I worked more than 50 hours this week. In the evenings, I had dinner with my parents on Tuesday and picked up foster kittens on Wednesday. Last night, I collapsed in a heap when I finally got home. Tonight, the same.
As a result, I have gotten no exercise all week. Well, I did a little yoga, but not a full workout since Sunday.
I've been trying to eat reasonably well, but haven't succeeded all that well. For the most part, I've been good during the day. But I bought some jelly beans a few weeks ago, and I ate way too many of them last night.
All of this means that I have many layers of stress. I have work stress, which isn't going to go away for at least another week. I have lack of exercise stress, which is caused when I don't get a chance to work out - since my body is used to getting regular exercise. And I have eating stress, exacerbated by the lack of exercise stress.
Layers and levels of stress are high.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Perimenopause Sucks
For more than 25 years, I was on birth control pills. One of the best side benefits of being on the pill is that you know exactly when you will have your period. It makes planning life much easier.
However, now that I'm in perimenopause, I can't plan around my period. Because I never know when it's going to come. For the months I worked at home, I didn't get my period at all. I just wasn't around other women enough to have my period "triggered".
Since I've been back working in an office since the beginning of the year, I've had several "extra" periods. And they last longer. The last one lasted 8 days. And several of those days were as heavy as when I was a teenager. Not the ideal by any stretch.
In the last days I was on the pill, I had a period for maybe 4 days, and most of those days were really light. I have been much more used to this scenario.
I'm hoping that, after a few more months in an office, my hormones will settle down again, and I'll get back to a more "normal" period. It probably still won't be possible to plan around it. But it would be good not to have more than one a month.
It's funny how one's expectations change. But I still think being perimenopausal sucks. If only because I'm a planner.
However, now that I'm in perimenopause, I can't plan around my period. Because I never know when it's going to come. For the months I worked at home, I didn't get my period at all. I just wasn't around other women enough to have my period "triggered".
Since I've been back working in an office since the beginning of the year, I've had several "extra" periods. And they last longer. The last one lasted 8 days. And several of those days were as heavy as when I was a teenager. Not the ideal by any stretch.
In the last days I was on the pill, I had a period for maybe 4 days, and most of those days were really light. I have been much more used to this scenario.
I'm hoping that, after a few more months in an office, my hormones will settle down again, and I'll get back to a more "normal" period. It probably still won't be possible to plan around it. But it would be good not to have more than one a month.
It's funny how one's expectations change. But I still think being perimenopausal sucks. If only because I'm a planner.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Not Like The Others.
Today I participated in an interesting exercise at work. It was called a Mentoring Circle. They asked three of us to be on the panel to talk about our work experiences and how we got to where we are.
I was the odd "man" out. The other two people on the panel were both much more senior than I am. I wondered about that, but the organizers told me when I got there today that they wanted leaders from all levels of the organization. So I guess I qualified. The other way that I was different from the other two is that I am new to my company. Both of my colleagues were "legacy" people - that is, staff from one of the many companies that my company acquired over the years. On the other hand, I didn't work for any of those companies - I'm not "legacy" anything.
Both of them were also what we call "in the line"; that is, they work directly for customers. On the other hand, I am "G&A" or overhead. One of the things that seems to be important for growth in our company is working directly for a customer. It's important to perform for a customer. It helps prove your worth to the company, which gives you a leg up for promotions. Something for me to think about in the future.
Finally, both of them have well-defined jobs and roles. I do not and never really have. In fact, I've had essentially the same job since I started at the company - at least officially. But my job has been more all over the map.
So I felt a bit like the children's game "Which of these is not like the other?".
And yet we had some things in common. Being open to new experiences. Being willing to take risks in our work. Being good performers.
After the end of the session, one of the participants came up to me and thanked me for coming from a different place. She too is relatively new to the company. Her role is nebulous. And it was good for her to know that there were others like her.
Maybe I'm not "like the others", but maybe that's okay.
I was the odd "man" out. The other two people on the panel were both much more senior than I am. I wondered about that, but the organizers told me when I got there today that they wanted leaders from all levels of the organization. So I guess I qualified. The other way that I was different from the other two is that I am new to my company. Both of my colleagues were "legacy" people - that is, staff from one of the many companies that my company acquired over the years. On the other hand, I didn't work for any of those companies - I'm not "legacy" anything.
Both of them were also what we call "in the line"; that is, they work directly for customers. On the other hand, I am "G&A" or overhead. One of the things that seems to be important for growth in our company is working directly for a customer. It's important to perform for a customer. It helps prove your worth to the company, which gives you a leg up for promotions. Something for me to think about in the future.
Finally, both of them have well-defined jobs and roles. I do not and never really have. In fact, I've had essentially the same job since I started at the company - at least officially. But my job has been more all over the map.
So I felt a bit like the children's game "Which of these is not like the other?".
And yet we had some things in common. Being open to new experiences. Being willing to take risks in our work. Being good performers.
