Would this help or hurt?
People get backstabbed all the time, and all we can do is live in mutual distrust. There are times when authoritative figures are the ones scamming the people in the lower echelons of whichever governmental structure the authoritative figure is in.
The scam does not equate to backstabbing. It's just pulling wool over the weak-minded's eyes. The backstabbing comes at the normal people. The figure chooses a random person, preferably someone he knows more about, or has access to his secrets(account), so that the random person(let's call him X) can be easily manipulated.
So if X were to give the figure access to his life, the figure would have the power to climb over X's head and shit on it.
Of course, this isn't something that a leader can spam. There are only so many people who would give out their passwords to an alliance leader. There must be a reason behind the backstabbing of a random civilian. It's like a latent disease if the leader were to have access to our intelligence. The trigger for the backstabbing could be when things are going wrong, like armies getting raped while the famed army officer has no idea what to do. What can he do to shift the blame from himself and carry on being a famed officer? Backstab someone of course. Throw all the blame to him, order people to attack him, say that he's a spy, annex him, stuff like that.
What can we do then, if all of us are unable to become authoritative figures? We can only protect ourselves and not be this trusting of leaders.
OK this sounds anti-government but what I'm actually referring to is alliance politics in Travian.
Doesn't sound that boring now I hope?
Through this, I learnt that there's a lot more to learn about people and why they do the things they do. It is interesting to see oneself become a victim of human nature, and it's interesting to see people try to defeat the bestial instincts within themselves.
Speaking of bestial instincts reminds me of sex. This is an excerpt from an erotic story:
I thought I knew what was going to happen but I wasn’t sure what to do about it. I liked her, really liked her, maybe more, but we had not even had a conversation yet. I wanted this but I also wanted more than this. Would this help or hurt?
http://stories.xnxx.com/story/15986/Hawaiian_Sunset
We always hear 'Begin with the end in mind'. What do people being in their minds with about the end when they are involved in a relationship? I'd say that most guys think of getting laid.
If there's a relationship, there must be a form of conclusion, something you want to achieve out of it. Let's not talk about abstract shit like 'love'. Let's talk about alliances. I seem to enjoy drawing parallels from Travian these days.
There's a huge alliance A, and there's a medium-sized alliance B. B could become a farm, or could aid in alliance A's quest of domination by being absorbed into A.
A could choose to destroy B completely and try to take in the best players of B, or build a cordial relationship with B, just in the hopes of B becoming stronger and eventually achieving the capacity to aid A in times of war.
To put it crudely, a relationship with B is equivalent to an investment.
Let's say there's an alliance C, which is damn small and useless. Alliance A would not bother with it at all because there's no potential for growth of C. There are no obvious benefits of building a relationship with C, so they simply don't bother with C and attack it from time to time.
From these we can see that people build a relationship with other people only when there's a possibility of reaping benefits.
And in Travian, benefits would mean protection in the form of defensive troops and resources to build up population/more troops.
What about in real life? We can see that every relationship is a form of investment already. I can socialize with a random guy who is quite smart and I might be able to get sexam tips from him. I can get to know a prostitute really well and bargain for a discount when I, uh, visit her to give her business. I can give freely to the poor, but that's for satisfaction of my own soul, to make me feel better about myself for being such a morally degraded person.
See? Only useful relationships are forged.
That brings us back to the point in a relationship, the boyfriend girlfriend kind. What is the end in mind that you have? Is it marriage? Kids? A one-night stand? A fling?
I think that the point in all such relationships is procreation. I don't know how can people be disgusted by what we're born to do, and what we were born by.
All I know is that I'd definitely have sex with my wife. If not there's no point in having a wife at all. I mean like you have a wife for a reason right?
So what was wrong with the notion that sex is a small but important part in a relationship? Weird people.
How can teenagers be disgusted by sex? I mean it's encouraged to not have it at this stage in life, but is there a need to be disgusted by it? For fuck's sake, you were born through the affinity of your parents and sexual intercourse. Unless you're a test-tube baby, but even then I'm quite sure your parents could have sex just because they want.
Gah. My blood boils.
And I don't know how to assure you that you're special.
-- 5/26/2009 12:42:00 AM
Bring Your Own Trolley Day.
