beauty

"She sees how her stomach looks when she’s standing in her bra. She sees how her face looks without any make up on. She sees how her chin looks when she looks down at her reflection. She sees how her arms sag when she has them up. She sees how her thighs jiggle when she walks or runs. She sees how her boobs look when she’s wearing a top. She sees how her acne looks when she washes her face. She sees how her legs look when she looks at all of her scars. She sees how her hair looks when she wakes up in the morning. She sees how her wrinkles show when she smiles. She sees how her stretch marks are visable when she sits down. See, the thing about girls, they can see every little detail about themselves, details that other people can’t see and they see every little flaw that other people don’t even notice. So when a girl doesn’t accept your compliments about her being beautiful, it’s honestly because she feels like she isn’t and she’d be lying if she said she was."

- Nash Grier

---

wow.

i find that quote infuriating.

who are you to be critical of your body?  who are you to say "i am not beautiful" when you did not create yourself?  what kind of twisted society and culture do we live in where people support a quote like this, which essentially says "my body as i really am is not beautiful, and you don't see me at those times, so i can't accept your compliments because you don't really know."?

stop looking at your body and treating it as though it has to be a certain way for it to be beautiful.

will your body always look the same?  for the rest of your life?  no, it won't.  does that, later on, you won't be beautiful anymore?  no, it doesn't.  seriously, if you've thought this through, how does this make sense in your head?

it's not about your weight.  it's not about your shape.  it's not about your attire.  it's not about stupid crap that people place so much emphasis on like jiggling thighs or stretch marks or messy hair or wrinkles or who gives a crap.  seriously, screw that whole idea of "this makes a girl beautiful and this doesn't".  it's dehumanizing and robs women of their God-given worth, and we are actively supporting that idea if we view women like that and let this idea run rampant without speaking up about it.

by even thinking about "what physical attributes of mine are attractive and what aren't?", you've already lost to the enemy.

who are you to hold yourself to a standard that God doesn't hold you to?

you can't make your own standard.

listen to this.  you're either going to end up prideful by accomplishing it, or you'll end up feeling ashamed/inadequate by not achieving it.  both take you away from the right standard of scripture as God's standard for you.  reading scripture is what gives you the proper perception of yourself, and reading scripture is what guides how you live and how you view yourself.  the biblical standard is not just one standard you can choose in lieu of other ones, it's the only right one.

but what about feeling like you can't shake the thoughts of wanting to look good and be attractive and "measure up"?  scripture, again, transforms and renews our minds (romans 12:2), taking you away from the false standards of the world and bringing you to a place where you can filter out and discard the lies that people (and you) want you to believe, and instead look at yourself only by God's true standard.

it's difficult because influences are all around, it's difficult because living according to God's standard is not cool/flashy/attractive in the world's eyes, and it's difficult because the instant you stop grounding yourself in the Word is the instant you'll start backsliding into thoughts of comparing and achieving and striving.  it's difficult.  God knows, but He provides a constant reorienting for those who ask.

beauty is important.  everything that is beautiful reflects God's image, and your body indeed reflects God's image, as well.

don't take it lightly, and don't think you can abstain from worldly influences by saying "i don't care about it", because the only way to overcome wrongful thinking in a world that only promotes wrong values is to be grounded in truth.  and you have to fight for that truth to be constantly learned and applied.

fight or give up, there's no in between.

---

this whole concept of beauty in today's world is an injustice that imprisons women and deprives their beautiful souls of feeling and understanding the worth they have.  my heart hurts for them.

what are you doing in the fight for truth?

