…entre nous soit dit…

between me you and the gatepost.

My Boss (who cares what Part number I’m up to now…)

Well I can assure you that I still have no romantic feelings or notions for him, but I cannot say that he has exactly followed that direction as well. Apparently he’s happy going on harbouring what ever it is he has for me. He says “love”, but I highly doubt that.

I find that when and if the topic of “us” that is now past and gone, he likes to try and compare what happened with us and what happened between Dom and I so long ago. I think he realises how important Dom was and that I loved him, so he feels the need to try and get an upper hand instead. Maybe then he’d have a fighting chance right? No. I can’t see myself with my Boss anymore. Not at all. In fact, I can’t even see that far off image that I once imagined about us coincidentally meeting each other again later on in life and getting it together again. Like two paths crossing thanks to fate bringing back what was meant to be… Although I did make the mistake of telling him that I once thought of that. Truth is, he’s out of the picture, and that’s that. I can’t see it at all.

I just have to put up with working with him and the small comments that still get exchanged. True, I do flirt back a lot…. and true, I do enjoy myself quite a bit…. But now? It’s starting to get a bit old. We’ve been flirting like this for the better part of a year now and for a couple of years before that there wasn’t flirting to this degree, but it was definitely there.

On the more interesting front though, but him and his now ex-fiance, seem to be going through a bit of a bitter stage in their “lets be friends” plan. I don’t know what’s happened, as it seems to be a bit of a taboo subject with him, but let’s just say that I think they’ve realised how different life can be sans their relationship.

Friday, My Boss was saying “Me and [his ex-fiance] were so not right… So not.” There was a story behind it – you could tell by the way that he talked and looked at something that wasn’t there as if replaying something in his head. But who knows what that was. Only a few hours after that, I was with his ex-fiance and one of the other girls from work (who is possibly even more innocent than the Virgin Mary and extremely fun to make uncomfortable about the subject of sex) chatting, and as per usual, sex came into the conversation… One thing I didn’t expect however was that his ex-fiance, would start spilling the beans on their now past sex life… Let’s just say this: we hit an interesting point where exact centimetres came into play and when she described what he’s best at. Of course, that made for lots of fun today at work when our little innocent friend came to visit my Boss and I in our store. I made lots of sly under the table jokes to her which he caught onto eventually whilst remaining clueless they were all about him… Poor guy.

In other news, Dom and I are officially over… No that we were ever back together again, but there was talk of it. In terms of any prospective relationship, we both realised that it wouldn’t work. Although we never had an ending as such, we’ve both come to our own conclusions that our story is over. Our time ended a long time ago. It’s just a pity that I had to put him through all this kerfuffle of late as my mind did a couple of 360s: Pining for him, falling in love with him when he’s not even here -thinking that I might have anyways, him having to put up with my drunken emails and abuse…. I feel sorry for him. Then again, apparently it’s in my nature to screw it up with all the guys and to leave a “trail of destruction” behind. I just didn’t want Dom to have to go through that again. He’s been through it a couple of times already.

But who knows? There may be more stories in the near future. Currently I’m trying to subtly (and as nicely as possible) derail the ambitions which I think may have started to form for one of the guys at college with me. He’s a really nice guy, a prankster, funny, and training to become a doctor to boot, but I never had feelings for him…. plus he reminds me all too much of my Mother’s ex boyfriend from when she was at university. Let’s just say that he looks very similar and that freaks the hell out of me. Do I even need to mention that Mum’s ex also used to live at this college? She’s even pointed out his room to me. Those were the years that made her infamous for being the flirt around this college… and how she knows where everything is here so well – after all, word is that she did spend more time at my college than at actual Uni. Yes my mother was a hussy.

One of my managers at work (an infamous play boy and living it up kind of guy) maintains that these are the best years of my life and that I should be living it up and enjoying it – not worrying about the hassels of relationships and such. I’m in two minds as to whether or not I think the same. One part of me wants to conform to society and maintain a good reputation…. but another part of me is just screaming for me to get out there and have some bloody well fun. My sister maintains I’m a kissing whore… and that would be hard to deny compared to her romantic record… but I don’t want hassels. So I’m happy to shamelessly use a guy for a little fun on the dance floor and then leave at the end of the night without ever having to see him again. It works for me alright? And until someone amazing pops up and makes me want to curb my ways, then that’s the way it will be: Fun.

