It's week 9, and for me the midsemester break is now here. I've been meaning to write a reflection on the Science & Religion course for the last week or two now, but as usual I've been lazy and unmotivated to do much uni work.
The course has been a lot tougher than I expected - in fact, it was different to my expectations to begin with. I must not have really focused on the "science" part of the course when I enrolled, because I definitely wasn't expecting to learn about elements of quantum physics! But that was a good surprise - I've wanted to read about quantum physics for a while now, but never got around to it. Now I've had a bit of a taste test with this gen. ed., and it's pretty fascinating (albeit trippy) stuff!
I was also hoping to be learning more about the different religions in the world, rather than having discussions mainly based on a Judaeo-Christian belief system. Admittedly I can see how it would be quite difficult to maintain a coherent discussion on topics such as Creation and Evolution (etc) while trying to learn about different religious beliefs at the same time - it would probably make the course quite disjointed. That said, I didn't realise we'd be discussing topics like Creation and the Big Band or Evolution to begin with.
Keeping up with the weekly discussion has been difficult for me, mostly because I've been too tired to concentrate after work - the weekly resources and lectures, while exciting and interesting and sometimes fascinating, aren't exactly what I would call light reading, and I always need to be reading the materials in silence (i.e. without music playing in the background) otherwise the words just don't sink in. I'm not a particularly fast reader either, so I've been falling behind and not participating in the discussions as much as I should be. Now my main concern is that I hope I pass the course! I'd hate to fail a gen. ed. subject, and a subject that I chose to do because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
----------------
Now playing: Jehro - Long Is The Way
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Saturday, September 15, 2007
week 8 discussion posts #1-2
On the topic of Providence, Free Will & Suffering
Discussion posts below altered slightly for the purposes of this blog
In response to the discussion of God creating a world devoid of evil and suffering, I think I've interpreted the question differently to Ariella and Priyanka. I think it's possible that God could create a world without evil and suffering, because I also think its possible that as free agents, humans are the ones who create the evil and suffering amongst themselves.
Ariella/Priyanka/others who agree, I apologise if I've misinterpreted your own repsonses, but that's my 2 cents worth :)
---
After reading Rachel's post on the discussion of how the good die young, I was reminded of how I used to think that "It always seems to be the good people who die early/prematurely..." and I couldn't understand it either. But the idea that came to me was, perhaps God takes the good people away from Earth because they don't deserve to suffer all the stress, the trauma, the evils and the dangers of living in human society. Like Michelle wrote, maybe we do live in a "relatively 'good' world" - after all, we could have been living out WW #101 rather than watching the news on the "War in Iraq", but I still think it's a world which is not as good as it could be.
But back to my main point - perhaps God handpicks the really good people and seriously takes them to a better place..
Discussion posts below altered slightly for the purposes of this blog
In response to the discussion of God creating a world devoid of evil and suffering, I think I've interpreted the question differently to Ariella and Priyanka. I think it's possible that God could create a world without evil and suffering, because I also think its possible that as free agents, humans are the ones who create the evil and suffering amongst themselves.
Ariella/Priyanka/others who agree, I apologise if I've misinterpreted your own repsonses, but that's my 2 cents worth :)
---
After reading Rachel's post on the discussion of how the good die young, I was reminded of how I used to think that "It always seems to be the good people who die early/prematurely..." and I couldn't understand it either. But the idea that came to me was, perhaps God takes the good people away from Earth because they don't deserve to suffer all the stress, the trauma, the evils and the dangers of living in human society. Like Michelle wrote, maybe we do live in a "relatively 'good' world" - after all, we could have been living out WW #101 rather than watching the news on the "War in Iraq", but I still think it's a world which is not as good as it could be.
But back to my main point - perhaps God handpicks the really good people and seriously takes them to a better place..
Friday, September 14, 2007
on providence & good will, amongst other things
So Larissa asks the question,
"Is it logically possible for God to create a world in which there is no evil or suffering, but where humans still have free will?"
To answer this question on a bit of a tangent, I think it's us, the humans themselves, who create the evil and suffering. This of course, assumes that we are created as free agents, and not somebody else's puppets.
Alexander wrote:
"There is the cliched argument that "What is light but absence of darkness?""
It's such a simple yet profound statement.
Reading on further through the discussion posts, I see the topic/question of "Why do bad things happen to good people?", and my fellow students' confusion and failure to understand just why it is that the nicest people seem to be the ones who suffer from terminal illnesses and the like.