(a good read: http://keeleychorn.com/bible-study/identity/identity-body-image/)

pw plz

my computer is freeeee to use.

my computer used to have a password on the log-in screen, but i gave it to everyone who asked anyway. that, and i only ever had to enter it whenever i had to restart my computer for whatever reason (which was rare because i never turn my computer off or lock it or have it set to ever go into standby or sleep or whatever). that made me realize that there was no point to have it. so i removed it.

when i moved into the suite at the beginning of this year, i made an interesting realization: everyone locked their computers when not in use and required a password to unlock them. and also had a need to incessantly lock it when not in use (to varying degrees).

i didn't think much of it at first, until i realized that no one (save for matthew) would actually tell me the passwords to unlock their computers if i wanted to quickly use it for something. he might unlock it for me, but nope, wouldn't give me the password no matter what. most of them also made it a point to lock it whenever they weren't going to use it, some the instant he left the computer, others only when leaving for an extended period of time.

i didn't, and still don't, quite get the point of these passwords and incessantly locking.

to a small extent, it makes me feel like there's no trust here! that, or we have some weird stuff we wanna hide. most everyone leaves their computer in his own room (as opposed to using it often outside of the suite), so that rules out the reasoning of strangers using their computers.

and yeah, i guess i wouldn't want anyone reading my emails or chats or something, but i trust everyone enough to know they wouldn't read through all my archives of conversations and go out and tell the world or anything. and in the case someone does glance upon a snippet of a conversation, so what? i know they wouldn't make a big deal out of it.

on the other hand, just because my computer is an open book to everyone else doesn't mean i'm going to treat their computers the same way if they kept them unlocked. at most i use it to look something up, and only when necessary.

the bottom line is, i just don't get the big deal about passwords and locking computers. i'm sure you all have your own reasons and such.

i'm really curious as to what your take is on this subject. do you constantly keep your computer locked?

about [we shot the moon - tunnel vision] -- i really like this group. why? 'cause it's the new group that jonathan jones (the lead singer of waking ashland) started after waking ashland split up. i was pretty sad that waking ashland split up because i loved their composure album, and even some songs of their final (and not as good) album, the well. and i only found out a few days ago that he started this group! AWESOME! i am so happy.

[r]
-when i was younger, my handwriting was pretty bad and for important things, like putting my name with sharpie on something i owned, i asked my sister to write it for me. and i would always marvel at how neat her handwriting was. i think my handwriting can now hold its own against katie's. >:]
-i have this thing where i like to fart in little bits at a time. some of you know this. heeheehe.
-i have this other thing where when i burp, i keep it in my mouth to suppress the sound, and then i blow it away so it doesn't get on anyone. ehheehee.

pour me a heavy dose of atmosphere

i SAW OWL CITY IN CONCERT, the same venue as the one i saw amber pacific at. IT WAS AWESOME. adam sang and played some electric guitar (two different ones!). there was also a celloist, violinist, drummer, and a female vocalist who also played keyboard and synth. it was AWESOME. oh wait i said that already, lols. they didn't stick around afterwards, unfortunately. i didn't get any merch this time, because the wristband was $10, t-shirts were expensive ($20), and the poster wasn't interesting enough on its own (meaning without autographs).

i'm planning to go see ANBERLIN in concert sunday, october 25th. allentown, pa. 1hr20min drive, daaang. BUT IT WILL BE AWESOME. ANBERLIN = AWESOME.

---

what IS integrity?
what does it mean?
what is it comprised of?

some questions..

is it okay to do something illegal if no one sees?
what if everyone else is doing it, too?
are some laws not as important as other ones?

these days, i think it's tremendously hard to have good integrity.

it's hard in the sense that a lot of things push us to cheat or cut corners or bend the rules, perhaps to get ahead, to make things easier, or because it's an easy source of enjoyment.
it's also hard in the sense that even if we put a ton of effort into trying to maintain our integrity, there are so many little subjective things that an outsider could pick at if trying to pinpoint cracks and faults.

some thoughts..

one thing that comes to mind for me is music piracy. yeah, it's illegal, but it's also widely prevalent. you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who adheres strictly to not downloading music.

now this isn't some self-righteous post about how i purchase [almost] all my music and everyone else downloads everything illegally and i'm so right and i hate piracy and blalhbalhhlab, it's just meant to get your mind crankin'.

even though i like to purchase music and support the artists, i'm conflicted a lot of the time, too.

as one (okay, probably more) of my friends said, "BUY music? that's such a waste of money, since it's so easy to get it from anywhere!" and it's true! why buy music?

i think one of the reasons that people don't feel bad, or as bad, about breaking the law, is when it relates to something that isn't monitored. you know, download a few songs, or a few thousand, no one's gonna know or catch you.

