Not your typical romantic...

I am by no means an overly-romantic kind of person. Most of my friends can vouch for this. I do, however, believe we are all worthy of the kind of love that gives us purpose.

Now, before people start biting my head off saying “we shouldn’t wait for somebody to give us purpose,” let me say I agree with you. I am not saying we as females should sit at home crocheting beanies and refining our culinary skills until Prince Holy-and-Charming arrives at our doorstep (even if the way to a man’s heart is generally through his stomach).

What I am saying is that often we put up obstacles for ourselves while searching for love. We convince ourselves we are unworthy, that we are somehow “not good enough.” We allow our insecurities to dictate our lives and our interactions with others. We let our baggage stop us dead in our tracks instead of letting it go and walking ahead.

The problem is that we only know what we are worthy of when we know ourselves – really know ourselves. God know us completely, and we need to view ourselves through His eyes. We would not settle if we valued ourselves the way Our Father in Heaven values us. How do we know God and thus know ourselves? Spend time in prayer, receive the Sacraments and study your faith. Where our heart is, there our treasure is also.

Often I get the feeling that the world’s idea of love was inspired by Greek mythology, even if most do not know it. It is said that humans originally consisted of four arms, four legs, and a single head made of two faces, but Zeus feared their power and split them all in half, condemning them to spend their lives searching for the other half to complete them – soul mates.

Seems romantic, but what a burden to impose on another person! Our identity is in Christ – not in another person. I don’t buy into the idea that God created us for freedom, that He loves us so much that He gives us free will, only to have us all pre-programmed with some matching partner in the universe that we need to find to be complete. He was crucified and has risen from the dead in order that “we may have life and have it abundantly,” not for us to “have life and have it abundantly as long as a member of the opposite sex validates us.”

Nobody expects you to be perfect. Those that do don’t deserve you. Further, it is when we search for perfection in others that our own imperfections are illuminated further. Our partner should complement us, not complete us.  In order for this to happen, we need to accept that we are flawed, and that our partner will be too (unless your spouse is Christ, lucky duck!).

“Let someone love you just the way you are – as flawed as you might be, as unattractive as you sometimes feel, and as unaccomplished as you think you are. To believe that you must hide all the parts of you that are broken, out of fear that someone else is incapable of loving what is less than perfect, is to believe that sunlight is incapable of entering a broken window and illuminating a dark room.”
Mark Hack

See, I don’t think romantic love is about seeing the other as perfect despite their imperfections. It is about sacrificing for them despite their many flaws. It is not about erasing or nullifying somebody’s past heart-breaks and disappointments, but allowing the other to see the good that God intended by allowing hardships in their life. As Christians, suffering takes on a whole new salvific meaning.

Love is definitely not about hiding away from the parts of us we don’t necessarily parade for all to see. We all have parts of us that aren’t all that pretty, but the best kinds of relationships are between two people who embrace each other’s brokenness and show one another how much goodness each and every one of us can bring, and how much difference we can all make to humanity – just the way our Creator intended it. Trying to change someone to suit yourself only showcases your own narcissism in wanting to see your own reflection in your 'beloved.'

The most human thing in the world is wanting somebody you love to pour their love into the cracks that made you who you are. That is how love gives us purpose – making somebody a better version of themselves, because without our imperfections we aren’t really us.

The *Real* Feminine Mystique...

When I was younger, my mum told me something I thought was ridiculous – or maybe it was simply something I didn’t want to hear. She told me that everything wrong with the world; specifically everything wrong with relationships comes down to women.

According to her, women ruined everything.

At the time I thought she was insane, but as time goes on I understand more and more what she meant and why ‘mother knows all’ (even if she does exaggerate just a tad…).

See, women didn’t ruin everything because of some chauvinistic idea that women are worthless idiots. Nor did they ruin everything because of some ridiculous fundamentalist ‘the-human-body-is-dirty’ idea that women are temptresses whose sensuality has men not being able to act, well – like men.

No, women ruined everything because they forgot who they are. They have forgotten their value and have therefore reduced themselves to objects. Treat yourself as an object –and eventually people will objectify you. They will treat you as a thing to be used. It never fails to shock me when I read commentaries or articles about people lamenting the sexualisation of girls only to praise the ‘freedom’ the sexual revolution gave men and women everywhere in the very next breath.

