The Blog of Elaine Wang

22 September 2014

Stop asking me that. Why do you expect me to tell you if you're the problem. Sure, I could tell you all my problems, but it's not like you can fix it so what's the point. Actually, I don't think you'll even try to fix it, it'll just end up being my own fault anyway.

My dad always says I look sad now. He wonders when we stopped going to play tennis and stuff together. I don't know when. It's like friendship but sadder. You don't know when it starts, it just happens. When he says it I always feel really sad, because I just don't know anymore.

My mom is just annoying. It's weird, sometimes I like her because she's my mom, but then she just manages to piss me off in like 5 seconds. Why can't you just stop talking for a minute. When I tell her to stop talking after she's been talking for literally hours, she stops for 5 seconds and continues. I just can't anymore. She say's it's rude to call people older than you loud/annoying. Yes because it's fine that you insult me all the time since "I'm your mom, only I would say this to you to you because I care about you." Yeah, so I tell you you talk too much about nonsense you've said so many times before, and you say it's rude. Well I'm sorry, I'm just trying to make you a better person because I "care" about you. Ugh. Stop being so damn hypocritical. I hate it the most when she thinks everyone is against her. She's so paranoid about everything; I can't believe she survived the real world. She always complains that she doesn't have anyone to talk to. It's not my fault you don't talk to any of your friends in Taiwan or some shit. She even says she doesn't want to make any new friends because she doesn't like it. Okay then if you don't want to, don't complain to me about it 24/7. She's so annoying about everything. Once my friend cooked with me in our kitchen, and after a few months, she goes like, "Oh is she coming over again? Are you going to cook again?". Then she literally laughs/does this weird keh snort thing she always does and says she doesn't like it. Oh my god it was so damn creepy. My dad goes like wth and she starts yelling at my dad like "omg why can't I dislike something yada yada yada." Just stop forever okay. Just stop. She claims there's nothing wrong with her head anymore but I seriously doubt that. It was better than before, but jesus christ please help me. Actually help her. She also always never answers the phone because her English isn't good so she's scared it's an important message. Not to mention, she complains to me all the time that she sucks at English and I should teach her. Yes, I will teach you and you will never use it. Her English isn't even THAT bad, she just refuses to ever use it ever, so of course it isn't going to get any better. Why do you want to learn it if you don't even try to use it.

19 September 2014

I always tell the problems I have in my classes (especially math) to my friends in a way that makes it sound funny, and that I don't really care as much as I do. My math teacher once said in class about how there are some students that silently freak out in the background. I immediately connected it to myself. I was thinking: that's basically me. I'm the person who sits in the back drowning in anxiety because math is so stressful. Everybody only cares about math, if you fail math you're stupid basically. Well that's the Asian way of thinking anyway. I think it's so weird that my friend has a math major for a mom and yet she doesn't seem to be making use of that. My parents can't help me at all on math, and I just started going to a tutor. I really don't think I'm stupid. Yet I feel like I'm going to fail and fall into nothing. I don't want to be that person that doesn't get into any college I apply to. Why can't I just be good enough. I really just want to be able to talk to some teacher at the school about this problem, especially my math teacher, but I don't want to be that whiny kid that can't cope. I know I'll probably just get the answer: "Why don't you just drop down the math analysis?" It really isn't that easy, as I said in my previous post. My best bet is probably the school counselors, I mean, that's what they're there for after all. I don't know. I'm not pretty, smart, anything useful. I just crack jokes at my own expense. In the end, words don't change a thing, it doesn't matter how much you reason it out; if you have a shitty grade you will still keep that shitty grade. I just feel like I'm drowning.