or, they feel like it's okay because it's not something physical. "it's not like i'm stealing the CD from the store!"

or, better yet, it's okay because everyone else is doing it, too, or they're more illegal! "i'm only downloading a few songs that i like since the rest of the songs on the CD are crappy, and other people download so much more than me! i'm GOOD compared to them."

or, some people say, if it's a big corporation, or someone wealthy, it's not as bad to steal from them. "it's okay, kanye's mad ballin', he doesn't need my money and it won't affect him at all if i don't buy his music."

or, that the law is unfair and a rip-off. "CDs are way too expensive, they overcharge for them! $10 for a movie ticket? get real!"

here's a thought: who ever even officially said that music should be cheap, let alone free? is it easy or cheap to write and produce and publish amazing music?

owning music that we can listen to whenever we want is not some right that we have, and i think we've grown to feel like it is.

just because a flatscreen plasma HDTV is expensive and is awesome and you want it, is it okay to steal it?

but this makes the situation most real for me.. even though i've never worked on a movie, or wrote any kind of great music, i know i can't even imagine how much work it takes to put it all together.

put yourself in their shoes.
if you wrote an original song.. if you designed a beautiful piece of art..

would you want someone to steal that from you?

[randoms]
-i will never use 0.7mm lead. i don't know why. i just grew up with 0.5mm and stuck with it. but that's only for lead pencils. as for pens, i will practically never use blue ink. i dunno why i just don't like it. my preferred is black, and i don't have any other colors.
-now that i live in a suite with five other doods, i re-discovered one of my shower hobbies. re-directing water from the showerhead to wash away random strands of hair stuck on the wall, the shower curtain, or anywhere on the bathtub. it's so addicting! and fun! maybe that's my slightly-OCD side of me talking.
-ever since i was younger, one of my dreams was to be trapped in shoprite. with a few friends, of course. i would wanna see how long we would be able to survive, only living off of what we could find in the store. we could last for months! more! YEARS?! hooohoo awesome, i'm laughing just thinking about it. if you steal that idea for a reality show after reading the post above, you have no heart.

SETTLERS

i love playing settlers. the simple gameplay with multiple underlying layers of depth and strategy played on a randomized game board with different dynamics every game.. golden.

recently, though, i've encountered some settlers controversy with me and my good friend, matthew. we played a lot of settlers together, and it got to the point where we'd be at each other's throats over in-game disputes on "how to play correctly" or "what the right thing to do is" and stuff like that, and we decided that we shouldn't play together. yeah, it was that bad.

ironic, because just a few weeks ago, i was amused by something matthew said:

"i love playing settlers because i get to hate you for those 45 minutes"

this makes me think a bit. what IS it that makes settlers enjoyable? what makes it "ruthless" as many people put it?

there are probably infinitely many different reasons, but here are some of my thoughts..

apparently, there are some unwritten "rules" to settlers.

"i'm sorry, but i have to!"

one of these rules that some people strongly believe in is that you must always do whatever you can in your power to help yourself to win. use the robber whenever you have the chance to, and everything and anything else that can benefit you, you must do.

another of these rules is that you have to target whoever is winning. it's not "right" to target people who aren't winning, because you're upsetting the natural balance of the game. the debate here comes into play when figuring out who is actually winning. some people judge it based only on points, which is accurate, but naive for a few reasons. check it out:

if person A has four settlements, and holds longest road, person A has 6 points.
if person B has five settlements, he/she only have 5 points.
who's winning?
points-wise, person A.
LOGICALLY AND SMARTLY SPEAKING WISE (heehee, i'm not biased at all), person B. why? person B has 5 points worth of settlements/cities, so we can call those 5 "resource-producing" points. person A only has 4 points worth of settlements/cities, so theoretically speaking, person A isn't making as much as person B. by attacking person A who has more points by using the robber and such, person B will be able to continue gathering resources and his rate of production will be much greater than person A because the attention is off of him.

some people also find it important to point out who's winning, or who has the most points, or when someone reaches x amount of points. i don't see this as bad, since some people may slip under the radar and get close to winning, so it's important to "notify" the general public.

here's a big question: is winning itself the only point of settlers?

