a thought

i don't really have much to post on this thing anymore. but there are certain times like today when a thought pops up from some stimulus and i just can't get it out of my mind, so i'd just write it down here for future references.

be warned though. these musings i have are usually not politically correct. (if they were they'd be pretty boring) and if i offend your sense of righteousness and justice please seek your opinions elsewhere.

***

now, the article that piqued my interest this morning came oddly from the "life" section of the newspaper. front page news, even. for those of you who don't have the big habit of reading, im talking about the headline of female-centred movies recently about "negative stereotypes".

im of the thinking that there aren't stereotypes for no reason. and one of the most important factors is that these movies portray women who are in their middle ages. i.e. hitting thirty, sometimes slightly over thirty.

that's one of the largest indicators, cause that is also when attitudes toward life get a big change. my opinion, of course, which counts for little especially since i never go through the phase women go through. but here's the largest difference i can make a guess on. before the middle ages, you'd think about partying, career, having a fun time etc etc. when you're pushing thirty or even closer to 40. family and children start occupying most of your brain cells. am i wrong?

i'd like to ask an open question right now. how many people out there, my age, slightly junior, slightly senior, maybe even those i know who are taking courses in various universities right now. how many of you people out there are thinking of settling down, having children and the works. (im not counting marrying, although as of late marriage ages are also getting lower). if i may be slightly bold and general, i'd say that most people out there are just concentrated on building career, having a fun time, going out with who they like.

and therein lies the problem. i am, of course, making a wild guess here and you're welcome to prove me wrong. (only when you're at the appropriate age, please) but once you're at a certain age, worries start to pile up. will i get a good partner? can i still have a baby? etc. there is some fundamental loneliness in all of us, the need to have a proper family. those with parents still alive can put off that feeling slightly longer. but still, it eventually catches up.

and therein lies the article about these characters being "man-crazy". they have to be, how can they be not? at that age when nature is screaming at you, when half the people you know are happily in a loving family. suddenly, oh noes. i need one! is it still too late? am i still available?

there is a good saying i read some time back. as men age, the pool of potential partners increase, while the opposite can be said of women. unpleasant as it may be, im inclined to think it's absolutely correct. and at the age panic starts to set in, well, you get what we see. "man-crazy" syndrome.

yea, while i was in school i was routinely and repeatedly chastised for being a chauvanistic pig. hey, it's not like i have anything against women. i just have the misfortune of pointing out glaring faults. and not just in women either. but seriously, i have never gotten scathing remarks when i make fun of the male side of homo sapiens. wonder why. maybe it's all the insecurity, the need to assure oneself, "hey, im in charge. don't go saying anything you damn bloody well please". or is it the need to continue the delusion of equality, in this still very male-dominated world?

one last question before i leave. has anyone wondered why it is almost impossible NOT to love babies when you set eyes on them, yet we keep insisting that we have to "know someone very well" before you can declare love? double standards much? especially the ladies. i'd like an opinion on this one.

more thoughts before another confinement

im not sure about any others out there. one thing i really hate is when i'm idle. that is, when the mind isn't working. either when it's brainless work ("move this here, move that there, and don't ask why.") or just plain idling ("just sit there, don't sleep, don't play and don't read"). i know some people are quite capable of spacing out anywhere they like. unfortunately im not capable of that feat and it's not a nice feeling knowing your brain is just rotting away.

...

something's been bugging me since my gp teacher told me there must be some deep-rooted reason for my cynicism. not that i think im really cynical or anything. but most studies show that it is always something that happened during childhood that affects your behaviour for the rest of your life. and i've been trying to find out what it is since then. and i think i might have found it just today. it is my belief that only 4 people in the world knows of this event ever happening to me, and only i know what kind of impact and why it has had.

it was rather interesting, since i was reading a book about commitment today. (does anybody ever wonder why most relationship books are written for women instead of male readers?) and i guess i still fall into most guy's "avoidance" label. i haven't finished but there are some interesting points, which i might write later. i'm still primarily a guy with male instincts, im afraid, even though most times i don't seem to behave like a typical testosterone-charged guy should.

