Nah to the ah to the NO, NO, NO

"Blah, blah, blah
I be like nah to the ah to the NO, NO, NO

All my ladies listen up "

Channeling my Megan Trainer RN

OK so I got a message from a friend today about the #thingsonlychristainwomenhear hashtag, saying 'they're are some crakers' (true in the horrifying sense) and that she 'was laughing so hard'. So I looked up this hashtag (mistake) I found literally nothing there to amuse me at all, not once did I laugh, or even snigger.  I sat there mouth open in horror.

As a women in a 21st century Evangelical church I would like to state here that I personally have never been on the receiving end of any of these kinds of comments. I have been very blessed to attend churches that value and uphold women. Nevertheless I'm not unaware that stuff like this happens. 

I feel I can't stay silent on this! I'm not going to discuss the roles on men and women in the church (1. because it would make this post way too long  and 2. it's not really the point I'm trying to make.) I think what I want to say it to validate women from a woman, who struggles with this that you are heard. Too much of this discussion is men correcting women on their theology. Nobody wants to have their thoughts/emotions disregarded by someone who has no personal experience in the issue, and is quoting from the biblical ideal.  I feel that I often sit alone in the middle of this debate.  On one side you have those who reject the (for the sake of argument)  traditional views of men and women in the church and on the other those who disregard them completely in view of complete egalitarianism. I feel there is an unheard middle ground; as I have spoken about before Intellectually I understand the concept, but emotionally I resent it. I understand an except the biblical roles of men and women but struggle to reconcile the biblical command/example with what I observe in the greater church.

To the women out there that are upset, hurting or (like me) down right pissed off at these belittling, hurtful, 'well meant' things that have been said. You are heard, you matter, you have a place in the kingdom. Let's strive to be loving Godly servants of the king, not matter where we fall on this issue.

Review: Reached - Ally Condie

Reached by Ally Condie is the final installment in the 'Matched' trilogy.

The first book in this series 'matched' I really liked and found interesting. although it was pretty typical of a YA dystopic series, the world itself and how Condie set it up as dystopic was really interesting. Often that's the thing that draws me in to a dystopic series; the actual world that it's set in, what it is that the government controlling, what's unique, what's forbidden, what's allowed etc (eg in the delirium series by Lauren Oliver that fact that love is forbidden is a really interesting concept, or in the Uglies series by Scott Westerfeild its that everyone get turned 'pretty' on their 16th birthday or Firstlife by Gena Showalter where you got to decided which place you wanted to spend you second life/death .. you get the jist)

The concept in the Matched series is 100% government control eg portion controlled meals set per person delivered to your door, whom you are going to marry, what job you will have, and when you get you assigned job people are separated so their job is the only thing that they know how to do so that the whole community is co-dependent on each other. So the 'Society' remains in power because everyone is segregated in such a way that they are dependent on each other, and thus, the 'society' to survive. Also a lot of things are strictly forbidden and there is a emphasis of the use of modern technology other old tech, shown in that people don't know how to write anymore. Creativity is forbidden and they only kept 100 of each of the old 'greats' I guess you'd call them eg 100 poems, 100 songs, 100 stories, etc (but of course there's an underground rebel movement fighting to preserve them.)

That's just a bit of background on the world the series is set in...
Reached is the final in the series and thus the climax, the crux if you will, but really I found the whole thing a bit slow... and just sort of dribbled off at the end.

Here's a couple of thoughts:

#1
I took me about halfway through the third book in this series to figure out/decide her name is probably pronounce cas-ie-a up till this point I'd just skip over her name whenever it was written. But that's probably just me... but it's pretty hard to read a book when you don't know how to pronounce the protagonist's name. * note I just looked it up on youtube to see how other people pronounce it other options include 'ca-se-a' and 'casha'. (I think i've made my point)

#2
This book does fall into the typical YA love triangle. Her best friend of forever is in love with her, they end up being matched, but she falls in love with someone else and ends up with him. Once, just once I want the protagonist to chose their best friend. However as the romance angle is not central to the book I'll let it pass and though annoying and over done it wasn't the focus of this book.
Although now that I think about it why do book with heroine protagonists always have male best friends? (okay so not always) but in the ones that do the friend has always has been in love with them forever and them realising that it's never going to happen and then eventually conceding to their best friend being in love with someone else. I get tired of reading the same characters over and over. It adds nothing what so ever to the plot of the actual story and doesn't give the characters themselves any semblance of their own individual personality or a realistic reaction to being rejected or the long suffering of unrequited love.


