There's one thing they never teach but you but you're supposed to miraculously know how to do: study. The thing is, I didn't learn how to properly study until about my second year of university, and I wish I knew how to before, so here are my six steps to being an expert studier.
STEP 1: DO THE READINGS!
I used to think I could get by not doing readings, and I was right. I could get by. But the semester I decided to stay on top of my readings is the semester I achieved a 4.0 GPA. Readings are so important because they give you a fuller, clearer picture of the topic at-hand. You may feel like they're useless & a waste of time, but I assure you one key way to become a quasi-expert on anything you're studying is to read. It's a tedious task, so be sure to put aside a few hours every week to get the job done. Highlight if you can and take notes in the margins, so you can easily refer to that later on and not have to read through the entire thing twice. When I say "take notes", by the way, I mean summarize what you read succinctly & in your own words.
STEP 2: ORGANIZE YOUR NOTES
During my first year of university we were prohibited from using our laptops in class, which forced me to take notes by hand. This, I learned quickly, was a blessing in disguise. To me, the best most effective way to organize my notes is to write them by hand in-class, and then type them out before a test. When I type out my notes in preparation for studying, I have all my readings done and I merge my margin notes with my class notes, which ensures I have a complete and clear synopsis of any topic. I then like to have a printed copy of my typed notes so they can be more portable.
STEP 3: USE FLASH CARDS
Never underestimate the power of flash cards! It may seem like a juvenile tactic, but it can be incredibly helpful for a number of reasons. First, the act of writing out the flash cards is a study method in and of itself. It helps you consolidate and remember information. Second, you're confining your notes on a given topic to one card, which potentially narrows down pages upon pages of information to something more realistic/manageable. I'm not saying to discard your full notes completely, but flash cards really help your brain bring recall key information quickly. This tactic is particularly useful if you're memorizing definitions or learning things word-for-word.
STEP 4: LEARN TO FORMULATE POTENTIAL EXAM QUESTIONS
Or in other words, think like a teacher to anticipate exam questions. What did the prof stress in class? If you know there's going to be long-answer or essay questions on your exam, which topics in your studying can you glean enough information on to write longform answers to? Having read your textbook can definitely help you navigate through this thought process quickly and efficiently. Pick a topic, ask yourself a hypothetical question about it, close your notes, and type out as much as you can. If you're not able to tackle this task sufficiently, try again until you can. Typing out answers to hypothetical exam questions helps you organize information, and it has happened to me a couple times where my own practice questions have actually showed up on an exam!
STEP 5 (OPTIONAL): RECORD YOURSELF READING YOUR NOTES
This may seem a little exaggerated, but it has benefitted me multiple times. This is especially helpful if you're not the best reader or it requires a lot of concentration for you to register what you read. Simultaneously seeing the words on the page and hearing them in your headphones ensures that every bit of information is given the opportunity to be processed. This is especially helpful if you're studying a very dense topic, or if it's a high stakes exam and you need to study on-the-go/at any given moment. This method + flash cards is really ideal for utilizing public transportation time.
FINAL STEP: PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT
One of the biggest issues when it comes to studying is discerning which information is important and which is not. Often, you don't have enough time to comb through pages and pages of stuff, so picking and choosing what gets studied is a really good skill to learn. But, like every skill, practice makes perfect. It's important to go to class so you can observe and anticipate which specific topics are most important to your professor. It may take a few tests to understand what your prof's testing style is like, but keep on it because eventually you'll figure it out. You also need to learn which methods work for you and which don't, but once you get that down pat you'll be so much better off.
I guess the last thing I'd like to mention is that, as you might have noticed, my favorite study methods are very hands-on and participatory. I like writing things out. I like reading things out loud. Skimming notes or reading them over and over has never proven helpful to me because I don't have a photographic memory, and chances are, you don't either - so don't be afraid to switch it up and try new things!
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Tuesday, September 6, 2016
Pokemon Obsession.... What?
Wow, where did Abundance of Erica go?! I'm so sad I haven't been able to keep this blog updated very much. There's actually no excuse - I just seem to have forgotten! :( I figured I would talk about something a little different today, and that's Pokemon. As we all know, Pokemon Go has taken over the world, and I'm 100% obsessed. I was so excited for this game to release, so when it came out in Australia first, I created an "Australian" iTunes account just so I could download it. I've been playing for around 2 months now and I'm nowhere near as advanced as some other players, but I still enjoy it nonetheless.
Unfortunately I don't find myself out and about very often because I work from home and I live in the suburbs, meaning I don't often get rare spawns. The "rarest" thing I would say I've caught is a wild Slowbro. In terms of egg hatches my best one has been a Charmander. I think the app still has a lot of work to do (better Pokemon tracking system, adjust Pokestops based on location - why do I need 100 potions if there are no gyms nearby?!) and the updates roll out quite slowly. Other than that it's been tons of fun.
One of my favorite things to come out of this Pokemon craze is the social aspect of it. I love watching gaming YouTubers go out on catching missions (faves: Lachlan, Vikkstar, Ali A). It's so cute when they meet up with their fans who give them tips on where to find certain Pokemon in the area. I have also loved seeing the positive impact on mental health. The feeling of community is really awesome and I think Connor Manning explains it perfectly (watch below).
Seeing as my capabilities playing Pokemon Go are limited since I don't venture out too much, I actually started playing old Pokemon Gameboy games via an online emulator to get my Pokemon fill, which is just crazy. Like who would've thought at 23 I would be digging up old Gameboy games from the grave and still thoroughly enjoying them?!
I know this kind of thing comes with a lot of criticism, but I hate the thought that people can be too old to enjoy this type of thing. I don't think it's infantilizing at all - these are the games that we grew up with and enjoyed, so there's certainly a sense of nostalgia that comes with it. Personally, the game has gotten me out of the house, getting exercise (whaaaaat? walks and bike rides), and it's a simple incentive to go out and explore. The people who criticize are the people who don't understand that some things can be fun just for the sake of it. There's no "point" and there doesn't have to be. I can be invested in Pokemon Go and do other more "productive" things equally. They don't cancel out.
Anyway, these are my thoughts about Pokemon Go. Overall I'm excited for new game updates and I can't wait for them to introduce Gen 2!
 |
| That's me! |
Unfortunately I don't find myself out and about very often because I work from home and I live in the suburbs, meaning I don't often get rare spawns. The "rarest" thing I would say I've caught is a wild Slowbro. In terms of egg hatches my best one has been a Charmander. I think the app still has a lot of work to do (better Pokemon tracking system, adjust Pokestops based on location - why do I need 100 potions if there are no gyms nearby?!) and the updates roll out quite slowly. Other than that it's been tons of fun.
One of my favorite things to come out of this Pokemon craze is the social aspect of it. I love watching gaming YouTubers go out on catching missions (faves: Lachlan, Vikkstar, Ali A). It's so cute when they meet up with their fans who give them tips on where to find certain Pokemon in the area. I have also loved seeing the positive impact on mental health. The feeling of community is really awesome and I think Connor Manning explains it perfectly (watch below).
Seeing as my capabilities playing Pokemon Go are limited since I don't venture out too much, I actually started playing old Pokemon Gameboy games via an online emulator to get my Pokemon fill, which is just crazy. Like who would've thought at 23 I would be digging up old Gameboy games from the grave and still thoroughly enjoying them?!
I know this kind of thing comes with a lot of criticism, but I hate the thought that people can be too old to enjoy this type of thing. I don't think it's infantilizing at all - these are the games that we grew up with and enjoyed, so there's certainly a sense of nostalgia that comes with it. Personally, the game has gotten me out of the house, getting exercise (whaaaaat? walks and bike rides), and it's a simple incentive to go out and explore. The people who criticize are the people who don't understand that some things can be fun just for the sake of it. There's no "point" and there doesn't have to be. I can be invested in Pokemon Go and do other more "productive" things equally. They don't cancel out.
Anyway, these are my thoughts about Pokemon Go. Overall I'm excited for new game updates and I can't wait for them to introduce Gen 2!
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
New Reality TV Obsession: The Genius
Hey everyone! Seeing as Survivor and Big Brother Canada just ended, I figured I would give The Genius a shot since I see a lot of game show bloggers/live Tweeters talk about it. (FYI I am also one of these people hahaha so if you would like to follow me: @ericaefff).
The Genius is a Korean TV show that can be watched subtitled in English. The first season is available on YouTube, and subsequent seasons are available thanks to an anonymous Genius god named "Bumdidlyumptious" who uploads the episodes on Daily Motion (Google it, lol). At first it's a little difficult to wrap your head around the concepts and the characters because you have to be reading the subtitles, but if you like strategy games, I can assure you that it's well worth it.
The basic concept of the show is that 12 (I believe - something along this number) people are cast, and they have to win strategy games to move on to further episodes. Each episode comprises of a "main match" and a "death match". Every player competes in the main match, and the loser of the main match enters the death match. The loser of the death match is then eliminated from the show. Simple enough.
The strategy games are very, very interesting. I definitely wish that Big Brother, and to some extent Survivor, would adjust themselves with a few cues from The Genius. The games do involve a certain degree of intellect. Sometimes basic math and logic is involved, but, moreso, the games favor those with political and social prowess. A lot of the games cannot be won solo, and require forming alliances with other players. It would be strategically beneficial, therefore, for someone who struggles with mathematical concepts but who can be a good social liaison to team up with someone who can do the calculations/probabilities.
Another cool concept that The Genius introduces is the use of in-game currency. Each player has the opportunity to accumulate "garnets" - little red, cubical gems - worth 1,000,000 of real Korean money, which amounts to roughly $1000/garnet. The players go through the game amassing garnets, and the ultimate winner collects all of the garnets happen to be in play during the finale episode which are then exchanged for real money. Garnets can also be used to bribe other players, as well as purchase advantages during competitions. I love the idea that the gameplay throughout the season affects the final amount in the pot - it adds an element of accountability and pressure to perform well.
This is the element that I think would work well for Big Brother. Having tokens worth real $$ that can be put in play during the season adds an extra bit of thrill with possible gambles during comps, and it has the power to flip the social game on its head because people would definitely be motivated by money.
Back to The Genius. One thing I love about the show is the casting. Actually, I have one gripe about the casting which I'll put out there first: there is a highly disproportionate amount of men cast versus women, which sucks. That said, the men and women that are cast are entertaining, charismatic, and brilliant. Some of them truly are geniuses: sky-high IQs, MENSA members, Harvard grads. Some of them are pro-gamers: videogamers, professional pool, and poker players. That said, the majority of the cast are other public figures like pop stars, broadcasters, and actors. You get a really satisfying mix of intellect and charisma.