Night x


August 24, 2009 Posted by | bored, college, emotions, fun, love, morals, secrets, sex | 2 Comments

Philosophy Essay Two: The Meaning of Life.

“Human life can only have meaning if God exists and there is an afterlife.” Demonstrate why this claim is true or false.

Many people hold different beliefs as to what the meaning of life is, and for thousands of years, philosophers and theologians have pondered over the truth of it – some producing theories on the subject. Among them are Epictetus, a Greek-born Roman slave who developed theories on stoicism and Robert Nozick who wrote about ‘The Experience Machine’ [1] and held an anti-hedonistic viewpoint. While both of these philosophers developed different ideas, they both shared a common goal: trying to understand what the most important thing in our lives is. Many believe that through theology and belief we gain meaning to our lives, but what if there is no God and no afterlife? Can we still have meaning? Atheists believe that there is no meaning to our lives, but we seem to be unable to accept this so we ‘have to invent meaning (and as a result we create) religions and areas of study which help structure and give explanation and purpose to our lives.’ [2] Although some believe this – that we use religion as an explanation for the meaning of our lives – others such as Nozick and Epictetus developed other ideas and tried to prove that there can in fact be meaning to our lives if there is indeed no god or afterlife.

While neither philosopher directly denies god and religion, each one says that there are other things more important. Epictetus writes that what matters for a good life (for most) is a peaceful state of mind that is tranquil. He insists that ‘all your attention must be given to the mind’ [3] and that the ‘price of a quiet mind’ and ‘freedom from passion’ [4] is by only caring about the things that are within your control – this includes everything that is our own doing – and to ignore all that is not in our control. Robert Nozick, on the other hand, does not condemn passion and desire or focus on the tranquillity of the mind, but instead says that in our lifetime it is not only our experiences and happiness that give our lives meaning, but also the contact with reality that we have. Nozick states ‘What else can matter to us, other than how our lives feel from the inside?’ [5] He then proposes for the reader to imagine that there is a machine that can simulate any experience we want, and asks the question do you plug yourself in? Nozick takes the stance that it’s not merely the experience that creates meaning in your life, but the lessons learnt and how actually doing those things forms you as a person, however for this to occur you can not have a simulated and unrealistic experience. This is completely contrary to a hedonistic view, which dictates that happiness is the only thing that matters in life – no matter how it is gained. Other philosophies can be seen to draw from hedonism, such as utilitarianism, which believes in the maximisation of utility for a good life [6]. The common factor throughout all these theories, however, is that mankind can search for, or reach, meaning in their life without the necessity of God or an afterlife.

Nozick and Epictetus seem to clash on the ideas of the involvement of emotion, passion and desire. While Nozick is relatively ambiguous as to how much weight must be given to happiness and contact with reality, he is certain that they must both be present. It can be assumed that to be happy you must have passion and emotion, and care for things that are “not in your control” as Epictetus would say. Based on this, with this happiness comes the contact with reality that Nozick describes as necessary, and in turn the downside of life that balances the out the happiness we are granted through our experiences. Without this touch of reality, we would be plugged into the theoretical “experience machine” unknowingly and without any individuality. We would not form self-identities and we would not be able to question reality. Of all the things granted to humans, some would argue that the ability to question “Why?” is one of the greatest and we need this contact with reality in order to use this ability. However, these emotions that comes with Nozick’s ideas are not included in Epictetus’ idea of a good life. Epictetus believes that all we need to have is a tranquil mind at peace with nature, and in achieving this, we shall also achieve contentedness. In a modern day society, Epictetus’ ideas may be seen as being submissive and impassive, but this is how he intends them. He says that ‘you will only be harmed, when you think you are harmed’ [7] and that the signs of a person that is making progress at achieving this tranquillity ‘blames none, praises none, complains of none, accuses none, never speaks of himself as if he were somebody, or as if he knew anything’ [8]. All of these aspects, nevertheless, would go against Nozick’s ideas of experience and contact with reality, because they veto the person from both feeling and passion, as well as the ability to adeptly question “why?” Despite these differences, both theorists have created plausible theories that would give, what they consider to be, meaning to our lives without the need of god or an afterlife.

