusing the caravan of being highway robbers. For example, in the General Conferences of the LDS Church in 1971 (April & October), the word "drugs" was used 62 times. In the most recent two conferences (October 2014 & April 2015), the word "drugs" was used one (1) time. And it was in a talk about gay marriage. If we look at General Conference as a time for the leaders to get up and accuse members of sin, might we infer that the young people of the Church in 1971 had a drug problem 62 times more prolific than exists now days? Or were these words in 1971 meant to be taken as warnings--warnings which the high majority of people took note of and adhered to in the first place? You be the judge. Good leaders warn. Bad leaders accuse and point fingers. Unmarried does not equal delaying marriage. Blah, blah, blah. You get the idea.

Comment below if you so desire.

---

 *I have had people ask me before if I have a family "of my own." The answer to that question is "yes." It consists of my parents and brother. I got a family of my own when I was born. It does not take me getting married to understand the concept of having a family.

Delaying Marriage (Part 1)

Ah get born, keep warm
Short pants, romance, learn to dance
Get dressed, get blessed
Try to be a success
Please her, please him, buy gifts
Don’t steal, don’t lift
Twenty years of schoolin’
And they put you on the day shift
Look out kid
They keep it all hid
Better jump down a manhole
Light yourself a candle
Don’t wear sandals
Try to avoid the scandals
Don’t wanna be a bum
You better chew gum
The pump don’t work
’Cause the vandals took the handles

~Bob Dylan

Let me preface all of this by saying that I had to co-write and oversee a math test this week for the class I teach. So far the average is 65%, which is really low. But that's what happens when you have a long haired elf writing half the test (The half I did not write). Because of the time spent on running the testing game, I am introducing an edited version of a post I originally wrote a while ago.

I also sold a guitar amplifier via my online outlet, which took some time. Finally I bought and ate some tamales. That took less time. But it would have taken more time if I had not removed the shuck.

Gerald Ford eats tamales (with shuck).

Now for the actual post. Be warned that this is another one of those attacks on the Little Red School House (LRSH). I do not want this whole blog to become a dating/marriage/bliss'n'froofroo blog, but it is about the only topic I can talk about on general terms relevant to a public majority. This post has been through many versions. Most of it just turned into a rant. Some of the ranting has been snipped away. Some of the rambling rant is still present. I hope to be more organized next week.

In a recent newspaper article that I read, the topic of young adults "delaying marriage" was addressed. Most of us are familiar with this topic. It is a common one. This article was a summary of a study done by a researcher at my current university in cooperation with two colleagues at a university in Indiana. I provide two links to two articles about this study on "delaying marriage."

Here are the links: Marriage is still important to young adults,  and Young adults putting-off-marriage. You can read these if you so desire. 

This picture....so good.

I currently have been unable to read the actual study since it was published in a journal I do not have access to. (Do keep in mind that I work at a university that has access to probably a couple thousand research journals). It is hard for me to properly comment on something I have no access to, so I am going to refrain from talking about the articles specifically. 

Introduction to the Issues.
Articles like those mentioned above are rather common in that newspaper. They have taken it as their personal mission to rid the world of those who are not married in accordance with the ideal. It seems that almost every week, I see some sort of publication from this newspaper that speaks about the topic of delaying marriage. Maybe it would be for the best if I just stopped reading such things. But many times it is like a bad car accident. You just have to look.

In the topic of delaying marriage, we need to answer real questions, questions that are primary, questions that actually matter. Many of these questions are hard to answer. Admit that. Too often this topic is vastly over simplified and people resort to yelling useless platitudes and offering ineffectual observations. We all want someone to blame. No one wants to just come out and admit that sometimes we do not know why someone is unmarried. We assume that anyone over age 25 or so must have some evil reason for not being married. It's either porn or video games, right?

Again, as I have previously mentioned, there are indeed men (and women) with "issues." However, I would be hard pressed to point to any single people I personally know with "issues" that would make them categorically unmarriageable. That's one of the unfathomable thing about how marriage occurs. Marriage happens to imperfect people. Who knows why. Last I checked, ugly people can still get married. Unintelligent people can still get married. Video game addicts still get married (I once sat next to some at work). Hence it has always been puzzling to me when someone suggests a given unmarried person is still flying solo due to some wholly insignificant "issue" they see in said person's life. This is a manifestation of the strawman concept that I addressed a while ago.

