Cheap is as cheap does

We all have them in our group of friends. They somehow creep in and before we know it, we’re stuck covering their shortfall of the dinner tab. You know the kind I mean – the person whose entrée was $7.99 and they chip in $8 as if tax and tip don’t apply to their meal.

The subject of cheapness has come up recently, and I must admit that it’s a quality that I tend to keep on the outer perimeter of my “circle of trust.” Quite frankly, I just don’t trust cheap people.

And, I need to be clear in that there’s a huge difference between being cheap and frugal/practical. One could also say it comes down to people with manners and people that don’t. To be fair, some I’ve encountered truly do seem oblivious to their infractions, but at the same time, I’m just amazed at how they never pick up on it when they see how most behave towards them.

Cheap is when you have the means but short-change your friends and you don’t follow normal social protocols, like thanking people for hospitality. The reason I have trust issues with this type is that, in my personal experience, they often take far more than they ever give, and I don’t strictly mean in the monetary sense. They’re the type that only calls you when they need something or don’t ever have the time to let you cry on THEIR shoulder. What goes around comes around amongst friends.

They’re so preoccupied with making sure they don’t get screwed over in some way that their neuroses eats at every other aspect of their personality, so that they aren’t that enjoyable to be around. It’s almost like their lack of concern for others translates into other issues, like being far too blunt or the person that always says something so awkward that it immediately halts all other conversations, necks crane and eyebrows raise to all ask “did he/she really just say what I think I heard?” Somehow they continually get included because their exclusion would raise the issue and cause more discomfort for most than it’s worth.

It reminds me a lot of that married couple in The Joy Luck Club where the husband took “equality” to the extreme, and they’d split dinner bills in half despite the fact his meal took up 2/3 of the total cost. Or, he’d tell her to pay for ½ the groceries even though he bought items she didn’t like or was allergic to. The result is that he’s also stingy with his emotions and care for his wife, even if this example is a little severe.

It’s far too difficult to keep an exact score, for we never really know when the game ends.

Illegal boundary crossing

After seeing last night’s episode of Lost, I simply had to blog about this particular topic. I wonder if men had the same reaction to Charlie’s obsession over Claire and her baby as women did. I would imagine most shrugged it off while many women probably had the hair stand up on the back of their neck.

I’ve had this happen a couple of times with guys where you meet them, and suddenly, they expect you to be in contact with them every day – even if you’ve been clear that the interest is not mutual from the romantic angle. It is about the worst thing a guy can do and automatically starts raising the red flag and ruining any potential to ever change your mind about that interest. Because after all, if a guy is this needy now, imagine what he’ll be like down the road? And why should he think he gets to jump ahead of 20 years of other friendships and families to expect daily communication?

One of my best examples of this is around the time my step-dad passed away. I’d met this guy a few weeks earlier. He made it clear that he had an interest, but I wasn’t really feeling it on my end. I was honest about that, but not the specifics of why, but admitted that perhaps my hard shell might come down once I got to know him.

So, the day my step-dad passes away, this guy calls me. I told him what happened and he asked if I needed anything. I told him I appreciated the offer, but I was fine. I had a lot of family and friends around, so I would be okay but that I was going to be extremely busy over the next several days and I would call him when I was ready to talk. He proceeded to call me every.day.for.the.next.eight.days. Do you think it mattered that I never called him back? No.

I sent him an offline IM and told him that I was confused as to why he kept calling when I specifically told him I was busy with other things (and quite frankly, much more important), and that I found it very disturbing. He apologized and said he didn’t mean to freak me out, but he did…and every other person I mentioned it to.

And I’m sure that most guys that do this aren’t psychopathic killers, but our defense mechanisms can’t tell the difference at that point and that’s all we have to go on. Once we start ignoring those little hairs on the back of our neck, then we could ignore a legitimately dangerous situation. But even from the relationship factor, I told the guy that it’s indicative of the fact that everything would be on his terms and that he would not respect my wishes.

And strangely, I’ve even told this very story to other guys who agree that this behavior is creepy…and then they do the same thing. It’s interesting that my guy friends have so ingrained in me that men need their space, yet it seems so inconceivable that a woman would want hers too. Why is that? And why aren’t men as bothered by this type of behavior? Or are they?