I think that 95.8FM is interesting. They were discussing on shopping trolleys, the kind which you insert a 1-dollar coin to free it for use.
A trolley like that costs $130. Doing my maths, I can conclude that it would greatly benefit my economically, as I'd have gained a profit of $129 every time I grab one of those.
Being a black-hearted man, why not? If I, uh, borrow without returning a trolley a day, I would not have to work at all.
Let's say your monthly salary is $3.1K.
That would be around 100bucks everyday for hours spent in front of the computer, staring at pixels and digits from 9-5.
Isn't that a bore?
Compare that with a trolley-'borrowing' man. He grabs a trolley, and perhaps buy some grocery(because it's convenient anyway, seeing as he won't be returning the trolley), and makes off with the trolley, leaving the supermarket to wallow in its own self-pity.
Then he can go home, with the trolley and the grocery still inside the trolley, and sleep. Booze. Wake up and Travian. Restaurant City. Runescape. Sleep some more. Wake up. Goes to the supermarket. And the cycle repeats.
Of course this is provided he can sell the trolleys at $130.
Which makes me wonder how trolley-producing companies earn their keep. You see, there is around 100 such missing-trolley cases per year in Singapore. Or at least that's the figure for one supermarket, I forgot. Which means that you add up and stuff and you can come up with a rather modest amount.
Let's cap this number of missing trolleys at 500. Which means that there is around a loss of 500 trolleys per year in Singapore.
How can a company earn from 500*130 per year? What's there to earn? OK, perhaps the trolleys are imported, so they have other markets to sell to. However, this number is limited. I mean, there's only so much a company can buy and hold, right? There's hardly any point in buying 1million trolleys for like, say, one of the 2 branches of Carrefour in Singapore. Not sure how you spell it but yeah.
In times of recession, one would think of ways to earn a quick buck. Supermarkets are always viewed in the bigger, more powerful, got money, should fleece, kind of light. So trolley companies and people are always out to fleece them, be it by theft or sextortion, as people believe in the spirit of Robin Hood.
I don't know if it's already being practised, but I think that trolley companies should encourage people to steal trolleys. Monetary incentive always works, making the average man quit his original job to lop onto the steal-trolley-get-$129bucks-and-get-more-incentives-from-trolley-company kind of job. Which would rock.
Let's say he gets 5 bucks for every borrowed trolley. That'd be $134 fucking dollars, which is a lot per trip.
Why bother smuggling drugs when there's such a safe way to earn money?
If you get caught along the streets, you could just say 'Oh I asked the counter people already, they let me because I'm sick =\' and give that wistful face and look innocent and then you're safe and $134 richer.
You can't say the same for drugs. 'I, uh, woke up with them in my pants. I don't know why are they there.'
And by kouping trolleys, you're helping with the Robin Hood cause. No, it's not like supermarkets are fleecing us, or are evil and stuff, but because you think that you're less-privileged(which is probably true), and so you..sobs..have to do this and not work your ass of for money like every other loser has to.
With such moral superiority, what's there that stands in the way of trolley-kouping?
Nothing until one becomes rich himself. Living off supermarkets sounds like fun, and I'd love to sexperience it one day, but what if you realized that you could actually set up your own trolley company, except that you don't have to manufacture any trolleys--you could simply steal, and sell back what you stole to your victims. That'd be great! And you could always employ the help of others to help expand your business and the income and output of trolleys.
Transport companies also use this idea of trolleys to transport goods. Lorries cease to be lorries, they are simply the motor of a long chain of trolleys which can transport goods, and thus you can shift houses with those. Trains are no longer made up of carriages/compartments/whatever fancy name you have, but are substituted with trolleys.
And no this time I'm not joking. Someone used 3 shopping trolleys to shift houses. Quite epic.
Moving on, others start to wise up and they all start their own businesses, and the Robin Hood cause is long-forgotten. They no longer have a common goal(which is to fleece and help each other when in poverty), because they are no longer in poverty. Then the fight for territory and trolleys commences and blah until the supermarkets decide to stop using trolleys altogether, leaving the commoners to live and die by themselves through the grotesque way of getting crushed by goods they are trying to purchase because Singaporeans always bite off more than they can chew.