After the end of the session, one of the participants came up to me and thanked me for coming from a different place. She too is relatively new to the company. Her role is nebulous. And it was good for her to know that there were others like her.
Maybe I'm not "like the others", but maybe that's okay.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
How Do You Define "Date"?
Friday morning, I was eating breakfast at Hartsfield airport on my way back from Atlanta. I wanted a protein based breakfast, as opposed to just a carb one, so I went to an actual restaurant to eat. Well, it was really a bar, but it served breakfast, so that worked.
There were two young ladies serving the customers. At one point, they went behind the bar to enter their orders and get drinks (non-alcoholic ones) for their customers. They were chatting, as co-workers tend to do. The one girl was insisting that her previous evening qualified as a date, even though apparently "he" was insisting that it didn't. I was just overhearing and of course didn't ask any questions, but it sounded like a date to me. Apparently, his contention was it was not a date because it was a casual restaurant (I think it was Five Guys). Her contention was that it was a date because they had a meal together.
I myself have started trying to date again. I'm not good at the whole dating thing. And it occurs to me that part of the reason for this is the ambiguity of what is a date.
If you just meet for coffee, is that a date? I think meeting for drinks would constitute a date, so why not coffee? Coffee is much more casual, it's true. But still it would qualify, provided other conditions are met.
Did one of you call/text/email the other to arrange the excursion? If yes, I say it's a date.
Was it a meeting of just the two of you? If not, if there's a group of people getting together, then I would say it's not a date. Unless of course, he and you do something afterward just the two of you. Then it would qualify.
And yet, if someone asked me how many dates I've had with the guy I've recently met, I'd be hard-pressed to answer the question. Because all three meetings fit the qualifications above, and yet, they were all casual meetings. First, lunch. Which was really a fix-up. And so a date of sorts, but really a quasi-date because we spent the whole time trying to figure out if we liked each other enough to have a second - well, date. So I guess, yes, that means the first meeting was a date. Hmmm....
The second "date" was for lunch on a Sunday morning. Again, a very casual meeting. I did pick him up at his home. And I saw his place when I dropped him off. And we kissed for the first time. So perhaps that really does count as a date too.
Our third date was for snacks, he called it. I would have called it drinks, except we didn't sit at the bar. It was a quick meeting - only an hour or so.
I think what's bothering me is that all our "dates" - and I guess I really need to call them dates - have been in the daytime. And little romance has been involved, other than a few kisses at our second date.
So maybe it's just my definition, but I'm counting these three dates as dates, but I won't really feel like this guy and I are "dating" until we have dinner out a few times. And maybe even a movie or something else. Even a show or a concert would qualify. Just something a little less casual. And at night. :)
There were two young ladies serving the customers. At one point, they went behind the bar to enter their orders and get drinks (non-alcoholic ones) for their customers. They were chatting, as co-workers tend to do. The one girl was insisting that her previous evening qualified as a date, even though apparently "he" was insisting that it didn't. I was just overhearing and of course didn't ask any questions, but it sounded like a date to me. Apparently, his contention was it was not a date because it was a casual restaurant (I think it was Five Guys). Her contention was that it was a date because they had a meal together.
I myself have started trying to date again. I'm not good at the whole dating thing. And it occurs to me that part of the reason for this is the ambiguity of what is a date.
If you just meet for coffee, is that a date? I think meeting for drinks would constitute a date, so why not coffee? Coffee is much more casual, it's true. But still it would qualify, provided other conditions are met.
Did one of you call/text/email the other to arrange the excursion? If yes, I say it's a date.
Was it a meeting of just the two of you? If not, if there's a group of people getting together, then I would say it's not a date. Unless of course, he and you do something afterward just the two of you. Then it would qualify.
And yet, if someone asked me how many dates I've had with the guy I've recently met, I'd be hard-pressed to answer the question. Because all three meetings fit the qualifications above, and yet, they were all casual meetings. First, lunch. Which was really a fix-up. And so a date of sorts, but really a quasi-date because we spent the whole time trying to figure out if we liked each other enough to have a second - well, date. So I guess, yes, that means the first meeting was a date. Hmmm....
The second "date" was for lunch on a Sunday morning. Again, a very casual meeting. I did pick him up at his home. And I saw his place when I dropped him off. And we kissed for the first time. So perhaps that really does count as a date too.
Our third date was for snacks, he called it. I would have called it drinks, except we didn't sit at the bar. It was a quick meeting - only an hour or so.
I think what's bothering me is that all our "dates" - and I guess I really need to call them dates - have been in the daytime. And little romance has been involved, other than a few kisses at our second date.
So maybe it's just my definition, but I'm counting these three dates as dates, but I won't really feel like this guy and I are "dating" until we have dinner out a few times. And maybe even a movie or something else. Even a show or a concert would qualify. Just something a little less casual. And at night. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)