Both stoicism, as described by Epictetus, and anti-hedonism, as argued by Nozick, can produce viable theories about what gives meaning to mankind’s individual existence without the need of God or an afterlife. Each philosopher comes to his own conclusion through different ideas, both with their positive and negative aspects to the lifestyle. Stoicism disregards emotion and passion for contentedness and tranquillity of mind, and in return doesn’t allow the person to be either hurt, or conversely, experience the joys of life fully; and Anti-Hedonism, which allows both as much happiness as we can gain, as well as contact with reality through our real experiences, that help to shape the person we become. Both theories involve self-development and education of the mind, whether it be questioning reality and life, or disciplining it to be at peace with nature. Neither of the theories involves the blind following of a religion created to satisfy our need for meaning to our existence, and in turn the necessity of a God or an afterlife.



·      Manual’ extracted from: Oates, W.J. (ed), (1940). The Stoic and Epicurean Philosophers. (New York: Random House)

·      BonJour, L. (ed), Baker, A. (ed),(2008) Philosophical Problems: An annotated Anthology, (Second Edition) (United States: Pearson Longman)

·      The Experience Machine’ extracted from: Nozick, R., (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. (New York: Basic Books)

·      Hawthorn, E., (1998). Atheism for Survival. (Australia: The National Library of Australia Cataloguing in Publication)

May 20, 2009 Posted by | essays, homework, life, morals, observation, philosophy, School Work, university | Leave a comment

Philosophy: Utilitarianism

So, I’m doing philosophy at university this year as one of my subjects. It’s pretty fascinating, although I must say that it is a whole lot more inspiring when you can actually discuss it in tutorials as opposed to just sitting there, listening and tuning out in the lectures. I usually tune out, and then get lost when the professors do the lectures. Either that or else I get all muddled up and confused and then I lose what was being said, because I’m busy trying to figure it out.
This past weeks topic was Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism has a quantative and reductionist approach to ethics and put simply is basically about achieving It can be simplified pretty easily to “the greatest good for the greatest number”. It’s all about the math really – the more people there are happy, the better. The numbers always win. Good old trustworthy Wikipedia describes it as:
“…the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility: that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all persons. It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome: put simply, the ends justify the means. Utility, the good to be maximised, has been defined by various thinkers as happiness or pleasure (versus suffering or pain)… It may be described as a life stance, with happiness or pleasure being of ultimate importance.”
For out tutorial discussions, we were given a couple of situations that we had to consider both from a moral point of view and a utilitarian point of view as to what is the right and wrong actions. We got some good arguments going, but there’s always different moral answers.
Situation One:
You’re standing on a bridge over some train tracks and you see a train coming. Tied to the tracks right below you is 5 people. Next to you (coincidentally) is a lever which you can pull that will move the train from the track it’s on, to another one next to it and in doing so it will miss hitting the 5 people. However tied to the other track is 1 person.
The dilemma: do you pull the lever or not?
From a moral point of view, only you can answer what you would do – pull the leaver or not. Personally, I would if I was able to react fast enough. Of course it would be emotionally traumatising knowing that you had pulled the leaver that had killed someone, but you saved five others. If I didn’t pull the leaver I would feel even worse because I would know that I could have saved those people, but instead I just watched them die and didn’t do anything.
From a utilitarian perspective, the answer is a yes without hesitation. You would of course opt to save the five lives over the one life, because that maximises the happiness in society. By having five people who can experience happiness and create happiness, that is a lot more than only one person on their own can create or experience. The numbers always win.
Situation Two:
 Same situation with the train, except this time there’s only one track and instead of there being a lever to pull to save the five people, there’s only some big bulky muscled up wrestler who is big enough that if you pushed him off the bridge, he would stop the train with the sheer size of his body. He would die, but the train would stop after hitting him and therefore it would save the other five people. (and yes theoretically speaking you are strong enough to push him over and yes he will land on the tracks)
Once again, from a utilitarian point of view, the answer is without a doubt yes – push him. You would  be able to, once again, save those 5 people instead of them all dying.
From a moral perspective however, most people would say no or be hesitant. For me, I wouldn’t be able to do it. There seems to be a line which I draw between pulling an inanimate object that changes a course of fate, and pushing a warm blooded, living breathing person to their death. Having that physical connection and knowing what you’re dooming them to by that action, would have so much more of an emotional and psychological affect on you. 
By pushing that innocent person, you are condemning them to death and putting them in the situation that they were previously no part of. However if the person from the first situation was already tied to the tracks, then they were already involved in the situation to some degree or an extent. I think that physical contact with the man, makes it feel just that little bit more like you’ve made the choice to kill them and the blood is on your hands. Whereas in the first situation, I think I could have eventually persuaded myself that there was really nothing else I could have done.
Situation Three:
Continuing from the topic of the week before, abortion, we had one situation involving this, however it is probably the most complicated one to consider of them all. If a woman gets pregnant (no matter how that happens – rape or accident), but doesn’t want to keep the child, should she be made to carry through with the pregnancy for the full 9 months and then give the child away for adoption, instead of being allowed an abortion?
We decided that from a moral stance, the woman should be allowed to make up her own mind as to whether or not she wants to carry through to term, because it is her body and is a basic human right to decide what happens to your own body. She should be allowed to choose based on her own decision and not told what she has to do by other people. However, we never really decided on a definite answer from a Utilitarian point of view though.
Now on one hand, the suffering that she may go through for those 9 months will be far less than the lifetime of joy that the child will be able to have if it is born. So the happiness outweighs the suffering here. However it must also be taken into account, other factors such as what happens if both the mother and child are emotionally and/or psychologically damaged for the rest of their lives, as is often the case. Then the happy life that the mother could have had would be outweighed by the two now unhappy  lives, which is negative. 
What happens if the mother kills herself because she had to carry through the pregnancy or she dies giving birth? Then we end up with the same numbers as before – 1 life, which isn’t even guaranteed to be happy. What if the mother would have had 3 children later on in life, but due to being forced to carry through an untimely pregnancy, then she is put off childbirth for life? Then the world has lost the possibility of 3 more happy lives for only 1.
There are simply too many variables to consider in this situation. To simply say that if we stop abortion and as a result have more people being born, then there will obviously be more happiness in the world, and as such it will satisfy the utilitarian way of life, is to suggest that we should start up breeding farms in order to make the world a happier place. That idea failed tragically in Romania where contraception was outlawed in 1985 and abortion had already been banned in the hopes that the communist party could force the “pure Romanian birthrate” and population to rise dramatically. Their failed plan, implemented by Ceausescu, resulted in large numbers of dangerous illegal abortions and tens of thousands of unwanted children being abandoned into the state orphanages. The severely malnourished children that ended up in the orphanages were given micro-transfusions of blood (an archaic practice) in an attempt to raise their immune systems, but ended up resulting in an AIDS epidemic from needles being reused and unscreened blood. This plan was a disaster to say the least.
Situation Four:

At a hospital, there are five patients who all need an organ transplant in the next few hours in order to survive. One needs a heart, another a lung, two need a kidney each and the last needs a new liver. Coincidentally there is a patient in the hospital with a broken ankle that just happens to have the same blood type and matching tissues to the other 5 patients. The person with the broken ankle has just come out of surgery for their ankle and is still asleep. They other 5 people will be dead before the anaesthesia wears off. A doctor there knows how to remove organs quietly and make the bodies go away, so he takes out the organs and gives them to the other five patients.
Morally, we are shocked by this. Harvesting one man’s organs is a crime and shocking to our society of course. Fact is, that there is a black market out there that survives on exactly this kind of murder, although it usually happens in a more crude way and not in a hospital. Morally though, this is extremely and utterly wrong to the vast majority of people.
From a utilitarian’s perspective, this is (given a shallow and very basic analysis) right, because once again, the numbers win out. However, if examined closer, there are more things to consider. Such as if the society begins to think that their organs could be harvested if they go into hospital for something as small as even plastic surgery or a broken arm, then they will eventually stop going to the hospitals, and as a result people won’t have any health care, get sick, and that will mean mass unhappiness of society, which is the complete opposite aim of utilitarianism.
All these situations are hard to decide on, and I think it’s really up to the individual as to what is right and wrong morally, because it’s based on what our limits are. Utilitarian perspectives can be relatively easy to decide on because it’s just about doing the math, but on a deeper examination, there can be so many more variables and possibilities that need to be taken into consideration before the numbers can be worked out.

March 12, 2009 Posted by | homework, life, morals, observation, people, philosophy, university | 1 Comment

My Boss :(

I’ve become pathetic really.

I don’t like any of the guys that I meet. I’m too freaked out to meet new guys and actually get to know them. I don’t have a thing for any of the guys that I’ve always known.

Instead, I only set high expectations for every guy, by expecting them to be as good as my boss. It’s horribly pathetic that after all these years, that I still only want a guy that is exactly like him. 