...

was also thinking about women's rights campaign (again). and the fight for equality and stuff. the thing i found weird was, you see, equality can really never be achieved, simply because differences between the sexes amounts to more than just differences between the sex organs and the plumbing. there are some innate differences, such as females having more brain synapses within the cerebellum and guy's having more compartmentalised brain functions.

and since im so used to the style of gp writing, let's use point example structure to think things through. a man can go around having one night stands, have thousands of lovers, and goes around bragging about this. this actually increases his social status (one way or the other, if you look at the famous playboys and who they are you'd know what i mean). now, sure women can go and do this nowadays, with the increased earning power and all. but would you want to? minus the social stigma, which can be argued to be artificial, im pretty sure most women would be disgusted with themselves should they fall to that. heck, a guy having gone through 10 girlfriends / wives wouldn't feel a damn thing (or so it seems, who knows what they really feel), but a woman going through 3 relationships would be scarred for life.

(i speak of this knowing a few people with relationship troubles. ever wonder why guys never go for relationship counselling?)

and for those who would prefer concrete evidences, i submit an independant study done in 1996 by mineesota (not sure if the spelling is correct). they asked a handsome/ beautiful person of the opposite gender to approach young adults, asking one of three questions. (a) would you go out on a date with me? (b) would you like to come to my apartment? (c) would you like to have sex with me?
please note that the questions were posed on the first meeting.

for women, 50% said yes to (a), 6% to (b) and none to (c)
for men, the results were 50% said yes to (a), 60% said yes to (b) and 75% said yes to (c)

the debate is still out on why this is so, but so far most people agree that women are more commitment oriented. that doesn't mean men don't want love and just want sex, but admittedly the perspectives are slightly different.

...

now that i've got to that, i thought i might have another bombshell to drop.

as much as i grumble and complain about national service, i thought it was quite fitting an exchange. no, i do not mean that we should serve whoever's up there because it's our duty and all, but i do believe it evens out the scales in what we go through.

apart from natural biological functions, which any woman will tell you is rather much of a hassle, they also go through childbirth agonies (something which i can never possibly relate), pick up the lion's share of the housework and also have the major role when it comes to kids. i kinda really respect those who've got it altogether. HOW do you juggle a career, kids, housework and groceries with everything else?

2 years of hell and a little something else every year after that. im not happy about it, but it kind of evens the playing field, personally speaking. which is why i grumble and grumble but i'll still go, i guess, just so that i can assuage my conscience and say i've had my share of suffering and not be high and mighty on the y chromosome.

...

who knows when the next time will be before i have something interesting to write? i sure have a lot of time to think and wonder now but not much to spare in the way of time and energy.

everyone treasures what they've already lost

it's been a long time since i came back here to post. mostly because i'm away from home. but also because i haven't been thinking much. and i hate posting something about nothing 'cause it kinda debilitates your intelligence. i can already feel my mind rusting away, watchng the damn sampans drift lazily past ont eh straits of johore (not that it hasn't already rotted to the core in BMT, but that's another story.)

friend of mine told me a few days back that she joined a discussion with a group of people on which the topic was on her need to go find a soulmate. i shan't speculate on the results of that discussion but it did ring off quite a lot in my mind.

ordinarily speaking and the social norm is that women need a soulmate a lot more. i'm not going to explain that, i think if you ask around that would be the general consensus. and everyone also knows that women look out for stability, support etc while men are generally less picky about that. that's all common knowledge so i shan't give it too much room here.

medically speaking, however, being attached, engaged or married seems to bring about greater benefits for men than women. statistics have shown this in terms of substance (alcohol, drug, gaming etc) addiction as well as tendency to fall ill, and average lifespan. the reason for this is still out waiting for someone with a PhD to proclaim but my personal guess would be that it's because women still have their social network to rely on.

but i'm not here to talk about who wants whom or who depends on whom. that's idle chatter. the bottom line is that they need each other, or there would be mass orgies and not marriage, for the sake of reproduction. however, isn't it kinda as of late that more and more people take each other for granted? like not thinking about what the other person feels, thinks etc. well, we're not psychics and we generally screw up, even me. but there's just this feeling i get that the relationship somehow isn't treasured greatly when you're in it. does anyone else have this experience?

