Never 21

The actual title of this post was supposed to be

Forever Never 21

but they don't let you do strikethrough in a title.  Another thing to be angry about.

Now I better just warn you that I'm still quite upset.  Maybe I should wait until this is a month behind me and I'm not so angry.  No, that wouldn't be as interesting.

Try using a quote from "Runaway Bride" to try calm me down.

"I don't blame you for being mad.  Or furious.  Irate?"

"Livid."

Deep breath Heidi.  Inhale.  Exhale.

This is me.

Let's get straight to my story . . . several weeks ago Kate and I went on a little jaunt to the mall to look for a new coat for mommy.  After trying several other stores, we headed into Forever 21, and found quite a good selection.  I tried on a few, and found a gray one in a style that I liked.  Still not sure though, I decided to buy it, take it home and get Dave's opinion, and then decide for sure.

{Dave said, "That looks just like your other coat."  Note to husbands: that is not exactly what your wife wants to hear.  But that's not the point of this post.  After wearing it for a few more minutes I decided it was too itchy around the neck anyway, and I decided to return it.}

I take the coat back, in the bag, with the receipt, and the girl is very helpful.  "Is anything wrong with the coat?" she asks in a very chipper voice.

"No," I reply, "I just decided I don't want it." 

"Great," she says, "would you like to exchange it?"  

"No thanks," I say.

"Okay, then I can give you store credit."

"No, I just want my money back."  

"Well I'm afraid we don't give cash refunds.  We only do exchanges or store credit."

"Well, I don't see anything that says that," I answer back, starting to get a little annoyed.

"It's on your receipt," she says smugly, pointing to the no cash refund policy at the bottom of my receipt in small print.

"Oh, the receipt I received after I'd already paid for the coat?"  I question, just as smugly.

"Oh, well there's a sign right here . . . well, I'm not sure where it is right now, but it's always right here on the counter."

"Well, I didn't see it." 

After this runaround continues for a few more minutes, I finally ask for the manager.  The sales rep looks relieved, and runs to grab the manager.

"Yes, how can I help you?"  The manager gives me a very condescending look as if she's dealt with people like me a hundred times.

"Yes, I want to return this coat, and I want a cash refund, not store credit."

"Well, we don't do refunds.  It says that at the bottom of the receipt."

"Oh, the receipt I received after I'd already paid for the coat?"  Sound familiar?  And then, I kid you not . . . she said - 

"Oh, well there's a sign right here . . . well, I'm not sure where it is right now, but it's always right here on the counter."

"Well obviously it isn't always right here," I say, and now I'm really getting mad.  Furious.  Let's just skip irate and go straight to livid.

She looks at the bottom of my receipt and says, "Besides, Jason ran your transaction - he's our head cashier, so I'm sure he would have mentioned it."

Did no one teach this lady that the customer is a guest?  They have a wallet?  They can choose where to spend their money?  That you actually want a customer to return?  Because I've never worked in retail, but I thought that was pretty obvious.

"Well, he didn't."

The lady wouldn't budge and insisted that since the day Forever 21 opened its doors 25 years ago they've always had a no cash-refund policy.  The cash register won't even give cash refunds, she insisted.  The encounter ended with me angrily grabbing the gift card with store credit in it for the price of the coat and leaving in a huff.  Yep, I left in a huff.  I like that phrase, and it perfectly describes how I felt.

But this was not over.  I talked to Dave about it and he called Forever 21 (he's better at intimidating people than I am).  I'm not sure how he does it, but he is very good at talking people into things, including me.  When he called in to Forever 21 headquarters, a district manager agreed to call him this past Tuesday, meet us at the store, and give us a cash refund.

No wait, this gets better.  It's now late Thursday night, practically Friday.  No call.  But we're not quitting until we get our money back.  In the meantime, I'll just rant and rave in the blogosphere.

And may I just take a moment to rant and rave about stores that don't give cash refunds?  To me that says, "We don't sell quality products" loud and clear.  In fact, because they don't sell quality products, they have no faith in their own merchandise, which is why they don't give cash refunds.  They believe that given the choice, you'll take your cash and spend it elsewhere, which is why they'll only do exchanges or give you store credit.  And they'll put that policy at the bottom of a receipt in small print, and they'll hide the signs that are supposed to be at the checkout counter.  Grrr. 

