Toilet Paper Roll Restocking Etiquette

I have a question for the "internets". When restocking the toilet paper in your bathroom, do you consider how you position the roll in the spindle? Or do you simply pick up the roll and insert it facing which ever direction it happens to be at the time?

I personally believe that there is a proper position that the roll should be placed in whenever restocking. I wouldn't go as far as saying it's a pet peeve of mine, but whenever I see a roll inserted "improperly" my OCD kicks in and I have to correct the "issue".

I would assume that my "Toilet Paper Roll Restocking Etiquette" would be common sense and thus a universal practice, but experience has proved that I should share the secret with the world. This is very simple, so pay attention...

When replacing a roll of toilet paper, you should always position it with the next available sheet rolling out towards you where rotating the roll towards you would result in more sheets being freed from the roll). I constantly encounter bathrooms where the paper rolls in the opposite direction. Why? That would be like pulling back the head of a PEZ dispenser only to have the candy come out the back side of the head.

That's my theory, at least.

posted by Christopher Schnese

The following post is way overdue

A very significant event transpired this past week. An event a lifetime in the making. One which is, though it's been almost a week, still settling in. That event, of course, was none other than my College graduation. Last Saturday (May 19th), at 10:40am, I walked across the stage with some of my closest friends as we commemorated the completion of our college careers.

It still feels so foreign to me. In theory, nothing has changed. I still have to wake up at the same time every morning. I still have to go to work every day. Only now, when my work for the day is over, I don't have to head to class. I don't have to stress over assignments. I am now free.

It's funny how fast this day arrived; how far I've come. I remember vividly a conversation I had a year ago with someone who was very important to me at the time. A year seemed like forever, but here I stand... a college graduate.

posted by Christopher Schnese

The fallacy of a "For or Against" mentality

Have you ever had someone make a comment towards you that, though completely in jest, you're sure would not have been made had their not been actual judgement behind the thought in the first place? I recently fell victim to just such a comment. What was said wasn't what bothered me. Instead, I was annoyed that someone had made an assumption about by beliefs followed by a snap judgement and offered no recourse for retort. The statement was made, passed by, and accepted as fact.

The issue arose because of content discovered during a "random" google search result that links my employer (a christian company) and a MySpace profile(specifically my profile). Now while there isn't anything overtly offensive on my profile, I do have a Change.org badge displaying the changes I support. This, my friends. Is where the Googler took issue.

Among the changes I support, there are three that someone of strong religious convictions might (or will probably) take offense to. Those changes are "Separate Church and State", "Allow Gay Marriage", and "Protect Women's Right to Choose".

Now righting these three changes, I almost had to laugh. Here I am writing a post about the trivialness of these issues, all the while knowing that these are some of the most controversial issues around. Issues that, in my opinion won the last election. That being acknowledged, lets move on to the point of this post.

With these issues, it's not a matter of being "For" or "Against". It simply does not work that way. Being "pro choice" is a far cry from being "pro abortion". In fact, I'm not a huge supporter of it. Furthermore, I can think of far more situations for which it should not be considered a solution than I can for any solution where I would even accept it.

Moving on to the Gay Marriage issue. I can't think of a single [legitimate] reason why a homosexual couple should not be afforded the same rights and perks guaranteed to a heterosexual married couple. As such, I don't think we as a country or a people have a right to lock them out of those benefits simply because it's "weird" and "foreign" to us. I mean hell, it wasn't too long ago that it was just as "weird" and "foreign" for interracial couples to marry (or even date). Why can't we evolve to the state of acceptance of same sex couples? If we're so worried about destroying the sanctity of marriage, why don't we outlaw divorce, shotgun weddings, and chapels in Vegas.

Just because I don't support something, doesn't [in my opinion] afford me the right to outlaw or stop others who support it. Which brings me to the last and final controversial issue. I believe that the Church and the State must remain separate. Beyond the fact that our government was set up this way, the Church [in general] does not share my "I can't stop someone else just because I wouldn't do the same thing" philosophy. It thinks that it's way is the only way, all should obey it's rule regardless of their own beliefs. For this reason, the two must remain separate until the day the church can separate what one is allowed to do and what [it believes] one should do.

Now I am fully aware this post could have the potential to spark a small flame war. Just please understand that I am not anti-church. In fact, since January I've been regularly attending church under my own accord and am completely open to the church for the first time in nearly 10 years. So please take that into consideration before posting comments. My only intent in the posting was to encourage people to realize that just because you allow something to happen, does not automatically equate to supporting it.

Image for this entry is licensed under Creative Commons (Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0) and was photographed by mad paul over at flickr.

posted by Christopher Schnese 

The Beauty Of A Wedding

Yesterday I attended the wedding of a friend of mine. Now I have been to quite a few weddings over the year (I've even been in a number of them), but this one stood out against the rest. It was amazing. Not because it was completely lavishly extravagant, but because of the overall aura radiating from it. That's the best way I can describe it.