I've thought about this before, primarily because of events that had affected me in some way. My kindergarten teacher, her name was Mrs Batty. However she was far from crazy, and did a wonderful job as the teacher of our class, Kindergarten Rainbow. I remember her peaceful smile, and she was all warmth and love. I don't recall seeing her after kindergarten; it's possible that she moved schools, who knows. I was too young at the time to pay attention to such things. By the time I was in Year 5 or 6, I discovered from my teachers that Mrs Batty had passed away due to cancer. It was a shock, and I felt sad.
And when I was in Year 4 or 5 (the years are a blur now), the mothers of one of my best friends passed away on the operating table, while having a brain tumor removed. That was also a shock, and saddening news. She was such a lovely person, really nice and kind, and she left behind 3 wonderful daughters and a loving husband. I felt terrible.
Taking my case to the realm of celebrities et al, Eva Cassidy & Princess Diana are the first who come to mind.
Eva Cassidy was an American singer blessed with an amazing voice. According to friends and family she was very shy, but very generous, and overall had a wonderful heart and soul. However she died at the young age of 33, battling cancer. Why did such a lovely and talented person have to leave so soon?
If you listen to some of her songs, even the ones that weren't ready for album release, you'll soon realise how incredible her vocal talent is. One can only imagine what potential was not realised due to her early passing.
Jeff Buckley is of a similar situation, although he disappeared in the Mississippi River one evening. His albums Grace and Live at the Sin-e are precious recordings of a genius at work. According to his mother, he was a good person too, kind and gentle.
"The good die young."
It's a cliche, but it's cliched because it's true.
And just about everybody would know about Princess Diana. I remember her most for her enormous contribution to humanitarian activities. Of course, there are many, many people around the world doing exactly the same thing, if not better, but my respect for her is from the perspective that she was royalty. She was very well-off; why would she have any reason to go out of her way to do something for people she doesn't know? But Princess Diana used her celebrity status to bring awareness into people's living rooms during the news. And I'm sure we were only seeing the tip of the iceberg on screen.
I respect celebrities who use their celebrity status to do good for the world - but only those who are genuine about their cause. Angelina Jolie was known for working in humanitarian activities long before the news articles on Bono, or Bob Geldof, or Madonna, etc. The most prominent (i.e. receive the most amount of TV coverage for what they do, based on my experience) celebrities who I think are genuinely dedicated to the cause, are Angelina Jolie and Bono.
The fact that being humanitarian has become "trendy" nowadays, is both a blessing and a curse in my opinion. It's great because that means more people are getting involved, donating money, aiding good causes. The bad thing is, what are their ulterior motives? Are they doing it because they think it's 'cool', or because they genuinely feel that everybody should have equal rights in the world, and poverty is unacceptable considering the affluence of many urbanised areas around the world?
"Is it logically possible for God to create a world in which there is no evil or suffering, but where humans still have free will?"
To answer this question on a bit of a tangent, I think it's us, the humans themselves, who create the evil and suffering. This of course, assumes that we are created as free agents, and not somebody else's puppets.
Alexander wrote:
"There is the cliched argument that "What is light but absence of darkness?""
It's such a simple yet profound statement.
Reading on further through the discussion posts, I see the topic/question of "Why do bad things happen to good people?", and my fellow students' confusion and failure to understand just why it is that the nicest people seem to be the ones who suffer from terminal illnesses and the like.
I've thought about this before, primarily because of events that had affected me in some way. My kindergarten teacher, her name was Mrs Batty. However she was far from crazy, and did a wonderful job as the teacher of our class, Kindergarten Rainbow. I remember her peaceful smile, and she was all warmth and love. I don't recall seeing her after kindergarten; it's possible that she moved schools, who knows. I was too young at the time to pay attention to such things. By the time I was in Year 5 or 6, I discovered from my teachers that Mrs Batty had passed away due to cancer. It was a shock, and I felt sad.
And when I was in Year 4 or 5 (the years are a blur now), the mothers of one of my best friends passed away on the operating table, while having a brain tumor removed. That was also a shock, and saddening news. She was such a lovely person, really nice and kind, and she left behind 3 wonderful daughters and a loving husband. I felt terrible.
Taking my case to the realm of celebrities et al, Eva Cassidy & Princess Diana are the first who come to mind.
Eva Cassidy was an American singer blessed with an amazing voice. According to friends and family she was very shy, but very generous, and overall had a wonderful heart and soul. However she died at the young age of 33, battling cancer. Why did such a lovely and talented person have to leave so soon?