Then the market for trolleys crashes, as there is no longer a demand for it because all the supermarkets do not use trolleys anymore. All the hoarded trolleys are sold at a dirt-cheap price, and recession sets in.
Why bother going through all these when you can just work for your own keep?
Don't be this lazy. Bring your own push-cart.
I'm not complaining about the Singapore culture by the way. I do recognize the flaws of Singapore's gracious society, but I do understand that there's no point complaining. Complaining is another Singapore culture.
I am immersed in this culture. There is no point ridiculing it, because I am Singaporean after all, and proud to be. There are always the extreme cases, like the one above, but there are nice and gentlemanly Singaporeans too(such as myself).
I think that Singaporeans are quite gutsy, to be honest. You don't see such balls from other people in other countries.
Take for example the pushing that occurs during rush hours. The people who are supposedly more high-classed, or foreigners who are not steeped in Singapore culture, would stand behind, be gentlemanly(stupid), and stone and wait for the others to squeeze in before attempting to enter, only to have the doors close on them, leaving them to wait for the next train and for the same scenario to repeat.
If they got the point, they would become kiasu themselves. If they haven't, then they are being stupid. If they got pissed, but they do not become kiasu themselves, then they are being hypocrites.
Which is why I think that Singaporeans are gutsy. They dare to fight for their own rights. Or at least, these kind of rights. The 'I paid 55cents for a train ride so I will not yield' kind. Which isn't too bad. You don't see such stuff happening.
It has never pissed me off before. I am more or less amused. I understand the need to stand closer to the people in front when trying to squeeze into a train, but I won't be like pushing.
To quote the Hossan Leong song 'It's not perfect living, but at least it's interesting'.
Uhh. Yeah.
-- 5/21/2009 09:21:00 PM
意难忘
So I was listening to 95.8FM just now when they were discussing about 'help'. The act of kindness we sometimes show to random people.
The host cited 2 examples, the first being a woman who got molested on the MRT. She screamed and made noise and stuff, but the people around her didn't bother about that guy. She even slapped him, but no one cared, and she had to take him down personally before passers-by decided to take action.
I admit, the voyeur within me would be saying 'WATCH ON!!!111!!!' and not stop him. But when you really think about it, would you seriously go to the woman's aid? What if your help was unappreciated? Like, if they were a couple having a lovers' squabble, and you butted in and got your ass hurt?
Onlookers remain as they are because they don't want to get involved, and I believe that that is understandable.
The old philosophy/adage '多一事不如少一事' evidently has taken root in many of our hearts. It is only normal to lie low, and keep a low profile, and stay out of trouble. Human nature, really.
Right now, in the comfort of my computer(yes I am inside my computer), I can safely conclude that onlookers are bastards and that they should jump into the situation, and that I would jump in to save the damsel in distress.
Would I really do that though?
I've told myself countless times to stand up and give my seat to the elderly. Y'know, because I'm a hypocrite and stuff, and that doing such a kind act would get me blowjobs. So anyway, I haven't actually done that very spontaneously, especially when it's crowded, and elderly are normally only left standing when it's crowded.
Which basically means I don't get my blowjobs. I feel bad, because I normally won't stand up and signal to the elderly to move over and stuff. It's just outstanding and I don't have the balls to do that. It's something that needs practicing I guess.
So would I really save damsels in distress?
I'm not very sure. So yea.
Now let us change the situation. There's a gangfight, the type where 3people fights 20+
Bottles are smashed, parangs are flashed, chaos everywhere. Ah that rhymes but that's not the point. Would you dare to step in to stop the fight when a crazy bunch of people armed with sharp objects are bent on hurting someone whom you don't even know?
I think that I'd only step in when:
Fear of death < need to save the life of unknown X
What about a poor innocent girl who is about to get gang-raped? Would I step in? I mean, the prospects of saving a damsel is definitely better than saving a random guy.
Yet we all know that we'd be filled with regret for the rest of our lives if we were to just stone around and watch as things happened, and see another person's life taken. Or destroyed. Or tainted. But we don't normally care about the long term effects, but our fear at that moment.
Awright those are rather extreme examples.
But from experience I can say that I won't be able to keep my calm in such situations. I'd probably just run away.
The need for self-preservation throws all rationality away. It is just human nature. Something understandable.
Acts of kindness are only done when it does not cost too much to the person in question, or when the benefits outweigh the cost.
