How women dress (modesty.)

I couldn’t get into this in my previous post, but I briefly mentioned a discussion in my English Class about how women dress.

Deep breath.

I’ve grown up going to youth group, so I must have heard this discussion at least a dozen times, usually once or twice every six months is when it comes up.

Every time, there were some girls who got really bent out of shape about it. Even offended. And the same thing happened in class. A few women, particularly the oldest one in our class, were in favor of having certain standards, shall we say; and one girl was getting a bee in her bonnet about being held to different standards than men.

If I want to not wear a shirt, or not wear a bra under my shirt, why shouldn’t I be able to; was her argument, a man doesn’t have to do that.

Um…how can I put this? A man doesn’t have a…reason to wear those things for decency’s sake.

To me the issue is really quite simple. Modesty depends on what you’ve got to work with. And wearing revealing clothes also depends on that, often enough.

I don’t wish to make men or women reading this uncomfortable, if you’re sensitive, and I am one of those folks; but I have to be honest too about this issue.

The real problem women seem to have, at least I’ve never yet heard a man complain that it’s not fair that we ask him to dress respectably, is that they have to deal with men gazing at them lustfully, and men do not have this problem.

Well, I don’t know about that. But I think it goes deeper, women also resent the idea that men can tell them to do anything, including how to dress; and then they get iffy even if other women are telling them.

After all shouldn’t girls be able to express themselves however they want?

If I was to be glib, I would say I’d rather not express myself then have me ogle me. And I’ve yet to catch one doing it, thank you very much.

But it’s not that simple is it?

And girls who resent this, do have a point. It’s not fair that women have to worry about it so much. It’s not fair that we have to worry about being raped, or have creepy remarks being made about us, and all sorts of stuff. Statistically, I think women are the victims of more violent cries then men are, though it depends on where you live.

It’s not right that we have to think about all this. My whole bus stop incident was one that I was prepared for, I’d thought about how I would handle it when something like that happened to me. But just the fact hat I knew it would happen and had to be prepared, is pretty sad.

Please men, please be shaking your heads and saying “Wow, that is terrible.”

I hope to God I never get assaulted, but 1 in 3 women are, or is that just the successfully assaulted ones? The attempted assaults could raise the number higher.

And if I’m in a dangerous spot, I hope that I have a good man around to protect me. Because the fact is, few women get assaulted when they have a man around them. In fact, kidnappers and assaulters will purposely target girls who they can tell don’t have a good Dad. Even losers in schools who pick up chicks and use them though they don’t assault them will go for the fatherless.

And I notice it’s the fatherless women who tend to have the most issue with how they dress.

We can talk about rights all day long. We can wish men didn’t lust. We can wish, quite frankly, that women didn’t lust. Don’t tell me any girl over 18 who likes men at all has never ogled one herself. Double standard much?

But the reality is, people lust. People are messed up.

And as I said, I believe there are really good men out there. And good women. I’m truly sorry if it’s never been your experience to meet one. But it’s not too late.

The point is, as I said in my class, do you play with matches in front of an arsonist? Do you drink in front of an alcoholic? Do you do drugs in front of a junkie?

Some people do, they are called being part of the problem. And people who don’t do, but don’t try to help their loved ones who are doing it are called enablers.

Not all men are enslaved to lust, not everyone does drugs. But if you know that someone has a weakness for something and you utterly disregard that by what you talk about, do, or dress like around them, you share the responsibility.

Sorry if I’m insulting your freedom, but explain to me where you get off?

“But Natasha, it’s my body, I can do what I want.”

Honestly, I’ve heard youth leaders try to be delicate and gentle about it, and it goes right over the girls heads. They turn up their teenage noses and stick out their chins and say “I have the right to dress however I want.”

Well, you have the right to jump off a bridge too, but don’t blame us for you broken bones.

But let me back off from laying down the law. I’m risking losing you guys by being too passionate.

I have felt like it was unfair too. I went through that phase.

It’s not all the girls fault. Whether we can blame men for checking us out if we dress that way, I can’t say, but we can blame them for acting on it.

I’d like to end this with another college story.

The other week I went to an event but couldn’t find the building for a good 45 minutes. (New student troubles.) I asked a few different people for help and they couldn’t tell me. But one young man decided to help me find it. He walked me form one end of central campus to the other. At first I was concerned since it was a total stranger, and not that many people were about. But he never was anything but courteous and respectful. a true gentlemen. He stayed with me until we finally found it, then left me outside the room.