okay, so not just relationships, even family, friends stuff like that. sometimes we just brush past each other, like a giagantic "X" meeting at a point and then parting forever. even family ties get loose after time.

yes, yes, i know, life is busy. everyone's climbing the corporate ladder, getting a larger salary, getting a better car, a better house, blah blah. and we keep telling ourselves there will come a day where there will be more time, after the taxes are paid, after the mortgage is done, after we upgrade the house... but that day never comes. it just gets busier and busier. a car that increases its speed all the time will wear out pretty soon, or hit an accident. so why should it be different for us?

if anyone read the history of the 9/11 incident, in some cases the authors have included what happened on the last moments before the crash. mobiles phones sent out hundreds of messages to friends, relatives, children, lovers. passengers on the plane called in the last minute of their lives, while those in the building did the same. yet, the general context of the messages and calls were the same. they didn't mention the size of their salary, their rank within the various corporations or the luxuries they have. no. the same three words echoed, sent, received and sent again. lovers to lovers, parents to children, siblings to their family. and friends to friends.

one guy spoke of the harshness of prison life. (this is based in US, i believe). the visiting room has a square table, and 4 chairs nailed to the ground. one chair is in red, and the prisoner sits on it when others are visiting. some family members bring their children, so the prisoners get to see their flesh and blood. yet, as the kids play at a small corner where the playpen is located, the parent can do no more than watch them and smile. sometimes the child calls out for the prisoner, at other times the child may trip and need assistance. i hope everyone out there can imagine the feeling when you get up in those circumstances, only to be yelled at by the warden "hey you! get back in the chair!"

a little closer to home, one of the sergeants i've been working with is married and his wife has just given birth. (he's only 3 years older than me, but i guess it's their choice) of course, as per the rule, he was given 2-3 days of paternity leave. he was able to be there to see his child born, and be there for his wife in the delivery room. but what about after that? he's stuck in the camp like us, executing operations under the sun. he doesn't get to see his child's first week, nor first month. he doesn't even get to call home because the place where we are at has no cellphone reception. can you imagine his anxiety when his wife fell sick with a high fever not even one week after delivery? i hope nobody else out there has to experience that.

make some time out for those who are important to you. it's useless to mourn and regret when these times are gone. resist taking on a large project over the weekend and spend some time with the family, or find a week where everyone is free and take a vacation. after all, the now only happens once, and it'd be a great mistake to leave it, only to find that one has lost everything at a later stage.

one more paper...

right. as for the absence, yes it is mostly attributed to the "A's" and prelims. no it is not mostly over, because the most difficult paper is coming up at the end of it, and i still have no idea whatsoever on how to pass it.

one person told me that she didn't like blogs and facebook because it's like opening up your life and diary for others to read. like you're sharing with the whole wide world your most personal details and life experiences and such. and that is rather true, looking at the state in which blogs are currently used. most of those i see are like describing their everyday lives, how they feel on issues, and stuff. which is ok, but perhaps not so palatable with 0thers.

other uses are pretty good too. the recent newspaper article on how one person uses the web to look for one particular person he saw on the subway? that's pretty avid use of imagination and technology, i thought. then there are those who use it for advertising purposes. boundaries of the net are only limited by imagination, but sadly most of us stick to tried-and-tested means of doing things. Plus it looks increasingly like just another popularity tool.

also, i didn't post much because i didn't have anything useful to say. i'm not much an advocate of posting mundane things and stuff. i don't have that much of an interest into other's lives and i hope nobody's going to poke into mine as well. and posting mundane and unintellectual things just shows the amount of thought processes. so unless i have something useful or discussive to say might as well keep silent.

and not that i have had that much time recently to think of anything else anyway. unless someone out there is masochistic enough to listen to another economics lecture, i shouldn't be saying too much because economics is about all i'm thinking of lately, what with the paper looming on thursday... but that's beyond the point now. heh.