This link is to an article written by a 29-year-old single woman about her life as someone who has yet to join the marriage club. She has an attitude that is much more positive than mine. About half of the comments left by anonymous readers on the article are laughably pompous or downright rude. I include only two (of 91 total comments):

"Judging from her picture, the person who wrote this article is attractive. Judging from her writing her personality seems okay.
My question is .. If she wants to get married, what is stopping her?"

"If an LDS female who looks like that would focus her efforts more on marriage instead of on defending herself, she probably could be married reasonably quickly."

Now of course I do not know anything about these commenters. Maybe they are really nice people. Yet clearly they have absolutely no flaming clue about how "the marriage game" works. These commenters are the types of folks who still think the Lakers should have gone for it on fourth down. Let me add that this lady who wrote the above article sings with the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Why is she unmarried? Why hasn't a man asked her to marry him? (Because--alas--all a girl can do is wait for someone to pass her the ball). Who knows. She seems to have all of the advisable check boxes: Serves in the Church, has a college degree, interacts with the opposite gender, blah, blah, blah. The usual bullet points the "experts" cite. Maybe she has some sort of commitment issue. But there are a lot of people in the world who have problems with commitment, yet who are still married. Maybe she has an inflated opinion of herself. But I know lots and lots of pompous and proud married people. We could run down the whole checklist and probably not really come up with a satisfactory answer.

---

Overall, the most common conclusion I have seen about rising marriage ages is that single people just need to "stop delaying marriage." That is pretty much the message I see from some sectors. They speak of single adults delaying marriage in the same way I might speak of ice melting in the sun. They treat the topic as if it was a foregone conclusion that single people must be delaying marriage. Ice melts in the sun, so of course a single person must be lacking in some quality that would otherwise quickly lead to marriage. It is unfathomable to them that not all of us meet our beloved spouse at age 15. "You mean you didn't meet your lover in the grocery store?" Some horses don't breed in the barn they were birthed in, you know.

A clearance on chunky stuff.

These people reduce marriage to a checkbox and make the whole institution cheap. They ignorantly think that I can just go out and buy a marriage in the discount rummage bin at WalMart. I also have too little room to herein address this, but understand that your little quixotic dative paradigm is not deterministic. Social economics has never been an assembly line.

If you read the 35 or so comments on the second news article I first shared above, a significant portion of them focus on stories about "back in the day" or how "young people these days" are just looking for more gadgets. I have already addressed the "back in my day" stories in a previous rodomontade. But the attack on young people about just wanting more electronics is ridiculous. I have found that more often than not such claims come from some middle aged man with an iPhone 430-Galactica, a big screen TV, a boat, and a nice truck to pull it. Try again buddy. I live in an apartment with walls that are painted four different colors since the owner wanted to save money and only painted half of the bathroom. I have a "dumb phone." I do not even own a TV. I buy my clothes at thrift stores. I am currently wearing pants that have a huge tear in the leg--pants, I might add, that I have owned for 10 years. And I never have had someone tell me they are not getting married because they wanted a new car or boat instead.*

Now admittedly, I own four guitars and three guitar amplifiers. This is probably the most impressive gadgetry I own. However, these purchases have been made over the course of more than a decade. You have to spend your money on something. I need something to do for entertainment, since clearly no one wants to wade, skate, eat out, eat in, cook together, or bowl (Did I list them all Messrs Ginobli, Tex, and Parkes?) in these parts. Furthermore, as I mentioned above, I just sold a guitar amp due to its increasing impracticality. And believe me when I say, if I had to choose between bidding for a cream colored American series Fender Stratocaster with maple neck and buying an engagement ring, clearly I would choose the latter. So far I have not been asked to make that choice.

I also have single friends and associates who have visited places all around the world. But I highly highly doubt that they are traveling the world in lieu of getting married. What do you want them to do, sit at home and wallow with a box of ice cream, just waiting for married life to come to them so that they can be as happy as you are? [Scoff]. You live life with the cards you are dealt, not the cards that someone else is dealt.