If you listen to some of her songs, even the ones that weren't ready for album release, you'll soon realise how incredible her vocal talent is. One can only imagine what potential was not realised due to her early passing.
Jeff Buckley is of a similar situation, although he disappeared in the Mississippi River one evening. His albums Grace and Live at the Sin-e are precious recordings of a genius at work. According to his mother, he was a good person too, kind and gentle.
"The good die young."
It's a cliche, but it's cliched because it's true.
And just about everybody would know about Princess Diana. I remember her most for her enormous contribution to humanitarian activities. Of course, there are many, many people around the world doing exactly the same thing, if not better, but my respect for her is from the perspective that she was royalty. She was very well-off; why would she have any reason to go out of her way to do something for people she doesn't know? But Princess Diana used her celebrity status to bring awareness into people's living rooms during the news. And I'm sure we were only seeing the tip of the iceberg on screen.
I respect celebrities who use their celebrity status to do good for the world - but only those who are genuine about their cause. Angelina Jolie was known for working in humanitarian activities long before the news articles on Bono, or Bob Geldof, or Madonna, etc. The most prominent (i.e. receive the most amount of TV coverage for what they do, based on my experience) celebrities who I think are genuinely dedicated to the cause, are Angelina Jolie and Bono.
The fact that being humanitarian has become "trendy" nowadays, is both a blessing and a curse in my opinion. It's great because that means more people are getting involved, donating money, aiding good causes. The bad thing is, what are their ulterior motives? Are they doing it because they think it's 'cool', or because they genuinely feel that everybody should have equal rights in the world, and poverty is unacceptable considering the affluence of many urbanised areas around the world?
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
an idol of mine
"I'm not into genre," she says. "I'm a singer who tries to communicate through song. I write songs because I need to write them. It's almost like cheap therapy."
Katie Noonan.
Blessed with a beautiful voice, her new album Skin is a great album with loads of class and silky smooth grooves. I personally think it's a bit of a step away from her previous George days, as this album is more pop than not, but I really dig it. After all, how could you not love a voice as heavenly as hers?
Standout tracks:
#3. Time To Begin "Time to begin / Let the sun shine back in..." This is the first single off the album, and as such it has a nice little music video to go with it. I think it sets the tone of the album well - you can sit back and relax, unwind with these silver tunes washing over your body, or you can chat with friends at a cruising party or bar on a Friday night. The rockin' bass line gets me in that Friday night mood - in fact there's a taste of House (dance music) & Jamiroquai to the song, it's great - and the (jazz?) flute IS NUTS! Makes me wish I'd kept up with my silver woodwind.
#4. Love's My Song For You "As we lay here in the darkness, chatting away the hours, I wonder / If I could, lie here forever..." One of my boy's faves actually. She's more breathy in this song, and it's really nice and easygoing, something for a sunny day outside, or when you're indoors and the sunshine's so bright it's lighting up the whole house.
#5. Little Boy Man "You're the greatest gift / You're the sweetest kiss.." I personally find the title rather catchy. Possibly because it does and doesn't make sense, both at once, and they're the first words she sings. The groovy-sounding keyboard and the drumbeat that feature throughout most of the song, get my head nodding and my feet tapping. Every time.
#6. Sunshine "I look up, and I see that smile again / I look up, and I see sunshine again / I look up, and I see your face again..." Again, the keyboard and drums get this song going. They definitely bring the groove to this album, and complement Noonan's voice very well.
If you manage to get a hold of the special edition of this album, which includes an additional CD with b-sides, you'll find that she does a fantastic cover of the song "Crazy" (of Gnarls Barkley fame). Can't rave about it enough!
Katie Noonan. Haunting. Heavenly. Magical. Must-listen.
A repsonse to the article "Katie Noonan hits the road"
Katie Noonan.
Blessed with a beautiful voice, her new album Skin is a great album with loads of class and silky smooth grooves. I personally think it's a bit of a step away from her previous George days, as this album is more pop than not, but I really dig it. After all, how could you not love a voice as heavenly as hers?
Standout tracks:
#3. Time To Begin "Time to begin / Let the sun shine back in..." This is the first single off the album, and as such it has a nice little music video to go with it. I think it sets the tone of the album well - you can sit back and relax, unwind with these silver tunes washing over your body, or you can chat with friends at a cruising party or bar on a Friday night. The rockin' bass line gets me in that Friday night mood - in fact there's a taste of House (dance music) & Jamiroquai to the song, it's great - and the (jazz?) flute IS NUTS! Makes me wish I'd kept up with my silver woodwind.
