easier to lie

probably not as well-known as some of the other titles i've used, but a great song by aqualung.

okay, i know that celebrities can't be honest about alllll the things they do to make themselves beautiful, but i'm not sure why they so blatantly lie when the changes are clearly obvious. is it because we're supposed to believe that they were all born that gorgeous, put together, and perfect, and that we, as mere mortals, can't even compete because we'll never be of that stature?

is it because they're mostly actors and paid to 'lie' in a sense; or are they delusional and think no one will notice that they have a new face? whatever the case may be, all you have to do is look at the pictures magazines find of these people in high school, or star magazine, where they're sans make up, to know that no one looks that fantastic naturally, or when they roll out of bed.

well, very few people. also, if i had hair and make up people, a stylist, a trainer, a chef, and spent three hours getting ready, i'd look pretty freaking good, too.

the last few weeks, my wrath has been directed at kim kardashian. yes, i watch all her stupid shows. why? no idea. but she keeps claiming that she's "super honest" about whether she's had plastic surgery, and that she hasn't had any work done. her proof is that she had botox injections on the show, so she's willing to admit what she's changed about her appearance.

OMG, don't get me started. first of all, all you have to do is look at pictures of her over the years to know that she's had at least two nose jobs.

this person
<---- does not look like this person ---->















granted, she's wearing make up in the picture on the right, but still, come *on*! and i'm not the only one who posits this theory. i found this online:



gotta love the internet.

















and as far as the boobs are concerned, which she claimed on CNN the other night are "100% real."

whatever...













the latest adjustment is her lips, which were already significantly full are now even bigger. her excuse? she had the flu. um, what? yes, that is her excuse: she had the flu and it made her lips puffier. first of all, this doesn't even make any sense.

last i checked, your lips don't swell up when you're throwing up for days, have a fever, and don't eat. second, that was like a month ago, and they're still ginormous!! that must be some killer flu that's hanging on for years. despite the fact that she has been trooping all over the country, promoting her new show, in full make up and trampily dressed (as usual), she hasn't so much as sneezed.

one last point. as any woman can tell you, when you lose weight, the first place it goes is usually in your boobs and your butt; most often the places you don't really want to lose it. now kim has lost like 15 lbs. in the last year or so, and her boobs and ass are still *huge*.

she gets thinner and her boobs and butt are the same size? not possible. i'm not even going to address the rumors that she had butt implants because if she did, she's even dumber than i already think.

claiming that big asses are an "armenian thing" doesn't work, either. she's only half armenian, as are her two sisters, and neither one of them is built like her. yes, genes are strange and selective, but both her sisters had small breasts, and the one who doesn't any more admits she had implants. the other one, who is somewhat heavy, doesn't have that shelf ass that kim does. and how anyone finds that attractive, i have no idea.

really, i could set my drink on that.


and don't even get me started on the hair extensions. grow your own damn hair!!!

changes

yes, a song title once again...

this may sound stupid, but i think i'm addicted to tv. i looooooove watching tv. it's in my genes. my parents watch a *lot* of tv; my dad not so much as when i was a kid, but still, i've had a set in my room since i was nine years old. i can't even fall asleep without it on because it drowns out all the shit in my head.

i watch entirely too much tv, it's too quiet when it's off, my apartment lacks animation and life that phoenix and grayson can't replace, and i absolutely can't miss an episode of any show that i watch, so i DVR everything.

i don't understand why i get so attached to fictional characters. granted, i realize that i'm not the only one who does this, but i was thinking about it last night. there are several tv shows that were i used to watch and were canceled or ended, and i was really disappointed every time.

maybe it's the consistency and schedule of knowing that i have something that i'm guaranteed to like, and will never let me down...unless there's a state of the union speech, or it's gonna snow, or some moron sent a bomb to a building downtown...*then* it gets interrupted, but the networks have finally realized that they need to plan for things like presidential events in advance. and they *do* show severe weather updates during commercials now, not during the show...

in the grand scheme of things, who cares about fictitious people and plots? they're not real, i'm not losing a friend, it's just a story made up by someone who's being paid to make up stories. although, every time i watch 'titanic', i'm like, "why does he have to DIE?!?" sad. just sad.

anyway, i've been trying to maintain some semblance of a schedule since the fall. because i'm done with coursework, and only have independent study classes, i was afraid that i wouldn't do anything; that my depression would suck me back in, and i'd spend six months on the couch, watching (what else?) the freaking tv.

actually, i've had a lot of things going on, and i feel very fulfilled and busy in my life. and my life is getting in the way of school. i went to a seminar/class on productive writing today, in preparation for starting my dissertation in a few months.

that is probably the most daunting thing i've written today. holy hell.

