Tuesday, March 1, 2011

kicks for free

remember when i was the kind of famous that got quoted in the huffington post?

well, now i am the kind of famous that gets quoted in the washington post.

and let us not forget the town talk. (thanks, louisiana!)

with all of this notoriety i thought for sure i would get a call inviting me to the oscars, but i didn't.


i did get a call asking me to be on a radio program talking about this ever-fascinating topic, though, and i agreed. and then i got really nervous. and then during the (live!) panel discussion i held my telephone to my ear so tightly that it was throbbing for hours afterward. (my ear, not the phone. the phone appeared to be just fine.)

i haven't listened to the program yet because i am not convinced it went all that well, plus listening to my recorded voice always gives me sort of an existential crisis, but other people who heard it said they thought it went just fine so i am going to swallow my pride and give you the link to listen, if you'd like.

adoring praise is always welcome, but if you think it went poorly i would ask you to kindly keep that opinion to yourself.

a few thoughts in the aftermath.

ichi. i disagree with my fellow panelist, joanna, that the author of the new york times article that started all of this hit the nail right on the head in describing what it is like to be a single mormon. i have said before and i will say again now, i think the author of that article was way out in left-field with a totally skewed perspective. and, because i have already said plenty about that, i will leave it there.

ni. i got a little bit worried that i was coming off as cavalier or dismissive of the difficulties other people face in trying to keep the commandments as a mormon. i certainly didn't mean to do that. i find it hard, too. really hard sometimes. but the cliche holds true. if it wasn't hard it wouldn't be worth it. and i do happen to think that keeping the commandments is worth it, and then some. as i was talking i realized that for as liberal as i think i am in a lot of things, i am actually really conservative when it comes to the way i obey the commandments of the gospel. and i feel OK about that. but i also get it that not everyone is interested in obeying that way, and that's OK, too.

san. i got cut off at the end (my clock said there were two minutes left, but what are you going to do?), which made me really sad because i feel like i ended on a sort of depressing note without saying the most important part of my whole final point. so, lucky you! you get to hear it now. what i wanted to say was this.

yes, i think every woman in the church in my position has to accept the reality that she might not get married. statistically speaking that is a possibility for all of us. and is that a hard pill to swallow? absolutely. because a life of taking out the garbage and setting mouse traps and figuring out finances and going to family reunions and bridal showers and baby showers all by myself forevermore sounds sad and lonely. but-- and this is the important part-- i trust my heavenly father. i trust that he guides me and takes care of me and is aware of me and i absolutely, 100 percent trust him to give me everything i need to make a happy life. that knowledge and assurance and perspective are what keep me in the church, and that knowledge and assurance and perspective are what i think people like our friend at the new york times are missing.

and now, i have a bonus for you!

which is also a bonus for me because i feel like it backs up my defense of chastity quite nicely.

intrigued? check out this article about why men have the advantage in sexual economics, even when they're total losers. give it a read and let me know what you think.

in some ways, the answer is a re-hashing of the "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" argument for chastity, but i think this presents a more nuanced case than that because it isn't a plug for chastity so much as it is a description of the potential consequences of sexual permissiveness. turns out sex is not the magic bullet solution to long-lasting, committed, equitable relationships between men and women. and in fact, sometimes sex can do just the opposite.

which is something i wonder whether our friend at the new york times, or others in her position, thought to consider.

and now i think i might be done beating this particular drum or dead horse or whatever the appropriate phrase is here. i think i have said my piece.

i'm still totally down for going to the oscars, though. maybe 2012?


Katherine said...

i listened to part of your interview. good job! you're very articulate and you sound great! by the way, when i read the title of your post, i totally thought you were going to talk about free shoes :) "kicks" for free!!! haha

Sarah said...

And now what do you say about Brandon Davies? I can't wait for you to be quoted on ESPN!

EH's mom said...

You were fabulous! As far as your listening to the interview, I say, go for it. If it doesn't bother you to listen to EH, this won't bother you either, the two of you sound just a like. As far as your performance and content, we could not have had a better representative of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I am so proud of you.