I haven’t seen him since, And I doubt I will since we have different class schedules, but he made my evening a lot pleasanter even if I was stressed out. And later I realized he probably escorted me because there was an assault on or by our campus not that long ago. And I was alone.

I think I would have been fine, but that doesn’t change that I appreciated the consideration.

Which is why I say for one fellow who might have been wanting to use me, I’ve had a dozen who wanted to help me.

I think how men view women is shaped a lot by how women view themselves. If you dress like a sex symbol, don’t BS me that you view yourself any differently. If you dress like a princess, you think of yourself as a princess.

You cannot give off mixed signals and expect to be treated with consideration. Most men will not try anything on a girl they can plainly see wouldn’t go for it. Those who will are the reason we need good men around us.

And that is that.

That’s all I’ve got to say about it, until next time–Natasha.

Free spirits.

Do you know what the hardest thing about college is? Remembering your assignments and instructions.

Some students are going “amen sister.”

Why does the system have to be that we do everything the way the book says?

This is the home-schooler in me talking, I’m too used to putting my own spin on things. I mean, for example, if someone gives you a writing assignment and lists some possible topics you could use, but adds “Or you  could pick something yourself” I am that girl who will pick something herself.

I don’t think that means you have to do everything the opposite of what people suggest. I take advice, I follow important rules.

But when it comes to stuff that is non-essential, I like to shake things up.

I have gotten in trouble with teachers more for wanting to do things my own way, or actually for resisting doing everything their way, then I ever got for being flat out disobedient.

I don’t directly disobey authority, I try to obey it on my terms.

I think someone reading this is bound to relate.

I apply this to my religion also, In fact I give God all the responsibility for me being this way. (Yeah, I can play that card.) I don’t wish to offend anyone, but I could never be Jewish, Mormon, Amish, or any of the more organized forms of the faith.

I hate regimentation.

I know that there’s merit in tradition and discipline, and I have no beef with the above sects for doing things that way, but it would drive me crazy.

I don’t think this about being too good for conforming, so much as it’s my character is already too developed in the kind of freedom I’m used to.

I love a good tradition, don’t get me wrong, I’m not going to storm about how Christmas tress are dull and Easter services are restrictive. And I need to be more disciplined.

But tradition and discipline are like salt and pepper, some like a lot, some like a little, but at bottom they are still seasonings.

The main dish of life is variety and flexibility. Because life is unpredictable.

And that is why people like me, though we seem helter-skelter to those of you who live by a schedule, tend to bounce back a lot faster when our plans go awry.

I will say this, you don’t have to have an outgoing personality to be into individual touch.

My mom, for example, is an introvert who doesn’t like the spotlight and will read the instruction manual before doing something. She likes organizations.

but I admire my Mom, because through her faith she’s learned to be flexible and change her plans a lot. She would naturally prefer organization, but she will stay the most calm in the chaos and crisis, and bounce back the fastest. Though her personality might lead you to believe she’d have a meltdown under pressure, that’s only if you don’t know her very well. All the people who know my mom know she’s tough.

But in a quiet way that’s very different form me. Yet she has that same “design it your own way” thing. Though she reads the manual, my mom believes in creativity.

Which goes to show you can’t put people in a box.

My dad on the other hand prefers things be done his way.

I can be like that too, maybe too much actually. (I have that oldest child bossiness thing.) But I prefer to go my own way.

On principle I tend to object to movies and books that send that message to kids. Because I believe kids need to be guided and they are not mature enough to know which way to go much of the time. But I do not believe at all in micromanagement. My mom never did that with us, and I think that’s why we turned out to be free spirits.

Young teens need to be able to express themselves outside of what their parents like or understand, but I would never advocate letting teens be rebels in the name of expression.

I don’t have kids, yet based on my own experience, I’d say freedom within certain boundaries is always the healthiest way to handle kids and their creativity.

To tie this back into the college students out there, I think this shapes our approach to academia.

I am so used to thriving when I can express myself with freedom. I’ve had a couple teachers in my life who understood me in that way. But college professors are so busy, how cant hey be expected to nurture that?

Well, the truth is, college is the last chance teachers have to awaken that in young people before they turn them loose on the world. It’s a slim chance, because 18-25 year olds are already pretty set in their ways, but there’s a chance.

We need college professors to care just as much, if not more, then high school teachers, because this is the last schooling most of us get before we set off on our career paths.No one is ever too old to be mentored.

