I’m in Canada, and although CTV aired some of of last night’s Super Bowl ads, I didn’t see them all. And I most definitely didn’t catch this one.
Beyoncé’s releasing new music?!
Let me retrace my steps.
Before I went to sleep–as one is wont to do–I felt the need to google Beyoncé.
That’s when I came across this article. The headline alone had me at hello!
Beyoncé Announces Country-Themed ‘Renaissance Part II’ Album in Verizon Super Bowl Ad, Drops Two New Songs
*Flashback to Lemonade*
Please note that I am a sucker for nearly every genre of music out there. I loved “Daddy Lessons”, and Bey’s performance on the CMA Awards with The Chicks blew me away.
It felt like a moment to me. Like I was witnessing a glimpse of a new horizon.
I’ve watched that video more than once, and every time, I end up having the same unfinished thoughts.
“If Beyoncé ever made a country album…?” (Can you IMAGINE?!?!!) Followed by, “Something else is going to come from this…”
But I was never quite sure of what.
Well. With Beyoncé’s next album, it looks like that “something else” is nearly here.
Did I also mention that some of her collaborators are Canadian? Somebody check the song credits—and call the CBC!!*
When I was first given the opportunity to review Becoming Flawsome, I was intrigued. The author, Kristina Mänd-Lakhiani, is the co-founder of Mindvalley, an organization which is, “the world’s most powerful life transformation platform”.
Becoming Flawsome encourages its readers to, “overcome perfectionism and self-doubt by unapologetically embracing your fully awesome self—flaws and all”. And as I embarked on reading the book, I was hopeful. Who doesn’t want to learn something new about accepting themselves completely?
Yet as I read, I felt a mix of emotions. Theoretically, I agreed with Mand-Lakhiani’s premise. Yet while reading some sections, I found myself disagreeing with what she had to say. In others, I felt as though she had covered territory that I was already familiar with. And both of these sentiments influenced my perspective on her work.
Certain chapters such as “Self-Care vs Self Love” may or may not resonate with readers. Therein, Mänd-Lakhiani makes an interesting case for a distinction between the two, noting that, “Self-care is about surviving, while self-love is about thriving.” (192)
That said, the examples that I’m about to discuss are indicative of some of the issues that I had with this book.
In the chapter entitled “A New Life” Mänd-Lakhiani tells her readers that, “Your only moral duty is to be happy and at peace with yourself”. Initially, I disagreed with this sentiment. I was concerned that her idea could be interpreted as one that promoted living selfishly. Truly, after a time, doing so can take its toll on your happiness and peace of mind.
In fact, I spent a portion of that chapter contemplating what the author may have meant regarding people’s “moral duty”. That is, until she eventually touched on the familiar idea that we ought to be careful as we aim to help others, because we can’t pour from an empty cup.
Those aren’t Mänd-Lakhiani’s exact words. But in self-help circles, they represent a widely-understood sentiment: You cannot hope to adequately help others, without making sure that your essential needs are met first. Yet she took time getting to this point, and once this segment of Becoming Flawsome was through, I found myself wondering why she hadn’t revealed this conclusion sooner.
Within this chapter, Mänd-Lakhiani also made a rather generalized statement about giving to others: “The world would be so much more of a better place if, instead of giving to charity out of guilt and obligation, we did good out of a sense of justice, unity, equality, and our own level of abundance.” (228) At this point, I couldn’t quite relate to her words. As far as I’m concerned, there are plenty of people who give to others out of love and a sense of altruism. In my mind, that is the norm, as opposed to the negative factors which she mentioned.
Nevertheless, one of Becoming Flawsome’s most salient points was made on page 188, via a paraphrased statement by Marisa Peer. “You are enough” is a popular sentiment in the self-help arena. And Mänd-Lakhiani wondered whether or not people risked becoming immobile or complacent because they put too much faith in the idea. Yet Peer had another perspective, explaining that “You lie back on your sofa doing nothing, not because you think that you are good enough, but the opposite—you do that because you are afraid that you are not enough. It is a fear of failure, of not being good enough, that prevents you from going out and exposing yourself to the world, doing something courageous and meaningful…” (188)
In Becoming Flawsome’s final chapters, the author makes a point which I feel overall addressed my journey with this book: “What works for some may not work for others.” (258) Its most fundamental tenet revolves around encouraging readers to develop authentic self-acceptance. Yet this is not an unpopular notion. Hence, if you’ve heard this sort of messaging before, much of Becoming Flawsome may seem familiar.