I'll keep you updated.  In the meantime, you should join with me in my boycott of Forever 21.

Dress for Success

 She definitely got more sleep than me.

It's a pretty famous saying: "Dress for success."  I'd be lying if I said this is the motto I live by.  My motto goes something more like, "You are what you wear."  You may be thinking, isn't it "You are what you eat?"  No.  Because if that were true, I'd be a morph between a Chex Muddy Buddy and a pan of brownies.  (Yes, I linked up the recipe, just in case you started craving Chex Muddy Buddies like I just did . . . everything is accurate except the part that says it makes 18 servings.  That's a lie.  It makes about 1 1/2.)

Back to my point.  You are what you wear.  Actually, I don't know if you are.  That would be going out on a limb.  I only know that I am what I wear.  Take today for example.  Last night Kate did not sleep well at all - turns out we have our 6th tooth coming in.  I got about 5 hours of completely interrupted sleep and woke up quite cranky this morning.  I didn't get to shower until about 10 am, and you better believe that when I got dressed I put on a very comfortable, broken-in pair of sweats.  Let me explain what that means . . .

It means that as soon as I can convince Kate to nap, I will run (yes, run) to the couch and try to catch-up on some of my sleep.  It means that I won't really feel like accomplishing much of anything today.  It means that I broke my no-t.v. rule for Kate and we just watched Playhouse Disney together.  And it means that today, hair and makeup probably won't be happening.

If I had accidentally put on my cute jeans, boots, and a nice shirt, today would have been very different.  I probably would have done my hair and makeup.  Kate and I might have taken a trip to the library.  I probably would have been motivated to put away all my fall decorations and get out the Christmas stuff.  And, I'd probably be feeling like a much better mom and person in general.

Sigh.  Oh well, I guess I should lay out my clothes for tomorrow ahead of time . . .

Am I the only person like this?  Please say no.

Goodbye, Harry?

 Image from http://filmkuw.com/

Rumor on the street has it that there are several nude scenes in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (part 1).  Okay, it's actually not a rumor, it's a fact.  And I didn't hear it on the street, I heard it from my mom, who heard it from . . . well, I don't know who she heard it from.  But I didn't think it sounded near as catchy to say: "My mom heard from somebody that it's a fact that there is nudity in the new Harry Potter movie."

Back to my point.  I did some research on it, and here's what I found out.  According to an article at nydailynews.net . . .

"The director of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" - the two-part final cinematic chapter based on the series of seven books - says Daniel Radcliffe will do several nude scenes in the upcoming movie, one of them of the steamy variety. 

Director David Yates told Britain's Daily Telegraph, "Dan has appeared nude in the past. There are a couple of scenes in the new film in which he will undress, but we're still thinking about how to present it."

In the upcoming movie, Yates explains, a monster tortures Harry's friend Ron (Rupert Grint) with images of Harry in some sort of tryst with Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), with whom Ron is passionately in love. 

"We'll create something that feels very sexy and very intriguing to bring about a reaction in Rupert," Yates told the Telegraph of the scene." 

Read more here.

What???  Why in the world does there need to be a nude scene in Harry Potter?!?  A book that is categorized in Children and Young Adult sections?  This is absurd!

Now maybe I don't have all the info.  Maybe I'm blowing this out of proportion.  But really?  I know that Hollywood basically believes that adding sex and nudity to anything will make it sell more, but as a devoted Harry Potter fan, I feel like I've earned the right to put in my two cents.  This is supposed to be a kids/family oriented movie.  It's pretty sad when the movie production team forgets who their audience actually is.

I suppose the scene might be relatively harmless and they don't really show much.  Maybe they just talked it up as a nude scene to draw another crowd.  But still - that's really annoying!

My family was planning to all go to the new Harry Potter movie together, but now?  Not so sure.  I'm interested - if you've heard anything about this, I'd be glad to hear your thoughts/input!