First off, the wedding ceremony itself was more personal than any I've been to before. Most seem like a wedding version of MadLibs, where you simply fill in the name of the Bride and Groom and you're good to go. This was completely different and tailored to the Bride and Groom. It was held at a church where they had grown up since they were kids and was presided over by the priest who had been guiding them as they grew up. There was this level of personal significance and support that I've never seen at a wedding before. But this wasn't even the best part of the wedding. The best part was watching the couple through the ceremony.

Let me first state that I met the Groom for the first time this year and I've only even met the bride once or twice, so I know absolutely nothing about the pair as a couple or what their relationship is like. However, watching them stand before the alter I could see all that I needed to know that they deserved to be right there. I was sitting on the Grooms side, so during the ceremony I had a clear shot of the brides face. The entire time the bride just stared into her [soon to be] husband's eyes with the most intense, amazing, deep, intimate stare that I've ever seen before. Though I couldn't see the grooms face from my seat, his body language, the way he held her hand, and the way her never broke her gaze, implied that he was every bit as tuned into her emotions.

Now in my past relationship, I had every intension of marrying my girlfriend. I loved her more than I had ever loved anything in my life, and I was every bit as infatuated with her a year later as I was when we first got together. I wore a promise ring on my ring finger and every time I was asked if I was married I always replied by stating I wasn't yet, but was planning to after I graduated. Now you'd think that being at the wedding would make me think about the wedding that I had hoped would be my own. Instead, all I could think about was the fact that I've never been looked at they way the Bride was looking at her Groom and how if I'm ever to get married, I want my Bride to look at me with that same passion. It was just an amazing and moving experience and it was the first time I actually enjoyed being at a wedding.

posted by Christopher Schnese 

Is There No Art Without Meaning?

Any student who takes an art course will eventually have the professor pose the question, "What is Art?" Inevitably, the class consensus becomes a believe that anything is or can be art. While that is usually agreed upon, most people still maintain their own beliefs on what exactly makes anything art.

I'm currently enrolled in an art class at my local University and I'm having trouble accepting the validity of some of the works being studied. It's not that I refuse to believe that the works are "art", it's just that the significance and meaning behind the pieces feel too contrived in my opinion. I can understand a work that's inspired by an emotion, event, or issue, but in art courses I'm continually subjected to works that seem to be reaching for a meaning that is not inferable without the arts explaining the significance. Furthermore, once it's explained, I often find it a hard pill to swallow.

My peers and I have a running joke, within the art department, that involves taking insignificant objects or completely random effect choices and inventing elaborate significances for them. For example, if a student is asked why they chose a specific camera angle in a shot, he may begin improving a story about the meaning behind the decision - "The main character in this seen is torn between two life changing decisions and by tilting the camera seven degrees to the left I am symbolizing that the character, who is moving to the right side of the frame, is taking the path contrary to the desired choice" - though it may have been unintentional.

While this is a fun activity as students, I often feel that "legitimate" artists receive amazing praise and recognition from the art community for participating in this joke. Now I'm not going to call out any artist because I am full aware that I'm no authority to set a precedent for what can be called are an what cannot, but I believe there should be a process. I believe that your passion for the theme of your work should influence the art itself. However, I don't praise artists who chose a subject matter because of it's impact or controversial nature, and then find the most outrageous least relevant concept to construct as the symbolism for that theme.

I can accept the notion that a two marbles, one painted white and the other black, mounted on white poster board is art. I refuse to, however, accept the notion that this work represents racism. We as artists don't need to assign contrived meanings to our art. Why can't we just appreciate the aesthetics of it?

posted by Christopher Schnese 

Love Is A Chemical

Tonight I was flipping through the guide on my DVR when I came across a film called What The Bleep Do We Know. After reading the description, "Scientists, mystics and theologians try to explain physics", I decided to give it a try. There was one segment of the vilm that I found particularly interesting. It began discussing the relationships between emotions and chemicals and later bridged to the idea of love.

The segment started with a little background on the emotional chemical process in the brain and how when we experience a particular emotion, the brain produces peptides for this emotion and then send them through the body where they are absorbed by and effect cells globally.

The film went on to explain that these chemical reactions are the same as the chemical reactions that take place when using Heroine. So, it is logically reasonable that we can become addicted to the chemical reactions to our emotions. Furthermore, just like heroine addicts require increasingly more heroine to receive the same high, if our body and cells become addicted to the chemicals of a particular emotion, we will need to experience that emotion more and more to fulfill this addiction. (Please also note that we can become addicted to negative stimuli, such as depression, also)

Which brings me to the title of this post and my food for thought. One of the interviewees made an interesting point or theory on love. She (yes, it was a woman), made the argument that love is simply a chemical reaction. When we are "in love" with someone, we are truly just addicted to the chemical reactions that take place when we are with that person.