...

just saw another of my old friends get hitched. well people never declare these things but it's an educated guess based on the things i see. and i wonder why i never saw it earlier. perhaps the first sign was when he started going to school early and more importantly alone. or maybe it was the increasing uncomfortableness on house-visits even though i used to that that a lot before. should have noticed, but i didn't. guess i'm getting kinda rusty after all. then again, as someone pointed out to me, it wasn't very nice reading people. people hate to be exposed, but it's nice knowing what's going on just by observations.

well of course i can't say much, but i'm guessing social circles do change with relationships. it's difficult to tell for better or worse, since each case is different, but social circles do change. and knowing my attitude towards vulnearability, i tend to shy away from such changes. because it entails a larger dependancy on fewer people (or in some cases, on one person) which isn't healthy when it comes to defending yourself.

...

and the recent news article about higher divorce rates? there was a rather similar question for one of the GP essays (not during the a levels) in which you were require to discuss the problem. the standard format would be to bring in the pros and cons, and what the government could do such as counselling services blah blah blah. anyone can do that. but i thought it was necessary to delve in slightly deeper and ask why the heck these rates are increasing. and i got soundly thrashed by the teacher who thought i was going off a tangent and not focusing on the question.

so it was quite a moment of vindication for me when i saw the reflect section write a report on the social issues surrounding these rise in divorce rates. one important factor they brought up was that the culture is now "me, me me" and that leads to selfish behavious which isn't compatible in a relationship. well that is partially true, but doesn't cover the whole thing.

in any relation, i believe there are always elements of give and take. you give in some, you take out some. think of it as something like a bank account. sometimes you put a little more in, in times of need you take some out. easy enough to imagine. what happens now, is that everyone's into the withdrawals. they expect something from this outcome, and they're going to have it. think about it. when we talk relations, getting married, whatever, how much of the time do we hear "we expect" or "i expect" or something along those lines? quite a bit, actually. so with expectations running high, withdrawals at a peak and nobody bothering to deposit much, i'm not too surprised that the bank is failing, badly.

of course, that isn't true for all cases. there are some i've been watching develop, and the imbalance is kinda not very safe either. by imbalance i mean if one party is giving way more than another. sooner or later the giving party will get tired, or burnout, and then we'll end up back on square one. which doesn't help much. the question of course is when the burnout happens.

i've got a few more theories on that but as this post is getting way too long i'm leaving it till the next. wouldn't be good for lag.

...

quote:
"fate is a cloth weaved from the many threads of wills. a single strong will to change fate can alter the threads in the cloth into a whole new pattern, and thus change fate itself"
- Miyo Tanaka, Rika Furude, Hanyuu (Higurashi no Naku Koro ni Kai)

been 3 weeks?

been a bit long since i last came on here. then again, it's like there isn't much time for it anyway >.> i haven't got time to think through my thoughts properly, even. seems like everyone's caught up in this big rush for studying.
and then i wonder... what's going to happen after this? life is like one big race to the finish line, except we never know what we're gonna do ONCE we reach that finish line.

just walk into any classroom and ask. "what do you want to be or do when you grow up?" i'd bet you'll get answers ranging from having tons of money, to being famous, or popular, or something like that. but noone seems to be able to answer the follow-up question, which is "what you want to do after that?" could you answer it?

this was the closest answer i got:

"so, what do you want to be when you grow up?"
a: "i want to be a millionaire and have lots of money!"
"so, say you're now 35 and earned your millions. now what?"
a: "*thinks for some time* uhm, i'm going to travel around the world!"
"ok, so you travel around the world and see all the sights there is to see. now you're 38 years old. now what?"
a: "..."

would that sound familiar?

...

just went back to visit an old teacher today. in the middle of SCGS, as usual... but oh well. what's there to be afraid of anyway =.= not like staring makes holes in you or something >.>
lost touch with a lot of people, i realised. sometimes things happen beyond my control. sometimes i just watch them drift away, and i know jolly well what's causing it... sighz. i try to be amiable... but sometimes things don't work out...