The sexual revolution did not free mankind, it turned us into slaves: slaves to the false gods of sex, materialism and pleasure.

I am not putting this on women. I am simply stating that as the self-proclaimed ‘fairer sex,’ we can be better, forcing men to follow suit.

Conventional (modern!) feminism (furthermore to be known as ‘feminazism’) tells women that only by being sexually liberated can they truly be free.

I am not a conventional modern day feminist. I believe in intelligent, ambitious women. I believe in education, equal work for equal pay, high heels and make-up. I also believe in class, modesty (the body needn’t be paraded in order to be validated) and chastity (humans are more than simply instinct-driven creatures). Above all, I believe there is no greater gift to mankind than motherhood. There is no job even half as important.

Any woman who considers choosing to stay with your children a form of slavery spits in the face of countless generations of strong intelligent women before them who did just that. This was not necessarily because they were forced, but because they understood what feminazis tried to make us forget: nobody can raise a child better than a mother.

I believe in the power of femininity so much that I believe women (mothers especially!) shape society. Archbishop Fulton Sheen puts it better than I (most people do…):

To a great extent the level of any civilization is the level of its womanhood. When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more noble her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.

“The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.” Wow.

See, women often complain about the lack of chivalry exhibited by men, but do nothing to entice a man to be chivalrous. Women complain that gone are the ‘real men,’ yet they often settle for the first testosterone-driven crooner who can act as genuinely interested in you as the last ‘flavour of the month.’ In short, women complain that men are pigs who use women, yet they not only allow themselves to be used, but often chase men whose ‘affections’ they know will be short-lived – or worse yet, use men in the same way.

I do not have a doubt in my mind that should women step up, men will be forced to follow suit. Countless heroes have found their principal inspiration and motivation in the love of a woman; and yet femininity is under threat. Women are becoming more crude and masculine; while men are trending toward femininity. I can only consider this a form of barbarity.

Being a woman is not about exhibiting a hatred of men or spending your life throwing pebbles at a glass ceiling – being a woman is about virtue, because only if women recognise their true worth will they be treated accordingly, and only then can society reach the fullness of truth, goodness and beauty.

Winged eyeliner, lipstick and pearls: always perfect with a good book.
Those gloves may make it hard to turn the pages, though.

Warts & All...

Coming off the feast of Pentecost this Sunday, commonly known as the ‘birthday of the Church, I was somewhat inspired to blog because - 

I’m in love… warts and all.

A friend of mine once told me there are two places one will always feel at home, no matter where they are in the world: McDonalds and a Catholic Church.

Whilst I’d like to profess my love for the fast food giant that provides me my favourite snack (cheeseburgers make me so so so happy), I can almost hear my waistline, arteries and doctor jointly scolding me.

The Catholic Church is home. She is also imperfect.

The Church we love is as flawed and messed up as we are, and the fact that She is Christ’s bride despite this gives me comfort.

Why? Because the Church MUST be flawed.

The Lord Himself told us that the sheep and the goats would be mingled together – just like the wheat and the weeds. Take a close look at his disciples. They were traitors, cowards, doubters, even men who were once notorious for the persecution of Christians! Would the Lord permit these men to be His apostles if He wasn’t teaching us something?

Jesus Christ was trying to show us that He came to call all sinners to repentance. We need Him because we are frail, and as such, the Church must be a place where the frail gather to be nourished by the good news and repentance of Our Lord. Only through the nourishment of His body, blood, soul and divinity can we live forever, and Christ gave this to his Church at the Last Supper – the Church He Himself ordained through the first Pope, St. Peter. In other words: the Eucharist is food for the weak, not a reward for the perfect.

Abigail Van Buren – otherwise known as ‘Dear Abby’ – famous for her one liners (she once told a woman the only cure for a married man that can't stay away from other women was ‘rigor mortis’) clarified that 'the church is a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints.'

She definitely hit the nail on the head with that latter statement. See, if one is not sick, there is no need to visit the spiritual doctor. No faithful Catholic would ever pretend they are not vulnerable. The Church is full of sinners and hypocrites – we all feel right at home there, and welcome others (that’s YOU!) to feel the same. *There is always room for one more hypocrite.*

People are full of criticism for an institution founded by Christ Himself, but fail to see the flaws in their own finite logic.

