OK it's been forever, but I am really grasping at things to talk about. I've been in Arkansas quite a bit, but that's more about work and less about moonshine and hog farmers. So that's not an interesting topic. I did have a "Stupid Julie" email this week, and Whitney helped me craft a response. I was proud enough of it that I felt it merited posting. The brilliant part is that the woman who sent the original email had entered the name associated with my email address as "Julie 'The Bride'" followed by her last name.
Original email:
"I promised Leslie that I would keep us moving in her absence. She suggested that we each select invitations we like—one for the shower and one for the Meet Michael party—and at the 4/16 meeting decide which ones we like best. I’ll start the ball rolling---I like this one from Wedding Divas---elegant, like Julie, and I’m thinking we could do one color for the shower (a more feminine color) and another (more bisexual—no, wait, that didn’t come out right—neutral? nongenderspecific?) for the Meet Michael party. But I’m not strongly invested, eager to see other’s favorites, and most interested in getting the ball rolling."
So presumably this is a wedding planning committee involving Julie the bride. We took her awkward expression around the concept of 'unisex' and ran with it.
My response:
"I agree that we should save the whole bisexual theme for the Meet Michael party - everyone knows all people are born bisexual until we inundate them with our societal gender constructs, but the shower is probably not the right forum for this particular soap box. I'm actually thinking we ask the Meet Michael guests to come as either Barbie or G.I. Joe and really bridge the gender gap...but hey, they don't call me Julie "The Bridge" D
(last name redacted for blog purposes) for nothin'.
"I also think we should have linen napkins at the shower, but on this point I'm more flexible."
24 hours and no responses, despite this being a very lively thread prior to my interjection.
