Checklist.

In a month's time, the Spring 2010 semester will be over and done with. As for me, I will resume classes for Fall 2010. I will be a college junior.

What? Didn't I just get into college? Wasn't it just the other day I walked into the wrong English 1 class and made a fool of myself? Wasn't it just the other day I was disappointed that my very first grade on a college paper was a C? Wasn't it just the other day I took my first nap on the Quad on a spectacular fall afternoon?

I have to stop and ask myself: What the hell am I doing? Yes, I am going to my classes and writing papers and reading and drinking massive amounts of coffee. Yet, I feel I am not taking full advantage of what college has to offer. I do not have a formal plan of action once I graduate. I need to take action damn it.

There a few things on my imaginary checklist that I would like to do before I graduate. I want to study abroad. I want an internship. I want to decide if I really want to go to to law school. I want to decide what other careers I would like to explore if I decide I do not want to be lawyer. Certainly, I would like to further my education, but in what other field?

This question about what I want to "do" after Spring 2012 has been bothering me for the last couple of weeks. Last year, I decided I wanted to be a lawyer. This year, I am not so sure. Is law my passion, really? As I learn about American politics and history, the more I want to move away. As I take courses for my history major, I realize the land of the free and home of the brave does not live up to the ideals we were forced to memorize in elementary school. Do I really want to defend the laws of a deeply hypocritical government based on elitist documents? I really actually do not.

This is a reason why I want to spend time abroad as an undergraduate. I want a change of pace. Not necessarily because I am sick of the US or New York or Queens (well, a little). Perhaps spending time somewhere else will help me make decisions about where my passions truly lie, if I want to "do" something that involves traveling.

I sound like the kind of person I would be infuriated with for being so... indecisive. I sound like someone who does not have a clue where their life is going, what their plans are, nothing.

This is what I do know, for now. I want to get a job for the summer to possibly save up for a study abroad program I will be applying to in Italy. I want an internship for the following semester.  I want to be in Italy for Spring 2011. I want to grab life by the horns and be happy by simply being alive.

Feminism.

On a couple of well known feminist blogs such as Jezebel and Feministe, some bloggers are ripping Tina Fey apart for her performance during some SNL skits that aired this past Saturday, especially the "Brownie Husband" one. The general consensus is that it's an embarrassing and insulting representation of single women. In the skit, Fey has a suit on, talking on a cell phone in her home. It is implied she lives alone with her cat and seems career oriented, perhaps indicating why she doesn't have a husband and has to turn to chocolate to fill the void in her life. It's supposed to be a commercial for brownie mix so they are advertising a new, super huge brownie for sad single women everywhere. You can watch the entire skit here:
 

On this other blog called The Frisky (which I am slightly addicted to) another blogger responded to these accusations of Tina Fey not being "feminist enough" by saying she is in fact a comedian and was not necessarily deprecating single women, but the brownie commercials. Commenters responded saying something around the lines of "This is why I'm not a feminist! They are all crazy and analyze innocent skits as evil evil things!!"

I was particularly annoyed with the comments left on The Frisky. Honestly, I don't know why I even bother reading that blog. Perhaps it has to do with the fact it helps me procrastinate immensely. Those annoying people who left comments left me baffled. I don't understand why women would negate the whole ideology of feminism. I am surprised also women this day in age would even go as far as bashing feminism.

Feminism and what it encompasses is discussed constantly and widely by many publications, organizations, and individuals with much more visibility and importance than this little blog of mine. However, I think it is important each woman understand what feminism means to her, not just some stereotype or abstract idea created by invisible people on the internet. Meaning, women cannot just generalize feminists are radical, loud mouth bitches who tear Tina Fey apart for starring in a comedy sketch intended to make people laugh. Surely, those exist. But those are not the only feminists around.

From experience, I think women do not understand that feminists have vastly different beliefs and ideals. Essentially, feminists are radically different from each other in a number of ways. However, they share one fundamental belief:  Feminists would all like a world where men and women have equal opportunity in all aspects of private and public life. Whatever that means to a each individual woman is up to her. But equality is paramount.