I used to think that I liked him a few years ago, so I convinced myself that I needed to leave work for a while to get over it – as they say, “out of sight, out of mind”. After a while it worked – I wasn’t seeing him every week at work, so I got over it and went on with other things. Then after a few months I went back to work and I though I would still be fine. But sure enough after a moth of two i was falling back into the same pathetic state again. Since then it’s been on and off being in the same spot.

Here’s the thing though: he’s engaged.

I’ve only ever known him while he’s been with his now fiance, because she is one of the other bosses and that was how he even got into the business. They’ve always been together. While I wasn’t working for them for that long stretch he proposed to her. They’ve been engaged for about 3 years now, but it still doesn’t stop me feeling the same.

Maybe I actually have feelings for him. I don’t know. Sometimes I think he might have some small sort of feelings as well. But that could just be that he feels protective of me. I don’t know. I’m certainly very close to him – I tell him things that I don’t tell others, and out of everyone I know, when it comes to boy issues, Owen probably knows more than anyone. There’s only one thing I can think of that he doesn’t know about, and that I have told a single soul about anyway.

Every time I see him we flirt. There’s no two ways about that and I’ll say it openly, because I know I do and he returns it. I’ve come to accept that fact. It makes me feel horrible, because he is as good as married and yet I flirt with him. To top it off, I’m friends with his fiance, who is one of my other bosses – and she’s so nice. I feel sick every time I see her purely because of that. It’s not like I’m the only one that picks this up as well. Other people have seen the odd moment here and there and most just turn a blind eye, but once or twice we have got the odd comment. 

Sometimes he says things that make me think that he does feel something maybe, not that it would matter because we both know how stupid it is, because nothing would ever be. Today was the closest that he’s ever hinted to admitting it. Well not really the most clear hint, because all the actions and other things said speak way louder I’m sure, but he said something today which made me stop and think. Sure, it’s extremely likely that I just did the complete girl thing and misread things, but still. 

All he did was sigh and when I asked him why he had, he said that he was just thinking about things. When I enquired what about, he said things that couldn’t be discussed. I asked why and all he said was that maybe someday we would discuss it. I wasn’t going to ask anymore questions, because I got a hint about what it was about. It was the way he said it and the timing of when it was said that sort of made me think that though.

I dunno. It’s days like these that I really wish that I could still be with him at the moment and that I actually don’t want to leave work… but it’s also days like these that make me feel sick to my stomach about what I do. It’s not like I would ever kiss him (let alone anything else), but it’s bad enough as it is because he does have a fiance and considering that, we are altogether too close in my opinion.

Then again I think I’d probably be happy for him to just be like a best friend in many respects. The really good guy friend that’s protective and looks after you. I could deal with that and it being the way it is all the time at the moment.

I don’t need more than that.

But I don’t want to feel guilty about it either.

March 8, 2009 Posted by | life, love, moods, morals, Personal, secrets, work | 7 Comments

Vandalism Has It’s Costs, Believe Me.