Nearly none of the characters are boring, and all are eager to get involved in the gameplay. I believe this is a product of good casting and game dynamics. The games are set up so that there is a definitive winner and a definitive loser - the fact that there is a definitive loser who is in danger every episode is what differentiates the competition gameplay from that of Big Brother and Survivor. Imagine if the first off the pole in a Survivor immunity challenge would be automatically up for elimination? That adds an entirely new degree of strategy and will to survive. Big Brother-wise, the chances of "floating" being a viable strategy would greatly diminish. I think both shows would become exponentially more entertaining if losing a competition put you in some kind of danger.
In terms of the games on The Genius, they are wildly entertaining and strategic. One of my favorites so far has been the Zombie Game, in which all 12 or so players pick cards out of a hat that assign them the role of "human" or "zombie". At the beginning of the game there are 2 zombies. There are 10 rounds, and each round a player must "touch" another player by both placing their hands on a glowing orb in the center of the room. If a zombie touches with a human, the human becomes a zombie. If a human touches with a human, they both remain safe and win a garnet each. If a zombie touches a zombie, nothing happens. The catch is that they must touch with a different player each round at least once, but they can touch multiple times too. Also, they each get one vial of antidote which they can consume within 10 minutes of touching another player if they believe they've accidentally touched with a zombie. They can also purchase additional vials with garnets if necessary. If, by the end of the game, every player has turned into a zombie, the 2 original zombies share a joint win. If there are humans left over, the human with the highest number of garnets wins and the human with the lowest number of garnets loses. If the number of garnets are equal amongst the humans, they share a joint win and pick a zombie for elimination. Watching the players scramble to figure out who's a zombie and who isn't is so much fun.
As you can probably tell, the opportunity for strategizing, lying, bribing, and forming beneficial alliances is pretty immense, which opens the show up to some pretty fantastic gaming. I'm about halfway through season 2 and I can't wait to see who wins!
The Genius is a Korean TV show that can be watched subtitled in English. The first season is available on YouTube, and subsequent seasons are available thanks to an anonymous Genius god named "Bumdidlyumptious" who uploads the episodes on Daily Motion (Google it, lol). At first it's a little difficult to wrap your head around the concepts and the characters because you have to be reading the subtitles, but if you like strategy games, I can assure you that it's well worth it.
The basic concept of the show is that 12 (I believe - something along this number) people are cast, and they have to win strategy games to move on to further episodes. Each episode comprises of a "main match" and a "death match". Every player competes in the main match, and the loser of the main match enters the death match. The loser of the death match is then eliminated from the show. Simple enough.
The strategy games are very, very interesting. I definitely wish that Big Brother, and to some extent Survivor, would adjust themselves with a few cues from The Genius. The games do involve a certain degree of intellect. Sometimes basic math and logic is involved, but, moreso, the games favor those with political and social prowess. A lot of the games cannot be won solo, and require forming alliances with other players. It would be strategically beneficial, therefore, for someone who struggles with mathematical concepts but who can be a good social liaison to team up with someone who can do the calculations/probabilities.
Another cool concept that The Genius introduces is the use of in-game currency. Each player has the opportunity to accumulate "garnets" - little red, cubical gems - worth 1,000,000 of real Korean money, which amounts to roughly $1000/garnet. The players go through the game amassing garnets, and the ultimate winner collects all of the garnets happen to be in play during the finale episode which are then exchanged for real money. Garnets can also be used to bribe other players, as well as purchase advantages during competitions. I love the idea that the gameplay throughout the season affects the final amount in the pot - it adds an element of accountability and pressure to perform well.
This is the element that I think would work well for Big Brother. Having tokens worth real $$ that can be put in play during the season adds an extra bit of thrill with possible gambles during comps, and it has the power to flip the social game on its head because people would definitely be motivated by money.
Back to The Genius. One thing I love about the show is the casting. Actually, I have one gripe about the casting which I'll put out there first: there is a highly disproportionate amount of men cast versus women, which sucks. That said, the men and women that are cast are entertaining, charismatic, and brilliant. Some of them truly are geniuses: sky-high IQs, MENSA members, Harvard grads. Some of them are pro-gamers: videogamers, professional pool, and poker players. That said, the majority of the cast are other public figures like pop stars, broadcasters, and actors. You get a really satisfying mix of intellect and charisma.
Nearly none of the characters are boring, and all are eager to get involved in the gameplay. I believe this is a product of good casting and game dynamics. The games are set up so that there is a definitive winner and a definitive loser - the fact that there is a definitive loser who is in danger every episode is what differentiates the competition gameplay from that of Big Brother and Survivor. Imagine if the first off the pole in a Survivor immunity challenge would be automatically up for elimination? That adds an entirely new degree of strategy and will to survive. Big Brother-wise, the chances of "floating" being a viable strategy would greatly diminish. I think both shows would become exponentially more entertaining if losing a competition put you in some kind of danger.
In terms of the games on The Genius, they are wildly entertaining and strategic. One of my favorites so far has been the Zombie Game, in which all 12 or so players pick cards out of a hat that assign them the role of "human" or "zombie". At the beginning of the game there are 2 zombies. There are 10 rounds, and each round a player must "touch" another player by both placing their hands on a glowing orb in the center of the room. If a zombie touches with a human, the human becomes a zombie. If a human touches with a human, they both remain safe and win a garnet each. If a zombie touches a zombie, nothing happens. The catch is that they must touch with a different player each round at least once, but they can touch multiple times too. Also, they each get one vial of antidote which they can consume within 10 minutes of touching another player if they believe they've accidentally touched with a zombie. They can also purchase additional vials with garnets if necessary. If, by the end of the game, every player has turned into a zombie, the 2 original zombies share a joint win. If there are humans left over, the human with the highest number of garnets wins and the human with the lowest number of garnets loses. If the number of garnets are equal amongst the humans, they share a joint win and pick a zombie for elimination. Watching the players scramble to figure out who's a zombie and who isn't is so much fun.
As you can probably tell, the opportunity for strategizing, lying, bribing, and forming beneficial alliances is pretty immense, which opens the show up to some pretty fantastic gaming. I'm about halfway through season 2 and I can't wait to see who wins!
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Montreal Nordstrom Warehouse Sale Haul
I haven't done a haul in sooo long, mostly because I haven't really had anything super exciting to share. HOWEVER. Last weekend I went to the Nordstrom sale where the old Target was, and I was so pleasantly surprised that I couldn't not blog about it. The irony of my last haul being the Target closing liquidation haul is not lost on me hahaha.
So, first of all, it's weird that Nordstrom had a sale here to begin with seeing as there is no actual Nordstrom store in Montreal. I guess the sale was meant to serve as an indicator of how well a Nordstrom would potentially do here, and also as a means to get customer emails. (If you provided your email at checkout you got an extra 10% off). The sale was put on by a company called Style Democracy that specializes in putting on sample/warehouse/liquidation sales across Canada (which, by the way, I think is such a fantastic business idea).
Essentially, the place was packed with rows and rows of women's clothing racks. Each clothing item was tagged with a colored dot sticker, which corresponded to a certain pricepoint. There were some really good brands available like Free People, Mink Pink, Madewell, and Wildfox - all for under $20. I can't even stress how incredible that is.
I was actually so pleased that I was at the sale both Saturday and Sunday, but had I known about it sooner I definitely would've gone during the week as well. My friend went a total of 3 times and got over 15 items. You could seriously go over and over and keep finding new things because they would keep replenishing and people would try things on and stuff would get put back on the racks.
The first thing I picked up is this casual comfy grey sweater. This was one of the items that you would see repeated in different sizes throughout the racks (whereas other things were one-of-a-kind). I liked it because the cut is really flattering. On me it's fitted at the top & on the arms, and then goes flowy on the stomach area which is perfect.
Then, I found this pretty patterned tank top. The cut of the neckline is a little low so I'll have to play around with it, but the overall fit was quite nice. I don't usually go for tank tops because I don't like showing my arms, but I like pairing them with sheer shirts or kimonos in the summer.
And surprisingly, I got a total of 3 tank tops in this haul. This one is from Free People so I automatically picked up. Free People clothes are great quality and usually so expensive. I really liked the color of this tank top (I have nothing like it), and I love how it flares out at the bottom.
I also picked up this sheer black lace kimono. Like I said, I love layering with these kinds of items in the summer. This one actually has strings so it can be used as a robe/coverup situation (it may even be intended as lingerie...?) but I might cut them off. It's the perfect length for wearing over leggings/tighter pants too.
I also picked up these casual cotton shorts to wear around the house during the summer. I know they look super plain but they're SO soft and I love the color.
Last but not least, another tank top! I really like the bold print of these. I can easily pair it with black or even maroon colored jeans, and it looks cute under the kimono too.
Overall I'd say the sale was a big success. Getting 6 clothing items in one go is really rare for me because not a lot of things fit me nicely. If you have a more typical body type, I would say it's all the more easy to find things at a sale like this. My mom, for instance, bought over 20 items (!!!) and we ended up paying no more than $20 for each item. On the Sunday (the final day of the sale) all tops were slashed down to $10 each, and all bottoms down to $14CAD.
Another note is that the changing room situation was pretty good too. It was great that the sale took place in the old Target, because you had the option of standing in line to wait for a proper changing room, or you could try clothes on in a communal changing area (separated by gender) that was lined with mirrors. I really liked having the choice.
I would 100% attend another sale like this if the opportunity arose! I'm so glad Target died and the Nordstrom sale rose. LOL.
So, first of all, it's weird that Nordstrom had a sale here to begin with seeing as there is no actual Nordstrom store in Montreal. I guess the sale was meant to serve as an indicator of how well a Nordstrom would potentially do here, and also as a means to get customer emails. (If you provided your email at checkout you got an extra 10% off). The sale was put on by a company called Style Democracy that specializes in putting on sample/warehouse/liquidation sales across Canada (which, by the way, I think is such a fantastic business idea).
Essentially, the place was packed with rows and rows of women's clothing racks. Each clothing item was tagged with a colored dot sticker, which corresponded to a certain pricepoint. There were some really good brands available like Free People, Mink Pink, Madewell, and Wildfox - all for under $20. I can't even stress how incredible that is.