I've fallen in love with Hokkien songs these days. No, it's not like they are new. And it's not like they are sung by people I know.
And if you've got time, watch 意难忘 every weekday, 4.30-5.30PM. It is vari naise.
here's the song I'm currently in love with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_JwvRYNW0Y
There are times when you feel like you're totally in love with someone, and that you want to give your all to that person you feel something special for.
Yet you fail to consider what happens when your love for that person runs out. Let's say that I'm interested in a girl. What happens when my interest runs out?
Can I then safely conclude that I am unable to sing this song to anyone?
This is stupid, and I think that all BGR-s are stupid. I think that such mating games are pointless when you can just get straight to the point.
And if you don't even know what I truly mean, I guess I should just leave it as it is. I cannot judge my character for you.
-- 5/15/2009 08:50:00 PM
Recognition. Mockery. And orgasms.
Every individual seeks his peers recognition. That is something every one can relate to.
Like, if I were to tell a joke, I expect people to laugh along. In this example, my humour is in need of recognition.
Recognition is in itself a form of integrating another person into the society, or the network of friends. By not laughing at my jokes, you are not allowing me entry to your social circle because you denied the existence of my humour, which is quite a sad thing actually.
Of course, that's just an sexample and isn't true. I mean, who can't recognize my humour?
Anyway enough of that bullshit.
As in Restaurant City, every restaurant has a toilet bowl. OK, at least most of them has. It's the same for humans. In this shitty world we live in(some people call it screwed-up, but I prefer to be more crude. It gives me orgasms.), we get full of shit all the time.
We all need someone to pour our sorrows out to, and being the stalker that I am, I enjoy stalking blogs of my friends. And as mentioned, a lot of people are full of shit, and I like to have my friends share their burden with me.
But that doesn't mean that they have to. Every friend has his/her own friends, and it's not rare to be sort of snubbed in the form of getting your request-for-burden rejected because you are not as close to the recipient of your concern as you thought yourself to be.
So when you extend your round hand, be ready to be rejected. The nicer people would reject it in a more subtle way, and that's a cue to stop showing concern of that intensity, because they are not used to receiving such kindness from you.
Even though you may want to help your friend desperately, as long as he/she is not receptive of your support. When people get turned off, they zone out, and they get pissed off because it shows a certain form of obsessiveness on your part.
So what do I propose, and you have to stick to?
When rejected, just shut up and move along. If you're not the recipient's toilet bowl, you just are not.
Stop probing, because it'd make the recipient uncomfortable. Remember that making the recipient uncomfortable is not an intended outcome, so it's best if you were to just show that you care, and move along.
The choice of whether the recipient would say what's up or not lies with him/her. Support is not a compulsory course the recipient has to go through, at least not from you. It is an option.
If the recipient/victim doesn't recognize you as a close friend, there's no point whining about it. Just because you treat him as a close friend does not mean that he must reciprocate.
Which reminds me of the common view that teenage life sucks and how screwed-up the world is.
Well. I think that we've had our good times in life when we were in primary school. We had our fun, we did our fun stuff, we didn't really know about the homework we had, blah blah blah, and we...
can't recall that much about it after all.
Perhaps many years down the road, while we are getting crushed by the weight of work, we'd start to think that 'hmm, maybe it wouldn't be that bad to go back to teenage life'. Simply because we can't recall much about teenage life after all.
What is lost is cherished. People whine about homework and stuff, when the only repercussion of not doing homework is getting scolded by the teacher, and perhaps detention, and maybe a bit more of extra homework. In the real world? Might get sacked. Some talk about stress indeed.
Besides, homework is only as serious as you think it to be. Not doing it doesn't get you killed often, if ever at all.
And the option to copy is never unavailable.
I recall with fondness the memories of mugging for O's. Having remedial till 8PM++ on days, and get off from school at 6.30PM because I'm in the focus group. It was bitter-sweet, but fun all the same. It is not exactly an experience I'd like to re-live, but one that isn't that bad after all. It tired me out to be honest, but I like getting tired. It gives me a sense of satisfaction, because I think that getting tired = work done, and I enjoy feeling accomplished.
Not that bad after all.