I am by no means an expert in all feminist theories and I am not a Women Studies major. I took a class called "History of Feminism" which helped me develop my own theories on feminism based on what measures women historically have done. So, yes I have a limited education about the development of feminism in our society but this class certainly helped in understanding what it meant a lot more than before. I know for certain I am a feminist. I do believe men and women should be equal in all aspects of life. Do I transcribe to the idea that we should get rid of high heels and bras because they are part of male tyranny imposed on women for centuries? No. Do I think the fight for equal rights is over? Absolutely not. Do I think Taylor Swift's songs about being saved by a Romeo type are anti-feminist? No, but she's not a little girl anymore and needs to wake up and smell the coffee. 

At the heart of the problem, women criticizing feminism has to do with ignorance. Many times, it's ignorance because they are not aware feminism is so broad and diverse. Person A's brand of feminism could condone prostitution; Person A could argue it's sexually liberating because women no longer have to be married to have lots of sex and have it be socially acceptable! Person B could argue women should wait until marriage because it's their choice not to be coerced by men into having sex when women are not ready. Yet, they are both feminists. They advocate women should choose what they want to do, free of whatever our still patriarchal society is imposing they should do. I hope that made some sort of sense.

I see no reason why people should not be feminists. Feminists, on a very basic level, just want a better quality of life for the female gender. They want to dispel inaccuracies created by a millennium ruled by narrow minded men with their pseudoscience. They want to spread knowledge and let women know it's not a solely a man's world anymore. It's ours too. And we can change things for the better.

As for feminists being bitter about men, this is not true for many women. Men can (and should) be feminists too! It's not about "taking away" all "power" from men. It's about sharing, just the way it was supposed to be from the beginning.

Feminist blogs like Jezebel and Feministe are great, don't get me wrong. I love a good feminist analysis just as much as the next woman. Granted, blogs like those aforementioned have a specific demographic that adhere to their general interpretation of feminism, which is totally acceptable.  I cannot, however, agree there is a certain level of "feminism" one should achieve in order to be "feminist." If we set impossibly high standards of what being a feminist is, then it simply becomes unrealistic and even hypocritical. Feminism for all people!

As for Fey being "un-feminist" because of certain skits, that's a little much. Yet, I would love debating the social stigmas attached to being a single women and why they are in fact in all these commercials for chocolate, and always alone.

Florence+The Machine.

Last Thursday night, my friend Priscilla and I went to the Florence+The Machine concert in (Le) Poisson Rouge in the West Village. The concert did not start until 8:30pm but we got there at 5pm to hopefully obtain a good standing spot.

We almost missed the venue, located on 158 Bleecker Street. There wasn't a very visible sign saying "(Le) Poisson Rouge," possibly to have that cool, underground vibe. After the security guy made me throw out the cookies I bought from the Duane Reade down the block and my water, we made our way downstairs into a dark room with a bar. We were confused and eventually asked another suited security guy when we were able to make our way to the room were the concert was happening. We had to wait for the double doors to open. At 7pm they opened the door and we landed a spot front and center. The stage was kind of low but it was alright, I guess. We stood right in front of the microphone stand that was decorated with fake flowers. It didn't look as tacky as it sounds. The room was lit with this cool blue light. Here's a picture. They moved the tables away for the crowd to stand.

 I talked to some people before the show started. These were hard core fans of Florence's music and some were even going to the concert at Terminal 5 the following night. They talked of her music like it was part of their being. In their defense, Florence's music is pretty powerful, the kind of music that compels you to close your eyes and just feel it. The crowd seemed pretty diverse, minus the fact most were under the age of 30: a medical student, a recent college graduate, a graphics designer, blonde party girls, and a few girls with British accents. Florence + The Machine is supposed to be quite mainstream in the UK so the British girls made sense.

The opening act was canceled so they were able to come on stage right at 8:30pm. The Machine comes out first (the band members) and then she came out, clad in this odd long white tunic with gold short shorts underneath, her red hair completely covering her face. She played "Howl" first, which is one of my favorite songs.  It was slightly eerie the way she was hitting the drum she had in front of her while looking down. My only complaint was that the microphone was low so it was hard to hear her sing.

 As you can tell from the shot, we were right in front of her.