I will praise my English professor for being the only one of mine to get this in some way. But there’s precious few like him. IF you have one, you better be thankful.

Any person who is willing to teach thickheaded freshmen for eight hours to 16 hours a week has patience, but not everyone has inspiration.

College is the only part of education that puts two adults together but still on unequal footing. We’re all allowed to choose for the first time what we will learn.

But no matter ho much responsibility we take, it can’t be denied that teachers play a pivotal role in inspiring the student.

That’s all for now, until l next time–Natasha.

Language Barriers.

Sometimes courage is not slowing down long enough for fear to catch you.

And sometime courage is staying still long enough for peace to catch up with you.

But I’d say the first one is my motto today. I woke up feeling achy, but upon getting up I felt better, and I’ve learned that my stress symptoms increase when I’m inactive. Inactivity can be just as hard o your body as hyperactivity.

So with that in mind, I want to switch subjects.

Some of you who’ve been reading my college posts know that I’m studying Language. Specifically English and ASL. (Guess which is harder.)

A few of my older followers probably remember that I went on a mission trip two years ago (almost three) to Cambodia, and there I learned a bit of Khmer.

Khmer (pronounced Ka-mai) is not an easy language to learn by rote. You have to hear it, and in my opinion you have to hear it spoken in real settings. My attempts to learn more of it since haven’t panned out well. I need a tutor I bet.

My ASL teacher wanted us to journal on a movie we watched in class about. Audism is a new term, probably not i most dictionaries, that refers to discrimination based on one’s ability to hear.

It’s a real thing. But it seems to bother people the most when their own families won’t include them in conversation by interpreting for them.

Welcome to my world, I would say. I’ve been frustrated many times over the years by being left out of conversations. I wish I could blame it on being deaf but all I can attribute it to is being young and not having common ground.

I guess being deaf makes it hard to have common ground and that’s the sting. Even if they did, they can’t talk about it.

But the problem between people of different languages isn’t really lack of knowledge. It’s a lack of heart.

Very profound things can be communicated between people who speak different languages. We’ve heard that love doesn’t need a language. It’s true. In Cambodia, the people were very welcoming and nice to us even though we couldn’t understand more than a few things they said. We didn’t need to to understand good will.

I’d venture to say the trouble between different groups of people isn’t about language or skin color, it’s about suspicion.

Remember when I talked about strangers? How we wish we could connect with them?

Oftentimes we build walls around ourselves so that we won’t have to deal with strangers as people. The don’t challenge us, we don’t feel guilty.

And that’s the real reason behind slavery I think. Slavery has happened many times between people of the same race by the way, just different divisions. Sometimes it’s not even between tribes, it can be between classes. They don’t talk about that when they teach kids that America is evil for having slaves.

Yes it was evil a lot of the time, but America is not the exception in any way except that it fought a war over it. You look far back enough into almost nay country and you’ll fine slavery. Often not between different races.

We don’t have to look different to make strangers of each other.

We don’t have to look the same to believe we’re kindred.

To be open to new and different ways is to be open to life. Life is constantly changing. People who recognize this are more likely to accept each other, I think. There is n o point in trying to live in a certain time while the rest of the world moves on.

And coming from a home-schooler raised to believe that the old ways are better, that’s a big concession.

I believe they are better. They were healthier, more in line with natural law. But I don’t believe you change the world by staying in the past. The world won’t stay with you. Solutions always lie ahead of us.

True brotherhood between nations always begins, and always will, with the laying aside of suspicions. The willingness to see each other as part of the same family. Just different looking and different sounding. (Heck some of us have that in our immediate family. I’m not exactly like anyone else in mine, my sister even observed that it’s hard to place who I look like.)

Suspicion is the killer of phileo love (friendship/brotherly love.)  You remember that part of Pocahontas? “They’re different form us, therefore they an’t be trusted.” But what led to that? Immediate suspicion.

You know, both the Native Americans and the White men were already determined to think that their ways were the only way and that they had nothing to learn from anyone else. Both of them. Is it any wonder that they were immediately suspicious of each other? While Pocahontas both in the true history and in the movie represented those of us who think we have something to learn from each other.

I will never be convinced that my religion is not the correct one, but what I like about mine is that it allows me to recognize wisdom in other cultures. There is no culture without it’s own revelation of God that it understand better then others.

Americans understand freedom, for example. Jews understand holiness. I think many Asian cultures understand the flow of the spiritual into art and lifestyle better then we do. I think the Native Americans understood a lot about the way God speaks through nature.