#3
On the whole I found the whole book really slow... up to the last 5th of the book pretty much nothing had actually happened. And the resistance, which is called 'The Rising', became a Governmental control in and of itself, like they became the replacement of 'The Society', but they weren't any better, and 'the rising' are trying to find the cure to the Plague, (that they invented in the first place to overthrow The society etc), the whole thing is just messy and hard to follow. It made it very hard to empathise with the characters at all, I really just didn't care about what happened to any of them. (Really I just wanted to to be over..)

#4 
The book is told by all three of the main character's perspectives (Ky, Cassia and Xander) switching each chapter, I'm really not a fan of this to be honest, writers generally do it for one of two reasons: 1 so they can kill off a character or 2 to 'show deeper insight' into the characters. I'm really not a fan of first person writing, just write in third person omniscient narrator and then you get everyone's perspective... 


All in all I was disappointed with this book and was overall underwhelmed. The concept started out as a modern Orwellien retelling but didn't stand up in the execution.

Dear friend

Dear friend,
These are the things that I should have said:

Thank you for telling me. Thank you for trusting me thank you for wanting to get help.

(I'm sorry that I'm a socially awkward munchkin and I'm not good when people tell me big news.) But I want you to know that I hear you and I'm here for you.

I'm not good at talking about my feelings or about other people's feelings for that matter but I can listen and if you want or need to talk about it I'm here.
I don't know if you're aware of it or not but yesterday was international mental health day the day you chose to tell me that you are one the 120 million people worldwide who suffer from depression.
This is not your fault it's no one's really. As you said I feel I should have more to say about this but right now but I don't.

I wish this wasn't happening to you and I wish I could fix it.
Love,
Shell

Review: City of Fallen Angels

City of Fallen Angels is the fourth installment of the Shadow Hunter series by Cassandra Clare.

Having read this far into a series there was almost an expectation for the excitement to drop off and this is what happened here. I devoured the first book in this series having finished it in three days and promptly ordering the next one online before I had even finished, I just had to know what happened. However, I was, over all, underwhelmed and disappointed with a lot of this book. 

Here's some thoughts:

Simon:
Something that I have noticed about fantasy/supernatural books is that no one is allowed to stay as a human... they're either a werewolf or a faerie or a witch etc or if they aren't at the start, they very soon will be. 
This was part and parcel with Simon. In the second book he got turned into a Vampire and by the end of the third book he's a 'super special vampire' (AKA 'Daylighter' Because you couldn't have a sub-central character that couldn't be around half the time...)
In all seriousness a large part of this book's plot focuses on Simon and that's probably a good thing because he's one of the only characters I can stand... despite the 'can't stay human' thing. I actually like his character. Simon is the 'morally good' character without being the annoying pretentious hero archetype. He does have his flaws though *cough dating two people at once cough*.
Simon ends up dating Maia and Isabelle at the same time and both the girls after being mad at him for awhile just let him off the hook by saying "we weren't exclusive". What? I have a real issue with this. If you are dating someone and you call them your boy friend (or girlfriend as the case may be) exclusivity is implied. I feel you shouldn't have to define the parameters of your relationship in order to expect monogamy. I think my issue here is not really with Simon, although he was knowingly cheating (although they decline to call it that) on both these women, my  issue is  the reaction of the girls. They essentials semantically excuse his behaviour.... NO just no. 

One of the things I really liked about Simon however is that he realised that Clary was never going to feel the way about him that he did about her. He recognises that she was only with him because she thought Jace was he brother. Simon didn't want her to settle for him he didn't want to be anyone's consolation prize. Simon is the realistic character. Clary was what he'd always wanted but for her he was a runner up prize and that's wasn't good enough Yay Simon (the closest thing to realistic human emotions in this book, while no longer being human.)