19 September 2014

[I wrote this in response to part of my friend's reflection, and I feel like it's a good addition to my blog]

"All I know is that my class is full of overworking sleep deprived sophomores. It’s society’s “chains” that are adding all this additional pressure on us. The moment we were born and welcomed into society. All these artificial needs that are beyond basic survival ones are instilled upon us, such as the need to wear better clothes, program better technology and eat more exotic food. I acknowledge the fact that need promotes innovation but on the other side of it, it’s all these tirelessly working people who honestly don’t care. So many students are coming to school just for the sake of coming to school, nobody really loves coming to school and only a select few enjoy learning. The biggest goal within our students here is to go to university. Everything is for college apps; sports, clubs, leadership and extra-curriculars. It is so infrequent when I see someone doing something simply because they are truly passionate about these days. But if it is passionate, it’s probably not great for college apps. In the end, we are fifteen and sixteen year olds who just want to have fun. Yet, we have to juggle rigorous academics, dramatic social life, and other aspects such as family, health…" (Shuge Luo)

For reals though. When you go to school every day knowing you cant fail because if you do, you will likely fail life/your parents will kill you and make your life terrible anyway, it really just sucks the life out of you. I'm so frustrated; even though I studied for my math test that was today, I couldn't finish because I'm slow. I'd like to think its not because I'm stupidly horrible at math, because even though I'm not great, I can get it if I try. I was literally like breezing through the test, and at the word problems, the teacher was all like, "lol guys only 5 minutes left". I saw so many people who finished, and I just wonder why I can't even though I know I do understand the material. Do you know how frustrating it is when you get 7/10 questions right with the 7 problems you did COMPLETELY correct (with the others unfinished because of time), and some other guy in your class finishes all 10 problems but gets something wrong in each one, yet they get a higher score than you? Like are you testing for true knowledge or just how many problems I can bullshit in 50 minutes? I am literally through the roof with math okay. I study: I know it but I'm slow as hell. I don't study: I just fail because I didn't study. And I know every person ever is going to be all like, "WELL. If you KNEW the material, you would be able to finish on time". I can definitely see the validity in that statement, but I feel like it's sort of narrow minded to say that. Some people have slower processing speed; are you going to fail me just because I can't solve a quadratic as fast as "normal" people can, even though my end result is just as good? Sure, I guess you could say that their math is "better" than mine, it probably is, but I don't think I deserve a 60-70 just because I couldn't finish, especially if I had shown that I did know what I was doing with what I did finish.

Chat:

Quote Prompt: "In the end they'll judge me anyway, so whatever" - Kid Cudi

Excerpt: 

In this passage, Piggy's haste retreat is a telling sign of self-consciousness. It's so easy for people in the world to influence others, especially through disapproval. Even Jack was influenced when his followers were disappointed that he couldn't kill the pig. His obsession with hunting pigs, and therefore showing them that he isn't too weak to kill, was inflated to an even more excessive amount. There's the possibility that being left out of a group is so distressing because cohesive groups often live; a lion kicked out of a pride has a much lower chance of surviving. Piggy's mind set is basically that of the quote: the majority of the boys laugh at his ideas, so he backs away because "whatever" (Cudi). It's so much easier to lose if a person has shown everyone else how much they don't care if they win or lose. This passage is remarkably important because, in it, Ralph shows signs of change. He responds to Piggy's suggestion seriously and "restlessly": "Unless what?" (Golding 84). Ralph moving restlessly indicates that he is legitimately worried about what Piggy is about to say; he cares about what Piggy is about to say. And what Piggy does say is jarring in itself. Not only because he is finally seeing what many readers are seeing, but because "being frightened of people" is exactly what he is. When he said this, the boys laughed and jeered at him; they think it's so ridiculous that the monsters and nightmares that keep them up at night are themselves. They can't believe this because they aren't the ones being laughed at. They aren't the ones that have to "duck [their] head[s] and [go] on hastily" every time they open their mouth just to speak (Golding 84). So many lives are set back by this, and so many ideas are lost in people's minds until they die because, in the end, others will just "judge [them] anyway" (Cudi).

Quote prompt: "Educate your children to self-control, to the habit of holding passion and prejudice and evil tendencies subject to an upright and reasoning will, and you have done much to abolish misery from their future and crimes from society."