#4. Love's My Song For You "As we lay here in the darkness, chatting away the hours, I wonder / If I could, lie here forever..." One of my boy's faves actually. She's more breathy in this song, and it's really nice and easygoing, something for a sunny day outside, or when you're indoors and the sunshine's so bright it's lighting up the whole house.
#5. Little Boy Man "You're the greatest gift / You're the sweetest kiss.." I personally find the title rather catchy. Possibly because it does and doesn't make sense, both at once, and they're the first words she sings. The groovy-sounding keyboard and the drumbeat that feature throughout most of the song, get my head nodding and my feet tapping. Every time.
#6. Sunshine "I look up, and I see that smile again / I look up, and I see sunshine again / I look up, and I see your face again..." Again, the keyboard and drums get this song going. They definitely bring the groove to this album, and complement Noonan's voice very well.
If you manage to get a hold of the special edition of this album, which includes an additional CD with b-sides, you'll find that she does a fantastic cover of the song "Crazy" (of Gnarls Barkley fame). Can't rave about it enough!
Katie Noonan. Haunting. Heavenly. Magical. Must-listen.
A repsonse to the article "Katie Noonan hits the road"
and you. the big guy.
Sure, I'll write you an email when you want me to.
Sure, I'll try and keep in touch.
Sure, I'll share music.
WHAT
ABOUT
YOU
Sure, I'll try and keep in touch.
Sure, I'll share music.
WHAT
ABOUT
YOU
Sunday, September 9, 2007
initial thoughts on evolution
Questions:
I thought I'd write up my initial responses to the following questions, before I read the lecture material.
1&2. Have humans evolved from vastly simpler organisms? Have other animals and plants evolved from simpler organisms?
How much simpler are we talking here? As in, from a single cell or amoeba, to some kind of amphibious being, to a simian being of sorts, then to neanderthals and finally to the modern homo sapiens we know and (sometimes) love today?
Perhaps.
I guess we all have to start from somewhere, right? I'm not much of a science buff, and I haven't really thought a great deal about where we all 'began'. My mind mainly thinks as far back as primitive humans, and anything beyond that, I've not contemplated. To me, this then implies that I've believed in God to an extent, in that I assumed that we started out as a simple form of human, and developed from there.
3&4. Does a belief in evolution lead to dire theological, moral and social consequences? Can a Christian believe in evolution and still be a "good Christian"?
"Dire" is a bit of an extreme word, wouldn't you think? I can see how a belief in the theory of evolution could affect a Christian's morals, and cause a inner conflict- I'm sure it would be fairly difficult to reconcile the notion of our beginning from a Big Bang, and the creation of Adam & Eve.. unless you were a bit of a religious scientist, and accepted the Genesis book in the Bible as more of a poetic description of God's Creation process, rather than believing that Eve was really created from one of Adam's ribs (I think that's how the story goes). I suppose that answers Q4 as well - I don't see why a Christian can't believe in God and Evolution at the same time, unless there's a passage in the Bible that specifically denies the concept of Evolution, and writes it off as a sinful belief.
Perhaps something more solid than a belief, i.e. an undeniable proof of Evolution, would stir a crisis in the theological world, and therefore have a social impact on the actively religious. Maybe you'd find a lot of people losing their minds, upon realising that there isn't a God. Or maybe they would not believe the proof, choosing instead to believe that the scientists had faked the evidence.
5. Does it matter whether we regard evolution as a "fact " or merely a "Theory"?
Of course. Accepting evolution as a fact, in my opinion, is to virtually write off the concept of God - unless you believe that God created the Big Bang. Then it wouldn't really matter. But if we consider evolution as a theory, no more and no less, then it allows us to keep our minds open to other possibilities of how we came to be, or how the world/universe began, et cetera.
Ok, now to read the lecture material.
I'm not sure whether I like this discussion on probability- that is to say, it feels as though our very existence is being dulled down to statistics and chance and complex mathematical equations that calculate the probability of things such as the chance of coin-flipping 100 heads in a row.
