My head is spinning – so much to think about, and decide. Well, OK. "So much" is really two things, but both are major and potentially life-changing. For me.

At the front of my mind right now, is work. Last week, I talked to my boss about where I'm headed within the company. The plans he originally had for me didn't work out, so he made me two offers, of which I could pick one. Both are very flattering. On instinct, I went for one of the offers. I'm very confused about this, for a number of reasons. First of all, when I applied for this job I didn't intend to work here for very long; a year maybe, to give me the chance to regain my bearings after the all the stuff that went on before and after last Christmas. I never really planned to be promoted to…well, to anything. Secondly, I was focused on getting my degree before mum died and the miscarriage. I sort of lost that focus when everything happened, and working was supposed to just be a temporary thing before I go back to school. One might object here that I could do both, and I suppose I could, for a while. Swedish higher education is not adapted for people who work ft though, so it would become impossible after a while. The alternative is to do both pt, and I don't think that is possible where I work now. Thirdly, I have an abso-fucking-lutely hellish commute. (I usually don't swear, but when it comes to my commute, no words are too harsh, lemmetellya.) I am away from home for 60 hours a week. Do I want that? No. We are contemplating moving into a more central part of Uppsala, closer to the railway station. The problem with this is we both LOVE the flat we're in now, it's in a nice area and it's good for the kitties. When I put it like this, I know what I should do: quit. Then I start over. "But if I stay, they'll give me a job which will be fulfilling and probably interesting, with my own projects or if I'm really lucky I get to deal with finances and we all know how much I loooove numbers." But it's so far away...and I want my degree...oh, but numbers...See? Very confused!

The second issue I'm struggling with is a biggie. I hassle Lars about it all the time, and he's as clueless about it as I am. The question is: do we want children? If so, when? Actually, we're more stuck on "do we?" for now. We would have to make such a concious decision. If we suddenly found ourselves (huh? that would be ME) pregnant, we'd be happy and adapt to it. Now, we have to decide: "Right now is a good time to have a child." Nuh-uh. We're both too much in love with our "let's have a drink and put our feet up" lifestyle to willingly implement an element that would demand actual responsibility from both of us. OK, so Lars is a responsible person. I am so not. And I've just heard horror stories from mothers who say they like it better at work because they can at least have their coffee in peace there and have nice, grown-up conversations instead of being tugged at every second and having all sorts of things regurgitated all over them. I don't want to be a parent, I want to be me first and possibly a parent second. It doesn't seem to work that way though. I'll probably get over myself in a while, and want nothing more than stay at home and be vomited on. The scary thing is that if I hadn't had the miscarriage in February, I would at this moment be at home, with 2.5-month old Jo/Lars Junior doing his/her stuff. Now there's a thought. "Be quiet, baby, I want to play on the computer."

I don't like making big decisions, so how about if I just don't? Hasn't ignoring stuff always been the way to make it go away? Oh no, hang on - it's the other way round, right? Crap.
posted by Johanna at 4:36 AM

I watched the morning news before I left home (*and* ironed a blouse, and washed/dried my hair, and fed cats, did makeup, made bed, went back to bed for an extra five minutes, all in 45 minutes! OK, so I had to RUN to catch the bus.). They were talking about abortion in regard to the election. I will willingly admit, I haven't been following the whole campaigns as closely as I could, but I'll stick my chin out anyway and wonder how in the world anyone could even contemplate voting for someone who a)supports the death penalty b)will probably get abortion made illegal asap.

Death penalty is a mystery to me. Lars and I saw Dead Man Walking a few years back. It made a huge impression on me, and helped me realize just how opposed I am to poisoning/electrocuting/[whatever other methods there are] someone, regardless of what they've done. What really gets me though, is the fact that, in many cases, you just can't be 100% sure that the person being executed is guilty. Unless there is an absolute way of proving someone has really done what he/she is being killed off for, it's abuse of justice. Although I don't agree with execution even if you can prove he/she committed the crime you stand accused for. The bottom line is, no it's not right to murder people but that doesn't give the authorities the right to in turn kill the person who committed murder.
And abortion...whoa. This issue angers me to the point of speechlessness. I can't believe anyone would want to go back to women either being butchered by some quack, or trying to do it themselves with a knitting needle/wire coat hanger/whatever. I saw some catholic "priest" on TV this morning, saying he was going to suggest to Bush if he is elected that all abortion clinics should be burned, and that the people working there should be executed. I hope he was kidding. And what a very Christian thing to say. Let the holy war begin! Gawd, this issue makes me so sad, because it is a sure-fire way to gain control over women's bodies and, ultimately, lives. I personally wouldn't have an abortion. My mother was adamantly against them, and for myself I agree. BUT I cannot even attempt to decide what is right for every other person out there. Sure, some people use them as a form of birth control. I don't think that is an ideal situation, no. But I do feel that a woman should have the right to choose...choose if bringing another child into the world with the man who abuses her is the right thing to do, choose what is best for the child. We don't need more abused, poverty-stricken homeless children, nor do we need children who know they were unwanted. And we certainly don't need women maimed in their desperate attempts to control their own destiny. I'm properly not making much sense here, but then I seldom do when I'm very upset. I realize I am not an American, and thus don't really need to involve myself. Women's rights are a global issue though, so I can't just sit back and be quiet.
posted by Johanna at 12:48 AM

I really like Harry Potter. What does that make me - impressionable and at the verge of turning myself over to the occult "powers" in society? I've read opinions like this before, and I never know whether to laugh or to cry. I read books about a student witch called Jill when I was 8 or 9, and even though I liked the imagery and setting of the stories, I didn't exactly turn to witchcraft right away. Articles like this make me wonder which of the books I read growing up - the ones that enriched my life, developed my imagination and made me starry-eyed for days - were really as "dangerous" as the Harry Potter-books, and in what profound way they Damaged me and made me spiritually disabled. My only regret while I was racing through Harry-Potter-world at breakneck speed was that they weren't published while I was still young enough to be able to enjoy them fully...I'm sure children enjoy them even more than I do, because Harry Potter is their equal.
A complaint I've heard as well as the Christian one is that Potter books are so violent. Sure, there is some violence featured in J.K. Rowling's books, but I believe reading about it is much less harmful than watching it on TV - in books, violence is usually not the main aspect of the scene, more like the means to an end. On screen (TV or cinema) violence is always the focal point of any situation where it makes an appearance, however brief. When children read, the situation is adapted to the child's imagination, and the horror adapted to the child's own tolerance of such things. On TV or in films the situations are figments of someone else's imagination, and apart from being static and unchangeable (unlike in books), are sprung from grown-up minds that have a higher tolerance for murder, blood and fear, or at least know that it's just make-believe.
I pity the children who's parents agree with the above beliefs. They will not benefit from the wealth of wisdom, healthy values and fun that the Harry Potter books submit to their readers.
posted by Johanna at 12:48 AM