This is another blog which continues in the story about Jane. The blog that follows this one (up the page) is probably rather harsh saying all that crap, because she is a good friend…. I just worry about her a lot and I don’t want to see her doing something silly as a short term solution and then getting caught doing it, or worse getting a habit, and then screwing up her whole life as a result of this phase, which will eventually end.
So I thought it was only right that I wrote about the things that have led up to this point in time and explain the events of the last few days which I alluded to in my last blog. I mentioned the fact that she was thinking about returning to the drug dealing business as a result of needing to pay a fine/damages for the destruction (vandalism) that she did and got caught for. Well I took some photos and as you can see… they’re pretty scary some of them.
You see, this whole thing started as the result of a dare which I made. Jane originally thought of the prank, but I put it on the to do list of things for her. Each of us made a to do list for the other person full of stupid little dares and this was sort of one of hers.
The dare was to create a crime scene type thing in the year twelve area of our school with like a body outline of a body/couple of bodies on the ground. So Jane did this using white paint. She also manages to rope in one of her friends to join her in the mayhem that she created.
However the two girls, when they went there at night time managed to get a little bit “carried away” and they got “creative”. By this I mean they ended up extending the prank artwork a long way. They began writing things everywhere and splattering paint everywhere else. It was crazy. By the time I got there a day and a half later, the cleaning process had begun and I missed out on the majority of it because it had already been cleaned off with numerous hours, chemicals and a pressure hose.
I got to see the year twelve area which was the place where they started and apparently the worst affected section of the school. I was honestly scared when I saw it. I can say that legitimately, because despite already having been told a few times by jane that they got “carried away” and having high expectations, I was still absolutely, jaw droppingly gob-smacked at both the amount that they had done and the amount of anger that was in it.
Most of the words were done by Jane, and it’s clearly evident that she wasn’t in a good “state of mind” a the time. The words were angry and scary to read – and I didn’t even get to see them all. Apparently there were some lyrics in the quadrangle (which were cleaned off long before I got there) which said something like “Let’s slit our wrists and burn down something beautiful” (Plus 44 lyrics – ‘No It Isn’t) and there were others as well, but like I said, I didn’t see them all. I was merely told about the others and am yet to see the photos that she took of them at the time.
But the thing is these words and angry splatters (which were on everything – every door nearby, every wall, every pillar etc) even had the teachers talking and worried. The teachers had all held our year group in really high esteem as being the best year group to go through our school so far, but they are now all saying that they have been sadly disappointed. our good reputation has been ruined by a “select few” and “that’s sad”. Do you know what? Who cares!
But most of the teachers, while also being angry at the girls for doing something so incredibly stupid, are really genuinely worried about them. My art teacher was worried about “where their heads are at” because the writings were so angry and vicious. That’s not really without warrant now is it?
Anyway. The day after they had done it, Jane went back to the school to hand some things in and admire their work. Our year co-ordinator (the boss teacher of our group) found her and began to question her. The cctv (video cameras) had revealed who Jane’s friend was, but they couldn’t identify Jane on the footage. She went into an automatic defensive mode and lied when she began to panic.
The reason our co-ordinator asked her was because when the teachers were asked who they thought it could have been, one of them (Jane’s favourite teacher) said that she wouldn’t be surprised if it was Jane and another girl (who wasn’t there). The teacher also mentioned Jane having asked for some paint from the drama department which she had just noticed was missing. Turns out that Jane hadn’t even touched that paint and so it was a false clue that led them to jane anyway.
So Jane then felt really bad after being questioned and went to talk to her favourite teacher, who she’s closest to and talks to a lot. While there, she broke down crying and whilst having her melt down, the year co-ordinator came to try and find her with a police officer accompanying him. He saw what was happening and told her to just come to his office when she was ready.
So, Jane willingly confessed to having taken a part in it all and having done the vandalism. Talks ensued from school, police, Jane, and then all again to Jane’s parents. It was a bit patchy for a while as to what course of action was going to be taken but everything has finally been decided: The school has formerly chosen to press charges against the two girls, which means that they will either be tried as juveniles by a board who will most likely give them a light fine each and lots of community service, or, they will be tried as adults (seeing as one turns 18 in december and the other in january), which will mean they will probably get a heavy fine and either community service or possibly jail time (though that’s doubtful) although it would still be served in a juvenile center.
In the event that they don’t receive a fine as a result of all of this, their parents shall be forcing each of them to pay back half of the costs for it all to be removed, despite it having been covered by insurance. it will be made as a “donation” to the school (not that it needs any more money).
The thing that’s still plaguing my mind, aside from the obvious worrying about Jane, is the fact that I can’t shake the feeling that I might have been able to stop it. I feel bad enough that it was a dare that I gave her in the first place, but I was supposed to have gone with them that night. Now, understandably I would think, I’m glad that I wasn’t there, especially seeing as things would have been multitudes worse for me than either of the other two seeing as I travel in a different crowd and hold positions of authority amongst the student body. But I can’t help but feel that if I had of been there then I might have been able to talk at least Jane out of doing all of that… and the other friend wouldn’t have done it without Jane.
So maybe I could have stopped this whole thing? 
True we’ll never know… but what if I could have? What if I could have stopped this whole ordeal which is happening right at the breaking point of exams, heightening Jane’s problems and worries, and causing possible future problems? What if I could have?
So is it partly my fault because of that??
I don’t know.

October 29, 2008 Posted by | depression, emotions, friends, idiotic, moods, morals, people, police, school, trouble | Leave a comment

drugs, sex, rock and roll

Well, this is a new bog, considering the last one decided to break down on me and now screws up my internet every time I try to use it, which results in the internet freezing and me having to force quit all internet windows (including all porn – kidding)

My last bog was more philosophical and about worldly things and matters, but lately I’ve been feeling the need to just write about everything. Much like I used to in my diaries. The only problem with them was that my mother used to go through them, and not to mention the fact that I always used to get terrible hand cramps.