I was actually so pleased that I was at the sale both Saturday and Sunday, but had I known about it sooner I definitely would've gone during the week as well. My friend went a total of 3 times and got over 15 items. You could seriously go over and over and keep finding new things because they would keep replenishing and people would try things on and stuff would get put back on the racks.
The first thing I picked up is this casual comfy grey sweater. This was one of the items that you would see repeated in different sizes throughout the racks (whereas other things were one-of-a-kind). I liked it because the cut is really flattering. On me it's fitted at the top & on the arms, and then goes flowy on the stomach area which is perfect.
Then, I found this pretty patterned tank top. The cut of the neckline is a little low so I'll have to play around with it, but the overall fit was quite nice. I don't usually go for tank tops because I don't like showing my arms, but I like pairing them with sheer shirts or kimonos in the summer.
And surprisingly, I got a total of 3 tank tops in this haul. This one is from Free People so I automatically picked up. Free People clothes are great quality and usually so expensive. I really liked the color of this tank top (I have nothing like it), and I love how it flares out at the bottom.
I also picked up this sheer black lace kimono. Like I said, I love layering with these kinds of items in the summer. This one actually has strings so it can be used as a robe/coverup situation (it may even be intended as lingerie...?) but I might cut them off. It's the perfect length for wearing over leggings/tighter pants too.
I also picked up these casual cotton shorts to wear around the house during the summer. I know they look super plain but they're SO soft and I love the color.
Last but not least, another tank top! I really like the bold print of these. I can easily pair it with black or even maroon colored jeans, and it looks cute under the kimono too.
Overall I'd say the sale was a big success. Getting 6 clothing items in one go is really rare for me because not a lot of things fit me nicely. If you have a more typical body type, I would say it's all the more easy to find things at a sale like this. My mom, for instance, bought over 20 items (!!!) and we ended up paying no more than $20 for each item. On the Sunday (the final day of the sale) all tops were slashed down to $10 each, and all bottoms down to $14CAD.
Another note is that the changing room situation was pretty good too. It was great that the sale took place in the old Target, because you had the option of standing in line to wait for a proper changing room, or you could try clothes on in a communal changing area (separated by gender) that was lined with mirrors. I really liked having the choice.
I would 100% attend another sale like this if the opportunity arose! I'm so glad Target died and the Nordstrom sale rose. LOL.
Friday, March 25, 2016
Let Down by The 100
(Beware of spoilers)
I want to get something off my chest: season 3 of The 100 is terrible. I guess I could begin by explaining how I hoped the show would unfold after season 2, because season 2 was great! I hoped the writers were going to focus on the fallout post-Mt. Weather. I hoped the writers were going to continue to show the character progression of each pivotal character and how they were affected by Mt. Weather.
Instead, the show fastforwarded to months? weeks? after Mt. Weather, and we were introduced to a slew of new characters (why!). It almost seemed as though each original character had developed significantly since the s2 finale and we were left trying to connect the dots ourselves. I get that shows do this. I get that they don't want to baby their audience by providing all the details. The thing is, so many shows take this approach and fail, because it almost certainly leads to plot holes. Look at Pretty Little Liars. Look at Orphan Black. Those are two shows I had to stop watching because they twisted the plot so much that it became frustrating because they overlooked the importance of filling the audience in.
The most annoying character development we've seen in The 100 so far is Bellamy's. Bellamy was awful at the beginning of season 1. He was selfish and tyrannical, but by the end of the season he softened up. In season 2 he became a hero of sorts. He learned empathy and seemed to have a strong moral compass. In season 3, it all went to waste. He flip flopped back to being emotionless and taking part in the genocide of the grounders. I seriously do not get how this happens. He warmed up to Lincoln, he was amicable with Indra, and he seemed to understand that not all grounders are the same. It's such a shame that his character devolved so much in the span of like, 3 episodes.
And then we have Clarke. Clarke decided, as per the end of season 2, that she no longer wanted to live with Sky Crew. The season ends with her leaving the Arc and walking into the forest alone. Bellamy did not go with her. Clarke's broken relationship with the Sky Crew and the grounders should have been the primary focus, yet season 3 began with Clarke being hunted by the Ice Queen. Where did this Ice Queen even come from? How did we get from point A to point B? What were Clarke's intentions in wandering off into the wild on her own? None of this was addressed.
Now Lexa's dead and the LGBTQIA audience is devastated. The showrunner, Jason Rothenberg, issued an apology about perpetuating the "bury your gays" trope in tv writing. The apology is alright (though I 100% understand if the LGBTQIA audience don't accept it), but Rothenberg should also apologize for convoluting the plot and letting character development fall by the wayside.
I'm not sure if I want to continue watching this season. I don't know how it can recover. We're already 8/12 episodes into season 3 and I don't see how it's going to improve. Absolutely no progress has been made for the show's true heroes... It's all pretty sad.
I want to get something off my chest: season 3 of The 100 is terrible. I guess I could begin by explaining how I hoped the show would unfold after season 2, because season 2 was great! I hoped the writers were going to focus on the fallout post-Mt. Weather. I hoped the writers were going to continue to show the character progression of each pivotal character and how they were affected by Mt. Weather.
Instead, the show fastforwarded to months? weeks? after Mt. Weather, and we were introduced to a slew of new characters (why!). It almost seemed as though each original character had developed significantly since the s2 finale and we were left trying to connect the dots ourselves. I get that shows do this. I get that they don't want to baby their audience by providing all the details. The thing is, so many shows take this approach and fail, because it almost certainly leads to plot holes. Look at Pretty Little Liars. Look at Orphan Black. Those are two shows I had to stop watching because they twisted the plot so much that it became frustrating because they overlooked the importance of filling the audience in.
The most annoying character development we've seen in The 100 so far is Bellamy's. Bellamy was awful at the beginning of season 1. He was selfish and tyrannical, but by the end of the season he softened up. In season 2 he became a hero of sorts. He learned empathy and seemed to have a strong moral compass. In season 3, it all went to waste. He flip flopped back to being emotionless and taking part in the genocide of the grounders. I seriously do not get how this happens. He warmed up to Lincoln, he was amicable with Indra, and he seemed to understand that not all grounders are the same. It's such a shame that his character devolved so much in the span of like, 3 episodes.
And then we have Clarke. Clarke decided, as per the end of season 2, that she no longer wanted to live with Sky Crew. The season ends with her leaving the Arc and walking into the forest alone. Bellamy did not go with her. Clarke's broken relationship with the Sky Crew and the grounders should have been the primary focus, yet season 3 began with Clarke being hunted by the Ice Queen. Where did this Ice Queen even come from? How did we get from point A to point B? What were Clarke's intentions in wandering off into the wild on her own? None of this was addressed.
Now Lexa's dead and the LGBTQIA audience is devastated. The showrunner, Jason Rothenberg, issued an apology about perpetuating the "bury your gays" trope in tv writing. The apology is alright (though I 100% understand if the LGBTQIA audience don't accept it), but Rothenberg should also apologize for convoluting the plot and letting character development fall by the wayside.
I'm not sure if I want to continue watching this season. I don't know how it can recover. We're already 8/12 episodes into season 3 and I don't see how it's going to improve. Absolutely no progress has been made for the show's true heroes... It's all pretty sad.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Best Sushi Ever: Vegan!!!
Hey everyone! Last week I went to try vegan sushi with my friends for my birthday, and I'm not exaggerating: it was the best sushi I've ever had. One of my favorite things about vegan cooking is that all the ingredients shine in a different way, whereas if you're having a meat dish, the star is the chicken/steak/fish/whatever and everything else is complementary. My impression is that with vegan food every ingredient plays a key role. This sushi was so innovative and so delicious, it kinda blew my mind a little and I can't stop thinking about it!
The restaurant in question is called Sushi Momo and it's located in the Plateau area of downtown Montreal. The only downside to this restaurant is that the service is horrendous because they do takeout and have a seating area, but presumably they only have one chef. That said, I was able to put up with it because the sushi was so tasty.
At first I was a little taken aback by the a-la-carte pricing. I think I'm just used to having all-you-can-eat sushi for like $20-25 and not worrying about it, but in the end I only ended up paying $14 which is pretty good. Bear in mind that the sushi in the following photos was split amongst 3 people. I was totally satisfied hunger-wise by the end of my meal, but I do wish I ordered more so I could taste all the awesome variations of vegan sushi.
I honestly can't really remember what exactly was in all of these but here's what I can recall. There was one roll (I believe the 5 pieces on the right) that included vegan cream cheese, tomato, avocado, carrot, and sliced green apple, which I know sounds SO odd but it was really good. I think it was called the "Four Seasons" roll.
Then we got these two which were the total standouts for me. The roll on the left was stuffed with "creamy jackfruit". I definitely knew I wanted to try something with jackfruit because although it is literally a fruit, vegan chefs use this to mimic pulled pork/chicken texture, and it does a pretty good job of picking up the flavor of whatever you cook it in. Then on the right was a spicy, creamy tofu roll which was honestly just as delicious as the jackfruit. It actually might have been my favorite.
We also shared a plate of tempura sushi that had sweet tofu, mango and avocado, and it was so amazing I forgot to take a picture of it. I loved the texture combo of having creamy avocado sushi fried in a tempura batter. The mango was a really nice tangy touch too.
Last but not least, we had to try the "Poutine Hosomaki". Basically, this dish consists of sweet potato sushi cut into bite sized pieces, fried tempura-style, then baked in "cheddar cheese" (I have no clue how they did this) and shiitake teriyaki sauce. Um... yes. It was everything.
All in all, I desperately need to go back to this place. Next time I would definitely go for lunch on a not-so-busy day because I'm thinking the service was slowed down because it was a Saturday night. Or maybe I can try and probably not succeed at making this stuff myself...!
The restaurant in question is called Sushi Momo and it's located in the Plateau area of downtown Montreal. The only downside to this restaurant is that the service is horrendous because they do takeout and have a seating area, but presumably they only have one chef. That said, I was able to put up with it because the sushi was so tasty.
At first I was a little taken aback by the a-la-carte pricing. I think I'm just used to having all-you-can-eat sushi for like $20-25 and not worrying about it, but in the end I only ended up paying $14 which is pretty good. Bear in mind that the sushi in the following photos was split amongst 3 people. I was totally satisfied hunger-wise by the end of my meal, but I do wish I ordered more so I could taste all the awesome variations of vegan sushi.
