2016 Election

I woke up to the results at 2am. I'm still processing.

To see a man, who doesn't even treat the people in his personal and professional life well, win the presidency breaks my heart. I know he will not treat America well.

Who does he actually care about? Who is he willing to protect? Will he listen to those whom he now represents? Will he treat all of us, not just those who benefit him, with kindness? Many of the promises and deals he has made in his life, he has broken and will break many times over for his own benefit.

I do not see a lot of good coming out of this election. Everything is red. Executive, Legislative, and probably the Judicial eventually as well. But I know I'm definitely having an emotional reaction. But the fear is real.

I fear for the safety of my friends and family. That's really the only thing that bothers me in all of this. We have a lot we can lose. I don't know exactly what yet; we'll have to see what happens for sure, what kind of tug-o-war we'll get ourselves into. But I'm anticipating a loss so great that I can't even fathom it.

I'm not angry. These were the results. I get that. But for now, I cannot get over this overwhelming fear. This fear has always been present, floating underneath the surface of my mind, but now it has come out and been shoved in my face.

But give me some time. Maybe the fear will subside a little or invigorate me. I want to see what happens. I want to see what we will do as a people.

If they try to trample on our safety or treat us like animals with less than human rights, we will rise.

All I ask is to be treated as a human being. All I ask is that you protect my friends and family to the best of your ability. Defend your fellow Americans as if we are your family. I will do the same for you to the best of my ability as a fellow citizen and human being.

I think I'm blind to symbolism.

I just want to ramble instead of going to sleep. I should sleep. I have to get up early to drive Brother to his class. But I want to ramble and get some thoughts out of my head.

I watched more TYT video clips today because I was bored. Just watched: http://youtu.be/dhp5zuL7Nes

All I saw was Bert and Ernie cuddling on the couch, watching TV. That's still mostly what I see. There may be intended symbolism in there. But what do I know about symbolism in visual or written format? Symbolism was one of the most difficult things I had to struggle with in my English classes (I had sooo many symbolism projects for both published literature and artwork/advertisements), and I think I'm pretty damn good at academic English when I try.

So liberals and conservatives alike attributed symbolic qualities to the Bert and Ernie cover image. Promoting the gay agenda, sexualizing characters that can influence children, and showing support for the gay community are some of the conclusions that people have drawn. Right or wrong, it's still just an image. The only reason you see a symbol there is that you yourself have put the symbol there.

Anyway, I tend to not see symbols when I look at or read something. Not unless it's clearly labeled as a symbol or until someone else points out the symbolism. Maybe some symbolism is just too complex for my brain haha; I don't know. But yeah, I don't always see it for myself. Like with Bert and Ernie, I see the symbolism now that it's been pointed out, but I still don't really see it. It's mainly just an image to me. Does it make me feel a little happier on the inside to see it? Yeah, I enjoyed Sesame Street when I was a child; so seeing some familiar characters interacting in a familiar way makes me happy. It makes me happy to see some physical expression of happiness and love, even in the medium of puppets.

I just have to ask: Why can't two males show affection for one another without it being gay or wrong? Yeah, yeah, I know, masculinity and heteronormativity. But really, why? Why attribute anything negative to something that is supposed to increase your level of happiness and closeness to another human being? Hugs have supposedly been scientifically proven to make people feel better, obviously as long as they are consensual and used positively. So why can't two guys do that for each other, whether they are gay or straight? Why does it have to symbolize anything? Why can't it just be two guys supporting each other or being happy in each other's presence?

Yeah, Bert and Ernie could be gay. Who am I to declare what they are? Only they would truly know. (But they're puppets... So I don't think we will ever get a straight answer from either of them.) Yeah, they are cuddling in front of the TV in the image. Why can't we have an image of that? What is the essential wrongness (or rightness) of that image, in and of itself, without the symbolism that we personally attribute to it? When I saw that picture, I just saw two characters cuddling. Two characters cuddling is two characters cuddling. I don't necessarily see right or wrong, good or evil. The most I would assume from that image is that they are watching TV together, or maybe one of them is asleep; I can't see their faces, so I dunno. As for the cuddling, what does that mean? It could mean anything. But why does it have to mean anything to us? I mean, friends cuddle, siblings cuddle, lovers cuddle, anyone can cuddle. Does it have to mean anything more than "I feel comfortable around you" or "I love you"? I just don't get it.

