Thu 26 Mar 2009
Soundtrack
Posted by cindy under Goals , Health & Body , Mental States , Photos at 9:16 am[19] Comments
I’d written about Avril Lavigne’s “I’m With You” before, here. When I was the most lost and forlorn, and I’m thinking of specific days, weeks, between 2003 and 2006, this song always seemed to be playing. It played in my head, on the radio, or the CD would just randomly land on that track. I never understood the chorus, which goes:
Isn’t anyone tryin’ to find me?
Won’t somebody come take me home?
It’s a damn cold night
Trying to figure out this life
Won’t you take me by the hand
Take me somewhere new
I don’t know who you are
But I… I’m with you
I’m with you
The rest of the song sets up the scenario, which is the speaker, alone, standing on a bridge in the rain, saying “I thought that you’d be here by now.” So if she’s alone, who the hell is the “you” she’s talking to? Who’s she asking to take her home? Did some random dude pass by whom she’s now hanging onto, just so she’d have SOMEBODY?
Driving to work this morning, the song came up again. This time, due to more recent experiences and perspectives in my life, I saw the song and lyrics completely differently. I saw “her,” emotionally lost and desperate, mid-air on a cold metal bridge in the rain, telling “the one” she needs him and she’s been waiting and searching her entire life. Where is he? What’s taking him so long? Even though the “you” never appears through the entirety of this song, she’s crying out to him. She wants to be “home,” and that’s not her house necessarily, that’s home with him, in his arms, in his life, where she belongs.
It’s been a joke between myself and my girlfriends from way back when that when I finally find “the one,” I was going to kick him in the shin and say, “What the hell took you so long?! Do you know what I’ve BEEN through waiting for you?!” But for years now, I’ve stopped believing that there is just one “one,” at least not in this existence, who is perfect for you/me in every enduring way from now until the end of this lifetime. I do believe in lots of “the one for now,” though. How dreary of me.
But I do hope that every girl gets to have this conversation at some point in her life…
Her: Where have you BEEN my whole life?
Him: Looking for you. And now you’re found.
I never said I wasn’t a daydreamer.
These two photos are for James. Cuz he’s a nag like that. Click “more” unless you don’t want TMI.
The above photo makes me realize that the goal I set for myself is probably too conservative. I’ll aim for 2% less body fat than I have now.
The second photo is blurry, but at least I have a visible butt in this one.
I think I had a comment about the post but then I forgot what it was after i clicked the link lol.
Dang you look good! And its funny that your first thought is how you should have been more agressive! You are soo overly concerned 🙂 But I guess some of that attitude is what keeps you hard at work, and what allows you to get and keep such fantastic gym results! I’m impressed!
Thanks! *blush*
I’d be interested in your comment on the post itself, tho.
You’re welcome! Ok, now that I managed to read the top part again I remember what I was going to say :).
I also don’t think there is one “the one.” Maybe more like there is “someone” that will work for you. I think it also depends on what your image of “someone” really is. If you’re looking for the perfect person that fits exactly everything you ever dreamed of that is highly unlikely to happen (though of course there would be exceptions).
If you find someone that covers most of what you need, keeps you happy, and you can handle the faults that are inevitably there then that might be good enough.
So is it bad to say people shouldn’t be looking for “The one and only perfect being” but rather one that is “good enough” to keep you happy?
In other terms, do you want to wait to win the lottery, or make a good and enjoy what you’ve got?
That would be Mr. Englyng’s theory, too. (See my quotes page.) But that’s a good argument for playing the state lottery. Hey, the proceeds go to education so it’s for a good cause, right? =P
I agree w/ James – there isn’t just ‘one’ person…I think it’s best to look for someone who works for you. To find someone who can fulfull in every way is unreasonable. (similar to girlfriends, you have 1 person to cry to, to go out w/, etc)
Those looking for ‘the one’ are just setting themselves up for disappointment…besides, I’ve always thought I’m the ‘one’ for me, ha ha …:)
I like that point about being one’s own “one”. =) Very healthy.
One of the more confounding notions regarding romantic relationships, perhaps…. I, too, believe that there exists more than “one.” I also believe that even relationships with “the one” will have issues and will not be “perfect.” (Even assuming that “the one” fulfilled all elements of a detailed definition, including “he must believe I am his ‘one’ as well.” Caveat: I believe a “perfect” relationship is not one without problems but one in which problems are tackled mutually and out of a shared desire to preserve and grow in love.)