They tell you the Church is over-programmed, but they think of endless complex resource hungry things for Her to do. They hate the Church’s hierarchical nature, but then complain leadership is poor and in the very next breath complain that ‘nobody should try and tell them what to do.’ People complain the Church is ‘not diverse enough,’ yet the Church is the only institution that combines people of every race and culture seamlessly – and these same people are those whose opinions rarely differ from those they surround themselves with in order to boost their egos. People then have the audacity to claim the Church is too worried about ‘appearances,’ but spend insane amounts of time reminding the Church of all the bigoted opinions against her. They call out people and condemn them for judging “the spiritual path of other believers who are dedicated to pleasing God and blessing people,” and then they blast the traditional church in the most disgusting of ways.

People want the Church to solve social problems, but should the Church get involved in social justice initiatives, it is criticised for being ‘too political,’ and ‘imposing a belief system where it does not belong.’ The Church is too rich they say – but take a vow of poverty and you’re mental. I don’t know, but maybe the world would rather She destroy the priceless art and buildings that are entrusted to Her care? Or would they rather the Church put an end to all Her charity work? Perhaps those people who consider themselves so enlightened would care to remember the Church *started* universities and has contributed in the most unparalleled of ways to universal education… maybe they have forgotten the contribution She has made to Science and the Arts?

No, they haven’t forgotten, but they choose to remain blissfully unaware of anything that questions their bias and any opinion that could render them ACTUALLY non-conformist. That’s why a great (young!) priest told his parishioners that we ‘need to stand up for the Catholic genius, with intellectual vigour and moral courage – clothed in holiness.’

See, the Church when looked at as a ‘cure-all’ solution is always going to fail, but no other institution has this burden thrust upon them.

Maybe if the same people mocking and sighing put as much time and effort into actually learning what the Church teaches as they do whinging, they’d learn that despite all the sins of Her past, despite the abominable sins of the minority of clergy as of late, and despite all Her warts, the Church is a divine institution. She teaches truth, and despite all Her persecution, this teaching has been constant, as promised by the only Son of God.

Let’s not forget that you and I are the Church – we are the members of the mystical body of Christ. Let’s fix what we see in the mirror, because only Saints can fulfil the vision for the world that so many have.  We can hardly critique the Bride of Christ if we ourselves aren’t perfect, huh?

... a skateboarding friar. Your argument

is invalid.

True Love is Intolerant

People often look at Christians and think “why the intolerance? Don’t you Catholics claim to be all about ‘love’ and ‘charity’? You’re all a bunch of hypocrites.”

To those people, I have this to say: yes, I am intolerant. Yes, I am also a hypocrite. What I am not, though, is uncharitable.

Fact is, if somebody you held dear to you said: “I tolerate you,” you’d probably be taken aback and insulted, wondering what warranted them to feign affection while actually telling you they feel the same about you as that ghastly mole they haven’t yet removed or the annoying barking Chihuahua next door. If this is the case, why do we allow ourselves to be convinced tolerance is a virtue?

True love is intolerant. It is intolerant of all enemies towards love. In the same way that a loving father is intolerant of any evil that affects his child, love does not give up in the face of enemies but fights with all its strength.

The Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen tells us the following:

"Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it. It does penance for the sins of others, but it is not broadminded about sin.

Why is this? Because…

Real love involves real hatred: whoever has lost the power of moral indignation and the urge to drive the buyers and sellers from the temples has also lost a living, fervent love of Truth.

Charity, then, is not a mild philosophy of "live and let live"; it is not a species of sloppy sentiment.  Charity is the infusion of the Spirit of God, which makes us love the beautiful and hate the morally ugly."

Fact is, Jesus was not a ‘nice’ person. He was all-loving, He was the ultimate teacher and the ultimate servant king, but He wasn’t ‘nice.’ Jesus loves you – but He’s also willing to tie a millstone around your neck. That’s why I love Him.

I love Him because He is the truth, and as the truth, He is unchanging AND He is intolerant – we need only look at His reaction to those who turned His temple into “a place for thieves” as evidence of this.

Tolerance is not for the loving, it is for the lazy and self-serving. Tolerance is not the ‘virtue’ of those willing to sacrifice. It has no interest in the well-being of others, only in avoiding sacrifice in order to remain comfortable. Our Pope-Emeritus Benedict XVI reminds us: “the ways of the Lord are not comfortable, but we were not created for comfort, but for greatness.”