Just so you know, in my head, Bert and Ernie do really like and love each other. It's not like they have been depicted as hating each other.


Words are so powerful. Symbolism wouldn't exist without words. We use words to attach symbols to everything we experience. Words themselves are symbols. What is a word? It's an abstract thing. We can't actually see, smell, taste, hear, or touch it, unless we give it a physical existence by writing it or typing it. Even then, we can't actually touch the thing that we call a word. It's a thought in our head that we learned from our peers, graphite on paper, ink on a canvas, photons on a screen, scratches on a bench. When we touch the manifested letters on that paper or on that bench, it still only exists in our brains. What we touch is paper, wood, metal, atoms. (Well, if we want to get technical, nothing ever actually touches anything.) Atoms aren't words.

It's funny. There is a word--well, there are probably infinitely many--out there that doesn't exist yet. So that nonexistent word doesn't represent or symbolize anything. But when that word gets thought of and starts manifesting in people's minds via social interaction, it's gonna mean something to people. Right now, it doesn't, but one day it will. It has the potential to make money, to destroy lives, to divide people, to do so much good, and to do so much bad. It's a damn word that doesn't even exist yet, but it's got so much potential energy waiting to be released because it doesn't exist yet. Once it comes into existence, all that energy changes into kinetic energy, giving that word speed, force, power, and momentum. And it will have a constant supply of energy until people stop using it and stop believing in its power, existence, or meaning. It's kinda like The Game ("I lost the game"); it doesn't exist until you give it existence. It's crazy that all of this is possible for a currently nonexistent word. The human mind creates so much potential.

So this abstract idea that we call a word allows us to see and experience our world in a way that's different from the typical animal's experience. Without words, we just recognize familiar things, people, and experiences. We recognize that we want more of what gives us a positive experience or feeling and we want to avoid what is negative. With words, we do the same thing, but words simplifies the process and yet can make it so complicated. We can recognize, categorize, organize, discriminate, and manipulate. Without words, hugs between any two people is a positive thing. When you hug someone and don't think about it, you just naturally feel good. With words, the recognition and simplification is "hugs are good because they make me feel good." The complexity, however, results in "two guys hugging is gay/bad" or even "front hugging tempts people into having sex." (That's a real thing. I just learned about the existence of Christian side hugging today.) How do people come to this conclusion?

Without words, you wouldn't believe anything until you experienced it yourself many times to establish a pattern, unless you find exceptions. Then you're just cautious enough to look out for the exceptions, or I would hope so. With words, you just have to believe the person who's telling you something as if it were a fact. You don't need to experience it yourself because someone else supposedly already experienced it for you. How do you know something is true until you make yourself know it's true, rather than having someone else let you know it's true?

Besides, someone else's word might not mean the same as your own word. We just assume that they mean the same thing because we use the same word. But we can't truly know that they mean the same thing.


Blah. I've lost my train of thought. This post was supposed to be about how I suck at seeing symbolism, but I didn't really stick to that. But what else could I say about my inability to see symbolism? I can't see it. So when others see it, I have to look again until I see it. Even then, I just think to myself, "Interesting. I see it, but I don't actually see it. How does this person see this so easily? Why do they see it this way?"

Mm. People and their brains and their ways of thinking. So intriguing what comes out of them.


Oh, I've always found the idea that people can be symbols to be very fascinating. I get why they are symbols to certain people. I can see how. But I still just see them as a person who took on some role or did something that inspired others. Just a person who did something that other people noticed. If no one notices you, you can't be a symbol of anything to others.


Thoughts are too complex to be fully formed right now. It's after midnight. Dang it. Not again. I have to start going to bed early soon, like this week. If all goes well, I start work early next Monday :D

Choose your sexuality. Can't? Try harder.