Obviously, if you and your lover are delaying getting married after having dated for, say, two years, you are probably just unduly dragging your feet. But even if this was true, is it my duty to the world to call you out on it? I am well aware of the glory stories of getting married with nothing but a pack of ramen and a few little fish. Please accept my congratulations and condolences. Honestly, if that time was right for you, wonderful. I really have no issues with you getting married when you feel the time is right. Just do not begrudge me my chance to get marriage right for myself.

(To be continued next week.)

---

*I believe that there have been some studies that suggest that money is the largest factor never married college students cite in reasons why they are unmarried. Keep in mind that much of this research is based in asking singles in the 19-22 year old demographic why they are unmarried. However, such research does very little to explain why those around the median marriage ages (Say 26, 27 years old or so) are remaining unmarried. Much of our oft cited research on marriage too often seem to focus on those who are 7-10 years younger than the median marriage age. Get some solid research that shows that educated 27 year olds are delaying marriage due to money and then we can talk. Too often I hear well meaning people speak to single adults about the wrong (IMHO) topics in relation to marriage. It is an all too common practice to hear about some study done on non religious 20-year-old black women in New York and then drastically extrapolate it to religious 28-year-olds living in Idaho. Please make sure the study you are citing is relevant before trying to insinuate its results onto an unrelated population.

How to get Married. Risk versus Reward.

The title here is a bit misleading as it makes it sound like a serious post on the risks and rewards of getting married. I know about neither. So I will instead talk about the relation of risk and reward. It is the basic concept of investing in the stock market. The more you invest, the higher the risk, but the higher the reward could be. Or it is like going for it on 4th down.* You might not make it, but if you do, the reward can be high.

I know that many of you are married. She/He loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah......so I think it's only fair to apologize in advance for writing about something you already know volumes about. But I guess that one faithful and unmarried follower reads this stuff to his household, so I had to put in something for him.

Back in the day, when Pluto was still a planet, I had a roommate named TimTim. He was unmarried, which was good for me (since then he would not have been my roommate), but bad for him (since then he could have avoided being my roommate). At times, TimTim would lament the fact that he was not married. We would counsel him as he lay in bed. Now this was a sort of blind leading the blind type of counseling, but I remember one time where we discussed "equilibrium based, gamble state economics." This is a fancy and superfluous phrase for "high risk equals high reward."  But I believe the first phrase was the actual one used since TimTim was rather cerebral. It was decided that he should call Sister Black (Since she had black hair like Madeline in Granite Flats. Although this well predates GF) in our ward and ask her on a date. This was a massive gamble as her Facebook status was "it's complicated" and she was some sort of "dream girl" for many a lad. I actually do not even remember if TimTim called her, but I do remember having this conversation.

In later conversations on this topic, we also began to wonder what would happen if we went to the "big open space" on campus and held up a sign saying "I am a great guy, please marry me." This would be a very risky proposition. But heck, if that went down, nobody could deny you trumped all "How I met my spouse" stories. And all you had to do was buy a poster board and a Sharpie. High risk, high reward. This is pretty much what Tinder is. And supposedly it works for some people. (I have never used Tinder. Honest to goodness.)

With that as a preface (it comprising nearly half of the post), let me now speak on the impetus for this post. As I have become more "aged" (meaning all my roommates are now married and I have not had a roommate older than me for something like 2 years now), people have begun to give me more suggestions on how to get married.

Truth be told, it is sort of like a parabola (concave up). When I first got back from my mission, everyone had a suggestion of how to get married. Sometimes they knew a "perfect girl" for me. Then they gave up for five years, and now it has started again. People have now realized that my situation is dire and that all hope is lost. Or something. The suggestions I have received as of late have become stranger. And more based in "gamble state economics." Maybe this is indicative of what the situation has come to. It will take random cosmological events to win the game. Their little deterministic game has failed and all that can save me now is a bending of both space and time to nontesseral methodologies.  