Continuing along this line of thought, based on chance and probability it is quite possible that human beings share a common ancestry with primordial slime, as William Provine suggests. Jumping back to Michael Denton's words that "to suggest that hundreds, thousands or possibly even millions of transitional species... were all unsuccessful... is verging on the incredible" - well yes, it is incredible. But I think it's possible too. We as humans like to think that we know everything, or we're on our way to knowing everything, but realistically we're nowhere near. For example, scientists and animal/insect experts (I've forgotten what kind of "-ologist" they are) are constantly discovering new species in the Amazon, just take a look at the news posted on the National Geographic website. And I'm sure that they've also missed a heap of flora and fauna too, what with all the incessant logging that's going on over there.
I think I have to eat some of my earlier words above, where I've said that I don't like the probability discussion - I've just read the review of the Theory of Evolution, and the concept of "survival of the fittest" is essentially boils down to probabilities. You have to be lucky enough to have the right genes or characteristics, or be able to adapt to your surroundings in such a way that you continue your lineage from generation to generation, and that's got a lot to do with chance.
The Selkirk and Burrows diagram reminds me of an article I read earlier this year (or possibly last year), about a new discovery that horses and bats are closely related. If scientists continue to find new links between different animal species, and perhaps even plant and insect species, maybe it's possible that scientists will reshape the concept of evolution as we know it today?
I thought I'd write up my initial responses to the following questions, before I read the lecture material.
1&2. Have humans evolved from vastly simpler organisms? Have other animals and plants evolved from simpler organisms?
How much simpler are we talking here? As in, from a single cell or amoeba, to some kind of amphibious being, to a simian being of sorts, then to neanderthals and finally to the modern homo sapiens we know and (sometimes) love today?
Perhaps.
I guess we all have to start from somewhere, right? I'm not much of a science buff, and I haven't really thought a great deal about where we all 'began'. My mind mainly thinks as far back as primitive humans, and anything beyond that, I've not contemplated. To me, this then implies that I've believed in God to an extent, in that I assumed that we started out as a simple form of human, and developed from there.
3&4. Does a belief in evolution lead to dire theological, moral and social consequences? Can a Christian believe in evolution and still be a "good Christian"?
"Dire" is a bit of an extreme word, wouldn't you think? I can see how a belief in the theory of evolution could affect a Christian's morals, and cause a inner conflict- I'm sure it would be fairly difficult to reconcile the notion of our beginning from a Big Bang, and the creation of Adam & Eve.. unless you were a bit of a religious scientist, and accepted the Genesis book in the Bible as more of a poetic description of God's Creation process, rather than believing that Eve was really created from one of Adam's ribs (I think that's how the story goes). I suppose that answers Q4 as well - I don't see why a Christian can't believe in God and Evolution at the same time, unless there's a passage in the Bible that specifically denies the concept of Evolution, and writes it off as a sinful belief.
Perhaps something more solid than a belief, i.e. an undeniable proof of Evolution, would stir a crisis in the theological world, and therefore have a social impact on the actively religious. Maybe you'd find a lot of people losing their minds, upon realising that there isn't a God. Or maybe they would not believe the proof, choosing instead to believe that the scientists had faked the evidence.
5. Does it matter whether we regard evolution as a "fact " or merely a "Theory"?
Of course. Accepting evolution as a fact, in my opinion, is to virtually write off the concept of God - unless you believe that God created the Big Bang. Then it wouldn't really matter. But if we consider evolution as a theory, no more and no less, then it allows us to keep our minds open to other possibilities of how we came to be, or how the world/universe began, et cetera.
Ok, now to read the lecture material.
I'm not sure whether I like this discussion on probability- that is to say, it feels as though our very existence is being dulled down to statistics and chance and complex mathematical equations that calculate the probability of things such as the chance of coin-flipping 100 heads in a row.
Continuing along this line of thought, based on chance and probability it is quite possible that human beings share a common ancestry with primordial slime, as William Provine suggests. Jumping back to Michael Denton's words that "to suggest that hundreds, thousands or possibly even millions of transitional species... were all unsuccessful... is verging on the incredible" - well yes, it is incredible. But I think it's possible too. We as humans like to think that we know everything, or we're on our way to knowing everything, but realistically we're nowhere near. For example, scientists and animal/insect experts (I've forgotten what kind of "-ologist" they are) are constantly discovering new species in the Amazon, just take a look at the news posted on the National Geographic website. And I'm sure that they've also missed a heap of flora and fauna too, what with all the incessant logging that's going on over there.