Can one ever stay neutral?

I was having a conversation with my friend, Marie, the other day and she was telling me of this mini-soap opera between these two other couples. Hopefully, I can do this clearly, so you'll get the point. Tom and Sally are married. Adam and Carrie dated for seven years. Tom, Adam and Carrie all know each other from college, so when Tom and Sally started dating and eventually married, they became a quad-rumvirate (yes, I made that up).

Adam cheated on Carrie with a married woman, with whom he continues to have relations. It was apparently his way of breaking up with Carrie, instead of just doing it upfront. Back to the married couple. Sally thinks they should not be friends with Adam because they are also friends with Carrie, and Adam intentionally hurt Carrie. Tom does not agree.

My own opinion was that it's kind of a blurry line as to when outsiders should get involved or allow themselves to be affected by another couples' troubles because, after all, we never know what really happens behind closed doors, right? But, say it's all true and there's not much more to it, at what point should another's actions affect our friendship with him/her?

Where is the line drawn between being an understanding, non-judgmental friend versus cutting out the "dead weight" because if Adam treated Carrie that way, is it fair to say that he'd treat his platonic friends poorly as well? Would your answer be different if Adam physically abused Carrie (vs. the emotional abuse of cheating)?

Here's to new things

I figure most of you might be on holiday this fine Monday, so I thought I'd go with a pictoral post. Instead of watching the Seahawks spank Michael's beloved Redskins, I broke my snow-shoeing virginity by going up to Mount Rainier with a friend of mine.

The picture to the left is of the summit of Mount Rainier. Can you see it? Can you see it? Yeah, me neither.

We were on 11' of snow, and you can see some of the tree tips sticking out of the top. Unfortunately, my digi cam doesn't do this view justice, for it really felt like we were in the Land of Powdered Sugar.

This path you see people coming down? Yeah, I carved that sucker out of fresh snow. And, I freely admit to falling on my ass a couple of times until I realized you had to go toe down and sink about 12" before moving the other foot. We were going around with a tour, but really, anyone could do this on their own.

We were hiking at about 5,400 feet up, but the summit goes up to over 14,000 feet. There is a base camp that most people can hike to in the spring/summer at the 10,000 level called Camp Muir.

See, I adapt to winter weather just fine. What cracks me up is how much my face puffed up in the cold, though my body was actually quite comfortably warm with my various layers. When I got in the car, my cheeks were practically magenta and I looked like I was about six.

Yep, I think I'll have to do this again, either at Rainier or closer to Seattle (it was about 2 1/2 hours each way, including 45 min. on the mountain alone).

Now, everyone wish my friends and me luck in getting tickets to this week's Seahawks NFC Championship game tomorrow morning!.

Film Recap

I finally saw the last 2005 big critic movie today, Brokeback Mountain, so I thought it was time to do my year end top 10 list. Just a reminder that I like all types of movies, as you will see from the list, and judge them for their context so they're not all brain busters. There's no rhyme or reason -- it's just what I like and in no particular order.

Favorites
Good Night, Good Luck
Pride & Prejudice
Walk the Line
Wedding Crashers
40-Year-Old Virgin
Serenity
Batman Begins
Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire
Crash
Rent

Honorable mentions
Charlie & the Chocolate Factory
Hitch
Madagascar
Mr. & Mrs. Smith
Exorcism of Emily Rose
Just Like Heaven
King Kong

Winner of yesterday's soundtrack guessing game: Phlegmfatale
1. Superman
2. Back to the Future
3. Mary Poppins
4. Deliverance
5. Working Girl or Little Black Book
6. Beetlejuice
7. Against All Odds

Does the end justify the means?

One of the more recent movies I’ve seen in the theatre is Munich, which was directed by Steven Spielberg. I don’t know how many of you have heard of it, for the studio intentionally decided not to over-market it, like most movies, due to the more sensitive and serious tone.