One person informed me they knew of a dream girl for me. And when they say dream girl, they mean they actually had a dream that I should meet this unknown girl. But again, perhaps this is the quintessential aspect I am missing: I do not gamble enough. Instead of just calling a girl I already know and getting shot down (Thrice), I should text a girl I do not know (after finding out her phone number from H.U.G.  because his sister went to elementary school with this dream girl).  Of course I might shame several generations of my family if it failed, but on the flip side, if the whole "text random girl in other state" thing worked, I could finally get them to stop talking about me at every family gathering I am not at.

So, from now on, perhaps I am going to shoot for high risk, high reward types of pursuits. Just you wait, pretty soon here you will be getting an announcement about my marriage to a foreign girl that I met after storming the field during a football game. Sure, this is high risk, but maybe the person arresting me will be an Italian beauty with whom I have an instant connection. Wish me luck, because if this fails, Tinder would be my only option. And we don't want that.

---

*How to do 4th down. If you have the ball and 25 yards to go, call a draw play. If they have the ball, allow them to gain 15 yards after five broken shoe tackles. This is the strategy I hear.

She Said Yes, I mean No.

I wrote this post a few months back, but it is being published just now "for a variety of reasons."

A few years ago I was in a Taco Bell and they had a pamphlet entitled "The Art of Saying No" in a holder on the wall. As I remember, these pamphlets were actually right next to the employment applications, which is a bit ironic. Or at least I think this is situational irony. I am sure that some English major will tell me my use of irony is wrong and will begin quoting Greek philosophy. Whatever. Maybe the true irony is that Taco Bell is giving advice on life skills and I actually am writing about it.

What did the pamphlet say?
We need to say no more often.

How do we say "No" successfully?
There's a right way to be happy, and it's choosing the right every day. There is also a right way to say "No." And sometimes you can say no without saying "No." The following is a "whine and complain story" that is not about any of you. Please avert you eyes.

I remember a long while ago, before The Beast went north and got cage rage, I met this person who was female. After a sufficient passage of time, I ended up asking her on some sort of "date" (It followed the 3 P's, but not the 10 P's. Well okay, a few aspects of the 10th P were present) and she said she would be happy to go, she just needed to coordinate her work schedule. She said she would "let me know" the next week what day worked. This turned out to be Absolute Rubbish. When someone tells you they will "get back to you and let you know," plan on them not letting you know. For about three weeks I wait for this girl to communicate with me. This was awkward as we saw each other often. But finally she broke the vow of silence and she spoke to me! She flapped her jaw about like this:

"(Blah Blah Blah small talk). Sorry, I got really caught up with dodging you for a short bald guy 'work' and forgot, Blah Yadadadada, Flub Flub Flub. But I promise with a cherry on top that I will talk to my boss and tell you what time for Friday this week. And I will get back to you and let you know." 

So being dumb I believed her. And she "forgets" again. After two weeks I ask her about it. She now says she ended up really strapped for time that week. (Oh really? I thought those Facebook photos of you on a "spontaneous adventure" last Friday with that dude that looks like Greg Wrubell indicated you had made time. That must have been a different person). Only after all of this do I realize that she actually is saying no using the "I'm busy = I would rather cuddle with an unbathed hyena than be seen with you in public" type of saying no. And it took a whole semester for her to say it. Absolute rubbish. Maybe this is dramatic irony since spectators of this debacle knew more than I, the actor in play, did.

Now if this female person had just told me from the get-go that she was "busy," that would have been fine. Then I could at least have moved on. I know that "busy" is a euphemism for "Leave me alone." Instead, I was jammed. Every time that she told me she would "get back to me" about the upcoming week, I had to avoid making plans. She could have chosen a more expedient way to say no.

Now the whole point of that story is not that I think this girl is a dumbo or that I was socially abused. The point is that I actually would have been fine with being told no, it just would have been nice if she could have done it a bit faster. I am too "busy" for that type of game.

So that is a whiner griner story about a girl that lives somewhere out East now.

Quantitative vs Qualitative: A LONG post on why Qualitative results should precede and drive Quantitative results.