In this passage, Jack fails to kill the pig with his knife, and he vows to do it successfully next time. When Jack hesitates, his followers seem sort of baffled that he would have mercy for the pig. Jack is in the leader position and he can't afford to lose that. Therefore, when he sees this kind of disapproval, he starts to stumble over his words and even begins to contradict himself by saying that he hesitated because he was trying to choose a place to stab, when clearly, he knew exactly where to stab: "You cut a pig's throat to let the blood out, . . . otherwise you can't eat the meat" (31). The book even explains to the readers that everyone already knew why he didn't do it even though he knew how. He didn't because of the "enormity of the knife descending and cutting into living flesh; because of the unbearable blood" (31). This is representing the human and sympathetic side of Jack, who isn't yet instinctual enough to cut into "living flesh". He isn't mentally prepared to take a life because once a life is gone, there's no going back. There is great responsibility in bringing the knife he is holding down on a living, breathing creature. Before crashing on this island, Jack was likely taught, in some way or another, the severity of taking life. However at the same time, not killing the pig is an emotional feeling. It's sympathy and in a way morality. It would be flawed to call it the reasonable and logical choice. Food is a component of life, but they already have food, albeit not meat. Therefore, Jack's "need" to kill and hunt is Id in nature. Though he displays the semblance of self control in this passage, his very obsession with hunting for no entirely logical reason is already beginning to show.

Hello, I am Thomas Hobbes and I believe in the equality of all people. Men and women are born equal and shall stay that way. Women are naturally equal to men because, in nature, nobody is born unequal; it is the civil laws humans create that produce inequality. Unfortunately, all people are born greedy, selfish, and cruel, and are equal in that way. There must be strict rules to control ourselves, or chaos naturally breeds from our desires. The strength of mind is paramount to physical strength, because the weak can defeat the strong through wit or the congregation with others. Much is based on fear and hope. Human’s all want what’s good for them, and if there were no laws preventing the harming or murder of others, they would harm for what they desire. This creates chaos and fear for life. Combined with human reason, people also seek to find peace among others, and this causes a social contract to be formed with one supreme authority. They consent to this social contract in exchange for peace. Consent is required before falling under the authority of anyone else; be it woman or man. Fear is what creates community, and this community is enforced by fear. In reality, here is no “good” and “evil”. What is good is what we want. What is evil is what we don’t want. What humans dictate as good and evil is what society teaches us. Without the supposed “morals” of society, there would be no true good or evil. What is right and wrong: what is ethical, depends on situation and is not absolute.

In “Dead Men’s Path”, Chinua Achebe uses the very sudden and late introduction of a white Supervisor to depict that, in real life, what is ideal does not always happen; in theory, people see exactly what their eyes see, though because no human is truly perfect, this often doesn't even matter.

Throughout the short story, Obi appears as a very opinionated man who strongly dislikes the incorporation of tradition into education. The narrative uses numerous words with negative connotations in order to signify its distaste towards tradition, suggesting that Obi is the narrator. An example being near the middle of the story: When the village priest attempts to explain to Obi why the ancestor’s path is important to the villagers, Obi just smiles at him and says that “[their] duty is to teach [the] children to laugh at such ideas” (Achebe 3). What he is essentially saying is that they must teach children not to acknowledge multiple ideas. However, it should be that the main focus is not whether the other opinion is wrong or not, rather it’s the simple acknowledgement of why the other ideal even exists that truly matters. Obi clearly is not respecting the villager’s opinion, but that does not necessarily indicate that he means harm. It appears that Achebe uses the entire first part of the story to focus the reader’s attention on Obi and his wrongdoings towards the village, only to use a nameless character at the end to unravel the deeper meaning of the narrative. At the end of “Dead Men’s Path”, a “white Supervisor” is introduced (Achebe 4), and just from the word “white”, the sentence already seems a bit odd. Assuming that one believed Obi were an outsider, and possibly white, it would be strange for him to refer to the Supervisor as also “white”. By making the conclusion that Obi is, in fact, not an outsider, rather that he is a past resident of the village, the sentence comes across as making much more sense. The Supervisor reports a very short, negative, and simplified version of the events that transgressed during Obi’s time at Ndume. He says that the town developed a “tribal-war” situation because of Obi’s “misguided zeal” (Achebe 4). His use of the word “tribal” again supports the the idea that Obi is of the same race as the villagers. It is as if he is implying that if he were in Obi’s place, this “tribal-war” would not have developed because he is not from their village. Yet this was his “mission” as well (Achebe 1). His suggestion that Obi’s ideals were misguided is somewhat true, but the author seems to be making the point that whether his ideas were misguided or not doesn't even matter in the end. Achebe paints Obi as the villain the first half, only to reveal that though his methods were not the best, he did mean well. Except, to the rest of the world, that doesn't matter. The rest of the world is us the readers. This draws a parallel to what the reader thinks in the beginning of the narrative (that Obi is a horrible prejudiced person), to what the reader realizes is the truth by the end. What the world sees is what the Supervisor saw, or pretended to see, and may not be the whole unadulterated truth.