As for her performance, she definitely delivered! She was full of energy. She paused for a little while to take off her enormous gold heels so she could jump around stage properly. She was visibly having a lot of fun on stage, which is great being her first time performing in New York. The band was great too. They had a this depressed, grunge looking harpist who looked like he wanted to be anywhere but there, but whatever.

I was disappointed with some of the audience, which ruined part of the show for me. Some people had absolutely no concert etiquette! It was about halfway through the concert people were clearly intoxicated. The blonde party girls behind Priscilla were spilling tequila all over the place. The worst offenders was a 24 year old I had talked to earlier, who was there with her douchebag boyfriend and came from Pennsylvania. She seemed like a decent person before she started drinking. She managed to give Florence a tequila shot, the Florence readily accepted. I don't know what Florence was thinking: what if that drink was laced with something? Well, the 24 year old was really happy Florence paid attention to her and had someone buy another shot for her. She managed to get the shot and was raising her arm while Florence was performing, urging her to take the shot. When Florence ended the song, she took another shot. A stage manager came on stage and told the 24 year old "That's enough with the drinks. Stop it, okay?" with his awesome British accent. She didn't listen. A security woman makes her way through the dense crowd to warn her to stop or she will be escorted out. Surprisingly enough, she didn't stop after the warnings and tried giving Florence a third drink. By now this girl has squeezed her way between Priscilla and I, pushing everyone to the side. Another girl in a striped dress also was drunk and pushy right next to her. The concert was nearly over and Florence was off the stage. A security guard asked the drunk 24 year old to step outside and refused, again. Another security guy came on stage and nearly pounced on her, pushing her back. Finally, that annoying girl was kicked out! Gah! They left the stripped dress girl, who spilled tequila on the floor and on my shirt. I was very happy when the concert ended at around 10:30pm.

I just wanted to get the hell out of there after the spilling of the drinks and the pushing and my feet hurting. Then again, this is the nature of these general admission, no frills shows. It gets crazy but you have no option but to endure it. I didn't want to push her because she was drunk and might get violent. I don't want to be kicked out!

I've been to other concerts that were standing room shows and the audience was a lot less rowdy. I, for one, do not feel like attending a concert for a while. Until I forget the insanity of the Florence + The Machine concert anyway.

In case you're wondering what songs she sang, Priscilla took a picture of the set list:

 Like I mentioned, I loved "Howl." I didn't like "Blinding" and I didn't like "Ghosts" much either. I'm not sure if that had to do with the fact they are slower songs. "Rabbit Heart" was great too; she had the audience shout "Raise it up!" and raise their hands as she sang. The participation was great. The graphics designer we met kept screaming: "Oh my god! You're fucking retarded! In a good way!" after every song. Florence heard him and said "Oh, I don't know if that's a good thing, but thanks."

If I had to rate this concert, I'm going to give it 3 out of 5 stars. Taking off one star for the drunk girls and another because my bag and my shirt were drenched with liquor. Florence's performance was excellent, but concerts are about the entire experience in my opinion. I suppose if she wasn't any good I would have just walked out in the middle of it.

So that's my review. This is my first concert review so I'm not sure how good this is. Let me know in the comments yes?

A note for Tegan (if she reads this!): we weren't allowed to record sadly that's why there are no videos! Sorry!

Boyfriends.

My good friend Bianca and I were sitting on the 8th avenue bound L train discussing how our spring breaks were going when we paused momentarily. A couple across from us were having a moderately loud argument. It was something about the girlfriend not receiving a text message promptly enough from her boyfriend. The boyfriend quickly hugged her-- from the corner of my eye it seemed like he smothered her-- and she remained motionless. However, her tone became softer, but she was still visibly irritated. I thought, "Why is she so annoyed over something as mundane as a text message?" But then again, this was her boyfriend. Everything he does--or does not do-- becomes a much bigger deal than if someone else had done it.

I'm not sure exactly what question to pose in this post. It seems lately everything I've been seeing or reading is about relationships and how to make one work and all that mumbo jumbo. Hm, maybe I should clarify what "mumbo jumbo" is. There are hundreds of relationship books on how to make it last with your partners and keep the passion and romance alive in a fading relationship. A few nights ago, the Discovery Channel had an hour long program dealing with how certain hormones and brain activity determine if a person is in love or simply in lust. It was fascinating stuff. Yet amid the very public scandals of certain public figures and the general slue of television programing dealing with broken and dysfunctional relationships it makes me wonder: Are boyfriends even worth the trouble?