Greatness. That means being willing to be nailed to a Cross for one’s friends, and especially for one’s enemies, because Love Himself was nailed to a Cross. Tolerance would simply smile and nod and grit its teeth but ultimately do nothing to reconcile man to God. On the other hand – Love died for us. Greatness means calling out falsehood and sin and facing possible persecution, tolerance simply means watching truth be abused and mocked. Even if the tolerant do not participating in evil, allowing evil for the sake of convenience and a false sense of security with the status quo is simply a way of allowing evil to triumph.

Real love bears all things, but it does not allow all things. It believes all things, but it does not remain inside itself. It hopes for all things, but does not wait in the corner. Real love endures all things and steps beyond itself through sacrifice.

Tolerance is cowardice. It is a pathetic and cheap substitute for real love. It washes its hands clean of the death of the innocent and the slaughtering of truth in order to “keep the peace.” Love is brave and unwilling to compromise. Love is synonymous with taking up the Cross and following Him, even to Calvary. Mother Teresa, acknowledged by even secular society as one of the 21st century’s most famous pacifists warns us: "Love to be real, it must cost—it must hurt—it must empty us of self."

Jesus did not simply tolerate us. He loved us and suffered for us, He gave Himself in order than we may be saved, and He loves us despite our sin and brokenness. That is love, that is greatness – and there is no talk of tolerance in that. This greatness came at a cost, and comfort was definitely not part of the deal when He who rules the Heavens and the Earth was nailed to a cross after being tortured and abused, and even after giving all He could give, made Himself captive in all the tabernacles of the world, neglected and abandoned, for love.

Still happy with being ‘tolerated?’

“Interfice errorem, diligere errantem” – “Kill the sin, love the sinner”
― St. Augustine

JPII – Catholic Superhero, Rockstar and Saint

WHAT. A. MAN.

Batman – take a seat. Watch a real hero in action.

His family were killed. His Gotham was the entire world – corrupted by evil. He studied and trained as a priest in secret whilst working as a miner. He fought hatred with love. He even had a cool butler [insert Catholic-nerdgirl Ganswein swoon here]…

… then in 1978 he went into a secret cave (read: the Sistine Chapel), came out with a cool outfit (yes, he had a cape) and changed the world completely. He even had a Batmobile (the Popemobile counts, OK? – It was bulletproof!).

The youth used to flock — literally by the millions — to see him. They chanted "John Paul II, we love you!" He chanted back "John Paul II, he loves you."

… and we all believed him.

THAT is *rockstar status*. 8 years after his death, you’d be hard-pressed to find a Catholic who doesn’t cite him as one of their biggest influences. Awesome. I don’t think I’ve met a single priest or religious under 40 who hasn’t told me he changed them because he challenged and inspired the world.

But why do we love him so much? JPII showed us what love really is: it’s fun. It’s personal. It’s soft and tender and playful but it is challenging and demanding and takes more than mere words – it asks us to step up and be who we are called to be. JPII taught us that.  He also taught us that above all – love is our vocation.

He was fun *cue YouTube videos of him with babies*, but he was a fighter – suffering until the Lord called him to the place meant for him from all eternity. He was intolerant of sin, but never allowed us to forget the redeeming power of Christ. He was young at heart even in his old age, but possessed a wisdom that only comes with true holiness.

He was a living Saint.

My generation are hungry. We are hungry for knowledge, hungry for honesty and hungry for love in a world that has forgotten that we are all brothers and sisters. It is a mistake to believe that young people want sex, drugs and rock and roll. JPII taught us that the “rules” free us. When seen in the right context, those “rules” take on a whole new meaning and purpose. They make us live life to the full and to pass on that knowledge and love to others to make a better world.

This is a man who refused to allow evil to destroy his belief in the inherent goodness of man. This is a man who taught a broken people that “no difficulty, no fear is so great that it can completely suffocate the hope that springs eternal in the hearts of the young.”

JPII believed in people. He truly believed that people needed Christ, needed His Church, and he stopped at nothing to make the world see that. He believed in the power of hope so much that he asked us to “stake our lives on it,” because “we are not the sum of our weaknesses and failures; we are the sum of the Father's love for us and our real capacity to become the image of his Son.”

