Confession

Kinda worrying confession coming. I rewatched and then reread Twilight - just the first one - and here's the worrying bit. I actually kind of enjoyed the book.

The movie is horribly overdramatic, with no actual basis for a relationship, no emotional development, no getting to know each other stage. They're just suddenly in love. That's not how it goes. The best characters in the movie are Charlie and the biology teacher with his golden onion.

However, then you get to the book. Reading the book again, I was reminded of how sarky Bella can be and how actually funny Edward can be. I  was reminded of them eating lunch together, of them talking, Edward explaining Carlisle's story, explaining Rosalie's behaviour better, them actually getting to know each other before they decided they were in love. That is far more realistic to me. And let's not forget that there are actually background characters in the book - Jess, Mike, Eric, Angela, all have much better, more individual characters than they do in the movie.

I also think that the book develops the plot better. Initially it's a normal thing like a girl moving to a town she hates and settling in. Then it becomes strange with a kid who's not quite human. And then he and his entire family are vampires and regardless of this, she loves him. And then, holy crap, there's a hunter out for her blood. But the story progresses well enough that you don't realise how big the difference is until you compare the beginning and the end.

I have been through several stages of my opinion of Twilight. I started as a mindless fan. That haze then faded, and I turned to the other extreme of mindless hatred, helped along by the other fandoms I was in. However, having now had the storm against Twilight die down and having given several years in between, going back to it now with a fresh mind has opened my head to more objective views. While Twilight is by no means anywhere near the best book I have read, it is also nowhere close to the worst.

I hope that others, as they get older (I know I was very young), will also be able to give every book series the open-minded chance it deserves. Opinion past that is entirely your own.

The Condom Debate

So I was out with some friends last night and somehow we got onto the topic that we all keep condoms handy just in case. Except one. She was saying how she'd never do anything so 'stupid' as to sleep with someone she doesn't know - well, it wouldn't necessarily be someone she doesn't know, at some point she could get really horny and have some kinky public toilet sex with her boyfriend; but that's beside the point - and the reason she gave for this is because she has 'morals'.

Now, it's entirely her choice who she sleeps with and when. However, what I don't agree with is her reasoning. By phrasing it the way she has, she has made it seem as if she is better than someone who chooses to sleep around. And someone who chooses to sleep with someone they don't know is no better or worse than anyone else. Someone who chooses to sleep with five different guys in a night is no better or worse than anyone else. Someone who chooses not to have sex at all in their lifetime is no better or worse than anyone else.

Doing what you want with your body is not something that constitutes 'morals'. Morals are essentially a societal fiction because they are never universal. The only thing that I would say makes sleeping around an issue is if the participants are not responsible with it - if the woman does not have contraception, if they don't use a condom etc. This is the only thing that matters, I would say. Because your body is yours and it isn't for anyone else to judge what you do with it. I would just say to look after it.

And surely it's better to carry a condom and not need it than need it and not carry it? Surely that would be the sensible thing?