In case this film is under your radar, it’s about the Israeli response to the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes that took place during the1972 Olympics in Munich. The culprits were a Palestinian organization called Black September. The movie, based upon real events, details the government-sanctioned, yet not officially recognized, mission to assassinate the 11 individuals determined to have played a role in planning the attack.

Some of the initial concern, before the movie was released, was how Spielberg, who is Jewish, would approach the story. Quite frankly, I was somewhat surprised with his tactic in asking whether the five members of the assassination team were, in fact, becoming terrorists themselves? Even the team began to wonder if peace could ever be achieved through violence, for as soon as one person was killed, one that was even nastier immediately replaced him.

While I thought he raised a good and very valid point, I didn't have a problem with what they were doing, especially in light of 9/11 and having no objection with going after Osama Bin Laden and dropping a bomb if he we know where he is. I even wondered, during the movie, if we would have had more success if we sent in a small Black Ops team to go in quietly and take their time to collect reliable information, instead of a good chunk of our Army into the terrain of Afghanistan and splashing it all across the front page of the newspaper.

Is it “terrorism” if the enemy is killed outright versus bringing him/her to trial? What do you think?

On the movie note, I thought it was just okay and would give it a B-. I loved the first hour and then it started to drag and go off on these side missions that was a little distracting and off-target. Then, there was the most awkward scene of all with the main character having sex interspersed with the actual killings of the athletes. Creepy. Since Entertainment Weekly also mentioned it in their review, I don’t feel bad doing so either. Eric Bana was great as Avner and it was nice to get a preview of the new James Bond, Daniel Craig, as one of the team members. I will admit that this is one I might have to see again, to see if I might like it better the second time around.

No, I'm not dead

Whew...I've spent the last week moving into my new place, running errands during the day and unpacking stuff at night. I've had muscles hurting that I didn't even know existed. Still not quite ready for pictures, as the dude is still making my cabinet doors, so the kitchen looks rather ghetto. I'm been a lazy blog reader, but I just haven't had a lot of time/energy the past couple weeks, but I'll be around soon enough.

I thought I'd take it easy on my first post back in a while and do more of a pictoral issue. So, I went to Arizona for Christmas to visit my youngest brother and his family. They live about an hour outside Tucson in a small town that basically supports the Army base.

One day, we spent going to a town called Bisbee, which has an old copper mine and we took the tour there. Here's a pic of A and me in our tour gear. There is somewhat of a purpose for showing myself to compare against a pic you'll see in a sec.














This was my favorite little trip into Tombstone, which is probably no surprise given what a movie whore I am and I do happen to adore this particular flick. What you see here is a shot of the Crystal Palace and down the main drag. Many of the exteriors are original from the Earp era, and some of the saloons still have the original mahogany bar tops.

Across the street to the right of the Crystal Palace is The Oriental where the Earps bought into the Faro game. Virgil Earp was walking from The Oriental to the Crystal Palace when he was shot in the arm by The Cowboys. The Oriental now sells period clothing to gullible tourists. A couple of buildings down is the old billiard hall where Morgan Earp was shot in the back and succumbed to his wounds. In the middle of this tourist store, they have a pool table with light over it and the story. Kind of cheesy, but still interesting.

The building on the right side of this pic is where the Earps picked up Doc Holliday on their way to the OK Corral in what became their infamous 30-second shoot-out. They walked down that street and took a left and it all took place next to the OK Corral, contrary to popular belief. Fascinated yet? I thought so...







My brother and his family were doing one of those period tourist shots, and they convinced me to do one for myself. Jessica, my SIL, tried to get me into a corset to be a prostitute but I thought I seemed a little more like a Madam -- don't you?

So, here's how I'd look as a Madam in the 1880s with what the camera lady said was my "Mona Lisa smile." Now, you know why I smile all the time for pictures, as I think my face looks twice the size (see...now look above for my proof). I did take shots with me smiling, but it somehow didn't seem to fit the image.







One last glory shot. Aren't my two nieces just so adorable in their Christmas PJs? Allison is 21 months now and Brittany will be four in March. Brit requested a "jumperline" for Christmas, so that was my mom's gift to them, and I was quite proud to have actually helped Allie get over her fear of bouncing by herself. Damn, was that actually something mother-like? hehe.