*deep breaths*

although i'm only reading and taking notes, collecting research here and there, i'm not writing yet, but the class was really helpful. i also found out that all the techniques i use to procrastinate (doing dishes, laundry, organizing, multitasking) are very common, so i don't feel like a complete slacker. and hey, my apartment is always clean. not that it was ever dirty before, but moving on...

i'm going to set up some new guidelines and structures around watching tv, reading, taking notes, and running errands. school is my primary job, and i need to treat it as such. if i don't feel good, and need to take the day off, then i better make up for it on the weekend or in the evening.

when i had classes with real life professors, i studied ALL the time. i busted my ass for school, and i need to get back to that. well, not completely, because i did nothing but study and work, but i need a focused mindset.

so bye bye shows that i really don't care about. bye bye to finding new shows just so i never run out of things to watch. bye bye stupid gossip "news" and repetitive celebrity crap. bye bye to washing clothes, cleaning cabinets, touching up the paint on my walls, and sweeping all at the same time.

qualifying exam preparation, i surrender to you. i am now at your mercy for the next ten weeks. omg, that is not *nearly* enough time...

smells like teen spirit

i keep hoping, or at the very least thinking, that people will mature over time. you'd think that the petty, gossipy behavior of teenagers wouldn't continue for the entire lifespan, but that doesn't seem to be the case. too much of life seems to be based on popularity and ass kissing, instead of ability and merit.

i'm trying to avoid this crap, as well as the people involved, as much as possible, but sometimes it's unavoidable. what is extremely maddening is when the situation involves me or something i'm involved in, and i'm forced to be annoyed. can't we all just grow up a *little* and stop acting on our insecure need to be liked by the "popular crowd" and accepted by all?

the fact is, not everyone is going to like you. and a lot of people in this world are stupid and not worth your time, anyway. and this whole social class issue (among groups where it's totally unnecessary and ridiculous) needs to stop. yes, there are different classes in our society, but i don't think a group of five people needs a hierarchy and someone to put in the corner on a regular basis...or maybe they do.

another thing i thought would go disappear as i got older is the tendency for women to throw their friends under the bus when a boy comes around. i'm in my 30s, people, and have friends who are also in their 30s; these dumb girls blow me off, cancel plans, and don't even make time for me. however, they *will* spend every free minute they have, and sometimes every day of the week with some boy (not even a boyfriend, just a potential).

totally. stupid.

yet another case of insecurity and an exaggerated need to be loved. how about loving yourself, taking care of your friends, and realizing that having a boy in your life is *not* the end all, be all?
rearranging your life and clinging isn't going to make him more interested, keep him from straying, or ensure that the relationship forms and continues.

if anything, you look desperate and lonely, and like you have NO friends, because if you *did*, wouldn't you spend *some* time with them?

who do you think is going to be there for you when your heart gets broken? your friends.

and who will have most likely broken your heart? the boy.

but no, keep doing what you're doing. good luck.

*another* lesson learned from reality tv...uh oh

so...i was watching "celebrity rehab with dr. drew" because who doesn't love a good train wreck? i started watching it last season (i think) because i had a family member in rehab, and although it's a reality show (yes, i know it's not really real), i wanted to see if i could learn anything about addiction. it can't hurt, correct?

first of all, i'd be hard-pressed to even designate some of these goofballs as "celebrities", i mean keyshia cole's mother? who the hell is keyshia cole? i *think* she's a singer, but how does that make her mom a "celebrity"?

another one of the so-called famous people on the show this season is rachel uchitel, who is labeled (very appropriately) "tabloid celebrity". now this dumb bitch (i'm sorry, but she is) is best known for being tiger woods' mistress.