My Mom Resume

I don't know if anyone else has had to put up with this, but every once in awhile, you run into somone that thinks being a stay-at-home mom has got to be the most boring and easy thing in the world.  After slugging them in the face, I want to let them have at it for one day, just to see how they'd do . . . there is a great I Love Lucy episode about that, by the way. 

Well, if any of you reading this believe that to be true, let me just set the record straight.  My mind is not rotting.  I don't bore myself to tears every day.  And I certainly don't sit around with my feet up while doing my nails.  I am improving myself.  In fact, I'm constantly learning new things and developing my talents.  And I made a mom resume to prove it.

Heidi M. Kimball

Occupation: Mother

Education: High school diploma, Bachelors from BYU, 9 months on-the-job training

Experience: 9 months

Skills:

- Professional grape peeler: Can peel and cut up a grape into small pieces that babies won't choke on in 10 seconds flat.  Can even do so under the pressure of a baby yelling for more and banging hands on the high chair.

- Can perform most tasks one-handed.  This includes undressing a baby, grocery shopping, making a bottle, vaccuming, and doing my hair.

- Car seat buckler: Can fasten baby in a car seat in 15 seconds, even when baby is yelling, wiggling, and arching back.  Side note: this is not easy.

- Multi-tasker: Can keep house relatively clean while simultaneously making sure baby does not choke, swallow hazardous material, fall down stairs, electrocute self, or get injured in some other manner.

- Sleep charmer: Can get baby to sleep even when baby is determined to stay awake, and is determined to make you feel like a bad person for wanting the baby to take a nap for their own good.

- Very funny: Can make numerous weird faces and noises to entertain and distract baby in all types of situations including: at church (when baby is two hours overdue for a nap), after baby falls down and gets hurt, during long trips in the car, in the grocery store checkout line, when baby is starving, etc.

- Other sleep skills: Can perform most tasks while still asleep, and perform most tasks on little to no sleep.

So there you have it.  I am a professional mom, and proud of it!

In Defense of President Packer

Over the last few days it has been interesting to hear the many different viewpoints on the talk given by President Packer in Conference.  I must admit, I was surprised at the swift and strong emotions his talk seemed to evoke from people from a wide variety of backgrounds.  Perhaps the reason I was so surprised was because all he did was reiterate the long-standing position of the Church on the matter of homosexuality.  He really said nothing different from other talks I have heard on the same topic.  For my curiosity's sake, I looked up same-gender attraction on the lds.org website, where it had a simple quote from President Hinckley:

"People inquire about our position on those who consider themselves so-called gays and lesbians.  My response is that we love them as sons and daughters of God.  They may have certain inclinations which are powerful and which may be difficult to control.  Most people have inclinations of one kind or another at various times.  If they do not act upon these inclinations, then they can go forward as do all other members of the Church.  If they violate the law of chastity and the moral standards of the Church, then they are subject to the discipline of the Church, just as others are" (Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, Nov. 1998, 71).

Compare this to what President Packer said:

"We teach a standard of moral conduct that will protect us from Satan’s many substitutes or counterfeits for marriage. We must understand that any persuasion to enter into any relationship that is not in harmony with the principles of the gospel must be wrong. From the Book of Mormon we learn that “wickedness never was happiness."

Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Remember, God is our Heavenly Father.

Paul promised that “God . . . will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” You can, if you will, break the habits and conquer an addiction and come away from that which is not worthy of any member of the Church. As Alma cautioned, we must “watch and pray continually.”

One of the reasons I'm so confused about the uproar is that I feel that President Packer actually gave this talk with the purpose of love and encouragement to those that struggle with same-gender attraction.  I love how he talks about how God never tempts us "above that ye are able."  This is true of ANY sin.  I don't understand why President Packer is receiving so much negative press for speaking out on something the Church has declared to be a sin.  He didn't change the position of the Church in any way, and he said nothing to try and alienate or make people feel unworthy.  He was simply stating the doctrine.

I love the way Elder Holland put it in a simple story (I also love the quote he shares from President Packer):

"A pleasant young man in his early 20s sat across from me. He had an engaging smile, although he didn’t smile often during our talk. What drew me in was the pain in his eyes.

“I don’t know if I should remain a member of the Church,” he said. “I don’t think I’m worthy.”

“Why wouldn’t you be worthy?” I asked.