First off, this will be a very long post. This was a month in the making. I wrote this in bits and pieces on scratch papers, so hopefully it all comes together. While this is very long, it can be cathartic to scribble down thoughts as I walk to school. Do not feel obligated to read the whole thing, unless you really want to. Future posts should be considerably shorter and less dense.

One last prefacing disclaimer: what I write might make some people question "What is truth?" (John 18:38). (Yes, I know who asked this).

If you just want to read the personal gossip/anecdotes/witty social critique, SKIP the next three paragraphs.  Warning: This entire post could be construed as judgmental, flippant, and offensive. I have admitted long ago that I think I am better than most people. If you want to read about something cute, SKIP to the very bottom of the post. Throughout this entire post, I am not speaking even remotely about any of you who would be reading this. I am not trying to make any accusations. Asking "Is it I?" is a very needed aspect of life that I will almost entirely ignore in this post. Also, to be patently clear, I am not trying to interpret doctrine or advocate unrighteousness. But we will end didactically.

---

One question that often can be asked in evaluating something is that of qualitative results versus quantitative results. In other words, "looks/feel" versus "numbers."

A fast example demonstrating Qualitative vs. Quantitative comes from the NBA. One would never think that a player that has a career average of 6.4 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.3 assists per game, and shoots 57% from the free throw line (rather mediocre quantitative results) would be a starter on three championship teams and would have his #12 jersey in the rafters of the AT&T Center in San Antonio.  But, Bruce Bowen (famous, so not a code name) was considered an excellent defender--something that sports metrics still have not really figured out how to capture. Bruce Bowen's utility was qualitative. You cannot quantify why he was a good defender; he just was.

Many times in life, we  allow quantitative results to dictate our qualitative results. This can be simply described as "check boxing." Allowing a number to drive our results usually comes at the expense of the quality of our results. Think fast food: Low price (quantitative) yields low quality. I will apply this to home teaching in a proceeding paragraph. 

---

SKIP TO HERE for gossip/anecdotes/Slaps In the Face.
In thinking about Qual vs. Quant, I began to realize that in certain aspects of life we are very quick to use quantitative results over qualitative results.

We can count how many times someone has their ears pierced, but we then entirely overlook that there are some "one piercing" people who walk around wearing what can only be described as garbage can lids on their ears (But only one pair!), bright pink "contraptions" on their feet, and painted like they were going to a KISS concert. I guess I could get up at the pulpit in church and ask them if they get ESPN with those satellite dishes on their ears. This might actually have positives, as a good television signal sure would make some of those talks easier to survive without going into organ failure. I am pretty sure that I darn near blew a spleen during some of those Corn Flake Especially talks (Wait, was that a Fred Rogers reference?). Although maybe that was just because the guy in front of me had gone nose to navel. It is not easy to spend 45 minutes silently laughing without losing a few vital organs. Well, the spleen is not vital, but you get the point......

As usual, please do not think that I walk around at school or go to church and keep a tally for times I have though "Oh, Sister Macafeeley has those darn tin cans hanging from her lobes and is painted like she thinks her name is Ace" (See far right man with Gibson Les Paul). If you were to ask me which girls in my current ward have their ears pierced and what type of earrings they wear, I would first say "There are girls in my ward...?" and then I would say "I have no idea. I do not go to church to observe such things." I think that the girls in my ward are overall quite decent and respectable young ladies. (Alas, none of them read this). And it is not my place to begin placing them into categories of naughty and nice, pierced once or pierced twice. But, I think this illustrates how we are really good sometimes at publicly judging people over the pulpit in a quantitative manner ("I would never associate with someone who has her ears pierced twice," while holding up two fingers), but we turn a blind eye to things qualitative.*(Disclaimer)

KISS/"The Midlands 12th Ward." 

Since the last paragraph was offensive, I will talk about something less offensive: Home Teaching. Back long ago, my family had some home teachers that were amazing. Brother Beard and Brother 'Stache would bring Oreos for Christmas. And that was all they did.  Now naturally, for some families, home teaching needs to entail more. Rightly so. But for us, that was sufficient. They shot 8.33% from the FT line (Worse than Bruce Bowen, but not worse than BYU's basketball team last year). This was their quantitative result.  But their quantitative result was perfect. Again, I am not advocating not doing home teaching, but I think that we need to start letting the qualitative result drive the quantitative result, not the other way around.