oh, and she had an affair with david boreanaz, too (also married). both of these circumstances have been covered to *death* by the tabloids. yeah rachel, your fiance died in 9/11, it was a tragedy, it happened nine years ago, blah, blah, blah, get therapy, get medication, get some help, get something, but stop screwing all these married guys.

unfortunately, i actually learned something about myself in watching dr. drew talk to her. i must now go hang my head in shame...

and, we're back...while rachel's addicted to benzos and drinks on a daily basis, she is also supposedly a "love addict". now, i'm not an addict of anything, particularly love, but dr. drew had some valid points about how this woman conducts herself with men.

a little back story about rachel: she said that she doesn't date, she never has, she doesn't like it. she immediately gets into relationships, and gets close to a guy quickly, not necessarily sexually, but emotionally, and that her relationships are intense from the get-go. she also said that the guys she usually dates are cheaters (duh, it's called "married").

this is sounding all too familiar.
uh oh.
i have the same relationship style as this tabloid queen who can't seem to find a decent guy, let alone have a sane relationship.

fantastic.

i've already discussed my views on cheating, no judgment, but i'm screwed.

now, a little back story about me: i don't date, i never have, i hate it. when i get into a relationship, it's on, right away: emotionally intense, all-encompassing, and at times, destructive. sound familiar?

there have also been a few cheaters in there. oh, and a married guy.

if i hadn't had some sort of boundaries, there would have been more than one married guy, so i've got that going for me.
woo. hoo.

dr. drew's diagnosis of rachel's love addiction was based on what she gets, and needs, from a romantic relationship: intensity, excitement, the fulfillment of some missing emotional element, the dynamics of co-dependency. she gets into relationships that are detrimental to her well-being, and despite the fact that she knows it's a bad idea, she plunges in regardless.

and she made a valid point, to which dr. drew agreed; she's not in this alone. each time she's dancing off the edge of a cliff, it's with some dumb ass guy who craves this type of fucked up relationship just as much as she does.

dr. drew's advice to rachel was that she needs to have a "boring" relationship, one without drama and immediate intensity. she needs to learn how to be close to someone, in an appropriate manner, of course.

hello, dr. drew, where have you been for the last fifteen years of my life?!? and are you accepting new clients, possibly long distance?

as we've already established, i grew up in a drama-filled environment, and until my mid-20s, created drama when it was absent because it was the only way i knew how to feel comfortable. the quiet made me anxious, not content. i was always waiting for the other shoe to drop.

i also grew up in an atmosphere of emotional intensity, and i guess i thought that if someone wasn't consumed by me right away and didn't want to be with me constantly, he didn't really love me. i craved that all-consuming desire to be as close to someone else as i could be, to be understood, and to have someone there for me *unconditionally*. i never really had that, either.

while i have made some very, very poor decisions when it comes to men, i didn't *think* i was a love addict. i'm okay with being alone and not having a boyfriend. hello, welcome to the last five years of my life, but this little lesson in the non-real world of reality tv hit pretty close to home.

i never *thought* i was a love addict...maybe i was wrong.

the world doesn't need another cynic

since i read and keep up with celebrity gossip, i kinda keep track of when couples break up, make up, get together, or as is more common lately, cheat. technology has made it *so* much easier to cheat, what with texting, the internet, even facebook, people have all kinds of ways to covertly converse, find people from their past, and get away with a lot more. unfortunately, technology doesn't make people smarter or more loyal.

i used to think that people who cheated were lacking in moral character, horrible people, unethical, and heartless. unfortunately, i've come to the conclusion that that's not always the case.

granted, i don't know any celebrities, but i do know lots, yes *lots*, of people who have cheated on their significant others. it seems that at some point in their lives, almost everyone has been unfaithful.

for the most part, these people are kind, smart, thoughtful, and not-so-bad. do they cheat because they're unhappy in their relationships, or they want out, or they're dissatisfied with the status quo? if that's the case, GET OUT OF THE RELATIONSHIP!

i don't understand people who maintain a relationship in which they're clearly unhappy, yet they stay regardless. are they cheating in the hopes that their partner finds out and leaves first, saving the cheater from having to do the dirty work? are they afraid of confrontation? do they want to get a little action on the side? do they enjoy the thrill? are they too weak to stand up for what they want?