“I’m gay.”

I suppose he thought I would be startled. I wasn’t. “And … ?” I inquired.

A flicker of relief crossed his face as he sensed my continued interest. “I’m not attracted to women. I’m attracted to men. I’ve tried to ignore these feelings or change them, but …”

He sighed. “Why am I this way? The feelings are very real.”

I paused, then said, “I need a little more information before advising you. You see, same-gender attraction is not a sin, but acting on those feelings is—just as it would be with heterosexual feelings. Do you violate the law of chastity?”

He shook his head. “No, I don’t.”

This time I was relieved. “Thank you for wanting to deal with this,” I said. “It takes courage to talk about it, and I honor you for keeping yourself clean.

“As for why you feel as you do, I can’t answer that question. A number of factors may be involved, and they can be as different as people are different. Some things, including the cause of your feelings, we may never know in this life. But knowing why you feel as you do isn’t as important as knowing you have not transgressed. If your life is in harmony with the commandments, then you are worthy to serve in the Church, enjoy full fellowship with the members, attend the temple, and receive all the blessings of the Savior’s Atonement.”

He sat up a little straighter. I continued, “You serve yourself poorly when you identify yourself primarily by your sexual feelings. That isn’t your only characteristic, so don’t give it disproportionate attention. You are first and foremost a son of God, and He loves you.

“What’s more, I love you. My Brethren among the General Authorities love you. I’m reminded of a comment President Boyd K. Packer made in speaking to those with same-gender attraction. ‘We do not reject you,’ he said. ‘… We cannot reject you, for you are the sons and daughters of God. We will not reject you, because we love you.’ ”

We talked for another 30 minutes or so. Knowing I could not be a personal counselor to him, I directed him to his local priesthood leaders. Then we parted. I thought I detected a look of hope in his eyes that had not been there before. Although he yet faced challenges to work through—or simply endure—I had a feeling he would handle them well" (Jeffrey R. Holland, “Helping Those Who Struggle with Same-Gender Attraction,” Ensign, Oct 2007, 42–45).

Now I realize that this is a sensitive issue.  Dave has an uncle who is gay (and I will be the first to say that you will not find a kinder or more thoughtful person), but does that mean we push him away?  Absolutely not.  The Church is clear on the issue of this sin, as with any other.  We love those who struggle, but we do not accept the sin itself.  However, it is not wrong for us to profess and live our beliefs, which includes the fact that homosexuality is wrong.

To close, I would just like to say that I believe President Packer is a good, caring man.  He has devoted his life to the church and has served very faithfully.  I also believe that President Packer cares about all of us, including those with same-gender attraction.  I truly believe that he is a man inspired of God, and that he was inspired not only with what to say, but when to say it.

Here is a link to his talk, please read it for yourself.  I would love to hear your thoughts.

 Cleansing the Inner Vessel

Here are a few links to other talks/articles the Church has on the issue:

 Helping Those Who Struggle With Same-Gender Attraction

Compassion for Those Who Struggle

My Battle With Same-Sex Attraction

When a Loved One Struggles With Same-Sex Attraction

Same-Gender Attraction

My New Found Soapbox

Okay, I have to admit. I'm pretty excited. My very own soapbox. I can say whatever I want and no one can stop me. I can already feel the power going to my head. Deep breath.

My first item of business: the much-contested mosque near Ground Zero. I know this has already been going on for quite awhile, but I wanted to put my two cents in, for what it's worth. My position - let them build it! I am so grateful to live in a country where people are allowed to express their religious opinions - and not just when it's convenient! How can we say we abide by the Constitution if we make a decision that so flagrantly goes against everything it stands for?

Now, I'm not obtuse (just in case you didn't know). I can definitely see how this might rub some people the wrong way. There are some people out there who are sensitive about this, and understandably so. But I think we as Americans could go a long way in showing that we practice what we preach, and that we aren't so narrow-minded as to believe that a few people can define an entire religion. I say let them build the mosque/community center.

I'm anxious to hear everyone's thoughts on the matter. Even those who disagree.

For more information: http://www.watoday.com.au/world/critics-stymied-on-911-mosque-20100804-11fl4.html