As for the part about how screwed the world is, well, humans have never been sane since they started thinking. There are several equations that humans are governed by:
When Greed + power > conscience, the person in question screws the world.
But is that really considered screwing the world? What exactly do you want to see the world as? A place where everyone is good to everyone else? I think I'd be very disturbed if such a world were to exist. Every human being acts in self-interest, and that's a fact that cannot be changed.
You're trapped in a jungle with another human whom you don't know. You have a fish, and both of you are famished. There is only enough water to last the both of you for 2 days. You know that help can only arrive in a week. Basic animal instinct would tell you to kill the other guy to save your own skin. Or at least knock him out or grab the water and run.
But the 'nice' side of us takes over and you go like 'oh we should share so we could survive together'. But when reality sets in, that only one of you can survive, you bankai and would save your own skin.
We can only presume the worse in humans in such a scenario. There are no miracles.
If you're an insane person, you'd share, and both of you would die anyway because there isn't enough water to go around.
Isn't that more screwed up? The same amount of water, and one walks away alive, and the same amount of water, but both dies.
I think that most people find the world screwed up because of the education system, and job prerequisites, which include accomplishments from the education system.
In this case, employment is the water from the previous analogy. To get employed, you have to prove yourself in the academic field, and you have to fight with others who are just as good as, if not better than, you. In this dog eat dog world, it's more of instincts, and you can't call that screwed up because everyone is fighting for survival.
As mentioned in my previous post, it is just 're-packaged' barbarianism. Not very shocking as it's human.
It is your choice to view it as 'screwed-up', but I think that's just human instinct. The daily jostling to get on trains during peak hour is evidence. If you miss the first train, you'd think along the lines of 'OK now time for karma to be on my side, I've paid my tribute and am going to take part in the jostling for the next train.'
No one goes like 'oh never mind, I am not in a hurry at all, let the others go first! I can wait, I have all the time in the world', because you have to pay a fine of $2 if you lag shit in alighting. And probably because you realize that there's no way you can get home without jostling.
Is that screwed up? No, it's human instinct. Unless you're saying that what we're made of is screwed up, then carry on. But then again humans are pretty screwed up. So why comment on how screwed up the world is?
I get the feeling that we all know that ourselves anyway. Saying out loud doesn't change the fact.
Which reminds me, I think that the way GP is taught in AJ is screwed up. We all have to have 2 files, the reading file and the written work file. Reading file would be used to file up all newspaper articles which are relevant to GP. The teacher would dump random newspaper articles on us from time to time, and they all have to be in this fucked up file. And if you don't have it, PHOTOCOPY.
I don't do things I don't see a point in, unless it's like paying tax--compulsory. If I have to do this stupid shit as if it were a get-out-of-jail-free card, then I'd have to do it even though it's not as 'free' as it claims to be.
But seriously, is there a point in filing up 2 years of newspaper articles? Of course, the articles chosen are relevant to GP, but it would still grow to be a considerable amount after 2 years.
Is anyone going to go through all that has been filed up? I believe that mugging is a tried-and-true way of achieving results, but I also think that there are subjects that can't be mugged for. GP content is always changing, like science. There are studies that show that having fruits after a meal would aid in digestion. Now they say it's before.
For people like me, I don't give a shit. So what you read now may not be true during the A's, and blindly 'mugging' it would not reap results.
So what is the fucking point? If you read and remember interesting articles, good for you. But there is no point cramming GP knowledge, because it should come naturally. Mugging it would make one more inclined to tweaking(and hence failing to answer) the question set, just to suit what the mugger has mugged.
And to be honest, I won't go through the reading file. You don't see sane people reading newspapers printed in '08. It's not called newspapers, it's called oldspapers, and that is a form of history, and I don't think that GP is about history.
So fuck that.
I feel inferior blogging that out because I think it's a stupid method to teach GP, and that I'm forced to go through this shit.
Which reminds me of a blog my friend showed me. It's a male who claims to be a bitch. I think it's quite easy to google him, seeing as his blog is very popular, but I think that he's just an attention-seeker.
I don't think that homosexuals would be proclaiming their sexuality on something as public as a blog.
I am not against homosexuals. Seriously. I respect them, but to post it on a blog? It is OK if you blog like a bitch, I understand that there are people with different blogging styles, but to state that you are 'Singapore's ONLY male bitch' is quite attention seeking. That person is just trying to break new grounds.