yeah, i play to win, naturally. it's fun to win! it's a nice sense of accomplishment, especially in an intense four-player game. but, as with many other things, the desire to win can result in a lack of other courtesies that you would normally exhibit as a person outside of the game, such as, oh, BEING NICE.

i don't just mean being nice as in "oh i won't put the robber on anyone!" i mean being nice as in attitude, words spoken, and general play style exhibited. it is just a game.

some people get annoyed at people who take the game too seriously and tell them "it's just a game, stop being so serious!"

it's funny, because then i also see people who take the game seriously provide reasoning for how they play by saying "it's just a game, chill out, i'm nice in real life."

i accept that, and i don't think that people who play meanly in settlers are mean in real life, because i know they aren't. however, i think, whether people notice it or not, the way that people play settlers is also somewhat representative of their own selves.

there's also something to be said about "becoming how you act". yeah, that's the informal way of putting it and i'm not sure how psychology puts it or whatever, but if you play enough mean/selfish games of settlers, there's only so much time that will pass before that play style starts to gradually become accepted (by yourself and others) as traits and characteristics of your own personality as a person.

back to the point, if winning is the only goal of settlers, then technically everyone should go all out and do everything in their power to win, right? meaning being mean in every way possible, being selfish in every trade and expansion and use of development cards, etc.

however, there's the other side of people who realize that if they play the crowd correctly, they can win by being nice. being nice allows you to have a certain veil over you as a player, since less attention is brought to you when you're not putting the robber on other people or stealing cards from other people. and being under the radar is always a key to victory. it's also a good strategy to be nice, because sometimes other people just roll more 7's than you do, at which point, if you got on their bad side, you're screwed!

for me, as well as a few people that i know, i get just about as much (if not more) enjoyment as i would from winning, when i help someone else to win. it's even more exciting when the person i'm helping is the underdog by a big stretch, and together we team up to make a huge comeback to steal the win from the first-place player. kind of a jerk move, but if a team effort results in 3 people working together and winning against 1 person, then the greater good is achieved right?

i remember once in game, me and abel weren't winning, but we pooled our resources together and helped the person in second place to build 5 roads in one turn and steal longest road, and thus the game, away from the point-leader, eric chen. yeah, eric wasn't too happy about that, but the whole enjoyment came from the fact that it was so epic and seemingly unachievable.

sometimes when i build up a partnership with someone else in the game, i end up realizing that i would be just as happy if they won as if i myself won.

i feel like because settlers is "just a game", it provides a cover (or excuse) for the "evil sides" of people's personalities to be free and run rampant. kinda like, it brings out the worst in people. ya know? [not everyone, mind you, so don't get the impression that everyone is suddenly super evil and selfish and mean and ruthless when they play settlers, haha]

what a fun game.

[riii]
-i took karate when i was younger, like in elementary school sometime. i think i generally enjoyed it. i don't think it actually taught me anything useful, though, since i don't remember any of it now.
-i was part of a swimming program at the ymca in 4th grade, and i HATED it. freestyle was the worst. i kept feeling like i was going to drown, hahah. i would occasionally grab onto the floating lane lines to support myself, once or twice while swimming across the pool. i did, however, enjoy the backstroke. it was relaxing, and i didn't feel like i was going to drown. i was just afraid of drifting sideways, and also hitting the concrete on the other end of the pool.
-i played indoor soccer, also at the ymca, when i was in 4th grade. i liked this a LOT. i remember i always played defense, always always always. i was the tallest kid on my team. on the contrary, i remember our goalie was the shortest kid on our team, and many a goal were scored on him since he was so small. noob. i probably saved his butt a billion times. i think i scored like one goal, or maybe two, by kicking it super hard from my end of the field, since the overall field was so small. OH. and one time, i went for a ball at the same time as this kid from the other team, and we collided shins together pretty hard. he cried like crazy because it hurt, and yeah my shin hurt a little too under the shinguard, but the funny part is i specifically remember trying to limp or grab my leg to make it look my shin hurt because i felt bad that he was crying and i wasn't. joke time!: i liked sharks and other marine animals when i was younger, so when we voted for team names, i chose the blue sharks, naturally, since blue was my favorite color. i didn't realize until some time later, since no one told me, that our shirts were purple. no wonder the crowds or parents were always kinda confused when they heard our team name.