I know that your first gut reaction to this is "no, that's bullshit! I know what love is" or "you're still pissed cause you got dumped. Stop making anti-love posts". Let me just start by saying that I am not going to take an actual stance on the issue, but I do see the logic behind it.

Just think about it for a moment. If we were to assume that the Heroine metaphor were true (again, for the sake of argument), it would explain the "honeymoon phase" of all relationships. At the beginning of the relationship, we are all producing and absorbing all the chemicals we need. However, as we become acclimated to these chemical responses, we need more and more to feel the same high. Therefore, if the chemical stimuli within the relationship does not actually increase, it creates the allusion that the stimuli are actually decreasing. It would also explain how someone could fall out of love with someone else. Whether they become addicted to other stimuli or whether their partner no longer provides those stimuli to them, they are no longer chemically addicted to a person, and thus no longer in love.

Whether you believe these theories or not, the hold a lot of merit and are worth some thought. That being said, whether or not love is simply a chemical reaction, it does not mean we do not have the choice to act on what creates these stimuli. There is always a choice...

posted by Christopher Schnese 

A Funeral & Some Perspective

I just returned from my Great Grandmothers funeral and I've done so with a little perspective. I think most would assume that burying a family member would naturally make one realize that there are other things in the world besides their problems, but something different happened with me...

During the proceedings, I began reading the headstones that surrounded us. Not the names, but rather the dates on the head stones. I found myself stuck on one grave in particular. A man who had died at age 22, the same age I am now.

My immediate reaction was, "god, that poor kid. He never got to experience life at all", then I returned to the thoughts I had on the way there and how I regrettably thought things would be better if the car was on it's way to my own funeral. This brought on a sudden flow of thoughts, many of which I can't even compose into sentences.

I thought about how I still have so much life left to live, but that it didn't matter because I had already had everything in life that I ever needed. I thought about the similarities between my love life and a funeral. When it's still alive, you take for granted that it's there. Yes you love and appreciate what you have, but you fail to realize that it really is a gift. That it will one day pass. And it could do so at any time.

When we bury a love one (actually or metaphorically), there is nothing you can do to bring them back. They are gone. The only thing you can do is live. Keep yourself going every day and never forget that person you love so much. All you can do is hope that someday... somehow... you will be reunited.

Is there a life after death? Is there new beginnings for lost love? Will the flame of my heart rise again from these ashes and burn as it once did? I don't know, only time will tell. All I know is that I must keep living; I must fight on...

posted by Christopher Schnese 

No One Is Invisible

It's funny how we, as a culture, tend to think that we're invisible to the world; that we can be standing in a public setting and somehow believe that we are still in a private moment. In a five minute stroll through a college campus or drive down the freeway, one can see example after example of this trend. The teenage girl confessing her worst secrets to the world as she talks on her phone, the student or driver with his finger plunged knuckle deep into his nose, or the drivers singing and dancing away as they speed down the freeway.

I experienced another example this morning. My family is currently renovating our roof. For the past week or so, there have been several man outside of and on top of our house hammering, prying, and cutting everyday from morning till afternoon. This morning they were working on putting new siding in place around the south side of our house, which just so happens to be one of my bedroom windows. Now take a moment to understand the mechanics of placing siding on the area of the house. When positioning ones self to complete this task, they are also inadvertently positioning their face directly in front of, and parallel to, my open bedroom window.

I awoke this morning to singing. One of the workers, completely oblivious to my open window, was singing obnoxiously as he nailed in the siding. I could understand his cultural ignorance if he had simply been working around or near the window and his sound had carried itself to my ears, but he was so close to the window that his shadow was cast directly into the window. If I didn't always keep my blinds closed, he could have looked down and seen staring right back up at him.

At first, I was pretty angry for him having disturbed my perfectly good sleep, but that anger quickly turned to amusement as I listened to him. He would periodically stop singing to partake in even slightly more humorous conversations with his fellow workers, but always return and each time with a different song. Please take note that his songs never corresponded to the music that was playing from their equally obnoxious stereo they had brought out with them. I laid there in bed for a good twenty minutes listening to what was going on until I decided that I wasn't going to get back to sleep and I should just get up for the day.

I know that I am just as guilty as the next guy, but it's still so funny how we can all fall victim to this unfounded believe that we can honestly have a private moment when we're out in public. I encourage you to reflect on the things you do when you're out in public and who might be noticing you. Furthermore, next time you're out, just observe those around you and amuse yourself with what you find.

posted by Christopher SchneseÂ