And I think it's an insult to other homosexuals, because his blog may mislead others into thinking that all homosexuals are like him--attracting attention, and being gay just to attract attention.
In a conservative society like Singapore, everyone does things but stops short of coming public. In a way, perhaps it is courage that led this guy to blogging about his sexuality, but what I see from his advertisement-plastered blog is that he is commercializing his sexuality.
He is making a mockery out of other homosexuals in a way.
I could start a blog and claim to be a homosexual, and post many weird pictures of myself or other stuff which I heard he posted but am not bothered in checking out. Then I would say that I am Singapore's only REAL male bitch. Then publish posts on how to vote for me for popularity.
I don't know what his true intentions are, but I think that he isn't being too matured with his blog. Not that I am, because bloggers are generally people with too much time on his/her hands.
-- 5/04/2009 09:44:00 PM
Life is barbaric. Live with it.
Well, no. The previous post regarding the stupid essay was stupid and doesn't make sense because it isn't even supposed to be there.
Lack of sleep muddled my brain and I forgot that I could actually copy and paste the entire 'essay' into an email and send it to my friend to copy, rather than to have to post on my blog and get her to copy paste.
Epic. Shan't bother deleting it either because it has been there for some time.
Had our sports carnival on Thursday. Wasn't that exciting, but it didn't take that long either, and it was an eye-opener anyway so I can live with that.
Saw Mr. Jeffrey Goh at the pizza hut near AJ, and it was quite weird to see him wave at me with his wife(um wife right?) holding his arm. It was also quite weird to wave back, considering the fact that we don't really see each other sexcept for our SPA lessons.
I hope the teachers would still remember me =\
Had dinner at the pizza hut with 1/3 of the class, and I realized that I completely do not have table manners. But like I say, eating is a barbaric process. I like being primitive.
Which reminds me of an article my sis showed me a few days back regarding Wolverine and why women think he's hot.
In the past, women only needed men who can keep the bears out of their caves, because that's something women can't do themselves(their prowess at combat aren't often on par with men after all). Now we can start wondering and trying to recall whether Tarzan was filmed/drawn with a lot of hair or not. Testosterone, being a steroid as it is, is shown all over men in the form of hair. Thus women felt a sense of security when they see hair on men, because it's symbolic of testosterone.
Slowly, societal views on hair and how it symbolizes barbarianism started to take ground, and it is no longer socially acceptable to walk around with a long beard unless you're holding onto a world record of some sort, simply because there were no more bears and caves that needs to be rid of bears so that it could become fit for humans to inhabit.
Then, the idea of men and women being equals took root, and some(most) males found it in their hearts to become more like women. That's why you see guys putting on make-up and making all those bullshit hairstyles, because they think people care, and because they are 'metrosexual'. And women, being visual creatures themselves, decided that looks should be an important factor in finding a mate, and so they dig these metrosexual people.
The gruff, le-strong-silent-type kind of guys are quickly dying out, because if you're silent you're unnoticed, and if you're unnoticed, you won't get to mate, and if you don't get to mate, you can't get your genetic material passed on, and if your genetic material isn't passed on, your species is endangered.
Then the metrosexual people gets to procreate and more metrosexual people are born. Which is a really bad thing, because the definition of metrosexual, as given by dictionary.com, is:
a heterosexual male who has a strong aesthetic sense and inordinate interest in appearance and style, similar to that of homosexual males
, which means that more money and time would be spent on stupid stuff like shopping. It is enough that women are contributing that much to global warming, males do not have to join in the fray.
Thus, as we can all see, men are getting more and more sissified, as the roles of men(like fighting bears) get diluted.
Why did I bother with talking about how men transformed to suit societal views and the needs of women? Because things are changing.
In times of economic recession, women are once again in need of 'security', thus they need to see hair.
Which is why Wolverine is getting popular with ladies, with him being as primal and bestial and muscular as a real man can be.
And that reminds me--why are people more receptive to muscles than hair? :c
The fact remains that the muscles are not meant for combat, but more for aesthetic appeal, and that's quite demeaning to the human body. It's like body modification, where you put stuff under your skin and fork your tongue so you look like a snake, except that it's more 'natural'.