[I'm posting my essays on here just in case I ever lose them somehow.]

In “Dead Men’s Path”, Chinua Achebe uses the very sudden and late introduction of a white Supervisor to depict that, in real life, what is ideal does not always happen; in theory, Modern progress and tradition work best in tandem, though because no society is truly perfect, this often doesn't even matter.

Human nature is the wildcard in the seemingly logical sequences of what should happen if something is done. Not all people are rational and may intentionally, or unintentionally use their faulty ideals to judge a situation in a completely inaccurate, detached way. “Dead Man’s Path” has a lot of intricacy in its narrative, where not everything becomes clear until one realizes certain possibilities. The text is heavily biased in the direction of modern progress being paramount compared to tradition, implying that it is in the view of Obi. So it is even more glaring when in the last paragraph of the short story, a “white Supervisor” went to inspect the school (Achebe 4). Generally, a person would not specify the race of another unless it really mattered, especially if they were of that same race. This suggests that Obi is Black and from the same area of the very school he is trying to reform. After receiving his education elsewhere (such as the west), he may have realized a different truth from what the villagers believe, though the way he implements his ‘truth’ is not exactly diplomatic. Despite this, it can be seen that Obi was genuinely trying to reform and make the school better. He honestly thought that what he was doing was right. Yet when the Supervisor arrives to inspect the school, he (the Supervisor) writes a short and heavily simplistic view of what actually transgressed during Obi’s time at Ndume. He uses the term “tribal-war” as if treating the Black people in the village, or possibly Black people in general, considering he includes Obi in his assessment, as barbarians (Achebe 4). He appears to paint it as just an insignificant dispute between a race different from his own. He detaches himself from this “mission” and leaves Obi to take the whole blame even though he likely would have acted similarly if he were in Obi’s position (Achebe 1). Perhaps his opinion on the event would not matter to some. However on a global scale, with this kind of thing happening all the time, it is a huge deal. What most people see is the news coverage of the incident. Usually many different politically diverse news companies detail the event, but in this short story, there seems to be only the white Supervisor. And because the white Supervisor is the one reporting the happening, what the majority of the world sees is consequently only what he saw. And what he saw, or what he claimed to see, may not have been the whole unadulterated truth.

Teacher Comment: Some strong writing, but an interesting reliance on general statements. SEE ME, because you've got some strong tendencies, but a style I don’t see very often.

yo i have no videos but i have 23 subscribers on youtube for some reason. probably cause doopy423/maggie my man subscribed to me back like 50 years ago when she used to make maplestory mmvs 

14 September 2014

I find myself always second guessing my ideals. It's not like I'm not sure of what I believe in, it's just that I always wonder if it's fair. I always think of what the other person's perspective might be. But when I don't see their reasoning, that's that. Like I just don't understand why people don't allow same-sex marriage. I do know many of their arguments, and I do know many of my arguments (obviously), but in the end why do they even matter. Why do these arguments even matter because why does everyone give so many shits about these two people who love each other getting married. I just don't understand. What is it to you that some people are getting married. It's not like you were invited, and if you were you don't even have to go. It has no impact on your life. And if it does, I would like to know what that impact even is. I swear even if God did exist (I'm treading dangerous grounds here) and He did bring about judgement day or some shit, why would you be worried. Why would you, who doesn't support what he supposedly believes is a sin, be negatively judged upon. It's just shocking how many people in the world are butt-hurt about this. Just grow up and live and let live.