We also shared a plate of tempura sushi that had sweet tofu, mango and avocado, and it was so amazing I forgot to take a picture of it. I loved the texture combo of having creamy avocado sushi fried in a tempura batter. The mango was a really nice tangy touch too.
All in all, I desperately need to go back to this place. Next time I would definitely go for lunch on a not-so-busy day because I'm thinking the service was slowed down because it was a Saturday night. Or maybe I can try and probably not succeed at making this stuff myself...!
Sunday, February 21, 2016
3 Makeup Tutorials to Try in 2016
One item that did not make it to my New Year's Resolutions list but is still very much a goal of mine, is to get back into enjoying makeup! I can probably count the number of times I wore a full face of makeup last year on one hand, which is such a shame because I have so much makeup & I love to apply it. I don't know why I didn't delve into makeup more last year... I probably got lazy, and to be honest I wasn't really feeling myself ~appearance-wise~ so I guess I didn't want to. I figured I would put together a short list of tutorials I would like to try out in 2016.
I usually think grey/black when I think "smokey eye" but a nice, warm brown-red smokey eye sounds amazing. I love the way the glowy cheeks & subtle lip balance out the eye makeup. This is a must-try for me.
This dark lip paired with cool, silvery eyes is such a nice combination. I definitely have to attempt to pull this off before spring rolls around!
I love the idea of blue/green eyeshadow and this seems like such a polished & classy way to do it! This is tagged as a NYE look but I think it can easily work year-round. The bright blue would be nice in summer as well.
I'm excited to try these out :)
I usually think grey/black when I think "smokey eye" but a nice, warm brown-red smokey eye sounds amazing. I love the way the glowy cheeks & subtle lip balance out the eye makeup. This is a must-try for me.
This dark lip paired with cool, silvery eyes is such a nice combination. I definitely have to attempt to pull this off before spring rolls around!
I love the idea of blue/green eyeshadow and this seems like such a polished & classy way to do it! This is tagged as a NYE look but I think it can easily work year-round. The bright blue would be nice in summer as well.
I'm excited to try these out :)
Saturday, February 20, 2016
Changing my Etsy Logo & Discovering my Illustration Style
Hey everyone! I mentioned a while back that I was going to talk more about my foray into small businesshood (haha). At the end of January I decided my Etsy shop needed a little makeover. I thought my designs were getting kind of stale and could use a revamp. Also, I was adamant that, in the new year, I would try my best to tackle Illustrator and develop an illustration style that could be carried out with all my designs.
The first order of business was to revamp my shop logo. My previous logo (similar to the logo I use on this blog) was near and dear to my heart because I painted the watercolor overlay myself. Like, painted painted with a brush and watercolor paints. I feel like traditional forms of art like painting and hand scripting are falling by the wayside, so I was always proud of incorporating that element into my logo. That said, it was time for a change. I opted for a similar watercolor-inspired style, and chose one color - a beautiful, bright coral. What I like about having one color in a logo is that it's super malleable. I now change the color of my logo based on the sticker sheet so that everything matches. It's a simple adjustment but it makes everything look cohesive.
Then I decided to close my shop for a couple days to create 10+ brand new sticker sheets. This was kind of nerve-wrecking at first, because I wasn't sure I could afford to close the shop at all, let alone for more than one day. I put out an announcement on Instagram saying I intended to close my shop & that all items in the "SALE" section would be discontinued. What happened then shocked me... I received TONS of orders scooping up the last of the sale items, and made about $200 in a day - a record for me. It was really effective, to say the least.
So I closed the shop and got to work. The first thing I wanted to do was design a full page of colorful breakfast stickers. I knew I wanted to work on this first because breakfast foods are overall really "illustrateable" meaning that they're colorful and easy to make into little clipart elements. My strategy was to get the outline for each item down in Illustrator, and then import the design into Photoshop where I would add the color and lay out the sticker sheet. This breakfast theme is one of my absolute favorites - I love the bright colors and how well everything works with my new logo.
Once I got the ball rolling with the breakfast stickers, I designed more than 10 new sheets. I worked super long days trying to get everything set up for the shop reopening, and overall I accomplished what I set out to achieve: a fresh, new shop look with hand-illustrated stickers in a unique style.
The first order of business was to revamp my shop logo. My previous logo (similar to the logo I use on this blog) was near and dear to my heart because I painted the watercolor overlay myself. Like, painted painted with a brush and watercolor paints. I feel like traditional forms of art like painting and hand scripting are falling by the wayside, so I was always proud of incorporating that element into my logo. That said, it was time for a change. I opted for a similar watercolor-inspired style, and chose one color - a beautiful, bright coral. What I like about having one color in a logo is that it's super malleable. I now change the color of my logo based on the sticker sheet so that everything matches. It's a simple adjustment but it makes everything look cohesive.
Then I decided to close my shop for a couple days to create 10+ brand new sticker sheets. This was kind of nerve-wrecking at first, because I wasn't sure I could afford to close the shop at all, let alone for more than one day. I put out an announcement on Instagram saying I intended to close my shop & that all items in the "SALE" section would be discontinued. What happened then shocked me... I received TONS of orders scooping up the last of the sale items, and made about $200 in a day - a record for me. It was really effective, to say the least.
Once I got the ball rolling with the breakfast stickers, I designed more than 10 new sheets. I worked super long days trying to get everything set up for the shop reopening, and overall I accomplished what I set out to achieve: a fresh, new shop look with hand-illustrated stickers in a unique style.
Thursday, February 11, 2016
3 Weeks Vegan... WHY?
I'm writing this blog post in part to figure out how I can better explain why I decided to go vegan to my friends and family. Especially since, once you full-on say "yeah, I'm vegan" it somehow seems irreversible. But there's no way around it... You can't have a slice of cake at your friend's birthday. You don't order your usual cheese pizza. There are questions.
I decided to go vegan based on timing, circumstance, and belief. For one, I'm firmly against anthropocentrism. I don't believe that humans, as a species, are meant to be at the center of the universe. I believe that we share this Earth and environment with animals. I think as soon as humans start to get too egocentric, we start to neglect our surroundings and let nature & the world around us falter. So on a purely moral basis, how can I logically choose to support the animal agriculture industry, an industry that is dangerously excessive, hostile, and abusive towards animals? I love my dog to bits, so how can I deny that same compassion to animals being unnecessarily slaughtered for food? But this idea is not new to me. I've always thought veganism was the right thing to do. It's the timing that made me choose to take the leap.
I can't realistically say transitioning into veganism is for everyone in any circumstance. I'm fortunate to be in a situation where I'm no longer in school & work from home, meaning I can spend time meal planning and cooking really hearty and wholesome animal-free recipes. I feel like this can't be overlooked. There are nutrients that your body is accustomed to getting from animal products (B12, iron, protein, etc) so you need to ensure that your meals can fulfill these needs. Without the proper planning and care, it would be easy to fall ill by not eating enough and not eating the right things.
I'm not vegan for health reasons. Yes, the health benefits are a perk, but ultimately I feel like I can't treat this as a diet like I might've in the past. Focusing on the "activism" side to veganism is what will ultimately make it last.
So far I think I made the right choice. I'm constantly tuning into documentaries and research supporting veganism, and every video I watch/article I read leaves eating meat & dairy far in the past. The only thing that has been a bit of a struggle is eating out (something I looove to do). I went to my favorite Italian restaurant the other day and was only able to have a salad. I thought I would be able to have a pizza without cheese but unfortunately they add yogurt to their pizza dough to keep it moist (bummer). Also, the waiters and chef weren't really keen to accommodate my needs even though I was extra polite and clear. That said, giving up my favorite restaurant is a compromise that I'm willing to make.
The major upside is that I've been very into cooking new meals and getting creative in the kitchen. I've been eating some really good stuff: lentil stew, polenta, homemade veggie burgers, stir frys, Asian noodle dishes, incredible stuffed "ricotta" pasta shells - you name it. This brownie recipe is the best I've ever used, vegan or not.
All in all, it's going to take some more getting used to, and my family & friends are going to have to adapt as well. But if they care about me & my life choices, they will come to support me.
 |
| Avocado Alfredo spaghetti.. So good! |
I can't realistically say transitioning into veganism is for everyone in any circumstance. I'm fortunate to be in a situation where I'm no longer in school & work from home, meaning I can spend time meal planning and cooking really hearty and wholesome animal-free recipes. I feel like this can't be overlooked. There are nutrients that your body is accustomed to getting from animal products (B12, iron, protein, etc) so you need to ensure that your meals can fulfill these needs. Without the proper planning and care, it would be easy to fall ill by not eating enough and not eating the right things.
I'm not vegan for health reasons. Yes, the health benefits are a perk, but ultimately I feel like I can't treat this as a diet like I might've in the past. Focusing on the "activism" side to veganism is what will ultimately make it last.
So far I think I made the right choice. I'm constantly tuning into documentaries and research supporting veganism, and every video I watch/article I read leaves eating meat & dairy far in the past. The only thing that has been a bit of a struggle is eating out (something I looove to do). I went to my favorite Italian restaurant the other day and was only able to have a salad. I thought I would be able to have a pizza without cheese but unfortunately they add yogurt to their pizza dough to keep it moist (bummer). Also, the waiters and chef weren't really keen to accommodate my needs even though I was extra polite and clear. That said, giving up my favorite restaurant is a compromise that I'm willing to make.
The major upside is that I've been very into cooking new meals and getting creative in the kitchen. I've been eating some really good stuff: lentil stew, polenta, homemade veggie burgers, stir frys, Asian noodle dishes, incredible stuffed "ricotta" pasta shells - you name it. This brownie recipe is the best I've ever used, vegan or not.
 |
| Perfecting my stir fry skills! |
 |
| Now I know this kind of looks like pet food but trust me when I say this is the best dish I've cooked so far. Lentils, carrots, bell pepper and kale in the most delicious peanut sauce. SO GOOD |
Monday, January 4, 2016
Award Show Season Thoughts
Seeing as I have plenty of time on my hands this year, one thing I really wanted to do is start watching more movies. I hate the feeling of watching the Oscars every year and not recognizing any of the titles - I guess it's like some weird kind of FOMO, like I'm not "in the know" about all these stellar movies that I should be seeing. As I've watched some movies from the list of predicted Oscar contenders, I can't help but think I'm not actually missing out at all. Let me explain.