JPII truly believed that love conquered all – and we need only look at the way he forgave his could-be assassin, in one of his most publicised and famous moments – to see how love manifests itself into actions that change the world.

We loved him because he didn’t merely TELL us how to be, he showed us how he was able to truly "respond to an abyss of evil with an abyss of love."

JPII, we love you… pray for us.

P.S. I kinda sorta forgot to mention that when (if! God willing...),
I enter into eternal glory, I expect him to be standing there with a cup of coffee.
We have a deal - dessert is on me.

Why killing babies is bad…

George Orwell once said that we have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. He may have been right in his own pre Roe v. Wade time, but now I can safely say that Orwell would take that statement further if he were a 21^st century man, by saying that stating the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men and even the mediocre woman. This happens to be very lucky for me, considering I don’t consider myself particularly intelligent and I am definitely not a man.

So, as a mediocre woman, allow me the honour of stating the obvious: killing babies is bad.

This may seem like a silly thing to say (because of course killing an innocent human being is wrong, right???) – but the obvious seems to be an absurdity in an age where people genuinely believe their opinions can be classified as ‘truth,’ no matter how mind-numbingly idiotic their opinions may be to somebody with any sense of logic.

Abortion is the murder of babies: plain and simple. It is the greatest evil of our age – of any age. There is no nice way to put that, and you don’t have to be a ‘Jesus-freak’ to acknowledge it.

Allow me to backtrack a little: as controversial as this issue is, it’s pretty black-and-white. Everyone agrees the right to life is primary, and everyone agrees human rights are universal. That means exactly one thing needs to be established: is the ‘foetus’ human? Any other issue becomes arbitrary once we conclude that, in fact:

YES. YES. YES. The unborn baby is human

But lest I be declared a dictator – don’t take my word for it. Let’s ask those who know more than I.

In 1954, Dr. Seuss came to the conclusion that ‘a person’s a person, no matter how small.’ No doubt inspired by this, IVF pioneer Dr. Landrum Shettles, in a book entitled Rites of Life: the Scientific Evidence of Life Before Birth, wrote in 1983:

“I oppose abortion…because I accept what is biologically manifest—that human life commences at the time of conception—and…because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic and humanitarian.”

Think he’s an exception? You would be wrong. Look up pioneering fetologist Sir Albert W Liley, geneticist Dr Jerome LeJeune or Keith L Moore. What about T W Saddler and William J Larsen? These people are experts. Still not happy? The Biebs had something to say too:

"I really don't believe in abortion, it's like killing a baby."

- Rolling Stone: Justin Bieber cover article, 2011

I don’t know about you, but tween popstars with amazing hair hold credibility enough for me.

So, let’s summarise:

1. All humans are deserving of equal rights.

2. The right to live is a primary right; it supersedes all others.

3. The unborn baby is human.

Ergo, the unborn baby has a right to life.

To those that tell me ‘times have changed,’ or ‘it’s a matter of opinion,’ I say this: it’s the pro-choice view of the foetus that is outdated, not mine. The pro-choice view takes us back to the mentality that made slavery of blacks and genocide of the Jews not only legal, but ideologically sound.

In this day and age (in our wisdom), it is completely out of the question that slavery could ever be legal again. But, what allowed such a horrible practice to continue – virtually unquestioned – for so many years? Indifference. Beating a slave was like beating a dog – it wasn’t nice, but it wasn’t worth getting upset over. In other words, people were indifferent because they did not believe blacks to be human.

When people finally started to question whether or not slavery was moral, for 60 years the debate centred around whether or not the slaves were human beings. Then there was the issue of realising that accepting slaves as human was ‘bad for business.’

Let’s apply this to today: the abortion debate has been settled. Science concedes the unborn baby is human. NOW, we realise that admitting the child is human has consequences. Powerful commercial and ideological interests will suffer – not to mention the fact that for some, it is too painful to acknowledge they have made a grave mistake in terminating the life of their child. 

Ordinary people changed their minds and ended slavery – and the same is happening in the fight to end this horror. We can not be silent when 1/3 of our generation has been murdered. This is the battle of our age – and no matter what pro-choice advocates think: we are winning, because good ALWAYS triumphs. Want proof? 