The list goes on.

And that’s not exclusive of course. It’s just a sample.

Language is a gap between people, but in God’s mysterious ways, He was made it one of the most powerful ways to bridge the gap between people, if we approach it humbly and with love and patience.

The Bus Driver.

You know those moments that people tell stories about? The ones that Christian authors use to impart spiritual lessons, and pastors do it too, to the point where it’s almost annoying. You want to say “Not everything has to be a lesson, man!”

Well, I have one of those stories tonight.

I’ve been taking the bus to college, as you know. (Sounds like the title of an article doesn’t it?) And last night I noticed something as I got on: I tapped my pass and the driver said “Thank you.”

I thought “Why’s he thanking me? He’s the one putting in hours of his life doing a really boring job that no one appreciates him for, though they should because I sure as heck don’t have the patience to be a bus driver.”

I know the driver just meant to be friendly. That was what struck me. He wasn’t being polite, just friendly. Trying to make the rather isolated situation a little more comfortable.

To the best of his efforts, since we aren’t allowed to talk to bus drivers unnecessarily. Of course I know that’s for safety reasons, but what a lonely way to make a living if you can hardly even talk to the people you see all day. And you don’t have a co-worker there to cheer you up either.

I feel awkward just in the 12-15 minutes I spend on the bus not knowing anyone.

I’m pretty sure way back when the public transportation thing got going, there wasn’t a rule about talking to the driver. And I’m certain that other passengers at least used to talk to each other. It’s sad to see all the young students on the bus make awkward eye contact with each other, but bury themselves in their phones rather than strike up a conversation.

We’ve been raised with the idea that talking to strangers is bad, and dangerous, and worst of all, unnecessary. That’s the killer isn’t it? We feel that as long as we have our electronic transactions, we don’t need to talk. even bus passes are just card stickers now, no eye contact is even required.

And I see this, and I think to myself, we’re so lonely. We’re just starving to connect with each other.

It’s not that we want to connect on some soul level with every human we meet. I think we want to feel part of their world, just as they, in a small way, are part of ours. We might never see them again, but they were people, and we were interested in them just because of that.

Though most of us would agree general kindness is a good thing, very few of us stop to think what common courtesy and kindness require, that you care. That you see other people as beings who shape your world and are in it and whom you owe some recognition just as they owe you some, because that’s what it is to be human.

To be ignored is perhaps the most inhuman of practices that we do on a regular basis, and I think we feel it deep down, we know something’s not right.

When I do happen to strike up a conversation with someone I don’t know, I always feel it’s a bit of an awkward trade off. You ask the culturally acceptable small talk questions, (which have been disdained by the more withdrawn folks of society, but are in place for a very good reason) but you don’t really feel like you can trust them. Still you try to make things more comfortable by being more familiar, because somehow we feel less afraid when we know someone, even if it’s just their name. Even if they didn’t tell it to us, we just heard them called by it.

We yearn to know things about each other. I don’t think it’s just busybodies who feel that way. It’s everyone. We’ve all looked at a particular stranger and wondered what their life was like, and we wish we could be in it somehow, because maybe we’d find something there that’s missing in our own world.

I’m not the first to think of this, there’s an insightful essay called Strangers by Toni Morrison that I recommend you check out.

What the bus driver, and myself by my slight smile and nod in response, are trying to do is reestablish something we feel we’ve lost.

My question is, is it just this generation that’s lost it? Or have people felt this way ever since we left Eden? I see something of it it Cain’s plea to God after he is sentenced to wander the earth. “Anyone who finds me will kill me,” as if he doesn’t know who that anyone might be.

Abraham said “I am a stranger in a strange land” but he still tried to have peace with some of the land’s inhabitants.

Being strangers and being estranged don’t seem to be the same thing. One is a fact of life because we can’t know everyone, the other is a deliberate choice to be shut off from the rest of the world.

In that sense, the person like me who has spent most of her days at home may yet be less a stranger to others then the person who closes them-self off to feeling or knowing anything about them.

I think we are hungry as a whole to reconnect somehow, but we don’t know the secret. I think technology has only provided the mask to hide behind so that we no longer know this, people used to know that being strangers was a sad thing.

Until next time–Natasha

(P. S. Watch for a new movie review in the next week or so, I’m planning on doing a DCOM.)

The Callous Conduct.

This essay is authored by my sister and is not my work in any way–Natasha.

