For the longest time in human history, certain things have had a certain way about them. For instance, the white wedding dress is supposed to only be worn by a virgin woman. However, these days, few women who wear one actually are virgins. Why would they wear them, then? Because somewhere along the line we forgot that that's the way it's supposed to be. Then, when we learn about things like that, we don't really care and just do what we want anyway. She's not a virgin, she knows about the convention, but she's wearing the white wedding dress anyway, because that's what she wants to do. I say things are better this way.

I think the only reason these conventions were put into place is because the people of olden times didn't have anything better to do than come up with and follow strange conventions. For instance, when a woman stands up to leave a table, it's considered polite for all the men to stand up at the table until she walks away, at which point they can all sit back down. Few people know of this, and even fewer practice it. I think in these modern times, if a girl got up to go to the bathroom and all the men stood up with her, she might get a little freaked out, especially if she doesn't know about the convention. She might even feel bad for having gotten up to go to the bathroom, and next time she'll just hold it instead of subject herself to the grand announcement that she's going to the bathroom. Can you imagine seeing this in common practice in restaurants? That would be so surreal. Every minute or two, all the guys at some random table just stand up for a bit. It actually creates a rather amusing image, like something out of a Terry Gilliam film.

Many conventions people just accept because they're raised with them would actually appear very strange to someone who wasn't raised with them and may not be aware of them. I won't get into the subject of religion here, but if you travel to foreign countries where they don't speak a Latin-based language, you may observe many strange customs that are unquestionably normal to the people practicing them. However, even in countries that are still living like they would've 200 years ago, conventions are being lost due to outside influence.

Honestly, I think these impractical conventions (I say this not to criticize conventions, but rather to limit my statement to just the impractical ones) are better off lost. Unless they're fun, of course, because fun is something we should have more of. Standing up at the table when a girl needs to pee isn't fun. However, when these things are seen to outsiders as strange and possibly scary, it certainly doesn't help to quell the xenophobia that exists even today. I think xenophobia is on the out, and has been for a while, although not nearly as much prior to the Internet boom. In spite of all the hate, drama, and anonynimity that's prevelant on the Internet, I think it's bringing us closer together as a world. I think it's also partly responsible for the loss of many conventions, as we all now have better ways to keep ourselves occupied than learning if the color of our clothes means anything about our sexuality.

I recently went and saw U2 3D at the Natural History Museum IMAX Theater. I wasn't going to mention it because they weren't going to run it more than another week, but I guess it's sustained popularity and showings have been extended at least to the first week in May. Therefore, I can recommend that you go. I've been twice, once this past weekend, and once the weekend before that. It was worth seeing twice.

So, it's a U2 concert on an IMAX screen, and it's in 3D. Now, going to a theater to see a U2 concert isn't something I'd normally do. I'm not the biggest U2 fan, honestly. Sure, I like their music. I have some of their albums. But they're not in my top 10. However, seeing it on an IMAX screen, that's got some appeal, just because it's so big. Then, it's in 3D? Oh, I have to see it. Now, if it was a band like Death Cab For Cutie or Linkin Park, the 3D and IMAX combination just wouldn't be enough to get me to the theater, but U2 is pretty good band, and they do know how to put on a good show.

One thing I must say about U2 is that they're better live than in the studio, especially when they've got a kick-ass South American audience. South American audiences are probably the best audiences in the world, because they're so excited and energetic, and they do stuff like sing along to instrumentals en masse. This kind of thing gets the band all excited, so, these guys who already do a good job live, do an even better job because of their audience. Then I get to reap the rewards in a theater where I can just sit there in a semi-comfortable chair and relax. That's a pretty good deal to me.

Even if you're not much of a U2 fan, it's still worth going to see. They didn't make excessive use of the 3D, but I consider that to be a good thing. I think it would have detracted from the experience. Still, there are some shots where you really feel the 3D effect, especially the shots overlooking the audience. Also, there's extra stuff during the end credits, so make sure to stick around when those start rolling. The first show I went to, nobody even got up out of their chairs when the credits started rolling.

There's a theater locator on their site (linked above), so you can find the one closest to you. If you can, make sure it's an IMAX theater, because the experience would be dulled in any other kind of theater. I saw Beowulf 3D in a regular theater, and the screen cut-off really detracted from the 3D effect. I don't think U2 3D would be as bad, but it's still good to see it in IMAX theater.

I have recently taken up GTO: The Early Years. There's some other name for it, but it's harder to remember. It's not an actual prequel to GTO, but rather GTO is the sequel, and Early Years never made it to TV. So, Early Years came out back in 1991 (and it wasn't called "GTO" or "Early Years"), then GTO came out in 1997. Early Years follows the high-school lives of Onizuka and Ryuji as they try to leave their gang lives behind and finally get laid. Neither venture goes very well for them. If you liked GTO, Early Years is worth picking up.

