![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trickykittyI don't understand how someone can feel good about themselves making someone else feel bad for not knowing some things. I know nothing of the French Revolution, I only yesterday connected the name J.K. Rowling with the Harry Potter books (which I'll probably forget shortly because I am not a child, an English woman or a parent and therefore could really care less), and I don't know how to change the oil in my car. I try not to pay any attention to the war going on and I bury my head in books about cognitive science and dyslexia due to my research paths. I really don't see what good it does me to keep someone around who insists on pointing out the so-called "common knowledge" that I don't know and tries so damn hard to make me "pro-active" regarding the issues of the world. What kind of friend puts you down instead of building you up in your own right? If this person can't accept me for who I am, then maybe they need to discard me and move on.
This person's view of the Sweet Valley High series, which I read avidly as a teenage girl (and can't for the life of me remember the author's name, but again I could really care less about that as well), is that such words are nothing more than kiddie porn. But at least I WAS reading and at least I CAN read. If I enjoyed my time reading non-fiction for girls instead of reading about wars of the past or more "adult" literature like The Scarlet Pimpernel (which I still have not read - there's also a lot of other books I have not read and movies which I have not seen - so shoot me), why the hell am I being chastised for it? What the hell does knowing the French Revolution have to do with creating neural networks of limbic system interactions with cortex functions? I'm a scientist, not a literature reviewer, a writer, a politician, a historian, or an activist. Women didn't get the right to vote because all of the women stood up at once. In fact there were many women who felt that what the activists were doing was uncivilized and that giving women the right to vote was akin to blasphemy. And then there were other women, like me, who went along with the political feel of the day and just worried about teaching school children or focused on sewing dresses or whatever else fancied their taste. So that's me, the non-activist (pro or otherwise) and to be put down for it, well just fuckin' nail me to the cross then.
This person's view of the Sweet Valley High series, which I read avidly as a teenage girl (and can't for the life of me remember the author's name, but again I could really care less about that as well), is that such words are nothing more than kiddie porn. But at least I WAS reading and at least I CAN read. If I enjoyed my time reading non-fiction for girls instead of reading about wars of the past or more "adult" literature like The Scarlet Pimpernel (which I still have not read - there's also a lot of other books I have not read and movies which I have not seen - so shoot me), why the hell am I being chastised for it? What the hell does knowing the French Revolution have to do with creating neural networks of limbic system interactions with cortex functions? I'm a scientist, not a literature reviewer, a writer, a politician, a historian, or an activist. Women didn't get the right to vote because all of the women stood up at once. In fact there were many women who felt that what the activists were doing was uncivilized and that giving women the right to vote was akin to blasphemy. And then there were other women, like me, who went along with the political feel of the day and just worried about teaching school children or focused on sewing dresses or whatever else fancied their taste. So that's me, the non-activist (pro or otherwise) and to be put down for it, well just fuckin' nail me to the cross then.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-07 08:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-08 12:21 am (UTC)Also, this was my sister. "You can pick your friends..."