Jace/Clary/debarkle
If you thought that was ranty sit down because my minor issues with Simon are nothing compared to my major issues with the Clary and Jace plot. 'Plot' is a term I use loosely here. Okay so after the whole 'are we related or not/agh I'm soo madly attracted to you even if we are related' debarkle, that was a major part of the earlier books. It was finally revealed that: no, in fact they're not actually related, so they can be inflamed with passionate lust for each other to their hearts content. 
Oh wait, no ,they can't because it's stupid, totally unrealistic and just plain ridiculous. Okay so Jace keeps having these 'dreams' where her tries to kill Clary, but instead of talking to her about it, he tried to distance himself from her. Wallowing in self-destructive self pity "woe is me I have the amazing girlfriend, but I don't deserve her and instead of talking to her I'm going to ignore and avoid her and not tell her what's wrong". Their whole relationship is so empty, melodramatic and based solely on 12 months (ish) worth of Adrenalin amped feelings. Ugh, seriously, see the 'kissing in the alley way in the rain' scene. Legit kissing. In the rain. In a dingy alley. Seriously. Thank goodness Isabelle interrupted them ...
You've known each other for 12 months and you're 17  ( I'm not saying that people as young as 17 cannot have real, strong, romantic emotions) but the way that this is written, in this really possessive, needy, trashy, kind of way (see the kissing in the alley above) it's just. No. Not healthy. Not functional.
I feel this is a common trend in YA teen relationships that they're possessive and over bearing and all consuming... to the point where it's just ridiculous.I do have a lot of issues with the Jace and Clary story line. It's not healthy and it doesn't develop their characters at all. It doesn't add anything to the plot it doesn't move the story on in anyway and in some senses stagnates it a bit. It also seeks to make that 'overly self-sacrifical' love desirable and it's not. Love is sacrifice, but not to the point where it is selfish and uncommunicative. I think that a lot of YA novels write protagonists like that. 'Oh I'm going to go and fight the/my demons by myself and not allow you to help me because that might hurt you/you might see me as weak'. I think that this is potentially very dangerous because it can perpetuate gender stereotypes and sets unhealthy benchmarks for relationships in young people. 

Other Notes:
Dumb ass Clary. Newly found out she was a shadow hunter with her (super special power of creating new runes) gets an address as a clue to this super creepy old church known in conjunction with the dead baby. Does she tell anyone about it? No.. she goes there. By herself. Oh yeah she tells Isabelle as an after thought.....

I feel I have to mention the other main romantic relationship in the book although they are absent for most of it: Magnus and Alec I feel this relationship is just so random to begin with. It came out of no where in the second book and all of a sudden they're super serious and they're on this major trip abound the world. Anyway Alec, for the part they're even in the book is such possessive childish brat; Magnus is a centuries old bi-sexual warlock that cannot die, of course he's had relationships before you, you conceited dick. Do they have any baring on your current relationship? No. Are you being a childish selfish brat? Yes. I mean yeah knowing that you're going to get old and your partner is going to live forever and move on eventually is something to think about.. but really, you'd think he would have considered that before this point.... ugh 

Ok so when I got to the part where they revealed 'Lilith' I was like 'of course she's Lilith'... It's the one demonesque thing that they haven't exhausted yet. Werewolves? Check. Vampires? Check. Magical vampire that can walk in daylight? Check. Half angel half human? Check.
What haven't we used...? Oh yeah .... Lilith the mother of all demons!