into the velvet sky

[about this song: I LOVE IT. the instant i heard owl city's music, i knew i had to get whatever albums they had out. they remind me of postal service, or as my friend put it, "electronica death cab", which works too. thank you betsy for showing them to me, who thanks jon huang for showing them to her. this entry is not directed at any particular person(s), nor do i have any particular person(s) in mind while writing it.]

here's something i recently thought of that i've been wondering about for a while [but hasn't occurred recently].

when someone shares a band/musical artist to someone else, why is there that certain sense of "ownership" from the person who originally shared it? i remember back as recently as a few years ago, this situation wasn't uncommon, whether witnessing it or personally experiencing it.

person A: yo, check out this band! they're great!
person B: woohoo, thanks dood! -- listens -- AWESOME!
[person B puts the song on their xanga]
xanga post: "HEY I LOVE THIS SONG YEAHH"
person A: YO, i showed you that band, and you didn't even mention me!? i listened to them FIRST! ZOMGZZBBQBQBBQAHHHDFD

i can understand it if person B makes some claim like "i love band xyz!" when they've only heard one song by them, but that's clearly not the case here.

i feel like the reason is that the person A's in today's society think what they listen to defines who they are, or their personality, or something like that. perhaps they feel threatened when a newcomer "claims" that music for themselves. too much emphasis is placed on who originally listened to/discovered the band, as if there was some big importance to the origin.

i know some people who don't listen to certain groups just because they carry with them a name, and a reputation for the "kind of people" who listen to them, or simply because the music is mainstream, and they don't want to seem like they're conforming with everyone else. maybe like clothing brand names?

i say, like what you like, and share [by word of mouth] with others what you like, too. i know there's probably tons more to say about this topic, but i think these are the extent of the conclusions that i've reached. what do you guys think?

i mean, i'm not goin' around saying, "johnny got me into taylor swift, now i love listening to her music!" every time someone mentions taylor swift. of course not! i'm just gonna say "i like taylor swift!" i'm sure johnny doesn't mind that i don't credit him.

the suggestion to listen to something may have come from someone else, but ultimately, how much you enjoy and like the music is completely your own.

[r][r][r][r]
-the only time i ever took a bus was in first grade when i went to fisher's landing elementary school in oregon. it was interesting.
-i got in trouble once on the bus. as we arrived at school, a bully tattled on me and said that i picked my friend's nose. which i didn't. the bus driver didn't believe me. lame.
-on the bus ride home, i would stare directly at the sun. until it turned into a black circle. or until i got to my stop.
-each day when i got off the bus stop, i found a rock on the ground. i kicked it all the way to my front door. i ended up with a big pile of rocks at the front door.

how would YOU react?

sometimes, people seem unfazed and simply continue on their way.
typically, people yield a little bit, but still stay on their own path.

occasionally, people freeze in their tracks, unsure of what to do, and wait for it to pass.