So far, I've seen Spotlight, Steve Jobs, and The Big Short, all of which are meant to be taking home the Oscar in top categories. I've read reviews on each of them, and none of the critiques point out their major flaws: these movies cast no actors of color whatsoever AND they each fail the Bechdel test miserably. The lack of POC and women in these films seriously prohibit me from connecting with them on any kind of meaningful level, so how can I ever agree that they should win best picture of the year? Sure, they each have other merits, but how can I be expected to get over this glaring oversight? Or maybe not a glaring oversight, but rather deliberate exclusion.
You can surely argue that the three movies I mentioned above are based on true stories, for which no POC or women play active roles in the real-life version of the narrative. Even so, film writers, producers, and directors take creative liberties all the time - would it seriously hinder the story if a main character was written as black or Latino or Asian & not white? Female, not male? I don't think so. In fact, I think it would enhance not only the storyline, but rather the perception of minorities in public consciousness in general. It would open the story up to a broader range of audiences.
I feel like, in this respect, the film industry is really lagging behind television. With critically-renown TV shows like How to Get Away With Murder, Scandal, Orange is the New Black, more women from diverse walks of life are getting the screen-time they deserve. And they frickin' own it. The actresses playing these roles compelling, talented, and awesomely qualified. Why is it so hard for the film industry to follow suit?
As Viola Davis said in her Emmy acceptance speech last year, "You cannot win an Emmy for roles that are simply not there" - same applies to Oscars. She means that if complex roles for women aren't written into the script, they won't be nominated. Conversely I would argue that if TV shows/films with great, intriguing female characters aren't awarded, they won't be written. It's pretty symbiotic. And of course with this thought comes the obvious follow-up argument that women and POC need to play active roles in all aspects of the industry, not just in terms of acting. I mean in writing, producing, directing, and even holding spots on the Academy board.
That said, I know I have lots of work to do in terms of what's left to watch. I definitely want to watch Carol, Creed, Joy, Mad Max, and a couple more, so hopefully those will make me change my mind a little.
So far, I've seen Spotlight, Steve Jobs, and The Big Short, all of which are meant to be taking home the Oscar in top categories. I've read reviews on each of them, and none of the critiques point out their major flaws: these movies cast no actors of color whatsoever AND they each fail the Bechdel test miserably. The lack of POC and women in these films seriously prohibit me from connecting with them on any kind of meaningful level, so how can I ever agree that they should win best picture of the year? Sure, they each have other merits, but how can I be expected to get over this glaring oversight? Or maybe not a glaring oversight, but rather deliberate exclusion.
 |
| The cast of "Spotlight" |
You can surely argue that the three movies I mentioned above are based on true stories, for which no POC or women play active roles in the real-life version of the narrative. Even so, film writers, producers, and directors take creative liberties all the time - would it seriously hinder the story if a main character was written as black or Latino or Asian & not white? Female, not male? I don't think so. In fact, I think it would enhance not only the storyline, but rather the perception of minorities in public consciousness in general. It would open the story up to a broader range of audiences.
 |
| A still from "The Big Short" |
I feel like, in this respect, the film industry is really lagging behind television. With critically-renown TV shows like How to Get Away With Murder, Scandal, Orange is the New Black, more women from diverse walks of life are getting the screen-time they deserve. And they frickin' own it. The actresses playing these roles compelling, talented, and awesomely qualified. Why is it so hard for the film industry to follow suit?
As Viola Davis said in her Emmy acceptance speech last year, "You cannot win an Emmy for roles that are simply not there" - same applies to Oscars. She means that if complex roles for women aren't written into the script, they won't be nominated. Conversely I would argue that if TV shows/films with great, intriguing female characters aren't awarded, they won't be written. It's pretty symbiotic. And of course with this thought comes the obvious follow-up argument that women and POC need to play active roles in all aspects of the industry, not just in terms of acting. I mean in writing, producing, directing, and even holding spots on the Academy board.
That said, I know I have lots of work to do in terms of what's left to watch. I definitely want to watch Carol, Creed, Joy, Mad Max, and a couple more, so hopefully those will make me change my mind a little.
Friday, January 1, 2016
New Year's Resolutions 2016
Happy new year everyone! Personally, I'm a big fan of a good list of new year resolutions. Having general, reasonably attainable goals for the new year has proven to be really positive in my life. In the past I've accomplished a fair few resolutions myself - like experimenting with hair color, losing weight, and getting better grades. So here are my goals for 2016!
First and foremost, "lose weight" has to make an appearance on this list. Let's just say 2015 was not my year in terms of health. In 2014 I actually went to the gym on a consistent basis for the entire year, but somehow that stopped in 2015... I think I'm going to try exercising at home, since I'm graduated from university now and will have lots of time off. With YouTube nowadays it shouldn't be hard to find lots of good cardio workouts. I even bought a yoga mat that remains unused (oops lol), so I could probably squeeze some yoga time in there.
Next, I would like to achieve my business goals. As you may or may not know, in 2015 I started my own business selling planner stickers on Etsy. I have a separate list of business goals that I would like to achieve, which includes things like keeping track of my expenses more diligently, and achieve 1000 sales. Wish me luck!
I would also like to get back on that 52 week savings plan! If you don't know about the 52 week savings plan, essentially you deposit money into a savings account every week of the year, and every week you add $1 more to the amount. So for the first week of January you deposit $1, the second week $2, then $3, etc. You won't ever have to deposit more than $52 per week (totally doable) and by the end of the year you will have saved over $1000! Last year I only made it to $450, but I'm going to try again this year.
Seeing as I will have more time on my hands this year, I do want to make the effort to blog more. I know I'm like a broken record and I say this nearly every post, but this time I mean it! For some reason I guess I wasn't inspired to blog last year, but I'm already feeling more up to it this year. I think the key will be low-maintenance blogging - i.e. not worrying about word counts or quality images, and keeping expectations on the lower side.
Another thing I want to make an effort to do this year is to leave the house at least every second day. I know this may seem ridiculous to some, but since I'll be working from home this year, I so easily see myself forgetting to leave the house for days on-end. Even if it's just grabbing coffee at Starbucks in the morning instead of making my coffee at home, I really feel the need to stick to this one.
The last thing I want to accomplish in 2016 is to Instagram more! It may seem insignificant but I didn't post nearly enough photos in 2015. I love looking back on my Instagrams at the end of the year and I was thoroughly disappointed by my lack of posts this time around. That has to change!
All in all, I wish you a good 2016, and I hope you accomplish all the goals you set out to achieve :) Best of luck!
 |
| Cheers to 2016! |
Next, I would like to achieve my business goals. As you may or may not know, in 2015 I started my own business selling planner stickers on Etsy. I have a separate list of business goals that I would like to achieve, which includes things like keeping track of my expenses more diligently, and achieve 1000 sales. Wish me luck!
I would also like to get back on that 52 week savings plan! If you don't know about the 52 week savings plan, essentially you deposit money into a savings account every week of the year, and every week you add $1 more to the amount. So for the first week of January you deposit $1, the second week $2, then $3, etc. You won't ever have to deposit more than $52 per week (totally doable) and by the end of the year you will have saved over $1000! Last year I only made it to $450, but I'm going to try again this year.
Seeing as I will have more time on my hands this year, I do want to make the effort to blog more. I know I'm like a broken record and I say this nearly every post, but this time I mean it! For some reason I guess I wasn't inspired to blog last year, but I'm already feeling more up to it this year. I think the key will be low-maintenance blogging - i.e. not worrying about word counts or quality images, and keeping expectations on the lower side.
Another thing I want to make an effort to do this year is to leave the house at least every second day. I know this may seem ridiculous to some, but since I'll be working from home this year, I so easily see myself forgetting to leave the house for days on-end. Even if it's just grabbing coffee at Starbucks in the morning instead of making my coffee at home, I really feel the need to stick to this one.
The last thing I want to accomplish in 2016 is to Instagram more! It may seem insignificant but I didn't post nearly enough photos in 2015. I love looking back on my Instagrams at the end of the year and I was thoroughly disappointed by my lack of posts this time around. That has to change!
All in all, I wish you a good 2016, and I hope you accomplish all the goals you set out to achieve :) Best of luck!
Monday, December 7, 2015
Being Friends With Someone Who is Anxious/Depressed
I'm procrastinating on homework at school at the moment and there's a girl sitting next to me talking to her boyfriend, and she's getting really heated. The girl is extremely angry that her "best friend" is quote: "lazy, flaky, doesn't work, and doesn't go to school". She says the friend claims she's "too depressed" and has "too many anxiety attacks", and she's upset that this friend does not follow through with plans. She doesn't understand why the friend says she's going to put effort into "fixing herself" but never does. She also doesn't understand why her texts and calls go unanswered.
Please note that I'm not a specialist nor a professional in this field, but I feel the need to comment because I have a few friends who are struggling through similar issues, so these are my personal thoughts on the matter.
The thing this girl cannot understand is that her friend struggles with mental health issues. She can't switch her anxiety/depression on and off. She can't get better in the same way neurotypical people can. For some, behavior displayed by people with depression and anxiety is incredibly hard to understand. It's natural to think, why can't this person just buckle up and get over it? Apply for jobs? Take some classes? If everyone else can do it, why can't they? But to those with depression/anxiety these regular tasks may seem like the absolute most challenging things in the world. It's not a sign of laziness, what they're experiencing is more like a mix of fear and helplessness.
Instead of responding to a depressed and anxious person with anger and confusion, the appropriate thing is to be supportive. Especially if this person is your best friend, it's important to acknowledge that, at this moment in time, they need you more than you need them. If it means sending a quick text to make sure they're doing okay or offering to pick them up when you have plans to hang out, then as a friend I think it's important for YOU to buckle up and do these things. The friendship may not seem reciprocal at the moment, but getting your friend out of their downtrodden routine will be super helpful to them, even though it may seem hopeless to you. I feel like it's important to be persistent and to ensure that your friend knows that you're there for them. In some cases, if you give up on the friendship, not only are you losing a friend, but THEY are losing a potential lifeline and perhaps one of the few sources of happiness in their life.
We're taught that relationships require balance and equal effort on behalf of both parties, but I really believe this is one case that this theory doesn't apply to. Unless your own mental health is at-risk by supporting your friend, then I think putting that extra effort into your friendship is worth it. Continue to encourage them to improve themselves, and even though it may seem fruitless at first, the moment you stop insisting is the moment they give up, too. I know you may be dealing with your own set of struggles and issues, but you're mentally strong enough to overcome them. Your friend isn't. Also, and here's the harsh truth in this case: it's not about you and your needs at the moment. It's about them.