Alright after sassily slamming 'City of Fallen Angels' for the last 1100 words here are some good things about this book:

It's written in third person so you do get to know everything that's going on and not just a one dimensional narration. A lot of YA series go the first person and you don't get a full view of what everyone is thinking/feeling. 
I have already mentioned my thoughts on the Jace/Clary debarkle, however there was no quintessential 'love triangle' in this series. Well there was for a little bit, but Simon steped aside, coz he aint no consolation prize *see above*.
The  shadow-hunter/nephilim  creatures were actually a really cool idea. With the runes being tattooed on their skin to give them different powers a really cool idea that could have been developed a lot more and the actual city/world of the nephilim was really interesting as well (shame that most of the story is set in modern day america..)
There were a number of characters that I quite liked in this book Izzy for example. She's bad ass and I feel didn't get developed enough. same with Maia and I'm interested to see where the Maia/jordan story goes...
So I slammed the book pretty hard and after writing this I did move my rating down from 3 stars to 2... 
but I'm still interested enough to read the next book...
Eventually.

Go tell it on the mountains.

Well I have been home from Nepal for one week. I thought that I would write a 'reflections on Nepal post', but I don't know where to start.... There are so many things I could say about this wonderful country, with its beautiful people and amazing scenery. I could go on and on about where we slept and what we ate (and our absolutely amazing chef!!) and all those things. But that's not really the point.
We went over there to tell people the gospel, to reach un-reached people for Christ, to love the lost, to share the good news with people who who might never hear it otherwise. It seems unfathomable to me that there are people in the world that have never heard the Gospel, ever. Back home there are so many that have not understood or even accepted the message of Christ, but they at least will be held accountable for knowing what they rejected. But there are hundreds of thousands of people who have never heard. They have never had the oppertunity to hear the message.
It is such a privilage to tell these people the life changing message of Christ. Something that really struck me was Binay said we are not comanded to convert people that's the work of the Holy Spirit we are just comanded to tell them. That is our comand. How wonderful that the burden is not on us? And how much of a blessing is it that God uses tiny broken humans in His olan for salvation? What a privlage! 

“for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!””

Romans 10:13-15 NIV

http://bible.com/111/rom.10.13-15.niv

Go tell it on the mountain, over the hills and everywhere, that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Intellect vs emotion

Although I don't need to justify my thoughts on my own blog, I feel I must preface this post with a couple of things:
1. No I do not hate men.
2. I know and except the created order and know that God made it that way for a reason.
3. This is something that I struggle with a lot, I don't need to be converted to the right way of thinking about it. This is just me airing my thoughts.
4. By all means chat to me about this I would love to hear your thoughts.

(In reading over this I realised that I jump from the context of a couple, to the church in general. I know these are two separate scenarios, but I hope you get the idea.)

I've been struggling lately about women and the church and submission, I mean more so than usual. I have struggled with this concept for some time and I thought I had dealt with it but it's back with a vengeance.

Intellectually I understand the concept, but emotionally I resent it. Why should I as a 21st century women have to submit to someone simply because they were born with a penis? (please excuse my crassness but the fact stands...)

Within my personal context  there are men of my close acquaintance whose leadership I would happily submit to (and do), not because they are men, but because they happen to be men, whom I respect and admire. Whom I know and they know me. I know that they have my best interest at heart and a genuinely trying to look after me, and the women in their lives. I know all that men in Christian circles are all supposed to do this, it's right, it's biblical. But to me they are strangers, why should I submit to them simply because they happen to be men?

I guess what irritates me about this is, when men act entitled in the area of submission "I man, you woman, therefore you must submit to me."

An acquaintance of mine once said yes I expect my girl friend to submit to me, but it is my obligation to be worthy of that and if I am not leading her in a godly way then you should not be obligated to submit to me.

It is my belief that this is a two way street. We teach our girls to be gentle, kind, submissive, but what a we teaching our men? (genuine question idk I'm not allowed in on the men's only talks)

And what about outside the church? Should we implement this men first leadership thing in all areas of society?
This came up the other night while I was at a friend's house playing the card game emperor - scum and when we finished the three women happened to be the ones that were they three emperors, the men folk there seemed to subtly imply that there was something wrong with this. They started to harp on about created order, I completely disagree. women should absolutely be permitted in positions of leadership/authority in government. I am unconvinced that the 'rules' for want of a better word of the church should carry over to the secular government. It's the entitlement thing they assume leadership as a right of passage rather than a burden and a privilege.