I wonder a lot: if what's right is subjective and it's just what we personally think is correct, what is really right.

13 September 2014

Mannnnn, I am just so confused. Today I had a really deep talk with my man Aditi and I just have so much to say about life in general. I feel like we both have really good views on our society, and we just understand life more than many other people. Maybe we don't and our views are just completely wrong, but I really do think it makes sense.

I have a very cynical view of society because I'm just so used to people being shit face assholes to me. I'm not stupid enough to think that 'wow everyone in the entire world is a douchebag, and there's absolutely nobody decent in this world,' because that clearly isn't true. In my opinion anyway. It's just that I'm so annoyed that people don't understand. I mean it isn't their fault; I'm just annoyed for no real reason. Like we are doing research on philosophers in History, and each group has to research a certain philosopher. We got Thomas Hobbes, and everyone just thinks he's a dick 'cause he wanted an absolute monarchy. His idea is basically that people are inherently greedy, selfish, and cruel. I pretty much agree with that. In fact, much of the class agreed with that. Let me rewind a bit. In the beginning of class, the teacher did the agree disagree activity. It's when he puts a statement on the projector and we can choose to agree or disagree by going to either side of the room. And when he put up statements like 'if given the chance, people will step over others to achieve what they want' and 'logic and reason are more important in a society than personal choice', more people agreed to those statements. But the moment Hobbes says essentially the same thing, it's like "oh shit what a dick 'cause he thinks absolute monarchies are the best." I mean, after researching him I felt like his ideas were very similar to mine, and I really agreed with him. He emphasizes a lot on equality of all people, including women. He says that nobody is born unequal, it's society's civil laws that creates inequality. Or more simply, just society that breeds inequality. There is no good or evil, good is simply what we want, and evil is what we don't want. Life revolves around fear and desire, if there is nothing to gain in life, why do we live. We live for the experience. I agree that not everything in life is going to be all happy and shit, but we do so much to make sure it is. We do step over others to get what we want. If not actively, then by exclusion. Like if someone at Monta Vista (my highly competitive school) got the answer key to a test, there is literally like a .005 percent chance they would share it with anyone else. First of all, if they plan on using that key, it would be stupid to spread it because it could easily reach the teacher. Second of all, people are selfish, why give that advantage away. Maybe a really honest student would give it back to the teacher and tell them, but that has a very low chance of happening in my opinion. Even at a non competitive school, it wouldn't change at all. People want the advantage. Not just humans, all living beings want the advantage. It's all about competing to live. Except for us it's less about competing for our lives, it's more about competing for a good life.

Many people wouldn't even give the key to their friends. Friends are friends, but they are still potential competition. I know it, I see it. Not as extreme as the answer key scenario, but more of like finding out what's on tests. When people ask their friends, 'oh what kind of stuff was on the test,' it's easy to tell that they are holding back important information. There are people that do legitimately tell, but you best believe that the moment the person they told gets a higher score than they did, that shit's gonna stop. I know they aren't holding things back for the reason that they don't want to cheat because I see them asking others the same thing. So it clearly isn't a matter of integrity, rather it's for the upper hand in life.

But I digress, basically I just really agree with Hobbes when he said that people are born selfish and greedy. It's hard for me to really believe that there is any wholly selfless act of kindness. Like if you help your friend on a test, you are being 'nice' to them, but are you really? First of all, if you get any sort of guilt relief or feeling of 'oh wow I'm so nice, she will like me more now' or even more selfishly 'now she will be obliged to help me when I need it' then it isn't really selfless. Also, is it actually nice to tell someone what's on the test? In the long run, what will they do without you? But my point is that being selfish isn't an entirely bad thing. Why is it considered 'evil' to want the upper hand in life. Maybe not evil per say, but it's just that selfish has a very negative connotation to it.