Since anti-gay people continually demand that gay people should just change our minds and become straight because sexuality is so obviously a choice, what question should we ask of anti-gay folks to turn the tables? So far, I've heard pro-gay people ask, "Why don't you try to become gay?" Answers have been, of course, "I tried, and I just can't be gay," "No, I'm not a sinner, so I would never choose to go against God," other similar answers, and no answers. Pro-gay folks have also asked, "When did you decide to become straight?" Answers include: "... I guess I never really had to decide," "I've known I was straight since forever" (That doesn't answer when you decided to be straight), and "I've never thought about that before." I don't think I've ever heard anyone say, "I decided to be straight," unless they were coming from ex-gay therapy.

[Note: When I say "anti-gay," I mean to describe people who are against the existence of queers and queerness. Not to describe people who are cool with queers but don't support gay marriage; I have had friends who felt this way. It took me a short while to wrap my head around that way of thinking; I don't agree with it, but I understand it now. I'm ok with my friends thinking like that. It doesn't affect me as much as I thought it should have. That being said, what they think should not (legally) dictate how I get to live my peaceful, harmless life haha.]

I think we should ask sexually straight people to try to become asexual. Why? Because asking them to become gay doesn't help us prove a point unless they're actually open to giving it a shot. Even if they think they do give it a try, because they are straight, they don't try very hard to experience the emotions or attraction and just believe they naturally make the "right decision." They have nothing to lose if they can't feel anything for the same sex, while queers who desperately want to be "normal" do feel like they have everything to lose and will try their fucking hardest to feel what they're "supposed" to feel. But when they don't feel it, they're "not trying hard enough." If straight people can't feel queer emotions or attractions, they can't explain their "decision," believe that they are making a choice (in the sense that gay does not feel like an option for them, just like straight doesn't feel like an option for queers), or believe that we are so abominable that we can go against the natural instinct of being straight--it feels like instinct to them.

Now, why ask straight people to try asexuality or ask them to try anything else at all? To make them see how ridiculously difficult their question is to answer and to provide evidence for. Being asexual is different from the norm and doesn't go against any religious beliefs and thus doesn't make them feel like they're sinning, so they can't try to throw that in our faces as an excuse to not try. When straight people say we can choose not to be gay, that's them saying we can choose not to be attracted to the same sex; so it should be true that straight people can simply choose not to be attracted to the opposite sex. Since they think it's a choice to be attracted to either sex, and we queers generally know they can't choose to be attracted to the same sex, I think it's fair to request that straight people attempt the same proposal to prove to us that it is possible for anyone, straight or queer, to make that choice. We could put them in a room full of sexually attractive members of the opposite sex and tell them not to notice their sexual attractiveness and not to feel sexual attraction whatsoever.

When a straight person tells me (to choose) not to be gay, this is the scenario that I think they want to see: They show me a female whom I find sexually attractive at that moment. At the snap of my fingers, I don't think she's sexually attractive at all anymore. I've chosen to find her non-attractive right then and there because I can.

If you tell anyone to do that, would that actually work? If someone said they could do that, I would think they were lying to me. But that's just because I can't believe them. I don't trust that they're telling me the truth. Just like anti-gay people wouldn't believe me if I said I tried to find a male person sexually attractive but couldn't. I probably wasn't trying hard enough. I think this just proves a question like "Why can't you choose to be straight/gay/asexual?" is ultimately a waste of time. Even if we all attempted to answer this question, the questioners wouldn't believe any answer or explanation that doesn't meet the standards that they set when they asked the question--the standards being there is only one right answer and there is no way to change my mind unless you can make me feel what you feel. But we can't really make others feel what they strongly don't want to feel. No adamantly anti-gay person is gonna seriously say, "Oh, I saw with my own eyes that you took me seriously and tried really hard to change. And I can see that you couldn't do it. I guess I am wrong, and you can't choose." No adamantly pro-gay person is gonna seriously say, "Oh, I saw with my own eyes that you took me seriously and didn't need to try that hard to change. I guess I am wrong, and you can choose."