Perhaps as a person who is not in a relationship and certainly not in love, this will be biased. I'm more than sure those who will read this will disagree with a lot of things I may or may not say, or write rather. I suppose a disclaimer is in order: I am a very cynical person, especially when it comes to relationships. This comes not only from very limited past experiences but also from observing the people around me. Some may think I am bitter. Maybe just a little. But you have been warned if the tone gets suspiciously pessimistic.

I guess I should offer an explanation of what "worth the trouble" means. Relationships and marriages require work from both parties to have a healthy and constructive one. Ideally, they should be very happy with each other and desire each other's company because, hopefully, the other person makes their life richer, happier, and more wonderful. The way the other makes them feel is indescribable and it's intoxicating. Ideally, the feeling should be mutual. In short, relationships are supposed to be awesome. For the most part; nothing is perfect. Obviously, if your partner makes you feel awesome, then by all means have a happy relationship! So, those kinds of relationships are worth saving, obviously. But what if your partner makes you feel like crap, annoys you to no end, hurts you in any way, shape or form intentionally, constantly and without fail? What if you do not have those amorous feelings towards your partner? What if that throbbing and insatiable desire becomes a weak and dull throb of what once was? Is that worth saving? From what I have been observing lately, the weak and dull throbs of what once was are the only relationships left. Certainly, this is not the case for everyone. However, those hopeless and futile relationships still abound and I want to know why.

Oh man, where to begin? Maybe one of the first inclinations relationships aren't all they are cracked up to be was in my own household. I will spare most of the details but my parents never had a picture perfect marriage. From the time I was about five I knew my parents did not love each other. I knew that something was off because parents on fictional shows on television seemed to like being in each other's company. Hm.

By the time I was eleven, there was an extremely popular talk show on Telemundo called "Laura." I think it's still on. Anyway, the host, Laura, would have the same sort of people on the show everyday. A woman would come on, clad in acid wash jeans and horrendous clogs, sobbing about how she suspects her boyfriend/fiancee/husband cheating on her. She would regale the audience about the story on how they met--usually at parties called "polladas"-- and how they fell in love fast and hard. The camera would pan to the audience, showing the sympathy and compassion on the plump and weathered faces of women who looked similar to the distressed woman. She would explain he would take her out for dinner and moved in to pay her rent. However, there was trouble at paradise she suspects: he was distant and coming home late. Laura would then ask her production people to roll the tape. There was her beloved usually in a city park making out with another woman who looked very similar to the woman currently sobbing, now harder than ever. Laura would then ask the man to come out, having seemingly no idea what he was doing there. The woman would charge at him, slapping and kicking him, calling him a "desgraciado" among other derogatory, but earned, names. He would then sit after the security men had the woman under control. He would explain, visibly flustered, that it wasn't him, they had him confused for someone else. But lo and behold, Laura would then ask the mistress to come out! The mistress would also fling herself on the man and hit him. The mistress would also wail about how they met at a pollada and how she believed they were indeed in love. Often there were multiple mistresses. Needless to say, it made for very entertaining television.

In high school, I listened to the woes and worries of friends in relationships, wondering why their boyfriends were infuriatingly insensitive. Yet, they were incurably "in like" of these so called "assholes" and let them toy around with them anyway. It seemed like a whole lot of drama for nothing in return.  Even after the sobbing and the heart wrenching theories to explain their behavior, the relationship was still crap, no matter what angle we looked at it. One couple stand out in my memory in particular. These kids would make out all over the cafeteria, in front of teachers and administration. Their "love" knew no bounds! When they broke up, it was chaotic and the subject of much debate among people of my grade. And when they would get back together, there was more debate and speculation. They didn't last long after they got back together. I know however that the female still liked the male very much and much after the relationship was over, even after he cheated on her.