and rarely (but amusingly), people instantly dart onto the grass as though a truck was passing through.
personally, i'd probably go with the second approach listed above.
as my totally sane math teacher would say, "CLEARLY", i'm talking about me biking around campus.
now lemme tell you, i have always enjoyed biking, and anyone who has known me in middle school or high school can tell you that the bicycle was my preferred (and only) method of transportation to just about anywhere i wanted to go. that is the beauty of parsippany, in that it is such a bik-able town. things are spread out and spacy enough for comfort, but at the same time not too far for anyone to sanely traverse on a bike. middle school, high school, tennis courts, friends' houses, church, strip malls, restaurants, all within biking distance.
oh, and one random journey all the way to not-so-nearby livingston with my good friend johnny, on which he almost got run over at an intersection by burger king. oops.
since i am such an avid advocate for bicycling, i'd like to name just a few of the benefits: no need for gas money, little to no maintenance, great exercise (sick calves and thighs), and great for enjoying nice days. plus, as i mentioned two blog entries ago, biking in the snow is a unique and awe-inspiring experience that you simply must experience at least once in your life.
now even though i'm all into biking and whatnot, what's funny is that my bike is super ghetto. my parents got it for me a long time ago from a family friend, and it belonged to her son (who is now a retired Marine and whose biceps alone would probably break the handlebars of the bike if he tried to ride it again).- the handlebar grips slip off if you pull on them, and moreso when it's raining.- the rear brake is pretty bad, and the front brake is only decent, which averages the quality of the brakes to be on the poor-mediocre end.- there is no suspension whatsoever.
- adding insult to injury, the old bike seat broke so we had to replace it with one that is rock hard. it hurts.- the spokes thingies are really rusty (and have only gotten rustier from bringing it to college, where there's virtually nowhere to put it where it won't get rained on), and thus i can only use two or three different gear combinations of the possible 21.- the gear shifter is actually not ghetto! it's an expensive top-of-the-line shimano gear shifter thing that we had to buy to replace the original one when it broke.- the kickstand is a wobbly twig.
however, the bike itself was free, and it's functional enough for me (ooh, it's tricky to rock a rhyme to rock a rhyme that's right on time it's tricky, it's tricky tricky tr-r-r-r-r-r-ricky).
there was a period when i didn't bike, though. (that is, when i got a car. duh.) instead, driving was the cool thing. driving to tennis, church, people's houses, giving rides, etc. (and also infinitely cooler when i would leave the car in the driveway and the gas would "accidentally" be low, only to have it magically filled up within a few days. parents are so nice.)

but alas, upon coming to college, and spending the first week or two without my trusty set of wheels, i realized my life just isn't meant to be like this. we were meant to be together. i brought my bike from home as soon as possible, and it's simply been like a dream ever since.
seriously, i can get from metzger to arc in four minutes. FOUR minutes. do the math. (i was considering doing the math of how much time i save weekly and yearly by biking instead of walking, but i'll do it some other time. i have enough math to do today.)
that was a brief (!) desription to bring all of you up to par regarding my bicycle affairs. NOW, back to my original topic.

i was inspired to blog today (even though i have to study for calc and chem exams on monday and tuesday respectively) because just a while ago, i was biking back from the dining hall, and i was cruising along and listening to music on my dandy bike ride, and just as i enter the crosswalk, i nearly get hit by a car coming from my left. my fault? in a word, no. i always wonder what would happen if i got hit by a car. sure, maybe i can avoid getting hit by looking both ways every time when i cross the street (which i do 90% of the time), but the point is that cars must yield to pedestrians, including pedestrians on bikes! (just kidding, that would make me like, a cyclestrian. or cyclist?) yes, wow, amazingly, that is actually what they are supposed to do! it's as if since i'm on something with wheels, drivers automatically no longer have to yield to me even as i'm crossing on the crosswalk. here, let me draw a picture of the inverse hierarchy that is what i deem the pyramid of yieldality*:

*not pictured: wheelchairs, rollerblades, skateboards, my car

now, if you recall the statements from the beginning of my post (yes, way back there), people react in a variety of ways when they see me on their sidewalk approaching ahead of them or alongside them. first of all, i believe i am a good cyclist, because, where applicable, i treat biking the same way i do driving. i always have complete control over where my bike is going and how close it is to others. granted, of course other people may not know that i'm so careful and considerate when i bike, so i don't blame them for how they react. however, there ARE signs directed towards cyclists that say "yield to pedestrians" posted every now and then, and i follow them dutifully regardless of where they are or aren't posted. i'm willing to take alternate paths, weave between people, bike on the [dry] grass, bike on the street, bike along with a crowd at a walking pace, and pretty much any other method that i can think to employ in order to make those traveling on foot around me as unhindered, uninconvenienced, and unscared as possible.
so please, if you read this and you see me biking, know that i'm not going to run you over if you don't dive out of the way or something ridiculous like that. i've only once accidentally nudged someone with my handlebar because someone else in front of me cut me off. i said sorry and i felt dumb.

now you may be wondering, if two people on bikes are approaching, how do you know who has priority? well, you know what chicken is right?
and thus, that concludes the history so-far of my biking adventures to the present day, though the journey is far from over.
don't you wish you had a bike now?