I  heard first hand a story just this week from a young mother with a son who is about 5 or 6 and a baby that is 1 year old. The mother was painting her basement walls in preparation for carpet that was going to be delivered the next day and had just put the baby down to nap. Then her visiting teacher called and wanted to stop by and share a message--right then. The young mother deferred, saying that she was trying to finish painting her basement while the baby slept. Undeterred, the visiting teaching came anyway because "she had not missed a month in over 55 years." But instead of helping paint or tending the young boy/baby, this visiting teacher came and overstayed her already unwelcome welcome, then taught a message from the Ensign that I'm sure was touching. And meaningless. But she got her number: 100%. The mother then had to stay up late into the night making up for the hours lost while the visiting teacher got her numbers. 

This story is not to discredit visiting teaching. But I think we can learn something about qualitative and quantitative aspects of Church service. You might have just hit a half court shot, but if it was in the other team's hoop no one really cares.

Now for another (subtly) offensive paragraph. I remember a time when I was a visitor at church (If you are asking "Is this my ward,?" rest assured that it is not. You would know beyond a shadow of a doubt if I am talking about you). I knew pretty much no one there, and they did not know me. I was the proverbial "unshaven single man" in the back. One of the speakers got up and began to go into a long diatribe about why he hated how the Church expends its tithing money on "stupid and ugly people." And people began to laugh in approbation. Wait, really? Oh, sure, these people probably pay their 10%. But perhaps these nameless people missed the qualitative aspect of paying tithing.

As a visitor, it was sort of a one and done thing and I have never seen these jokers again. However it opened my eyes to the fact that we would never dream of paying only 9% (a quantitative result), but it is easy (and defended with vehement importance in the Waddlyacha 8th Ward I guess) to belittle how our 10% is used. Perhaps this is where we ask "Is it I?"

The overall conclusion I want to make is that too often we allow a number to become our doctrine, then checkbox that we have adhered to that number, and pat ourselves on the back. That about sums it up.

---

*(Disclaimers). Yes, I heard live (and reread and watched while writing this post), the counsel given by President Gordon B Hinkley on women and earrings. It was given in a talk entitled “Great Shall Be the Peace of Thy Children” in October 2000 General Conference. Some things to keep in mind:
1. Sustaining a leader for something they never actually said can be nice, but baseless. The question we now need to ask is "What did Gordon B Hinkley say?"
2. I have no idea how to even interpret for you personally what he said. You need to do that.
3. It is entirely fine if you walk away from reading the talk and still feel exactly the same as you did before reading it. I am not trying to convince you of a certain view on earrings. 

4. We can read some interesting words in 1 Samuel 16:7. As always, I am not advocating that our appearance does not matter, but this teaches us an important principal. I am aware of course that a woman who wears large earrings can still be an entirely worthy member of the Church. The last thing I want is to turn this into some sort of bash on women and modesty.
5. That oft used "body is a temple" argument is rather specious here. Are we really going to say that a woman who has her ears pierced once has not defiled the temple, but ears pierced twice? Well sister, that has now defiled the temple. You read that talk, and he clearly makes a wise social concession (Okay, I interpreted something). In our society, it is perfectly acceptable (by myself included) for women to have their ears pierced. But again, read and listen to the talk, because both mediums were informative for me.
6. Gordon B. Hinkley sat on the BYU Board of Trustees since before I was born. And yet BYU's Honor Code always previously allowed for 2 sets of earrings.  
7. If I had daughters (which, as you know, I do not), I probably would advocate them not to have their ears pierced twice.
8. President Hinkley was clearly speaking in an overall qualitative and not quantitative manner. And that is the subtle point that both he and I are making.
9. I am also aware of what Elder David A Bednar has said on the subject ("Quick to Observe", BYU Speehes). He closed by saying "The issue was not earrings!" I could clearly say a lot more, but I will not. 
10. Understand that I could write a tome as thick as the US tax code and still not cover all of the different aspects of this topic. I know that some of you will take (and perhaps have) what President Hinkley said differently than how you perceive I have interpreted his words. Again, "What is Truth?"