...

i'm starting to write quite a bit. seems kind of solace, i guess. fiction is always good 'cause it leaves a lot to the imagination. but i seem to like the WRONG kind of fiction >< aghs, we'll see how it turns out, again...

the long haul

right. a long national day holiday. might as well use the time for something. can't seem to want to study at home at all, but i guess no surprises there...
been thinking quite a bit about an issue or two. and i'm starting to see danger signs glaring out, sometimes subtle, sometimes pretty obvious. hmm. gonna have to come up with a few excuses regarding that situation soon. but i'm kinda lazy at the moment so i'll just continue feigning ignorance =P

hm. right. i wonder. getting rather lazy to input stuff here. not sure whether it's 'cause of that, or nothing much to input. and i continue seeing people's blogs dissolve into oblivion, or abandoned, or simply uttering surfacial gibberish with nothing very interesting to say. well maybe it's interesting to some but gossip isn't my field >.>
i started this page up during a time when blogs were "in", "hot", "trendy" and what not. except i still don't consider myself going with the flow. some people keep diaries, possibly so there's something, or someone, to confide in, or more probably 'cause some things just have to be written down or else it's forgotten. for me, i'd rather look on it as something that i can look back on sometime in the future and go "hey, that's what i thought". how many opportunities like that do we have?

...

right. *cough* national day. quite a few portions to this. the school's one was... well i wouldn't be so mean to say that it's a disappointment... i guess it's just... odd. it really looked more like the kind of stuff we used to have for children's day back in primary school, than a full-fledged national day celebration from a JC. then again, it's much better than the usual performance garbage-cun-assembly we usually get, so i guess it's all good. oh, and the annoying announcements didn't really help. don't need to blare the same message every 5 minutes... we heard you the first time.
heck. too bad i spent the better part of those 6 hours in some dank dark classroom trying to be as quiet as possible >.> but that's another story.
the celebration at night... sorry, it was crowded, dark, and i couldn't see much. the J1s complain that they're sitting on the track but that actually gives them a front-row seat. so i'm not sure why they're complaining. of course, that changes when they've got no interest in the proceedings, but i'm sure everyone wants to see what the performers have painstackingly practised for us, right? of course! was there any doubt?

right. the PM's national day speech is almost the same as every other year. nothing very special, actually. or maybe i just heard too much of the same thing. but the filming location was a nice touch. on top of the main national library branch, overlooking a good chunk of the city. gotta hand it to the location selectors...

ah yes, and the celebration, or parade itself. somehow it just doesn't seem to be as grand as it was before. possibly because the stage was smaller, i guess. not enough space. give and take a bit, i guess. but the water around the stage does allow for a bit more spectacularity for the shows...

...

hm, another point to make. i wonder why everyone's so taboo-iest over the issues of gender and sex? it's like every time it's brought up in class there's some form of discomfort or fidgetyness. i mean, all right, some people are uncomfortable talking about sex, god knows why. maybe it's not something you want to shout out in the street, but isn't not knowing about something worse? the best defense is a good offense. it's always better to be in the know about these damn issues than keep avoiding them your whole life. just don't get out and start yelling about them in the street and it should be ok.

while i'm on that, a study was publishedsaying baby boys are now more "expressive" and "relate better to emotions". the proof? they gave pictures of baby girls to adults telling the adults they were boys, and did the opposite with baby boys. they went on to conclude that most adults deemed the boys more "expressive" and thus boys were more expressive than girls. what the heck. Dung for brains, some people (if you'd pardon the language). you've proven nothing except that societical stereotypes are more entrenched than we think. has nobody thought that perhaps, just perhaps, people are saying the buys are expressive because they are presumed to be girls? and that everyone's just following the stereotype? obviously not =.=

and while i'm on that subject, seems society has placed way too much emphasis on women's rights and stuff. okok, there are SOME countries where the imbalance is pretty obvious, but i think, especially in the developed countries, the scale has been tipped way too much. *cough* before the women's rights activists start hounding after me, it probably warrants a closer look.
if i say the sex laws are unfairly tilted, i don't think anyone would say i'm wrong. just too many examples. heck, even now we separate boys' and girls' dorms not for protection of girls but for the boys! >.> but no, i think i'd mention education this time.