Please note that I'm not a specialist nor a professional in this field, but I feel the need to comment because I have a few friends who are struggling through similar issues, so these are my personal thoughts on the matter.
The thing this girl cannot understand is that her friend struggles with mental health issues. She can't switch her anxiety/depression on and off. She can't get better in the same way neurotypical people can. For some, behavior displayed by people with depression and anxiety is incredibly hard to understand. It's natural to think, why can't this person just buckle up and get over it? Apply for jobs? Take some classes? If everyone else can do it, why can't they? But to those with depression/anxiety these regular tasks may seem like the absolute most challenging things in the world. It's not a sign of laziness, what they're experiencing is more like a mix of fear and helplessness.
Instead of responding to a depressed and anxious person with anger and confusion, the appropriate thing is to be supportive. Especially if this person is your best friend, it's important to acknowledge that, at this moment in time, they need you more than you need them. If it means sending a quick text to make sure they're doing okay or offering to pick them up when you have plans to hang out, then as a friend I think it's important for YOU to buckle up and do these things. The friendship may not seem reciprocal at the moment, but getting your friend out of their downtrodden routine will be super helpful to them, even though it may seem hopeless to you. I feel like it's important to be persistent and to ensure that your friend knows that you're there for them. In some cases, if you give up on the friendship, not only are you losing a friend, but THEY are losing a potential lifeline and perhaps one of the few sources of happiness in their life.
We're taught that relationships require balance and equal effort on behalf of both parties, but I really believe this is one case that this theory doesn't apply to. Unless your own mental health is at-risk by supporting your friend, then I think putting that extra effort into your friendship is worth it. Continue to encourage them to improve themselves, and even though it may seem fruitless at first, the moment you stop insisting is the moment they give up, too. I know you may be dealing with your own set of struggles and issues, but you're mentally strong enough to overcome them. Your friend isn't. Also, and here's the harsh truth in this case: it's not about you and your needs at the moment. It's about them.
Friday, December 4, 2015
Latest Netflix Love: Jane The Virgin
I've been interested in watching Jane The Virgin ever since Gina Rodriguez won an Emmy award in 2014 for Best Actress in a TV comedy. This was the first time a CW network television show had ever won Emmy, so I figured it must be a good one.
The premise of the show is hilarious. Jane (Gina Rodriguez) goes to the gynecologist for a pap smear and is instead artificially inseminated when the doctor gets two patients mixed up. Jane finds out she's pregnant, which is of course impossible given that she's a virgin. Poor Jane has to decide if she wants to give birth to the baby whose father turns out to be someone she had a short fling with five years prior.
The accidental pregnancy sets off a ton of weird plot twists and absurdities that give the show its quirky character. At first, I thought I would be quickly annoyed with how unrealistic the storyline was, but I learned to suspend by disbelief and get to know the characters better instead. Eventually I warmed up to the soap opera/telenovela structure of the show. The characters, as is the case with any great TV show, are incredibly interesting and multi-dimensional.
I actually have three favorite characters: Jane, Rogelio, and Rafael. Jane is a type A workoholic with a huge heart, and she genuinely wants the best for others. The other characters often underestimate her ability to handle difficult situations because she's so sweet and sometimes comes off as naive, but Jane always rises to the occasion and is stern when she has to be. As far as role models go, I imagine Jane is perfect for a younger teen audience.
Rogelio is a telenovela star with a huge ego. His hubris is exaggerated on the show to the highest degree which makes him such a fun character. When things get too serious we can always count on a funny Rogelio scene to lighten the mood. He grapples with balancing his fame and family life, and of course, always puts his family first, making him lovable despite his arrogance.
Finally, what would Jane the Virgin be without Rafael *insert heart eyes emoji here*? Spoiler alert (but not really, because we learn this in the pilot episode), he is the father of Jane's accidentally inseminated child. Rafael has a morally-questionable past, but a recent bout of cancer softened him and made him more compassionate. (Admittedly, the gratuitous cancer story element annoyed me at first but I managed to let it go). Even though he's imperfect, he's infinitely more interesting than Jane's alternative love interest, Michael. So I'm definitely #TeamRafael.
All in all, if you're looking for something lighthearted but interesting to watch, I highly recommend Jane The Virgin. You can find season 1 on Netflix, and season 2 is currently airing :)
The premise of the show is hilarious. Jane (Gina Rodriguez) goes to the gynecologist for a pap smear and is instead artificially inseminated when the doctor gets two patients mixed up. Jane finds out she's pregnant, which is of course impossible given that she's a virgin. Poor Jane has to decide if she wants to give birth to the baby whose father turns out to be someone she had a short fling with five years prior.
The accidental pregnancy sets off a ton of weird plot twists and absurdities that give the show its quirky character. At first, I thought I would be quickly annoyed with how unrealistic the storyline was, but I learned to suspend by disbelief and get to know the characters better instead. Eventually I warmed up to the soap opera/telenovela structure of the show. The characters, as is the case with any great TV show, are incredibly interesting and multi-dimensional.
 |
| Rogelio |
Rogelio is a telenovela star with a huge ego. His hubris is exaggerated on the show to the highest degree which makes him such a fun character. When things get too serious we can always count on a funny Rogelio scene to lighten the mood. He grapples with balancing his fame and family life, and of course, always puts his family first, making him lovable despite his arrogance.
Finally, what would Jane the Virgin be without Rafael *insert heart eyes emoji here*? Spoiler alert (but not really, because we learn this in the pilot episode), he is the father of Jane's accidentally inseminated child. Rafael has a morally-questionable past, but a recent bout of cancer softened him and made him more compassionate. (Admittedly, the gratuitous cancer story element annoyed me at first but I managed to let it go). Even though he's imperfect, he's infinitely more interesting than Jane's alternative love interest, Michael. So I'm definitely #TeamRafael.
 |
| Rafael and Jane |
All in all, if you're looking for something lighthearted but interesting to watch, I highly recommend Jane The Virgin. You can find season 1 on Netflix, and season 2 is currently airing :)
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
What I Learned in University
It's the last week of my undergrad! Woooooohoooo! I know I haven't blogged in a while but I figured my future self would be pretty upset if I didn't blog about the completion of my university degree. I thought I would document some of the lessons I picked up along the way.
First, I want to thank my parents who were able to finance my degree. Thanks to my dad who paid for most of my tuition, and thanks to my mom for supporting me in ways she was by no means obliged to. She paid for the majority of my cell phone bill, my train pass, big portions of my vacations, in addition to, of course, providing my housing and food. All I had to pay for is Netflix, new clothes, and socializing. I know I'm privileged to be subsidized by my parents when many my age are struggling and in debt. The lesson here is to acknowledge and be grateful for the help I've received. Thanks, parentals.
Second, I learned to stop denying my intellectual ability. In CEGEP, my strategy for getting good grades was to anticipate what the prof might want and replicate it to the best of my ability. This rarely led to any grade better than a B. In university, I decided I was smart enough to take chances with my assignments. I decided to have faith in my intellect and it paid off. I've been pulling straight As since the second year of my undergrad when I decided change my approach to school. Writing about what you like and what you think is much more rewarding and fun than having to write about boring topics that you don't feel connected to. Profs (good ones at least) recognize when a student takes risks with their writing and they grade accordingly. It's nice.
Speaking of good profs, I learned that not all profs are good. Some are arrogant and condescending. Some are so worried about academic bureaucracy that they forget what their job is. I had one prof that was so hell-bent on not giving As that no matter how hard you worked, how often you consulted the TA and got professional feedback on your work, you were doomed to a B+ at best. It's demoralizing. Bless McGill students who have to go through this on a regular basis.
I learned to reeelaaaxx about the future. Ever since high school it's been clear that I should be focused on one thing only: $$$. At this point, many of my friends are discouraged, anxiety-ridden, and stressed beyond belief about what they're going to do when they graduate. This is no bueno. I decided that I need to chill out a bit so as to not have a head full of greys before I hit 25. We live in a time that glorifies hard work, which is not to say hard work is a bad thing, but it serves to make those who are not constantly working feel incredibly guilty. We're trying so hard to transcend the notion that millennials are lazy and useless, that we're overworked and tired beyond belief. I refuse.
Finally, I learned that I need to celebrate my accomplishments more. Over the course of three years I completed an internship, secured a position that paid more than minimum wage, QUIT said position because I realized it wasn't making me happy, took my time to complete my major without stressing the hell out, and completed a minor along with it. I made Dean's List. My GPA is nearly a 4.0. I'm more socially and politically aware than I've ever been. My friendships are stronger than they've ever been. My bank account isn't in the negatives. I'm a small business owner. Am I on the road to riches? Who knows, but right now I'm good. It's all good and I'm proud of myself.
Friday, September 11, 2015
My Lil Business: Etsy Shop
Hi everyone! Lately I've put blogging on the backburner to focus on something new: my Etsy shop! About three months ago I discovered the niche community of planners online. Essentially, there's a whole industry built around planning and planner decorations and stamps and stickers. There's a company called Erin Condren that sells custom planners, and an entire market has opened up for those who want to buy art supplies to beautify the inside of their planners.
I've always enjoyed stuff like scrapbooking so I was immediately interested, and now, months later, I have my own shop where I sell my own stickers!
It's been doing really well, so much so that I decided to quit my part-time job (I'm also a university student) to pursue it more regularly. I was told by someone earlier this year that I should take my passion for design work and put it towards a business. They suggested I do freelance design work. Thing is, I'm not confident I can design anything and everything. I'm self-taught in Adobe software. I'm artistic. But I'm not a professional. With my stickers, I can create things on my terms that meet my standards, so from that perspective it's kind of empowering!
I hope you don't mind that I'll be blogging more frequently about planner-related stuff. I want to pursue this for all its worth and blog along the way so when I'm older I can remember my first real entrepreneurial endeavor!
I've always enjoyed stuff like scrapbooking so I was immediately interested, and now, months later, I have my own shop where I sell my own stickers!
I hope you don't mind that I'll be blogging more frequently about planner-related stuff. I want to pursue this for all its worth and blog along the way so when I'm older I can remember my first real entrepreneurial endeavor!
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Sigma E25 Blending Brush Review
Recently, Obsessed Canada asked me if I would like to review a Sigma brush, and if so, which I would like to review, and I immediately gravitated to the E25 Sigma Beauty Blending Brush because it reminded me of my favorite eyeshadow brush of all time - the Mac 217. (Do excuse the state of my 217 in the pic below.. It's a well-loved brush as you can see!)