Thoughts from reading “The Bad Beginning.”

Upon this perusal of the first book in the Series of Unfortunate Events, one thing in particular stuck out to me (in fact, the only thing that really stuck out to me), and that was anger.  More specifically, righteous anger. It was not something that was featured in this series so much as the overwhelming sense of sadness and hopelessness that sticks out in every book.  The very word “unfortunate” speaks of remorse and regret, rather than such an emotion as anger.  Righteous anger really only seems to be felt by one character in this book, and that is Klaus, the middle Baudilaire orphan.  His and his siblings’ parents have been cruelly taken from them, they have not a penny to spend at the moment, and they have been deposited, like so much unwanted luggage, upon the dirty doorstep of Count Olaf.  This alleged relative is cruel and unreasonable; he has taken advantage of their helpless state and thinks of nothing except how he may gain their fortune. Why, indeed, should Klaus not be angry?  The more pertinent question may be, why is he the only one?  Where do the helpless have to turn if no one has righteous anger?  The book, The Bad Beginning, by Lemony Snicket, is, I believe, an example of how the idea of different “truths” and “realities” for each person affects the more vulnerable people in society.

These children are being abused and mistreated.  Of all people who plead for the law’s protection, surely they are the most deserving of it.  Why has no one helped them?  Why does nobody listen when they try to explain their situation?  Why are even those who care what happens to them rendered ineffectual?  These are questions that occupy the reader’s mind for the whole of the series, and it gets very frustrating to have to witness over and over.

It is not logical or realistic that every single time the Baudilaires are in danger, no adult can or will help them, and the only ones who really seem to notice or mind this are the children themselves.  True, it is

  Gardner 2

kind of this series’ thing, but one must admit that if something like this happened today there would be outrage.  There would not be a snowball’s chance in hell of Count Olaf escaping the long arm of the law.  The public would despise him and offer pity and support to the three orphans.  Mr. Poe would be fired.

Yet it is not so in this book’s world.  Our heroes just can’t get ahead.  They are friendless, penniless, and helpless.  The only people they can rely on are themselves.  Why is that? Because the books do not follow the rules of logic and reality, and because every  single adult is incurably Stupid.

Each one has a nonsensical idea of what they think life is which they adamantly refuse to give up in favour of the reality the children are actually facing.  Mr. Poe doesn’t believe anything is wrong with Count Olaf.  He chooses to believe that it is merely the children’s grief or petulance that causes their discontentment.  Count Olaf and his theatre cronies refuse to see themselves as bad and evil, instead labeling the children as the nasty and unpleasant characters of the story.  And everyone absolutely will not see how it is completely illegal for a guardian to marry his 14-year-old charge.  Except for the orphans themselves, each person believes what is most convenient for the sake of himself, herself, or the plot.  Violet, Klaus, and Sunny are the only characters who have even a remotely firm grasp on reality and justice.

This is  a literary example of one of the downsides the belief in different realities for

different people can have.  It brings to center stage the utter helplessness of those who depend on justice to save them, when no one around them “sees things” the same way they do.  They have nobody to fight for them, nobody to get angry for them.

We see that they are being treated unfairly, but in the book’s world, who knows?  Perhaps that’s only how they see it.  Perhaps what is outrage to an obvious injustice to them really is only an overreaction to Mr. Poe.  Maybe Count Olaf really is a devilishly handsome hero, just trying to obtain his just desserts.  Who’s really right?  Yet we cannot help but root for the orphans.  We see that they are good-natured, heroic, and resourceful people.   It defies our sense of right and wrong to think otherwise.

 

  Gardner 3

What would it look like if reality and absolute truth were subjective to each individual–if people only saw what they wanted to see?  There would be those, just like the three children, who slip through the cracks, who get abused and mistreated because no one can or will stand up for them in righteous anger.

Reaction to The Incredibles 2 trailer.

The Incredibles, the best superhero movie I know of. And after 14 years, the movie in the new trailers is the best they could come up with?