This comes back to the idea of good and evil. I feel like if society never taught us since forever that killing is bad, then we wouldn't really have the idea that murder is evil. I think it would be more like, 'if you kill someone/an animal unnecessarily or in a cruel way that makes them suffer, you are being illogical and unreasonable, and that's a waste of energy'. Which is where I think our sympathy comes from. First from the idea that we get from society, and second from the idea that illogical killing is a waste. Like in the wild, killing a bunch of animals for no reason is just a waste of food. A waste of food and energy inhibits your own life, therefore you shouldn't do it.

You might think that I should think evil exists. I've met so many douchebags in my life it's crazy. I say they are douchebags because I don't understand why. I don't understand the logic for being mean to someone for no reason. Maybe there is a reason and I just don't see it. What I'm asking is: what are they gaining in life by bringing me down. Maybe it's just pleasure: they like the feeling of being mean. I suppose that does makes sense in a way; after all, I did say that people live for what they want in life. It's just a very illogical way to live in my opinion. So, in a way, I guess I do believe in evil, but do I believe in it because it's been wired into my brain from the moment I was born, or is it because what's right and wrong is already naturally there? As I said in the beginning, I'm confused. Is it nature or nurture? I usually always take the easy way out and say both, because I really do think it is both.

Moving on to a different topic, I always assume the worst of people. I do this so I can't be disappointed. People seem to always ignore me in favor of someone else. Especially guys. Now, I do acknowledge that this totally makes sense in an evolutionary standpoint because of course: the people we see as 'prettier' probably do have the better genes, which is why we see them as pretty in the first place. Now there are obviously exceptions to this. People also like intelligent individuals, though that has to do with genes in some way too. And as corny as it sounds, I suppose many of those exceptions are because of that little thing called love. I can't say much about that since I've never experienced romantic love. But anyway, I also think that what we see as pretty now may not actually be healthy anymore. There are already many debates on that so I won't even bother. As I was saying, I do understand why people naturally gravitate towards their attractive peers, I just don't understand why, again, people have to deliberately make less attractive people feel worse about themselves. Like sure you can be friends with whomever you want, and you can like whomever you want, but why do you have to be deliberately mean to me?

Whenever I'm in a group that isn't my friends, a lot of the time, nobody ever listens to my ideas. I say something and they literally are just like 'um, yeah sure'. I mean come on man. Why you gotta be this way. For real though. Once I said to my group, 'hey, I think we should have fire as more important than food and to some extent water' nobody listened. This guy in front of me literally went like, ummm you can drink water from the wild without boiling it. Like you might get sick. Okay bitch let me tell you something. Yeah you CAN drink the water and you MIGHT get sick, but do you understand that the moment you get sick, you will start to throw up and loose even more water aka die? Bitch I didn't think so. Obviously I didn't say that because I didn't want to waste my energy trying to convince these ungrateful idiots. Okay no, it's actually mostly my own problem, I didn't try and convince them because I was scared of being that annoying bitch that everyone hates because she takes everything too seriously. Okay, so I let that slide. 'Hey, I think someone should make a signal for rescue too,' woah I think someone actually acknowledged my presence this time! Oh, never mind, nobody gave a shit. So I thought about it. We were in lit. class and were preparing to read Lord of the Flies. So I was like okay, I'll relay my idea to some really outspoken girl in my group (keep in mind this group was 10 people) and she will say it for me. At this point I don't even care about credit anymore, I just can't watch these people being stupid for any longer. That sounds really condescending but let me tell you. Man it was so damn painful. The group literally put down 'building transportation' as one of the priorities. Oh my GOD. Of course we will just build a wooden raft out of logs and row our asses 9000 miles in some random direction to society. Bitch we are not in damn life of pi. So the girl relays my idea, and the same guy who dissed my idea previously goes like, 'yeahhh that's what I meant by transportation'. BITCH IN WHAT WORLD DO YOU LIVE IN WHERE TRANSPORTATION = SIGNALING. That's not even the worst part though. So after this guy agrees, I go like, 'okay so why don't you [the girl in charge of writing] write it down?' I was completely ignored. Shot down and shut down. Maybe she just didn't hear, so I repeat it two more times. Finally I just give up and ask her for the pencil. And she gives it to me so clearly she could hear me. In the end, I had to write it down. Jesus christ by then I was about to implode. I just ended up standing to the side doing nothing because I figured it wouldn't make a difference either way. It was just a game in the end.