As I used the E25 I discovered that it's slightly different from the Mac 217 - not worse, not better, just different. The E25 is a lot flatter in shape than the 217, which is more oval all-around. This has its pros and cons. Pro: you can use it to pick up more shadow and place it all over the lid more efficiently. Con: it loses the ability to be as precise as the 217. Also, the E25 is denser than the 217, so you have to work a little harder to soften those edges.
The main reason I would advise picking up a Sigma E25 is the price point - $18, versus $25 at Mac. Sigma is a really reliable makeup brush brand, and they're my second-favorite right next to Mac. Whenever I feel like I need a certain brush but don't want to dent the wallet too much, I turn to Sigma! The brushes are sturdy and well-made. As a piece of advice, I would recommend the white bristled brushes over the black bristles, as the black bristled ones do tend to shed a little bit, but generally Sigma is a great mid-end brand for makeup brushes. Though more expensive than Elf they're higher in quality, but lower in price and comparable in quality to Mac.
Overall the E25 is a really nice addition to my brush collection. After all, you can never have too many eyeshadow brushes!
 |
| Left: Sigma E25, Right: Mac 217 |
As I used the E25 I discovered that it's slightly different from the Mac 217 - not worse, not better, just different. The E25 is a lot flatter in shape than the 217, which is more oval all-around. This has its pros and cons. Pro: you can use it to pick up more shadow and place it all over the lid more efficiently. Con: it loses the ability to be as precise as the 217. Also, the E25 is denser than the 217, so you have to work a little harder to soften those edges.
The main reason I would advise picking up a Sigma E25 is the price point - $18, versus $25 at Mac. Sigma is a really reliable makeup brush brand, and they're my second-favorite right next to Mac. Whenever I feel like I need a certain brush but don't want to dent the wallet too much, I turn to Sigma! The brushes are sturdy and well-made. As a piece of advice, I would recommend the white bristled brushes over the black bristles, as the black bristled ones do tend to shed a little bit, but generally Sigma is a great mid-end brand for makeup brushes. Though more expensive than Elf they're higher in quality, but lower in price and comparable in quality to Mac.
Overall the E25 is a really nice addition to my brush collection. After all, you can never have too many eyeshadow brushes!
Sunday, July 5, 2015
Latest Netflix Love: Sense8
Let me just start off by saying, Netflix is KILLING IT. They totally took the ineffective, outdated model of traditional television (i.e. making one episode at a time due to unsure network funding, etc etc) and flipped it on its head by shooting full seasons and making all the episodes available at once. They're essentially capitalizing off how much we love to binge watch, and they produce better quality content because of it.
The latest Netflix original series that caught my attention is Sense8. I'm a fan of sci-fi stuff like Orphan Black so I figured this would be right up my alley. It's basically about 8 individuals located around the world who can connect telepathically. They can communicate with one another and experience eachother's realities.
I watched the first episode and thought, meh. It felt like the show had a lot of convincing to do. It was a little overly dramatic and took long to get to the point. But as the episodes progressed, I got more involved. It hit me how crazy the production must be on this show. How can they possibly organize themselves to be able to shoot in worldwide locations every episode: London, Chicago, Mumbai, Reykjavik, Berlin, San Francisco, Seoul, Nairobi, and Mexico City? It's insane. Thinking about the level of production required to accomplish this is mindblowing to me. Like, even if it's not filmed on location (I'm not sure if it is), it's still incredibly complex to achieve the kind of authenticity Sense8 captures from each place.
There was one moment in particular that really convinced me that, yes, this is a fantastic show. (No spoilers here, don't worry.) It was a very simple moment, but so so powerful. All eight of the sensates become connected in their different parts of the world and sing along to "What's Up" by 4 Non Blondes.
It seriously felt like a spiritual experience when I watched it for the first time. I've embedded it below, but trust me, the impact is so much stronger in the actual episode. The scene comes after a really intense and emotionally-charged episode and it feels like a breath of fresh air. Each character experiences the song differently but the essential message is felt by all of them: "I wake in the morning and I step outside, I take a deep breath and I get real high and I scream from the top of my lungs, what's going on!" They're in this crazy experience together and they're not sure what to make of it but they're trying their best. It's amazing.
Another thing I love about the show is the incredible diversity and representation. You have a transgender woman in a mixed-race relationship, a gay man, a totally nonsexualized and strong Korean woman, an African man.. It's incredible. It goes to show how much more compelling storytelling is when you have diverse perspectives.
Overall, I highly HIGHLY recommend this show for anyone that has a general appreciation for TV, and anyone who loves a good bit of sci-fi.
Monday, June 8, 2015
Gay Representation on CBS’s Big Brother: The Case of Frankie Grande
Since Big Brother 17 is right around the corner, I thought it would be a good time to post this essay I wrote last year. It's important to keep in mind how minority groups are represented on reality TV, that way we can mitigate our sometimes harsh, visceral reactions to contestants we dislike.
Gay Representation on CBS’s
Big Brother:
The Case of Frankie Grande
CBS walks a precarious line with Big Brother. On one hand, the show is
the epitome of cheap reality television, chock-full of tacky challenges, where
one contestant gets evicted each week and the last houseguest standing wins
$500,000. On the other hand, the show can be considered a microcosm of American
society. This gives the producers a certain degree of social responsibility. What
CBS chooses to air (and not to air) is important because it shapes the worldview
of those who watch the show. As Sears and Goddaris argue in “Roar like a Tiger
on TV?” reality TV programs reproduce contemporary society, and they “provide
the viewing audience members with cues about ways of acting in the real world”
(Sears & Goddaris 184).
As I watched the season 16 contestants’
pre-season interviews, I found out that Frankie Grande was cast as the season’s
gay male contestant. I was pleased about this casting choice because I was
familiar with Frankie’s YouTube videos,
in which he comes across as friendly, outgoing, and sociable—a great
combination of attributes for a contestant to have. Additionally, Frankie went
into the Big Brother house with a
relatively large fan base already built-in because he is Ariana Grande’s
brother. Right off the bat, Big Brother
puritans were annoyed because Frankie’s fame was bound to give him an unfair
advantage in the game.
As such, he was entering the house with a certain degree of stigma attached to
his name.
At the season’s one-week mark, fans began
to turn on Frankie for various reasons. In the following essay, I will attempt
to determine why this fan hatred came to be, and at whose fault: Frankie’s or
CBS’s? I believe CBS’s penchant for heteronormativity made it difficult for him
to operate authentically, and Frankie, by no fault of his own, played right
into the negative tropes the show often employs. I will address heteronormativity
on reality TV, the damaging effects of gay tropes, and the unrealistically high
standard to which gay reality show contestants are held, using Frankie Grande’s
experience as the vehicle for exemplifying my arguments.
I should begin this analysis by, first
and foremost, situating myself as a white, heterosexual, feminist woman, and I
acknowledge my subjectivity as such. I reconcile my difference from Frankie
Grande by approaching this topic from an academic queer & gender studies
standpoint, and I by no means wish to speak on behalf of the gay community. My
goal is to rationalize Grande’s experience on Big Brother by using the experience of others in the LGBTQ+
community as a framework to guide my investigation. I am also invested in the representation
of oppressed minorities in media, particularly given the profound potential for
audience mimesis and validation (Silberman 449).
Heteronormativity on Big Brother
Season after season, only one gay man is
cast on Big Brother. The imbalance of
gay-to-straight characters on season 16 was a whopping 1:16, which places a gay
man in a house full of heterosexuals. This heteronormative context is
drastically different from the setting in which gay males perhaps find
themselves outside the Big Brother
house. Frankie Grande performs on Broadway, which is a notoriously safe space
for individuals who identify as queer (Clum 247). Grande himself expressed how
fond he is of the inclusive nature of theatre, given the camaraderie between
straight and gay colleagues. He says, “There’s no faux pas with us being
lovey-dovey and touching each other in theater” (Schultz). His public image is
also very closely tied to his sister Ariana, who recently denounced Catholicism
in favor of supporting her gay brother, which paves the way for an inclusive
and tolerant milieu for Frankie and his Grandtourage (Ehrlich).
 |
| Grande on the set of Rock of Ages |
The Big
Brother house is very different. I imagine, for a gay contestant, the
compulsory heterosexuality of the show can be staggering. Compulsory
heterosexuality is defined as “the accumulative effect of the repetition of the
narrative of heterosexuality as an ideal coupling” (Ahmed 145). Much of Big Brother’s appeal is the hope that
two of the houseguests will couple up, or to borrow one of the show’s many colloquialisms,
become a “showmance”. The gay male contestant, of course, has no potential to
engage in a showmance since he is the only homosexual man there. In “‘You are
not Allowed to Talk About Production”: Narratization on (and off) the Set of
CBS’s Big Brother” Ragan Fox reflects
on his time in Big Brother 12 as the season’s
gay male. He notes the particular moments in which he felt isolated from the
other contestants due to his sexuality, particularly at times when houseguests
were discussing the possibility for showmances: “Early in the game, I felt left
out when my roommates discussed potential romantic pairings among the houseguests”
(Fox 193). These casual conversations constituted his “othering” by putting him
on the periphery of the pre-established Big
Brother rhetoric (Butler 133).
Frankie Grande tried to conform to the
heteronormativity of his male peers on Big
Brother. He mentioned that his strategy going into the house was to
“infiltrate the jock alliance” because he has a “fraternal way of relating to
[straight guys]” (Schultz). I believe Grande’s way of interacting with the
other men on the show was problematic. He found himself in hot water when
mentioning to the guys that they should “double team [Victoria]” and “take all
of her virginities in one night”, in reference to raping another houseguest
(Goddard). In another instance, Frankie and Cody Calafiore were discussing a
rape scene in the movie Showgirls,
and Frankie thought the scene is hilarious, while Cody maintained that rape
scenes do not belong in movies (Grodner).
As such, Grande appealed to the other contestants’ heterosexual masculinity in
a way that was degrading and unacceptable, by repeatedly perpetuating the belief that rape is amusing.
The Gay Villain & the
Problem of “Zankie”
Fox also explains that “gay characters
are marked by their failure to achieve intimacy” and so the show’s producers,
fans, and LGBTQ+ contestants must find “other ways to performatively render gay
sexuality” (Fox 193). One of the ways in which gay characters are typified is
by enacting various tropes, which are “stereotypical, repetitious
representations” of the gay persona (193).