I think anyone who really liked the Incredibles will see why I’m upset, but for those of you who might not ever have been that into it, or even watched it, here’s my objections to the ideas in the new trailer:

  1.  Role reversal done wrong: Am I expected to believe that Mrs. Incredible, supermom, is going to decide to pursue a career as a superhero while leaving her children to be guided by their often clueless father. Am I seriously supposed to buy that her mindset will completely change in the span of a few months? That she would feel like it was right to do that? That she would wold become the one pushing for superheros to be a part of the world again at the cost of getting to watch her family grow up…Please.   And am I supposed to believe Mr. Incredible would not want to be a part of the bigger picture, whether or not anyone asked him to be. This is what he believes in, down with mediocrity! Yeah! Tell the kids to embrace what makes them special.
  2. The incompetent male twist: Am I also the only one who remembers that Mr. Incredible is a very adept spy. He hacked into a supergenius’es computer, tricked a probe, knew  a bomb was going to go off by listening to a wall beeping, has a self driving car, and figured out single handedly how to defeat the robot. Remember that, Disney? He was the one who figured it out. Oh, and he defeated the darn thing by himself before it got upgraded. he also got Syndrome monologueing and almost took him out. He is Mr. Incredible for crying out loud! Yet I am supposed to buy the stupid dad cliche? He never had any trouble connecting with is kids, or believing int hem, or handling them. and suddenly Jack-jack is going to be too much fro this resourceful, intelligent, experienced man….?
  3.  The demon baby cliche: If I have to watch one more “baby is too smart for adults” movie I’ll…obviously do nothing, but I’ll be very disappointed in it. Boss Baby was probably the funniest and least gag worthy presentation oft hat, and even then it only worked some oft he time, but when it’s not Alec Baldwin pretending to be a baby and an actual baby being a little unstoppable force, then…seriously? Furthermore, Jack-Jack was never a mean baby. He was very sunny tempered until Syndrome took him away. Now if you wanted to play the angle that that traumatized him (though it didn’t seem to) at least that would be interesting but I don’t give the movie that much credit. I don’t buy the idea that Jack-Jack would enter the terrible twos while still an infant who can’t even walk. His personality is completely changed. Also, why would he even be eating cookies? If he’s not toilet trained, he’s definitely not needing sugar and chocolate. He was still on freaking baby food a few months ago.
  4. The uncreativity: My siblings ad I could come up with three different plots that would have been way more interesting than what the trailers show. We had hoped the movie would be set ten ears into the future, but even for the immediate pick back up we had better ideas for who the whole issue of superheroes cold be handled. Why not do an X-men like story? The Incredibles are already ripping off the Justice League, why not Marvel? (Oh right, Jack-Jack’s become the incredible hulk. Ha!) The Croods was more original then the idea behind this trailer. It seems just like Despicable Me.
  5. What about the kids?: When I saw the trailer show Mr. and Mrs. Incredible run off to defeat the Underminer, leaving the kids to warch, I was like “What the heck? Didn’t we see all of them suit up at the end of the first movie?” The parents were finally willing to let the kids be superheroes too, it was “in their blood” as I recall. And the kids were good at it. Also, I recall that Violet flat out refused to be left out of the fray. Am I supposed to believe the parents are going right back to keeping them out of it and telling them to hide under a bushel. By all means, let’s play the cliche “mom and day won’t let me be me” card. It’s such a nice change for the unusual “parents encourage their kids to be exceptional” vibe of the first movie.

I guess you get the picture.

You know, I don’t hate the idea of a superhero movie that tackles the balance of fatherhood and letting your wife do great things, and teaching your kids not to let one gift define their personality. That’s fine.

But it has nothing to do with the Incredibles. The Incredibles was much more than that. It tackled hard subjects with such apparent ease, such grace, that it made its points without even seeming to try.

And does anyone argue with how it ended? Whether the world agrees or not, you should use your gifts to help people. To save them. End of story.

Embracing your whole self, Violet shows us, will make you confident. Even if no one else knows why, you know what you’re capable of.

not flaunting your powers but using them when necessary is what Dash learns, and he puts it into practice, while his mom lets him still be good at something that other people can see. Because it’s not wrong to be exceptional.

Letting your talents keep you from your family is a mistake, as is lying to them, but also you need to let them help you bear the weight of the job you have to do, that’s what Mr. Incredible teaches us.

And Mrs. Incredible learns that keeping your family safe often means letting them learn how to protect themselves, and sometimes you have to bring out your dangerous side again to be the best mom and wife you can be. Also, she remembers that she’s a super with or without her husband, but she chooses to be with him.

Jack Jack doesn’t really learn anything, because he’s a baby.

Now, is it just me, or did I just cover all the problems the trailer sets up for the sequel, that the first movie already solved. There’s nothing new here.

Well, I  hope I’m wrong, but we’ll always have the first one at least. Until next time–Natasha.