Shockingly, when we started reading Lord of the Flies, I found Piggy in the same situation as me. Though much more serious. He has so many great ideas yet nobody would listen to him. They all listened to the hot guy, Ralph, and the guy with charisma, Jack. Ralph is a bit better now, but Jack just descended into intense creepiness. I can't deal with this book, it's basically filled with crazy douchebags. Which brings me back to the point of good and evil. Would it be bad if you were stuck on an island with absolutely no food left and you decided to kill your friend and eat them. Like is it bad to want to live? However, I don't like Jack because he kills with needless cruelty. He enjoys the sound the pig makes when she's in fear. The thing is, he says that he 'needs' pig meat. They establish that they actually don't need the meat because they already have sea food and plants/fruits (though I wouldn't eat just any random plant that might be poisonous). And his charisma causes many of the other boys to follow his ways. Mob mentality.

Okay I'm really going off topic now. When I said in the beginning about the philosopher project and people just thinking Hobbes was a dick, I have established that I clearly don't agree with them. I'm not saying I agree with absolute monarchies either, I just agree with a lot of what he said. I don't think people should completely self govern because the majority of people are pretty stupid okay. Including myself. Like the american revolution. People were all butt hurt about paying taxes because they didn't have representation. And I guess that makes sense, but I feel like if people had the chance to pay less taxes now of course they would. Going back to the point that people are selfish. If we governed ourselves, maybe the world would be 'nicer' but it wouldn't necessarily be better. Many people, like me, don't know shit about politics. Also, the world might be 'nicer' but that also probably won't happen either. Nicer is basically having the majority of the world agree with what you agree with. So basically it's what you want (again back to selfishness). I see so many people with my same view like accepting homosexuality, accepting equal rights for all genders, being against racism, etc. But that's in my community. I live in Cupertino (if you don't know where that is, it's where the Apple main building is, infinite loop. Apple is literally everywhere here), and Cupertino seems much more open minded than many other places. Then I realize that there are still many, many people in the world that don't believe in what I believe.

Back to the History project. So like there are two other people in my group, and I feel like they kind of understand that Hobbes' views do have a point, but they still conclude that he's a horrible dick. Like I feel like they don't understand because they never experienced it as much as I did. The cruelty of people I mean. The girl in my group is one of those really spirited hot girls, and the guy is just there. Pretty people can have problems too, of course, but I just don't think they can have the same problem to the extent that I have it (I mean people making fun of me because of how I look). Keep in mind that I do understand that being skinny doesn't equal being pretty, and being fat doesn't mean being ugly. Like not all skinny people are attractive okay. I'm not even going to lie. But the thing is, I don't care that they aren't pretty, and that's the difference. I have eyes, I can see superior aesthetics. No matter how subjective beauty is, I don't know, you can still just see. Like even if you don't personally think someone is pretty, you still recognize that they aren't ugly. I'm not sure how to phrase it.

Many attractive people are nice too. And I know it's partly my own fault that I'm not acknowledged. I don't actively try and extend myself because I feel like I might be annoying them. Like what if they don't want to talk to me. I'm literally shocked when someone who isn't my friend says hi to me in the halls. It genuinely shocks me. That's the level of confidence I have.

6 September 2014

Wow I'm so done right now. Well these days I'm always done. First I get sick from some person I don't know. I thought it was my dad, but he says it's his allergies, and he's not sick. But whatever, I am sick. Then I went to school and had History 3rd period. That's normally fine and whatever, but today there was a map quiz and apparently I'm the only damn person in the class that didn't know. Well I saw it on the board at the beginning of the week but then was like yeah totally and then forgot. That's definitely my fault but now I have a 64% in History aka a D and that's just painful. I'm scared that it's going to be really hard to raise my grade, all because I failed that test. I think it shouldn't, because there isn't much in the grade book, but at the same time it's like, man I have a D.