I think I have to eat some of my earlier words above, where I've said that I don't like the probability discussion - I've just read the review of the Theory of Evolution, and the concept of "survival of the fittest" is essentially boils down to probabilities. You have to be lucky enough to have the right genes or characteristics, or be able to adapt to your surroundings in such a way that you continue your lineage from generation to generation, and that's got a lot to do with chance.
The Selkirk and Burrows diagram reminds me of an article I read earlier this year (or possibly last year), about a new discovery that horses and bats are closely related. If scientists continue to find new links between different animal species, and perhaps even plant and insect species, maybe it's possible that scientists will reshape the concept of evolution as we know it today?
Saturday, September 8, 2007
strength.
I've been hosting my own little experiment lately - I've asked my friends to choose a song for me. Perhaps it reminds them of something we did together, or they think the song represents me in some way, or they think that I would like a particular song. It doesn't matter why they choose it, but telling me the reason for their choice is a bonus to me.
And today I received a not from a friend, who quoted 4 songs for me. I knew the artists but I didn't know the songs (except for one, who I didn't know at all), so I visited YouTube to see and hear the songs.
I felt a bit brighter afterwards. Jen reminded me of the person who I think I used to be. Perhaps I'm still the same, but my circumstances have brought out another side of me that my previous environment, i.e. high school, didn't really call for.
This is probably the second time that a feeling of reconnection has built up inside of me - I mean, a reconnection to the 'old' me. The feeling that I used to be stronger, and more vibrant, and the belief that I can still be that person again, if only I let myself.
I don't really understand why I cling to old memories so much. Like how I've just been reunited (via Facebook) with primary school friends whom I haven't seen since Year 1 or 2, and how I have a habit of searching through high school photos for a good display picture of me, when really, those days are at least 2 years old and not reflective of who I am now.
And now, time for a mini rant, because I've just been reminded of it:
I don't like prissy people. People who are constantly very showy, posting blogs about how they only spent $300 on clothes this weekend, or how they haven't been out on a Friday night for the last two weeks, ohmygoodness what a tragedy. Get over yourself. Do something better with your time and money.
I'm sick of seeing your pouted lips, the left side of your face, your oversized designer sunglasses, the deliberately widened eyes to try and beautify yourself that little bit more. Why don't you take some more relaxed photos, I've seen your jawline and your collarbone and your slimmed waist enough times. I'd love to see you take some more friendly photos, casual snaps - stop being such a poser. I liked you better when you weren't such a priss.
Maybe I'm just bitter.
I'm pretty stubborn, and don't like change most of the time. That's something I'm trying to fix though - I want to embrace change, take them as challenges, tackle them head-on, instead of moping and moaning about them.
I'm sick of being a pessimist.
I'm trying for no more tears, no more fears.
And today I received a not from a friend, who quoted 4 songs for me. I knew the artists but I didn't know the songs (except for one, who I didn't know at all), so I visited YouTube to see and hear the songs.
I felt a bit brighter afterwards. Jen reminded me of the person who I think I used to be. Perhaps I'm still the same, but my circumstances have brought out another side of me that my previous environment, i.e. high school, didn't really call for.
This is probably the second time that a feeling of reconnection has built up inside of me - I mean, a reconnection to the 'old' me. The feeling that I used to be stronger, and more vibrant, and the belief that I can still be that person again, if only I let myself.
I don't really understand why I cling to old memories so much. Like how I've just been reunited (via Facebook) with primary school friends whom I haven't seen since Year 1 or 2, and how I have a habit of searching through high school photos for a good display picture of me, when really, those days are at least 2 years old and not reflective of who I am now.
And now, time for a mini rant, because I've just been reminded of it:
I don't like prissy people. People who are constantly very showy, posting blogs about how they only spent $300 on clothes this weekend, or how they haven't been out on a Friday night for the last two weeks, ohmygoodness what a tragedy. Get over yourself. Do something better with your time and money.
I'm sick of seeing your pouted lips, the left side of your face, your oversized designer sunglasses, the deliberately widened eyes to try and beautify yourself that little bit more. Why don't you take some more relaxed photos, I've seen your jawline and your collarbone and your slimmed waist enough times. I'd love to see you take some more friendly photos, casual snaps - stop being such a poser. I liked you better when you weren't such a priss.
Maybe I'm just bitter.
I'm pretty stubborn, and don't like change most of the time. That's something I'm trying to fix though - I want to embrace change, take them as challenges, tackle them head-on, instead of moping and moaning about them.
I'm sick of being a pessimist.
I'm trying for no more tears, no more fears.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)