Ultimately, I remain divided in my thoughts on this book. Becoming Flawsome touches on some information that falls under the self-help genre’s fundamentals. And when you’re beginning your self-help journey, it can be beneficial to have a basic foundation. Yet if you have already read these types of books, you may find that it covers familiar territory.
Looking at the recent Supreme Court ruling on Affirmative Action in the United States, it’s hard for me not to see the subtext of what occurred. Contrary to what certain people may think they have achieved, the problems that they believe existed have not been solved. Not so long as things like legacy admissions are still in play.
I have nothing more to offer on the matter. And even though this video is a few years old, I believe Hasan Minhaj said it all.
Years ago I became obsessed with the multi-lingual video for “Let it Go”, the hit song from Frozen.
I watched it repeatedly, many, MANY times. loved seeing the passion that each singer brought to their performance.
Meanwhile, today, I discovered this video.
Overall, I loved Halle’s voice. Yet with technology being what it is, I can’t help but wonder (assume?) that her voice was translated via AI. Somehow, this both delighted and scared me.
So much about it has had me mesmerized. I like to think that officially, I’ve never believed that rich people were smarter than me.
Yet as revelations about the Titan have come in, I’ve started to realize something: It isn’t exactly that I’ve been too naive about the world’s wealthiest people. Rather, certain things have become crystal clear to me.
One thing this situation reminded me of was a comment that Michelle Obama made while on her book tour in 2018.
So many of us have been duped into believing that because someone is ultra-wealthy, or in an incredibly important position, they’re wiser than the rest of us. Yet from where I sit, everything about this disaster proves that the following assumptions are false:
Given the opportunity to be innovative, wealthy people will seek access to–and use–the best technology.
Whenever possible, wealthy people heed the word of experts who are wiser than them.
Wealthy people value their safety. When embarking on–or organizing– endeavours that involve a degree of risk, they do their due diligence.
Ultimately, I see this tragedy as a reminder: We are all prone to mistakes, naïve thinking, and hubris. And problems are bound to arise when people engage in the latter two attitudes. There’s no telling who their actions will affect.
Meanwhile
Like so many other humans after a horrific event, I crave closure.
The questions in my mind keep collapsing on themselves. One thing I’ve wondered is what’s next? How many more dubious things are influential people preparing to unleash, without considering the repercussions? (Hello, social media!) How many such things have already been released, but the general public isn’t aware of them?
And at the root of my curiosity, there’s this:
If the Titan was an unregulated vehicle, how did Stockton Rush gain permission to offer it to tourists for excursions?
I mean, I can imagine how. (Immediately, I think it’s a matter of privilege. But maybe the details lie in one of the articles that I’d skimmed???)
I honestly don’t know the hoops Rush had to jump through. But no one could stop him.
And that detail leads me to another question: WHY?
Also, how much research had the passengers done on his vehicle? And how much information about it was available that wasn’t prepared by a PR firm? It feels as though so much information about the Titan’s true nature was revealed this week—since it went missing. But what about beforehand?
Leave it to the internet algorithm to bring something foreboding to my YouTube homepage last night.
This week the news of Titan, the missing submersible, has been on many people’s minds. And this story only deepened my fears about the situation’s outcome.
The tourist submersible that went missing while exploring the Titanic wreck was previously the target of safety complaints from an employee of OceanGate, the parent company that owns the sub and runs tourist expeditions of the wreck. That employee complained specifically that the sub was not capable of descending to such extreme depths before he was fired…
The concerns Lochridge voiced came to light as part of a breach of contract case related to Lochridge refusing to greenlight manned tests of the early models of the submersible over safety concerns. Lochridge was fired, and then OceanGate sued him for disclosing confidential information about the Titan submersible. In response, Lochridge filed a compulsory counterclaim where he alleged wrongful termination over being a whistleblower about the quality and safety of the submersible.
It’s disturbing to think that someone was fired due to their concern over safety precautions.
Meanwhile, Netflix released a trailer for a film about freediving. If it came out any other week, I would be fine. And normally, I’d be curious. But a part of me wants to tell them to read the room.
OceanGate’s CEO is a man named Stockton Rush. He was on board when his vehicle went on this week’s voyage. I can’t help but wonder if his fellow passengers were aware of how he perceived safety.