Why do these people stay in unhappy relationships even after being scorned and hurt over and over? Why do we bother trying to make it work when the other partner obviously wants out? And it's not just the boyfriends in the relationships; girlfriends are guilty of the scenarios above as well. Men just get a worse rep than women in these sort of situations.

I never understood why people agree to be together if they clearly make each other miserable. There are a ton of reasons, of course. Financial stability from a partner. A home. The kids. Other commodities. But what if both partners are capable of taking care of themselves? Why do they stay?

Perhaps they are in denial. They do not want to come to terms that a relationship of three years is no longer something they want or need. They are different people heading in different directions yet they can't seem to get out of the rut of their mundane relationship. Perhaps they feel their partner "completes" them when in reality they are scared of being alone. Perhaps they are afraid of heartbreak. Understandably. It's a horrible, sinking feeling of misery.

I could sit here all night and list possible reasons people stay in disintegrating relationships and marriages. I suppose I can't understand it because I am not in their shoes. I do not want to fathom a life being stuck to someone I can't stand for the sake of God-knows-what. Or maybe they are truly and deeply in love, despite the flaws.

Love, like I said in a previous post, is something everyone is looking for. We have boyfriends and girlfriends to determine if we can love them. But if you are fighting over a half hour about a text message, maybe you should reconsider if that is someone you can potentially love.

GreeNYC.

On my way home this evening, I saw an advertisement advising "A" train riders to switch to more energy efficient light bulbs. Here's a visual:

I thought the light bulb made up of the subways lines was clever and cute. That little bird that is now the new mascot for these subway ads letting people know to be more energy efficient and all of that environmentally good stuff.

I'm all for going green--especially with the reminders of Earth Day coming up all over the place--but I have a few problems with our mass transit system demanding us to go green. They are making it kind of impossible to commute.

Those on the subway and buses are already being green by choosing to take public transportation as opposed to a taxi or driving themselves. Granted, many people that take public transportation are not doing it primarily for environmentally conscious reasons but that's besides the point. With the way the MTA is cutting its spending that directly affects millions of people, it seems to me that it is becoming increasingly difficult to choose one of the greenest way to travel.

The latest and most dramatic changes to the system has been the decision to eliminate the W train and my beloved V train. The changes will take place on June 25. Yes, I am very fond of the V train; when I was in high school I would ride this train from Queens Plaza to Woodhaven Blvd to catch one of the plenty dreadful Queens bus lines home. The V was the most enjoyable part of my commute; it was never packed to the brim with people making it easy to locate a seat. The mostly bump free ride was soothing as one would be transported from Astoria to Woodside to Jackson Heights to Elmhurst in less than a half hour. Even riding it into the city was a delight. Many commuters would opt for the vastly overcrowded F train which runs on 6th Avenue as well, making my many trips to study for the SAT Subject Tests at the Mid Manhattan library pain free. Today (well yesterday technically) I took this train from 42nd Street to 14th Street which took a mere five minutes. It's promptness and speediness still don't fail to impress me. Why, dear God why, would they even think about eliminating one of the most efficient lines of the subway system?

For the same reason I listed above. Not many people ride this train as opposed to other lines so the MTA sees it as a waste of money. If commuters are not packed like sardines in a can then it obviously must be unnecessary! So, what they are proposing is changing the color of the M line (it's brown now so it will be orange... this bothers me too) and having the M run from Broadway-Lafayette to Forest Hills and having it run from Essex Street to it's current end location, Middle Village-Metropolitan Avenue. The new map will look a little something like this:

From my understanding of this map, there will be 2 M lines going to different places? I would imagine it will cause a lot of confusion and pissed off commuters going to a part of Queens they didn't mean to go to-- at first. Then we will get used it and know where we are going.

The M was crap to begin with though. It shows up once every 20 minutes even during rush hour. Commuters transferring from the Myrtle-Wycoff station in Ridgewood from the L to the M sprint if they hear the train coming overhead. Otherwise, they are in for a 15-30 minute wait of a packed M train. I have been a victim to the unprecedented cruelties of the M train. Whenever I drive pass the Forest Avenue stop in Middle Village/Ridgewood/Glendale there is never and I mean never an M train passing through. It sucks so much. There is no other way to describe it. These are the options the MTA is giving us. Suckiness to the extreme. As if commuting in Queens wasn't bad enough!