SKIP TO HERE for nothing offensive. Here is a cute little book that I have never read: "Pinkalicious."

If I had daughters (which, as you know, I do not), I probably would advocate them not to read this book.

The 10 P's of Dating

There is a talk called "Dating versus Hanging Out" by Dallin H Oaks (Given May 1, 2005) that has become legendary for those that advise the YSAs of the USA. I think that everything Elder Oaks says in that talk is based upon valid conclusions.  People just love to (mis)quote from it. It can be fun! Now I could write a lot about this talk and some of the odd dative dogmas that have sprouted like cheese mold from it. Perhaps at some point I will write a post about social statistics and what it tells us about marriage trends, dating, and hanging out (and how it is not at all as bad as we think). But for now you can read about the Gale Shapley algorithm on Wikipedia.  However, before moving on, let me just add that the last time that I hung out, none of you under age 30 were married. In fact I can think of a few people over age 30 that were not married at that point. I read from the talk again while writing this. Please do not look at what I say here as some sort of serious exposition on the topic of dating. Instead, this is a serious exposition on the topic of post Cold War approaches to reconstructing the poultry industry in Strandburg, South Dakota.....errrr wait, wrong blog......

 

And now!!!!The moment of truth!!!! The 10 P's of dating. But first a comment on the original three. They actually came from a teenage girl. We will overlook that. The original P's are "Planned," "Paid," and "Paired." Insofar as I can determine, I have never broken these rules. Although maybe I will receive multiple nasty messages from girls I've dated, saying I dissed them, their people, and their Great-Granny Bazookaloo. Well, I probably will get such messages whether I say anything on this blog or not, so there you have it.

Okay, now I really will post the 10 P's. These are all mine. Some are more pragmatic than others. In order for something to count as a date, you must fulfill at least 7 of the 10. 

1. Practice. Some of you may remember "Practice on the expendables." Do a few basic run throughs with your roommates. Watch for the high ball screen and the pick and roll. And someone box out Rondo!

2. Pack the Peanuts. Salted, unsalted, shelled, unshelled, dry roasted, honey roasted...doesn't really matter. Something high in protein will keep you in the game when you are feeling listless and all you can talk about is eggplant.

3. Precious. Say "My precious" at least three times on the date. The glory of this phrase is that it can be used in two different ways. If the lady is a romantic, "My precious" is a great term of endearment. I use different terms myself, however. On the other hand, if the situation dictates, you can use this exact same phrase, but said in a creepy Gollum voice. It all depends on the girl. Some of them really go for the "short, balding, ring-obsessed, man sporting only a loin cloth" types. 

4. Polka Dots. Something about white circles on a dark background just screams "Hey honeybunch, who's your dream boat?"

5. Puppetry. If you ever feel yourself grasping for things to say, a puppet should be your go to move. Sock puppet, marionette, ventriloquist dummy, or hand puppet; each will liven the mood. Both entertaining and educational, puppets can make even the most awkward situations manageable. Get in the groove and let the puppet do the talking. 

6. Prom. Don't go.

7. Personal Flotation Device (PFD). Marty McFly wore one for the entirety of the first Back To the Future movie. And girls liked him because of it. A PFD will significantly lower your risk of drowning in her ocean of emotion. Or at the very least you will not go down if the waiter spills your drink on you. Remember that most PFDs are dry clean only. 

8. Pass on the Princess. If she is a primadona with a tiara, you better check she's not still in preschool. Such a puerile practice should have been purged by prepubescence. As the saying goes, when you date a princess, you date her fairy godmother. And then you end up riding around in an oversized squash for the rest of your life. 

9. Pine Sol. Ladies love that fresh "just cleaned" smell. Dab a bit behind the ears and in the armpits. Avoid the mouth and eyes.

10. Progressively Peculiar. Begin the night by acting quite normal. Slowly ease the discussion towards a conversation on beavers. End the night by asking her opinion on men that wear hip waders to restaurants. Slowly raise your pant leg to show you have a pair on under your trousers. Smile knowingly because, hey, you have to use those waders and that $30 fishing pole somehow.