Now one might think it ironic that to get away from prying and intrusive eyes, I would turn to publishing my thoughts on the Internet, but really it makes sense. Here I’m an unknown person on another unknown computer in the world. Completely anonymous and someone (such as yourself) reads this, then I really don’t mind on account of the fact that the chances that we know each other are so incredibly small it’s not funny.

So anyways, I’ve noticed something lately – it seems like the latest craze this year amongst school kids seems to be watching TV series’ on DVD. I’ve found myself also becoming victim to this craze considering I went through a MAJOR Gilmore Girls phase last year and (sadly) ending this year. Last night and all of today I watched the whole first season of Skins, which is a magnificent TV series, produced by the Madman Television and SBS in Australia. It’s rated R18+ on account of its ‘High Level Drug Use’. I can’t exactly argue with this considering pretty much every single scene involves them either using drugs or talking about them.

Now I have never been a player for the drugs team and I’ve never exactly been a big fan. I had a close friend a few years ago that got seriously mixed up in that scene and it screwed her life up. She wound up addicted to a couple of different substances, a drunk and was admitted to institutions for trying to commit suicide three times and other acts of self-harming. She also mixed with the crowds that did the same sort of thing, which resulted with her getting boyfriend after boyfriend that was a bad influence, horrible to her, beat her, and forced her to do more drugs. Eventually it climaxed with one that beat her to a pulp after breaking into her house and she was hospitalised. For some insane reason she stayed with him after this happened. He continued to beat her frequently and finally she ended up bashed and pregnant after he had beaten and raped her. She STILL claimed that she loved him and he her.

I did my best to convince her she had to leave him and eventually she did after he paid to have the pregnancy “taken care of” (aborted). It wasn’t soon enough in my opinion, but she found it hard to let go of that whole scene. She after being on the straight path for a while eventually went back to her old ways and we drifted apart when she moved to the other side of the world. But needless to say, after seeing one of my closest friends go through this I became somewhat scared of losing a friend to drugs and I never touched the stuff myself. For a very long time I didn’t touch alcohol either.

Since then I think my ideals and morals have really changed. Watching Skins and all the drug use in there, I only saw a fun environment with heightened and crazy experiences. Popping pills (like ecstasy) and smoking marijuana doesn’t seem so bad and the ecstasy just seemed to make the raves even more exciting. Admittedly ecstasy is very much the party drug and the newest craze amongst my year group as far as drug craze’s go, but I had still thought of all the people in my year group that I heard about doing it as absolute wankers who were so incredibly stupid for doing it that it just wasn’t funny.

Don’t get me wrong, Skins has got the whole overdosing spin in it just to let you know that you can do some serious damage when you take drugs, but it still created a new, good light within my mind surrounding drugs such as pot and pills. I would still never touch anything heavy like heroin or acid or anything like that, but I have new thoughts about the lighter stuff – if any drug can really be called “lighter”. It has made me think that I might not be opposed to trying them if I was at a rave or all night or good party. Something good anyhow. Just to see what it would be like.

This year has been a big year of changing thoughts for me really. I’ve begun drinking a lot more and enjoy it – it’s become a combination of outlet and social lubricant so that I can enjoy things more. Of course when drinking, your enjoyment can also be very dependent on who you are with and most of my friends really are not helpful in that aspect. Because I’ve realised this about my friends so much more this year, I’ve been hanging out with some different crowds and been influenced by them.

On one camp I was with one of the boys and it came up that I would have to go back to our dorm with my friend before the other girls woke up and that we couldn’t stay in the boys dorm all night because of what the girls would say and think. One of the boys then turned around to me and said, “You’re 17 aren’t you? So you should be able to do what you want to do.” This really opened my eyes and made me realise that I wasn’t doing all the things I wanted to do. I also realised the fact that I didn’t mind the idea of doing or trying some of the things that I had previously been very opposed to. And if you follow my drift, the title of this blog refers to some of the things that have changed (except iv loved rock and roll for a very long time so it need not be counted).

So basically, watching Skins today was again an awakening to the ideas that are continually changing within my head. Thoughts both morally and idealistically about many subjects that are relevant to growing up in this day and age. But whether or not I give into these thoughts, or at least if I give into them any time soon, is another matter and a bridge I’ll cross when I get to it. At the moment I’m just happy waiting for the next party so that I can get drunk, party, dance and all that jazz 🙂

August 2, 2008 Posted by | drugs, morals, sex, skins | Leave a comment