Hair, like muscles, is something that is characteristic, but not exclusive, to males. Not many people understand that though but oh well.
They still appeal to a woman's need for security though. A lot.
I still don't think that a person should train muscles just to make women fall in love with them. Nut that fun. Muscles were of practical use in the past, and I think they should remain practical in the future besides increasing chances of bedding women.
So I was wondering, why are humans so weird? They feel for one thing at one time, then change it because it seems barbaric, and revert to their original forms when they can't hold on anymore. Or at least for females only, because the aforementioned sexample only refers to a woman's fickle nature.
Like eating, living is barbaric. Or maybe that's because you need to eat to live, but either case life is barbaric. To go up you must push someone down. It's like playing chess, except that the chess pieces are your dicks, which doesn't make sense because one man is entitled to only one dick.
Either case, it's just repackaging the whole shit and claiming that it's more 'barbaric' one way than the other. How we avoid teachers is like how we avoid fighting strong bears. How 'civilized' is that? Just because we're properly clothed doesn't mean our natural instincts are. Appearing, and being, are completely different.
How we argue with teachers to prove our point is similar to how we fight the bears.
And no one can argue this point with me, if not he/she would prove that he/she wants to be morally/intellectually superior, and in that case would prove that my hypothesis, that arguing is a barbaric process, is correct. Humans vs. humans, not healthy. No wait that'd mean teachers aren't humans.
Eh wait. No actually that just means that I live an unhealthy life because I'm always arguing with teachers.
So anyway, we all lead a barbaric life. Except that we don't know it, because we don't think it's barbaric at this point of civilization. Perhaps in the distant future, humans have evolved to the point that there is no need for communication. Our language becomes a 'barbaric' thing for those people to look back(and down) upon.
Just because I still think I live in prehistoric times does not make you more superior than me >(
Yes I am actually very insecure about myself therefore I hug my bag everyday and am blogging this as a form of re-assurance to myself that everything is ok and that it is perfectly fine to be barbaric :c
Now let's talk about how barbaric it is to witness stuff and record it down and show it to the world. This struck me during mass civics on Thursday, and I think it struck me when I watched a video on cruelty to animals, but the animal one was long ago.
During civics, we watched a video on life transformers, highlighting impoverished families.
I don't see why they should make an entire episode on the living conditions of the family, and broadcast it. They are highlighting the pain of the family, and possibly humiliating them further. Never wash your dirty linens in public, yo.
And I always get this feeling that what's on reel isn't real. I mean, who goes around baring his/her heart and life story out on national/international TV? Though I do agree that the story was tragic, and that I can't help but feel sympathetic, I can't find it in me to think that it's acceptable for stuff like that to be screened.
Exposing one's life on TV is quite demeaning to it. Makes people think that it's just another drama serial, one that you watch, sympathize with, and forget about in just a couple of hours, and forgetting that the tragedy we watch for an hour is a nightmare they have to live with for life.
Reminds me of Kevin Carter. Heh I finally found his name:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter
He witnessed 'necklacing', which is a painful way to die. I don't think any woman would want to be killed with broken glass shoved into her vagina while being burnt by a tyre-ful of gas around her chest and arms, and made this comment:
''After having seen so many necklacings on the news, it occurs to me that either many others were being performed (off camera as it were) and this was just the tip of the iceberg, or that the presence of the camera completed the last requirement, and acted as a catalyst in this terrible reaction. The strong message that was being sent, was only meaningful if it were carried by the media. It was not more about the warning (others) than about causing one person pain. The question that haunts me is 'would those people have been necklaced, if there was no media coverage?''
There is so much more you can do other than sitting down and sucking your thumb, or snapping away. Photographs cannot bring back the dead.
Media is too abused.
On a random side note, there are times when you wish for a language between you and your designated recipient, that there is a frequency only both of you can tune into, that there is a code only the two of you can decipher. Everyone wishes for something exclusive to themselves and the person they want to be exclusive to, but reality always disappoints.
Which makes me wonder why did I bother typing that in the first place, =\
Sometimes I wish I have long-sleeved shirts to block out the goosebumps that have nothing to do with the weather.
Sometimes I wish I had better homeostasis.
But I know that it'd be OK anyway.
-- 5/01/2009 11:41:00 PM