more and more researches keep showing that boys are getting handicapped in school. that they're being outperformed, blah blah blah. genius. go figure. apparently nobody ever took the trouble to find out why though. like doh, if you put a rowdy, hungry-for-action boy into a classroom setting to learn alphabets, words and penmanship that seems to have no use or significance whatsoever, they're obviously NOT gonna have an interest. what's more, once the mindset that school is a bore and is a waste of time. you can kiss dreams of that person doing well in school. let's turn the tables around and say that in grade 1 and 2 (or primary school for us, since most researches are carried out in europe/US) there wasn't the classroom subjects but you're graded on physical development, i.e. you have to run, jump, move about and you'll be graded on that. let's have a look then, who's going to have learning difficulties, eh?

on that note, it can't help but be noticed that the subject of gays and homosexuality is in the newspaper print again. why are those two terms almost synonymous now? isn't there the other side of the coin to homosexuality? you never even hear about lesbianism, do you? i don't think anyone ever wondered why. but there's a good reason for them to focus on gays so much. plus why they bring a myriad of STDs and stuff.

gotta get to the basic first though. everyone knows sexual stimulation is caused by hormones in the body, right? right. just so happens that the hormone respnsible for it in guys is testosterone, the same one for physical violence. what this means is that the sexual urge is usually accompanied by a need either to hurt or for hurt. which is also the reason for the great big BDSM market, but that's another story. it's of interesting note that any sexual urge a woman has listening to a recording of sexual contact is immediately lost if one of the parties involved is hurt, in any way. curiously enough, most women know that, and is reflected as they say they're put off by emotional or physical pain. but here's the interesting bit: they think OTHER women will be aroused in midst of pain. why? i can't understand that bit. perhaps one day someone would explain it to me.

in any case, back on track. also to note is that the sexual drive of most men is at least 20-30 times higher than that of a woman. i think there's something biological in there that dates back to ancient times, since a woman has to carry to baby and stuff... anyway, it's hard fact.
so where does this lead us? that in a normal, heterosexual marriage, the woman usually acts as a sort of "inhibitor", i'm guessing. and well... in gay couplings... no holds barred, plus there's no emotional attachment that comes with women. so i guess there is some truth in them being more promiscious, on the purely biological level.

still, that doesn't give us the right to condemn people or what not. it's not like it's a personal choice or something. think of it as a writing hand. you can be left-handed, right-handed or ambidextrous. it's a kind of inborn thing, right? unless someone wants to tell me s/he actually changed their writing hand by training =.=. So! in your sexual orientation you're either hetero, homo, or bi. same as right, left and ambi. so we might as well be condemning all left-handers, or condemning all who have blue eyes. yea. tell me when that happens so i can get a ticket out.

...

to end of the extra-extra long post, i don't have the usual quote. well i do, another innuendo from the MCs over at national day celebrations in school, but i came across something from HML that i thought was better. except that it's a whole story, so this post is just gonna get that bit longer... (slightly adapted, as some parts i thought wasn't as striking)

There was once a girl who was blind. She despised life because of this, and would lament for hours on end. Her boyfriend was the ever caring type, always there for her in times of need, yet he knew that she would not be happy as she could not see. One day, a pair of eyes came to her, and after a lengthy operation, she could see again (okay, i'm not sure if there are eye transplants, but for story's sake let's assume there is). the first person to be there was, of course, her ever faithful boyfriend, whom was happy for her. alas, she realized with a shock that he was blind too, and called off the relationship. heartbroken, he took his own life, leaving her with a note.

"Dear, please take care of my eyes."

...
question is, if you're in that situation, would you do it? don't give the "correct" answer please, answer honestly... i dunno. i think i would have expected the be tossed aside. Human relations are like that. when you're a burden, or of no further use, it's "goodbye" to any relations you have had. your person is only as much as your utility and how much use you could be to others. pessimistic? maybe. but it's the truth.
but even then, i believe i'd still have given up myself for others. life is too short to enjoy on your own. better to spend it making others slightly better off. after all, what's a little cost or pain to you, if you can make others happy?

...

A/N: oh yes, another music change. two songs this time, and clearing of the old ones. as always, translated is better for understanding, i think.

don't rush, don't rush

yea yea i know i haven't been updating for a dang long time. don't push me. nothing much of interest to say these few days anyway, so rather than post nonsensical stuff might as well leave it blank. been busy around anyhow. i should get to revision really sometime soon dammit >.>

will think of something intelligent and long by national day, i hope.