Social Netball Practice

A few months ago I attended a satellite broadcast of a LDS CES (no explanation here, you're smart- figure it out) fireside. I will not mention the speaker or topic, for my discussion is about the people in the choir. The participants were college-aged people at Brigham Young University. Aside from remarking about the speaker's exquisite facial profile, I contemplated the contrast between the male and the female choir members.

They all seemed very young looking for college enrollment. However, the physical characteristics not shared between sexes were those of attractiveness. Boy, those boys were dorks. There is not simpler nor more refined way of stating that. I could not understand how any girl would desire to accept an invitation to date any of them. I obviously once (still?) fit into that category so I have considered apologizing on behalf of all male Caucasians, but what is the point of a 'sorry' if circumstances are not to change?

Now, there is much discussion in the social and academic world about woman's attraction to men through emotions; traits other than physical beauty and strength. However, true this may be, it is difficult psychologically prove. Sure there are many examples of pretty women choosing overweight and overbearing men: According to Jim, King of Queens, Family Guy, Roseanne, but to make the initial agreement to meet for dinner, movie or a stroll does the girl have only to hope that the conversation will be stimulating enough to distract her from the vehicle from which the words flow?

I will admit that I have many feminine tendencies, so though I may not understand I may try and relate. Sure the Jolies and Aguileras of the world are great for the eye (not too relevant of examples?), but they have never caught mine. Of the females I wish to pursue these are words I would not use to describe the physical attractiveness I look for: gorgeous, sexy and hot. Now, you may retort "You're excluding people from your search. You're prejudging people in those categories and ruling them out before you get to know them." Sure. I am. We all have preferences. Some like people fair-skinned, some like auburn hair, some choose from the pool of people with a college degree, some look for a southern-belle. I am not excusing myself with the general public. Nor did I just describe the ideal mate for me (or did I?) I am solely stating the pick-up lines are only used after the choice has been made on physical features.

A related discussion is with flirting and those first steps wooing someone. Is there a way to get out of seeming threatening in these situations? The only method I see being effective is putting on a show through sarcasm. Any form of courtesy is returned by gratitude only. That truly is the purpose of doing such good turns, but it would be nice to get a number also. Is courtship a lost art? Has it evolved that someone "calling on" someone else is viewed as stalking?

In any case, good luck to you ladies dealing with all the stereotypes associated with guys attempting to hit on you. That's about all the advice there is. The rest is for admonition in Cosmo. And, as Radio From Hell's Kerry Jackson always reminds "wear a condom."

Lastly, as the year nears to its end, I present two words that have been overused. Sure they are, were, great words, but even spoken fads must end.

Quintessential- the topics/items/people modified by this word are just 'examples' of the subject presented. related to the word 'epitome' oft-used last year that we have been able to regain
Epic- stop using it to describe your drunk weekend happenstances. the only thing epic that happened this year was the Larsens' motorhome exploding into flames

The Rat Pack

If you were sly enough to guess at the play on word- the title of the blog is meant to inform you that near the time of 1 am, I will wail at or about something (see it's clever 'cause I obsess about whales).

This morning I wish to classify the main, glory members of The Rat Pack. Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and Sammy Davis, Jr. have formed an era of culture. While only a few performers today are able to sing the genre of songs these three did and entertain in the same way they did, there is not a musical troop to command more than a generation of audiences.

Frank. Frank. He was just a god. He held every listener in the palm of his cool, calming voice. Each piece he performed, whether mellow or blasting, captivates the soul. Frank Sinatra was just, is just, the MOST TALENTED stage, big band, night club, television, movie performer. Make sure to also view one of his acting roles in "The Man with the Golden Arm."

Dean. As conveyed through the his roasts and variety show, Dean was the ENTERTAINER. He was genuine. When he thought something was funny, he laughed, boisterously. As the stereotype is used, Dean was the welcoming, hearty Italian.

At the possible risk of controversy, Sammy had the BEST VOICE. It was pure, classic and powerful. Unbeliever? "What Kind of Fool Am I?" from the album "The Ratpack."

You may agree, disagree or reclassify these icons. As a shock, I will trump there talent with the best all-time vocalist and performer- Nat King Cole. I recently watched a short documentary of the life of this man. At every clip of his singing I smiled with peace. He loved to sing. His voice cut through prejudice and fear that blanketed the country and world during the middle of the last century. He was a black man that had a television show during primetime Monday night in 1956!

As Isaac Hayes summarized, "He was the personification of cool. He was cool before it was cool to be cool."