The trouble with these tropes is that they preserve “negative and limited
portrayals of homosexuals”, which thwarts the efforts of the LGBTQ+ community, since,
as I previously argued, what is portrayed on reality TV shapes the worldview of
its audiences (193). In the case of Frankie Grande, I would like to particularly
focus on the tropes of the villain motif and the gay-by-association
heterosexual character.
It is quite often that, in
competition-based reality TV shows like Big
Brother, the homosexual contestant is characterized as the gay villain. This
is unsurprising, given that the gay villain motif has been documented in media
many times before, be it in “Disney movies, witches and psychos in canonical
films, and perverts and child molesters in the news” (198). Fox suggests that the
gay villain trope is born out of the stereotype of the gay contagion (202),
which I believe is associated to Judith Butler’s understanding of Simon
Watney’s concept of “gay disease”, explicated in his “Policing Desire: AIDS,
Pornography, and the Media” (Butler 132). The stereotype of the gay contagion
is rooted in the longstanding, homophobic response to AIDS; which is directly
related to the notion that gayness can be spread, and even worse, that it is life-threatening
(132). So, when a gay male participant on Big
Brother aligns with a heterosexual male, the public reaction is both
complex and outrageous.
“Zankie” refers to the homo-hetero relationship
between Frankie Grande and Zach Rance, another male houseguest on Big Brother season 16 (O’Keeffe). Zach
and Frankie got very close in the competition. Their relationship was quite
physical; they hugged and touched and cuddled constantly. This could have been
the brink of Big Brother’s first homosexual
showmance, however producers were quick to dismantle that possibility. On July
6th, CBS exposed Zankie’s relationship and answered the question
fans were wondering: We know Frankie is gay, but is Zach? His answer: “I am not
gay, but the bond that Frankie and I have is so genuine and sincere, that I
truly feel like he is my boyfriend” (Grodner). This mixed response is exactly
what CBS was hoping for: Zach Rance is straight and there is no possibility of
Zankie becoming a veritable showmance. On the other hand, CBS must have realized
how many Zankie supporters there were, because the second half of Zach’s
statement was enough for fans to go wild with excitement. Many “Zankie” fan accounts sprouted on Twitter, Tumblr, and YouTube around this time, which further solidified and arguably fetishized Zach & Frankie’s relationship. Essentially, the producers gave fans just enough information for them to be excited about the
possibility of Zankie, but sanitized the response by having Zach confirm that
he is not homosexual. Later on in the episode Zach says once more, “I’m
straight and I only date women, but Frankie is just one of the best people I’ve
ever met” (Grodner).
The problem with Zankie is the
following. Zach confirms he is straight, but continues to show affection
towards Frankie… So how does this paint Frankie? It brings us back to the gay
villain motif, which is perhaps best iterated with Zach’s own words to Frankie,
as heard on the live feeds on August 3rd: “You try to turn me gay
every single day. I feel like you get closer and closer every time but it ain’t
going to happen […] Frankie’s the horniest guy in the world.” (Grodner). The “straight-mistaken-for-gay” trope that Zach enacts is
“commonplace” in television, and it “derives much of its humor from the
audience’s knowledge that the character is not, in fact, gay” (Fox 202). The
problem is that this kind of behavior cites and reproduces the myth that gay men
are predators, especially in their relationships with heterosexual men (202).
While Fox, on his season of Big Brother,
was particularly careful not to come off as a sex-starved gay predator, Frankie
embraced this trope by taking Zach’s comment as a compliment to his virility (Grodner).
In his autoethnographic essay, Fox reveals that CBS prodded him to talk about
hetero-male cast members in a sexual way, which confirms the producers’ desire
to perpetuate the trope of the gay villain as sexual predator (Fox 204).
In an article from The Wire entitled
“Breaking Down How Frankie Grande Became the Most Hated ‘Big Brother’ Contestant”, author Kevin O’Keeffe cites the
“destruction of Zankie” as one of Frankie’s pitfalls. Later on in the season, Frankie
contributed to a plan to have his showmantic partner Zach evicted. This move further
entrenched Frankie into the villain motif because it proved to fans that
Frankie did not care about Zach for anything beyond companionship, and was
willing to cut him whenever he needed to. Breaking ties with allies at
strategic points in the competition is generally seen as a strong move (Hayden Moss cutting ties with his showmance Kristen to benefit his alliance in season 12 is the example that comes to mind),
but the backlash Frankie received proved that he was being held to a different
standard than that of a heterosexual man playing Big Brother.
The fact of the matter is that Frankie Grande was not placed in this competition to win. He was simply there to contribute
his gay storyline. This is perhaps why Andy Herren, gay male and winner of
season 15 of Big Brother, is one of
the most-hated houseguests in the show’s history. He was not there to win, but
he did anyway. Alas, the role of the gay male is a typecast on Big Brother. “Type” is defined as “any
simple, vivid, memorable, easily-grasped and widely recognized
characterization” that has “no complexity of character or multiplicity of
traits” (Wojcik 226). Frankie was not expected to excel in this competition; he
was not meant to be the lead role, but rather, a supporting role (243). The gay
male is therefore subordinate to his heterosexual competitors. Any time he
transgressed this boundary by succeeding in the game, Grande was vilified even
further.
Catch-22 for Gay
Contestants
It is my assertion that the gay man
is set up for failure when he is cast on Big
Brother. Frankie fell victim to the villain motif (among other tropes), but
even if he actively resisted this kind of stereotyping, he would not have been
able to escape these representations. Fox went into the Big Brother house fully cognizant of the negative ways in which he
might be portrayed, and he worked very hard to combat them. Even so, CBS
portrayed him as an oversensitive villain, and he found himself “ensnared in a
web of gay representation” (Fox 204).
Fox addresses the fact that he was held
to an impossibly high standard on the show. When Hayden Moss, his fellow
housemate told him: “You are an awesome representative of the gay community”,
Ragan appreciated his compliment but also acknowledged the unfairness (204). No
one tells heterosexuals that they are “awesome representations of the hetero
community”. As such, gay competitors have to “serve as an exemplar of a
historically marginalized group and
play a game known for cheating and backstabbing” (205). Anyone can see that it
is extremely difficult, and perhaps impossible, to operate under such rigid
expectations.
Still, Zankie’s hetero-homo relationship
is being hyped as progressive in the LGBTQ+ community. In his article entitled
“Frankie Grande on Big Brother and
the Hetero-Homo ‘Zankie’ Showmance That Had Everyone Talking”, Brandon Schultz
claims that “this is one of the first times
we’re seeing a serious, strong love between a straight man and a gay man that
goes far beyond tolerance—and it's on network television” (Schultz). While I can definitely see how Zankie’s
relationship might be considered progressive, I feel like this speaks volumes
to the need for a homosexual relationship between two men to be seen carried
out on a normative reality TV show like Big
Brother. Zankie, as loving as it may have been on the surface, was
extremely tumultuous and problematic, particularly because it vilified Frankie
as a gay man and conserved the myth of the “gay contagion”. Perhaps after
acknowledging how much the public was rooting for Zankie, CBS might see that
fans are eager to see relationships alternative to heterosexual ones. In
breaking the show’s heteronormativity, a door of possibility would open for Big Brother’s homosexual contestants by
allowing them a fighting chance to excel in the game, and it would also
ameliorate the way homosexuality is perceived on a macro level.
Works Cited
Ahmed, Sara. “Queer Feeling.” The Cultural Politics of Emotion. New York: Routledge,
2004: 144-167.
Butler, Judith. “Part iv: Bodily Inscriptions, Performative Subversions” in “Subversive
Bodily Acts.” Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 1990: 128-141.
Clum, John M. Something for the Boys: Musical Theater and Gay Culture. New York: St.
Martin's, 1999. Print.
Ehrlich, Brenna. "Ariana Grande Reveals Love For Gay Brother Frankie Made Her
Question Catholic Faith." MTV News. Viacom International, 22 Oct. 2014. Web. 02 Dec. 2014. <http://www.mtv.com/news/1972089/ariana-grande-questions-religion/>.
Fox, Ragan. "“You Are Not Allowed to Talk about Production”: Narratization on (and
Off) the Set of CBS's." Critical Studies in Media Communication 30.3 (2013): 189-208. Web.
Goddard, Emma. "Frankie Grande's Rape Joke on 'Big Brother' Is Insensitive &
Completely Inappropriate." Bustle. Bustle, 31 Aug. 2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2014. <http://www.bustle.com/articles/38047-frankie-grandes-rape-joke-on-big-brother-is-insensitive-completely-inappropriate>.
Frankie Grande Discusses "Showgirls" Rape Scene. Prod. Allison Grodner. Perf. Frankie
Grande and Cody Calafiore. YouTube. YouTube, 23 Sept. 2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UryhuU4sus>.
Grande, Frankie. "FrankieJGrande." YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2014.
Grodner, Allison. "Big Brother Season 16." Big Brother. CBS. Los Angeles, California,
25 June-24 Sept 2014. Television.
Grodner, Allison. "Zach and Frankie Conversation." ItsZankie'sLife. Tumblr, 3 Aug.
2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2014. <http://zankieslife.tumblr.com/post/93781100693/zach-you-try-to-turn-me-gay-every-single-day-and>.
O'Keeffe, Kevin. "Breaking Down How Frankie Grande Became the Most Hated 'Big
Brother' Contestant." The Wire. The Atlantic Monthly Group, 2 Sept. 2014. Web. 02 Dec. 2014. <http://www.thewire.com/entertainment/2014/09/breaking-down-how-ariana-grandes-brother-frankie-became-big-brothers-most-hated/379465/>.
Schultz, Brandon. "Frankie Grande on Big Brother & Hetero-Homo 'Zankie' Showmance
That Had Everyone Talking." Out Magazine. Here Media, 2 Oct. 2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2014. <http://www.out.com/entertainment/television/2014/10/02/frankie-grande-gay-big-brother-hetero-homo-zankie-showmance>.
Sears, Camilla A., and Rebecca Godderis. "Roar Like a Tiger on TV?" Feminist Media
Studies 11.2 (2011): 181-95.
Silberman, Marc. "The Politics of Representation: Brecht and the Media." Theatre
Journal 39.4, Distancing Brecht (1987): 448-60. JSTOR. Web. 05 Dec. 2014.
Wojcik, Pamela Robertson. "Typecasting." Criticism 45.2, Special Film Issue Part Two:
New And/or Neglected Approaches To Understanding Moving Images (2003): 223-49. JSTOR. Web. 05 Dec. 2014.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)