And it's not only Queens residents suffering the consequences. The M is mostly being discontinued in Brooklyn, meaning there will be more people on the R and the D. I can't speak for the volume of commuters on those trains in Brooklyn but I'm going to assume those lines are going to have more riders.

Ah, but I haven't gotten to the best part! The new orange M lines will be 480 feet long as opposed to the 600 feet the V train is. And we will have to wait on average of .75 minutes going to Middle Village and .60 minutes going to Forest Hills. .75 minutes MTA time=10 minutes real time (source: experience). What does that all mean? In short, it means a crappy subway line is going to be even worse with larger crowds and a longer time to get home/work/school/go to a friend's house to bake cookies because you can't at home.

Ah, yes the W. I did not ride that train very often but when I did it treated me well. The MTA wants to extend the Q line to the Astoria-Ditmars station so it runs alongside the N train. That's all good and well but the W was such a lovely train line. Now it will be an overcrowded Q line. I've taken the Q in Brooklyn and that shit takes an eternity. It makes every single random stop. It's usually not too crowded in Brooklyn, I'll give it that. But it still takes a million years to even get to Atlantic Avenue from Avenue H. The MTA made the calculations for me: passengers will have to wait an extra 1.1 minutes during rush hour and an extra 2.5 minutes during off peak hours for the Q. Oh yeah, and the N is going to be making more stops too because the W was local. An extra 1.1 minute wait. In short, it will take a fucking eternity to get to anywhere on those lines.

Where's the silver lining you may ask? The MTA thinks it will be saving $4 million with the elimination of the V and $3.5 million with the termination of the W. Also, there will be a permanent extension of the G train from Church Avenue to Court Square in Queens and shorter waits for it. Woo fucking hoo.

What about the rest of the subway system? Never mind the new waits on the F/M lines and N/Q lines. What about the damned C line? It was voted the worst line in the entire subway system due to infrequency, poor quality of sound from the operator/conductor, and nastiness in general. It's overcrowded and it also sucks. What about that overcrowded mess of a 6 line? What about the bus routes that are vital to Queens residents because the trains are ridiculous and don't service about half the borough? Where's the added frequency? Where's the major cleanup of the Nostrand Avenue train station on the A/C line that always smells like piss? The MTA is solving nothing. The MTA is the root of the problem.

There were talks of raising the subway fare to $2.50 but that did not pass. I spend roughly $1,000.00 a year on unlimited Metrocards to commute. Where is that money going to? Certainly not to benefit the consumers. Then they have the sheer audacity to tell me I need to be more green?! REALLY? You are chastising me for not being more energy efficient when honestly I can't afford to spend more money on energy efficient products because you are a major cause to my poverty! And for what?? Worse service and increasing the possibility for inappropriate sexual contact on those overcrowded trains. Kiss my ass MTA.

With these cuts and no signs of service improvement in sight, many commuters will turn to car services and driving to get around. I can't think of one person who would rather ride the train for an hour and a half pressed upon a hobo than drive for half that time to get to their destination. Or car pool. This might be a stretch but the MTA is certainly being counter intuitive. For many, it will force them to seek alternative, non-green ways of getting around. Unless they actually do something to benefit the New Yorkers who need this service, just stop. Stop shoving this green propaganda down my throat as I sit in a packed Brooklyn bound A train, contemplating begging my dad to drive his Subaru to school. You are in no way helping me in my decision to kill the earth with one angry step on the accelerator at a time.

In case you are wondering were I got all my information from and for additional cuts to public transportation, it's all here: http://www.mta.info/news/stories/?story=24 and click on "Final Report of all service changes" under New York City Transit.

Courtesy.

There are few things I get worked up about. It is my belief that life is too short to sweat the small stuff. I like giving people the benefit of the doubt. All in all, I think I'm pretty easy going. However, there are somethings I will not tolerate. One of these being people being downright rude.