I mostly concur with previous comments suggesting that the wiser decision is to find one who “works for you.” However, I am equal parts realist and idealist, clinging forever to the premise of the glory and power of love. Finding someone whose definition and understanding of love is equal to and compatible with your own is imperative. Next, of course, is discovering that the person desires to share that love with you and only you forever. If you find that, then you probably are light years ahead of most relationships and will be able to positively, effectively, lovingly move through any muck that comes your way. I presume that other variables many people seem to value (too) highly in the relationship equation, such as similarities and differences, shared interests, religious and political issues, etc., are discovered, analyzed and properly factored during the time it takes to discover the two parties share this compatible love and desire to do so “permanently.”
Ultimately, I believe that too often people have not defined, for themselves, what love is, what they need/require from a partner, what they are capable of consistently providing to the other, and what their relationship cost-benefit analysis dictates. It is much too common (self included) to look outside (like, say… at the other person ?!) when choosing a partner. First, we must be hyper-aware of ourselves – look inside first, and then continue to do so as you begin to look outward….
Oh, and for the record, your photos make it difficult to do anything but look outwardly… Stunning, you are!
I actually did think quite a bit about what you wrote. I even thought about it while away from the page.
Paragraph 1: Agreed. I don’t expect perfection, but to the extent perfection is subjective according to one’s personal tolerance, I’d hope for a pretty close match.
Paragraph 2: In reading this, I immediately thought about my own “definition and understanding of love.” Turning inward, I didn’t find any ready clear answers. That bothered me because I’ve always been a fairly introspective and observant person. I wondered whether I’ve never defined it, or whether my definitions have now “evolved” into mud. I considered defining love now as it pertains to me, and found that I am presently unable to open that can of worms. Your two-fold equation plus presumed variables is indisputable by me, though.
Paragraph 3: Already realized it applies to me in my analysis during paragraph 2. I feel sheepish, but again, am unable to reach for the can opener. I think I’m just petrified. Also, as with the second paragraph, I find your principle pretty airtight. I just don’t think I’m there, yet.
This is the first time I realized that I *may* be the type to just shop for some vague something, and make decisions during browsing based on, “Oh, that looks good.” (As opposed to “I’m looking for a brown suede closed-toed work-shoe with a two-inch heel, preferably by designer Jimmy Choo, preferably under $1K.” Which, if you know me, would never happen.) I used to pride myself in not overdefining something so that I keep myself flexible to the possibilities, cuz who am *I* to know better than divine providence, right? But *maybe* I was just fooling myself.
I guess one day, when I’m able to stare into the mirror, I’m gonna need do some self-reflection.
Thank you for your for-the-record. But it doesn’t soften the hard blow above. 😉 haha!
I don’t believe I would have been the best person *I” could have been had I stayed with my (ex) husband for a lifetime. Many things about me would have been suppressed. It took meeting someone new to discover that. But after I grew up, we grew apart, and I am post-divorced for 3 years I can see where he was perfect for that decade of my life.
I hope Mr. Wonderful and I will always be together, but if life takes us in separate directions someday I know I would look back and see where he was perfect for THIS time in my life.
I don’t believe in one and only FOREVER, for MYSELF. Everyone is different. Some people could not handle more than one life partner. For me, it would have been a disservice and unhealthy.
Next post, I think you should upload nude photos of yourself. If not, at least you should be topless.
Flat Coke – You’ve always been good at learning things about yourself by looking in. And I think you’re right, sometimes one doesn’t realize one’s growth potential UNLESS one moves on. Also sometimes, one grows anyway and simply outgrows the other person.
Vicky – Hey, don’t be catty with me. Blame James. *pointing at James*
Wow…I didn’t think the pictures were that revealing. It’s nothing I haven’t seen at the beach or at pool parties. If I wear swim trunks it doesn’t mean I’m going to go strip at Chippendale’s! …unless the pay is good. How much does that pay? Will they let me keep my trunks on?
What?? What did I do????!!!
Dwaine – Actually, I think I’ve seen less on teenage girls walking into the courthouse.
Re Chippendales’ pay, one resource states: “Unlike gentleman’s clubs, where most men want to be perceived as big spenders, free with $10s and $20s, ‘with women, it’s all about the dollar bills,’ says Bobby, adding that he’s made anywhere from $50 to $800 in a single night. (Another Chippendale reports an annual income between $45,000 and $60,000 on his MySpace page.)”
I think there are other reasons men work at Chips, since the pay isn’t great. For you, I say if you want to take the trunks off, you’ve worked HARD (especially lately) on your body, you should be proud to have others appreciate your progress!
James – *picking up rolled up newspaper*
Just for that, you don’t have to pay a cover. 😉
Ok, you can whack me with the newspaper. It was worth it!
Dwaine – Thanks! =D
James – Thanks! =D
There is no perfect person because nobody is perfect. We just have to accept the other person as they are and decide whether we want them to be the one. Its our decision.