The founder of the pro-choice movement in the US – Bernard Nathanson, is now a pro-life advocate. Jane Roe – now known as Norma McCorvey, is also a powerful advocate for the unborn, despite being credited as the reason abortion became legal in the US. Abby Johnson, director of a Planned Parenthood facility in Texas, was similarly inspired just last year.

Society is (slowly but surely!) coming to the realisation that however inconvenient it might be, and whatever it means for your credibility or lifestyle, there is no denying the unborn their right to life. I don’t think Nathanson and McCorvey ENJOYED telling the world they were wrong about everything they used to stand for and Johnson definitely did not receive a goodwill payout from Planned Parenthood, but their conscience won regardless.All in all, it comes to show that when it comes to the issue of abortion there is no grey, it is simply a matter of life or death.

The feet of a 12 week-old foetus... The womb needs to be the safest place on earth again.

Being a girl is not as easy as it looks...

Let’s be honest here: I think even men should admit to themselves how easy they really have it. being a female is *freaking exhausting*, and I’ll tell you why:

Below are my top 4 reasons – bar biological – why women hate life.

1.     Talking:

Girls have to talk about everything all the time. All. The. Time. ALLLLL THE TIME. We talk about everything – what we ate during the day, we talk about our feelings, we talk about what we did at work – why/how we did it/the reasons we loathe working (deep down, I think it’s just that we all know we belong in the kitchen), we talk about our feelings and how we feel about feeling said feelings, we talk about why we hate boys (yes, all of you – even if we like you, we don’t), we talk about our feelings – and when that’s exhausted, there’s always talking about what other people ate/how they feel/what they did at work/why we hate them/how they feel.

Frankly, I feel like it’s all just a little too tiring.

2.     Food:

This may shock you, but women are so pre-occupied with food, it’s infuriating. Once we’ve finished thinking about what we ate, we move on to reminding ourselves why we shouldn’t have eaten it. Before we know it, we’re planning our next meal and pep talking ourselves out of it. This is quite a lengthy process, and before we’ve had the time to rebuild our self-esteem (not to mention our self-control), we have eaten this forbidden ‘next meal’ and are in the foetal position in the once again lengthy process of regretting the effects of it. This contributes to a cycle of insecurity that can only be broken with copious amounts of chocolate.

This, ladies and gentlemen – is the reason all women hate themselves.

3.     Money:

Being a girl is expensive. We need things boys don’t know the names of nor would ever willingly pay for even if they did know their names. Besides pants (for those who keep up with modern day social convention) and possibly a pair of sneakers – guys don’t really need anything. Girls on the other hand, spend money on things called:

-        Curling tongs/Crimpers

-        Party Feet

-        Pantihose

-        Toggle Bracelets

-        Totes (not always slang for ‘totally’)

-        Foldable Purse Hangers

-        Tulle (if the phrase ‘A-Line with a Tulle Underlay’ means nothing to you, you live a much less complicated life than I)

-        Falsies

If I were a guy, I’d be rich (you know, if I wanted to die alone and not have a significant female other who would spend all my money on ornate doilies). Nobody ever said life would be easy.

4.     Grooming:

I know what you’re thinking. 1 of 2 things:

a)     Girls worry about this too much – what for?

b)     Guys have to do it too.

RE: a) no, we don’t. Girls HAVE to worry about looking decent – and looking decent takes time. To all the boys who complain about this: I’d like to see you react if your girl rocks up somewhere with something that bears an uncanny resemblance to a nest on her head, her eyebrows unplucked, nails chipped with fortnight-old nail polish, clothes tatty and old (let’s not even get started on how hard it is to find funky, fashionable ladylike clothes) and a complete disregard for her skin – among other things. My guess is you would not be pleased. Give us a break – if we could avoid it, we would.

RE: b) no, you don’t. Getting a haircut and clipping your facial hair every 2 weeks doesn’t count. Just in case – showering doesn’t either.

 
     I know, I haven’t ranted (much!) about guys here. Why? Because we’re *insane* independent of boys – they just add to our woes. Let’s save that discussion for another day.

When all is said and done, though – thank goodness we’re the fairer, smarter sex – or there would be some serious ass whooping. Plus, at least our shoes are more fun. Guys will never know the relief of taking off a pair of seriously gorgeous, seriously high, seriously designed-by-Lucifer-himself heels at the end of the night. That alone is worth all the fleeting drama in the world.