Wednesday afternoon I went to my school's library to read a massive amount for my Introduction to History course. The material is rather dry so I wanted to concentrate the best I could. I made my way to the third floor which is the quietest of all the floors. The lack of computers may or may not have to do with that. Anyway, instead of walking all the way towards the back as usual, I sat in what most consider the "front" part of the library. I'm not entirely sure why I decided to make that change yesterday. It was quiet. Instead of these separated desks that are in the back there were these four seater tables. I suppose I wanted a little more space to spread my reading material. So I sat in the "front" part with the tables. For the first hour this section of the library was so quiet you could hear a pin drop. My neighbors in other tables were also emerged in their reading. One girl was typing away on her cute red Dell netbook.

Then the trouble began. There are tables closer to the staircase, not too far from where I was sitting. From that general vicinity I started hearing people. It would not have been a problem if they had been studying. No. These people were laughing and talking rather loudly. Not jut loud for a library. Just loud in general.

I was getting irritated. Here I was, trying to understand why European philosophers all of a sudden decided that history should be studied in a linear fashion as opposed to circular, and these incredibly rude people were being loud. I looked up and my neighbors were visibly annoyed as well. I had to do something.

I got up and followed the source of the noise. I saw it was four college aged guys laughing and horsing around. I walked up to them in a stride that I hoped demonstrated I meant business.
"Excuse me."
They all stopped talking. As if the mute was on. There were no books on their table.
"Could you keep it down? We can hear you from all the way over there." I pointed towards the other tables.
"Sorry."
I turned around to walk back to my seat. I added before I walked away "Keep it to a whisper; this is a library."

I heard one of these guys say "She's right." As if they didn't know they were in a damned library.

I sat back down, feeling pretty good about what I had just done. I hoped my neighbors appreciated my gesture to keep the silence. I returned to my reading.

Less than ten minutes later, they started up again. I heard female voices this time. Some others had joined them. It did not sound as if they were doing anything remotely productive.

My blood began to boil. Was this Chuck E. Cheese? No, this is a fucking college library. Did these people think they were in a cafeteria in middle school?

I slammed my pen down and walked over there again. Their group had grown to quite a few people, including three girls.

"Obviously you don't know what 'be quiet' means," I snarled. "Have some common courtesy; people are trying to get work done." I may have gotten a little loud. I was absolutely pissed.

I got another loud and insincere "sorry" from these people. Then I went to the bathroom. As I came out I heard one of the girls.

"We should be quiet unless you want to be... rawr." She was addressing her little friends. She made something that sounded like a cat sound.

I did not respond. I felt that I would get aggressive if I did. The last thing I wanted to do was to throw punches at a library. And then get kicked out.

Thankfully they left soon after. I left soon too. These other people came around and were talking. Granted, they were working on a group project and they were speaking quietly. The these two girls sat across from me and were making small talk. I felt the universe was against me reading and muttered under my breath "Fuck this!" and packed my stuff up and left.

It's not so much the Chuck E Cheese people were being loud at a library. I was angry because they had no respect for other's people space. It was obvious that people around them were concentrated on their reading, their papers, etc. There is a reason why there are libraries and why there are cafeterias and lounges. Even after I had told them politely they were distracting others, they continued to be obnoxious. It's hard to believe that college aged people still act like they need to be disciplined. I have honestly never encountered such inconsiderate, rude, disrespectful, immature asswipes.

I did what I could for my crusade of silence in the library. If they had stayed longer I would have had to call security. I would have done so. I'm not going to let a lack of courtesy from despicable people win. It's not about being quiet anymore. It becomes about so much more. In a society where a lot of manners do not seem to matter anymore, I wanted to make a difference even as small as keeping people quiet in a library.

I take comfort in the belief that karma exists. What goes around, comes around. Silly library people.

I shared this story with my advanced expository writing class. We all had a laugh at those peoples' expense.

Escape.

Today, I feel like escaping. I love New York, I love the cold wind in the winter whipping me in the face, I love getting wear scarves every day. I sincerely do. Tonight however, I desperately want to get away from it all. I do not want to go to a necessarily warmer place. I simply want to get away for a short amount of time. Some place new and fresh for me. Somewhere intrinsically happy.

There are those moments that one needs to escape their reality as content as one can be. Away from hostility and insolence, away from the chaos awaiting outside the bedroom door. I want to land somewhere where peace is commonplace, somewhere welcoming.

If only I could hop on a plane to St. Barts.