now, i'm not judging, just pondering this obscenely common phenomenon. i've been on both sides of this fence, and both sides suck. the grass is never greener, either. when i did cheat on someone, i was young and stupid, and as bad as this sounds, i did it to see what it was like. ah, capricious youth.

i have absolutely no excuse for being the other woman, a situation that has happened more times than i care to remember. i'm not immoral, stupid, or heartless, so why the hell did i do it? in one instance, the guy was an ex-boyfriend, and the fact that he was married didn't stop us from starting a relationship...and effectively ending his marriage. that is huge, i mean *huge*, and utterly stupid.

after his divorce, and our eventual break up, he jokingly referred to me as his "crowbar" because he would start things up with me again in order to get out of whatever unsatisfying relationship he was in.

wow, don't i feel special?
and incredibly stupid after realizing that he was using me for years.

as far as the other instances, there is nothing i can say to justify it, and yes, hindsight is 20/20. pick an excuse, any excuse: i was fool enough to believe lies that were told to me, i didn't respect the sanctity of the guy's marriage, i was just fucking selfish: i wanted what i wanted, regardless of the consequences. i think that not having good physical boundaries is another culprit. i let people get close to me physically when it wasn't appropriate because i didn't have the courage to respect *myself*.

i do believe in marriage, and i've been cheated on relentlessly. i *know* how incredibly difficult and hurtful it is. it's a behavior that i thought i would never tolerate, one that would immediately end my relationship with another. yet i stayed...for over six years. that will not happen again.

i never thought i'd be the one to aid the betrayer. looking back, i'm not sure why i chose to reverse that situation and be the vampire.

maybe i was tired of being the victim.

can we please return to our regularly scheduled celebrity gossip?

"hi, my name is april and i love celebrity gossip."

yes, i'm working on my phd, and yes, i know that gossip is bad, usually untrue, but...it's sort of addictive. i'm usually pretty selective about what i read because i don't have a lot of time to read for pleasure. i know that what a person reads is usually indicative of who she is and what she likes, but...please don't judge. i'll explain.

everyone needs an outlet and a guilty pleasure. i don't drink, i don't do drugs, i don't gamble, i haven't had a boyfriend in __ years. so my guilty pleasure, or drug of choice, if you will is celebrity gossip. and i assure you, it is a drug. it's addictive, bad for you, and not something you discuss in mixed company.

i am forced, fine it's my choice, to read pages and pages of incomprehensible theory until my brain aches. it's essentially my job for the next thirty years.

mind you, i'm still selective about what i read/watch. i refuse to even look at the enquirer (because it's not a legitimate news source?). also, you could never convince me that bigfoot won the lottery after eating brad pitt's love child, and escaped via spaceship.

i do love us weekly; the stories are about actual people and have (semi)plausible stories. lindsey lohan having a meltdown and throwing her glass at her ex-girlfriend? that's something i could be convinced actually happened. i'm all over it.

oh yeah, i also watch e! news because my tv is on e! about 80% of the time. it makes for innocuous background noise that i can ignore and read through...and i'm also addicted to some pretty crappy reality *shows*, but that just feeds my celebrity addiction.

now, there's a trend in celebrity gossip mags lately that is annoying the hell out of me. while i do watch reality shows, i watch reality shows about *celebrities*, not random ass people who are famous for being genetic, or fertile, freaks. i know that celebrities are playing to the cameras, but these shows feed my need to know the dirt about hollywood.



so, this trend of having all these pseudo-celebrities on the cover/main story is stupid. that's it, just stupid. for one thing, putting the girls of '16 and pregnant' on a magazine isn't exactly a great message to send teenagers. "look, if i get pregnant in high school, i can be famous!" fantastic.

or if i get 15 fertilized eggs implanted in my uterus, i can get sponsorship from huggies and start a jewelry line. it's about that ridiculous.

i just want to read semi-trashy stories about people who are legitimately famous..."jennifer aniston and brad pitt were at the same benefit; oh no!" "christina aguilera's marriage is over because she's bisexual!" see, real cutting edge stuff. ist that too much to ask? you're not gonna get that on the 10:00 news.