Yesterday via social media, I saw the the following quote. And eventually, I found the article it came from. I admit that I skimmed to find the content, and looking at it in context I was horrified. Commenting on the Passenger Vessel Safety Act of 1993, the article states that
The law was well-meaning, Rush says, but he believes it needlessly prioritized passenger safety over commercial innovation (a position a less adventurous submariner might find open to debate). “There hasn’t been an injury in the commercial sub industry in over 35 years. It’s obscenely safe, because they have all these regulations. But it also hasn’t innovated or grown—because they have all these regulations.” The U.S. government, meanwhile, has continued to favor space exploration over ocean research: NASA today gets about $10.5 billion annually for exploration, while NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research is allotted less than $50 million—a triumph of “emotion over logic,” Rush says. “Half of the United States is underwater, and we haven’t even mapped it!” (emphasis mine)
The little that I’ve read about Mr. Rush has left me with a portrait of a man who was eager to make his mark in his industry. He wanted to be an innovator. But his comments above, combined with the previously-linked article suggest something sinister: He so longed to be a pioneer in his field, that he saw basic safety regulations as an enemy of his success.
It’s good to be ambitious. But Dear Reader, I implore you: Don’t be so desperate to be the first to do something, that as you pursue your goals, you consider yourself a god.
We humans are exceptional and can do all sorts of things. But at the end of the day, we have limits. We cannot defy the laws of nature, God, the Universe—whatever you care to call it. We mustn’t idolize our desire to be unique to the point where we ignore experts’ wisdom.
Some like to say that rules were meant to be broken. But is that attitude worth it if it results in risking people’s lives?
I’m someone who has taken swimming lessons as an adult, and in order to be truly safe in the water, I know that I need to take more. And throughout this saga, a part of me couldn’t help but think of swimming as a comparatively simpler aquatic activity, and a point of contrast.
Remembering certain drowning cases involving adults has made me want to ask a question. At the risk of insulting the Titan’s passengers, did they truly understand what skilled swimmers take for granted?: Navigating the water isn’t remotely the same as going for a walk or even existing on land.
It’s all too easy to meet your end if you aren’t properly prepared.
I’ve always thought the ocean was beautiful, from afar. But right now, if I were given the opportunity to voyage out into her depths, I’d rather keep my distance.
I keep writing and NOT sharing random rants on the worst of the manosphere. Long story short, I’m tired of the negative influence that certain figures have on society. Meanwhile, it often feels like some men (people) are so eager for leadership, they will tolerate and defend folks who exhibit all sorts of behaviour.
One of the movement’s figures has been in the news lately. I couldn’t help but think it’s high time I shared one of my drafts.
You know what I would like to see?
Please Note: I would actually NOT like to see this. I think that we have more than enough poison in this world.
But anyways… Just for example’s sake, imagine a woman. Strong, gorgeous, professional. Imagine seeing her come up. Literally. From obscurity to becoming incredibly famous. She’s both a beauty—and an intellectual. Envision her hitting her stride. Imagine her having massive audiences, and being the talk of virtually every woman you know.
Let’s call her Lady Laura.
Picture a large number of the women in society, regardless of background, hanging on her every word.
And then, every now and then, repeatedly and without fail…
Imagine what would happen if Lady Laura said something off-colour about men. Her statements could range from specious or absurd, to utterly vile. But regardless of whatever she says, she’s entirely unrepentant.
And when she says these things, they come out of her mouth more than a handful of times. In fact, her horrible commentary on men is very well-known.
So well-known in fact, that every brother, son, father, uncle, random dude that you know is flummoxed. Some are even a bit anxious.
“Have you seen this ish….?” they say to their sistren. Yes, yes we have.
But we laugh and let it slide ‘cause Lady Laura gives GREAT makeup tips! She’s crafty, and one helluva cook, too!
If such a woman ever were to exist, I wonder what kind of media coverage she would receive. I wonder if reporters would actually be concerned about this woman’s ability to influence the public’s views on men for the worst. Or… Would the (mostly male) worriers’ fears be ignored?
Would Lady Laura have a podcast or a book deal? Would she be the talk of major media circles?
Because there are male public figures who have been skating by on the fact that their audiences think they’re incredibly entertaining, or rich, or God Knows What Else. All the while the media completely ignores things like their horribly outdated takes on how bigotry works. And they are not influencing society for the better.
It’s a Spotify exclusive, ’cause I’m using some of their music–from Jessie Ware and Beyoncé, to be more precise. And I’m proud of the damn thing, even though it’s awful. Awkward “Am I really doing this?” voice? Check. Pointless pauses? Check!