There's a character in the manga named Abe who gets women like crazy. Onizuka and Ryuji convince Abe to teach them how to get women. He breaks it down into three simple parts for them.

1. Appearance - Well, this makes sense. He's not talking about having a pretty face. It's all about how you do your hair, shave your face, and what clothes and accessories you are wearing (emphasis on that last one). That makes sense. If you just throw on whatever and have messy hair, women are going to think you're a slob and you don't care. They don't want that. You take care of your appearance and it gives women the impression that you'll take care of them. The first impression you make on a person is usually with your appearance (outside the Internet). So I think, alright, I can do that.

2. Confidence - Women want a man who's confident. They want someone who will take charge and get things done, and exuding confidence gives them the impression that you're that sort of man. Also, I think women just get off an confidence. It's important not to confuse confidence with arrogance. Also, women don't dig braggarts. Confidence is more the air about you, the way you speak, walk, or stand. I figured that with the other two, confidence would come naturally, so I didn't worry about it. I'll just learn what the third thing is and I'll be fine. Or, so I thought...

In the comic, Abe never actually tells them what the third thing is. It was kinda frustrating him not telling them about it, both for them and for me (the other guy who wants to know). So, after doing some stuff for him, he decides he needs to show them. It's like the matrix; you can't be told what it is, you need to see it for yourself. So, instead of telling them what it is, he displays it for them. My reaction to discovering what the third thing was was very similar to that of Onizuka and Ryuji, and that was depression and damn-near surrender. I think Onizuka said "There's no way I can do it."

3. Tolerance - There's many things I've never been, and tolerant is one of them. Upon realizing this was the third thing, I reflected on my life, and how I've always reacted to everything. I don't know what the antonym for tolerance is, but I would use it to describe myself in both of my last two relationships. I would probably use it for all of my relationships, but I don't remember the rest of them too well. Just my general dealings with people, I'm barely tolerant if at all. So, here I was expecting something I could just do and I'd get women, and instead I got advice that was basically "Be the opposite of yourself". I work tech support for a living, and on an almost daily basis I fail at being tolerant. Just today I had to apologize to someone for criticizing them for not following directions. That's actually what prompted this post. I was kinda depressed at the time, but now, realizing that, like Onizuka, it's not something I can do, I'm even more depressed. Maybe after I get my congestion problem fixed and can sleep better at night, I'll be more tolerant. I hear sleep deprivation makes people cranky, and I haven't a good night's sleep for as long as I can remember.

But, yes, Tolerance. Women want a guy who will protect them, not attack them, either physically or verbally. That makes sense. I'm so fucked. What a bitch of a thing to learn from a comic book. That's depressing, too.

I've realized what it is that attracts people to anime more than anything else. It's not the vibrant colors. It's not the unrealistic action. It's that the characters are different from one another. Yeah, they use a lot of stereotypes, but one thing I've noticed when watching a lot of American shows is that when two characters are talking to each other, it feels like one character's monologue represented by two actors. They're two different physical entities, but the words coming out of their mouths could easily be interchanged with each other.

Not all American shows have static characters. There's plenty that have diversified characters. Discounting ones based on comic books, Sex and the City comes to mind, as each character has their "role" in the group. The Sopranos, keeping in mind it's a mafia show, has character diversification. I'm sorry to fans of Stargate, but that show didn't. The characters in that show either have attitude A or attitude B. Yeah, so they're not all the same character with a different actor, but there's still very limited character diversification. Honestly, I don't watch TV much anymore, so I can't really name shows. However, if you were to find a script for a show, remove all the character names from it and read it, even if you were familiar with the show you'd be hard-pressed to tell one character from another.

Now, not all anime has good character diversification. Also, you don't find a lot of original characters in anime. You've see them before in all the other shows, just with a different appearance (and maybe a different voice). So, yeah, Japan's got its cookie cutters for characters. The thing is, they've got a lot of them, and they don't use the same one 3-8 times per show. Maybe they'll have two or three characters that are very similar, but it's not a common occurance. Typically, you've quite the variety, and if you were familiar with a show, and someone said that a character did something, you'd be able to guess which character it was pretty easily.

Maybe it's just animated shows in general, though. I mean, look at The Simpsons. Hundreds of characters, few are similar to each other. Family Guy also has good character diversification. Aside from the fact that Peter and Lois are modeled after Homer and Marge, they've got a different set of cookie cutters, although Family Guy does much fewer characters. Also, if you watch some of the kid shows, there's good character diversification there. What is it about adult live-action that can't manage this? Do they write a line and then roll a die to see which character says it?

Well, that's just my observation. You may notice it, too. You probably will now, at least.