Skip to main content

Keep up with me now.

I met up with a couple of old friends tonight. And a new friend. A few friends. The one thing that has always bothered me was the handshake. I know what a handshake is. I'd like to think that I give out pretty reasonable handshakes. But everybody seems to have a different idea of what a handshake is.

You grab hands and shake them.

This is what you do for people that you have just recently met or are only acquainted with or if you are feeling like being a little formal with your buddies. I understand that when it's good buddies you do the bro-shake and grab thumbs and optionally go in for the shoulder pat. This is, however, reserved exclusively for good buddies. Not for people that you don't know very well. You cannot be somebody's bro if you have only just met them. The rules of etiquette here are very simple.

So I cannot for the life of me understand why people go for the bro-shake when you clearly are not good buddies. It makes the entire thing awkward because one person goes in for a bro-shake while the other goes for a handshake and then it's ruined and then they both try again but switch shaking styles and eventually just sort of flutter their hands at each other and blow the whole thing off.

This sort of thing bothers me.

And don't even get me started about handshakes where one of the involved shakers goes in with a sort of limp hand offering as if they expect you to kneel and kiss their hand. That is just ridiculous and kind of offensive, I think. I mean, who the hell do you think you are? Only broads can do that, and even then it is relegated only to a very specific sort of setting. Like high-class dinner parties.

Also, I think I'm going to use more proper writing rules when I use instant messenger. I feel guilty when I don't. Like I'm perverting the language.

I worry about things. I'm always worried. I don't know what to do with my life. And it's creeping up. Anybody want to stress out about it for me? Fuuuck.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

You ended weak, but you started.

This is something I feel very strongly about. So strong are my emotions about it, in fact, that I have haphazardly drafted this singular post about it on the fly. I hope, for your sake, that you are seated as I deal with this incredibly important social issue and say controversial things--the likes of which give women the vapors. Shorts. I fucking hate shorts. I hate them because you can't look cool in them. Think about it. Have you ever seen an action hero save the world wearing shorts? No. Action heroes wear pants. Men wear pants. People who save the world wear pants. Pants, pants, pants. Nobody wears shorts excepts, like, stoners, lazy guys, and dudes. And bros. Those archetypes do not do adventurous things. Indiana Jones? Pants. Robocop? Pants. Flapjack? Pants. Bear Grylls? Pants. Australian stereotypes? Shorts. Australia really likes to try to censor their internet content. That doesn't sound so awesome and/or manly to me. To prove my conclusion that shorts a

Waiting and such.

A doctor came to speak at our lecture series the other day. Honestly, I don't even remember what kind of doctor he was. I don't remember any of the questions he answered. I don't remember any of the anecdotes he related. I don't remember any of the insight he imparted on us or any of the wisdom he shared. Except for one thing, which really resonated with me at the time. "The biggest challenge facing you as pre-health profession students," he said before the lecture ended. "Is the overwhelming cynicism of our society." He's right. He's right, and it's awful. I'm a pretty cynical guy, but at least I know it's a joke. That everything is a huge joke. But everybody is so jaded these days. We just can't stand to entertain the thought that maybe--just maybe--things aren't as bad as we think they are. As we want them to be. That maybe--just maybe--people aren't always selfish pieces of shit. There have been a lot

Pseudo-science (like psych).

I consider myself a man of science. I try to approach problems and deal with them logically, using observations previously recorded to handle new problems. So of course my interest was piqued when someone I knew posited that men are needier and more complicated than women. An interesting theory. But to properly examine it, one must understand the concept of sexual selection and its two aspects: male competition and female choice. Which brings us to point one: men are needier [in relationships] than women. This is true. In a natural/primal setting, the males are generally love-'em-leave-'em kinds of guys. Their main objective is to reproduce as much as they can. Humans, in their infinite wisdom, have decreased the emphasis on this to the point where it has become a footnote in male purpose. Civilization dictates that, instead of finding a partner for the sole purpose of reproduction, males find females for life companionship. With the effective removal of their natur