Please allowed me to make this quite clear - I have nothing against these men at all nor am I intending to attack them in any way, this is just me voicing my thoughts and opinions (aka venting but trying to be eloquent and diplomatic - although frequently it comes out as a bit of a whinge.)

I feel we need to open the conversation more to have a cross gender discussion. instead of the contestant segregation.

The 'women's' talks talk about submission and modesty and not letting our brothers stumble but the way we act, dress, talk, etc

What are our young men taught?
(seriously someone answer this..) 
My hope is that they discuss similar - how to act to love their sisters and to be 'worthy' of submission to be gentle and humble.

Obviously we are designed to complement each other so lets open the conversation to how to support each other.

What are our young men discussing where the women aren't not there?
I for one am sick and tired of being told to be submissive and dress modestly and be a good Christian women (pretty much everything I am not) when I'm not hearing from the other side that men should be worthy (worthy is not the word I want but I can't quite think of the word that I want here) of these things ? I mean I know that we are all called to obedience. This is the way that God planed for men and women to work together. Together being the operative word. 

We are constantly being told and reminded of how to serve each other but are we aware of our own weaknesses in order to let the other serve us. Ladies are we giving our brothers opportunities to serve us?

I think ultimaly this is something thing that I struggle with and that I constantly wrestle with. I need to remember that I am submitting to God's plan when I submit to men. That my heavenly  father knows what is best for me. He is huge and I am tiny. Me having a whinge about that fact that I was born an woman and therefore having to submit to men is like an act shaking it's fist at God and saying "Why did you make me so?" You are an ant you have a role and a purpose - that doesn't make you an less significant to God. I have a role and a purpose, I guess I'm just struggling to figure out what that is.

Credit where Credit's due

I am a photographer. I love being a photographer. There are so many things that I love about being a photographer. 

There is one thing that I dread more than anything in the world though, is the responses that I get from  people (either to actually seeing some of my work, or to when I tell them I'm a photographer.) I've had some shockers lately. I have come to the conclusion (/ I choose to believe) that people just don't realise just how insulting the things they say are.

I displayed some of my work at a stall my friend and I had a recently to raise money for our trip to Nepal. I expect people to comment on my work, whether questions or criticisms, and that's okay, great even, but there is always one, one person who says something that I' sure is meant to be a compliment, but is actually really insulting. 

And this time the gentleman in question was admiring one of my macro water drop photos (one that I'm actually really proud of) and he said "You must have a really nice camera!"

*giant internal cringe*

But I calmly (if rather curtly) replied "It's not about the camera."

He was shocked "It isn't?!"

*sigh* 

Okay let me explain why this is insulting:

1) First and for most: No actually I do not have "a really good camera" I have a Nikon D80, with a cropped sensor, 10 mega pixels, it came out in 2008 which is old when you're talk dslrs and the ISO quality leaves a lot to be desired! (Please understand that I am not saying these things to complain about my camera! Quite the opposite actually, it doesn't matter what camera you have, see point two.)

2) I really really cannot stress this enough! It is not about what kind of camera. As my lecture put it "the camera is just a devise for capturing light." There is a quote that sums up my feeling about this perfectly "The single most important component of the camera is the 12 inches behind it" Ansel Adams. Any skilled photographer will be able to pick up any camera and make great image with it.

3) Note there that I said 'skilled'. Yes being a photographer is a skill. When you say you must have a really nice camera" completely negates my skill as a photographer. It negates my skill, my passion, my training and credits a (essentially) a lump of metal and glass and that is infuriating! 

There is a saying that a bad tradesman blames his tools, but on the flip side a good tradesman doesn't credit them. A builder doesn't say to someone admiring the house they built "I owe it all to the top of the range (insert brand name here) hammers that I have, that how I built the house" No! That's ridiculous! 

Photography is about so much more than picking up the top of the line camera and pressing the shutter. 
When you credit my camera instead of me you are saying that the images that I make are just a fluke. You are saying that anybody can be a photographer (which some many people are inclined to believe but is not the case.) You say that with the right tools any body can do that. 

I can pick up a hammer and nail some wood but that doesn't make me a builder.

A camera is a camera.
It is the tool of my trade that is all.