"Why don't you choose to be gay?" is a nice, witty retort. It makes us feel good for a moment because we bested the opposition on that point. But it doesn't really get us anywhere closer to common ground, especially now that it seems to be used by pro-gay folks only as a witty retort and treated by anti-gay folks only as a trivial retort rather than an actual challenge that deserves some serious consideration.


Random: I've been told some anti-gay folks would prefer that gay people were asexual, so that we just would stop sinning and/or committing abhorrent sexual practices. Is this true? I thought they wanted us to be straight and make babies. Or simply burn in hell.

Another random: If homosexuality is as bad a sin as murder, and murderers who stop murdering generally aren't forgiven for their past crimes, are ex-gays unforgivable for their past gay crimes too? I mean, yeah, the one-time offenders may be forgiven, depending on the circumstances. But would forgiveness be granted to serial killers or mass murderers who supposedly repent? What about the serial gays who become ex-gays? The forgiveness that I'm talking about here isn't from God but from the people who judge the sinner. And "serial gays" could mean whatever you want it to mean.


Different topic: In general, I think it's easier for gay people to imagine being straight than for straight people to imagine being gay because we're inundated by heteronormative/straight behavior just about everywhere we go. Straight is generally the default setting; we believe we're straight until some event, person, or moment makes us do a double take.

Most of the information about queer people that close-minded, straight people have tend to come from their own imagination; the stereotypes and beliefs about us come from very little exposure to actual queer people. I mean, queer people are exposed to straight people most of their lives; so we stereotype straight people, but we're aware that there are all types of straight people. There are nice ones and mean ones. It's the same in the queer community. But because of the lack of exposure, people generalize and leave it at that without taking the time to investigate their presumptions and to get to know individuals.


How I see things: Every person is a potential friend. When we judge another person before we get to know them and don't give them a chance to be a good part of our lives, we're reducing our lives' potential. Obviously, we run the risk of meeting not-nice people who aren't good for us. But sometimes, I think it's good to know firsthand who is good and who is bad for us.

Don't just assume a group of people can't add goodness to your life. All that potential will just go to waste. (I was going to make a physics analogy, but that's much too nerdy.)


I know that everything I've typed is based on sexual attraction rather than romantic attraction. It was just easier to simplify. Besides, romantic attraction is a whole other beast to tackle in regards to pro-gay versus anti-gay. Though, you can obviously substitute "romantic" for "sexual" in what I've got typed up there.

Romantic attraction is more emotional. I feel that trying to argue about emotions is even more fruitless than arguing about physical attraction. Physical attraction may be somewhat relatable and understandable just because it's considered to be an "animalistic" quality shared by all human beings. Romantic attraction isn't really considered in the same way; I don't know what descriptor fits romantic attraction. But to try to explain something so abstract, so personal, so individualized, is such a difficult task. No one can truly, without a doubt, understand what you feel. What you feel is what you feel; to get someone else to know exactly what you're feeling is so close to impossible. Even if you could, you don't know if they actually get it. You can only assume that they do when they say they do. To get anywhere close to that impossibility requires a large amount of empathy, which I tend to feel is very much lacking in these kinds of arguments.


Rawr.


I apologize for the randomness, rambling, and long-winded-ness. I was watching some The Young Turks clips on YouTube, and thoughts in my head started to bubble out. I was trying to catch them all before any of them hit the ground and were no good anymore haha. I missed a few though >:

Question 2

I don't know if it's because people don't think I think about other things or they don't want to ask me other things. But many people have been talking to me about love and relationships. And I only bring up the topic with a few people -shrug- A couple of people trying to give me advice lately too >_> or "encourage" me to do something about my relationship status -_-

Like I need people to remind me that I'm alone, that I want to be with someone -sigh-

Anyway, I'm not sure how I'm gonna answer this question. I thought I already talked about this enough, but I guess not. I'm just gonna type whatever stuff comes to mind. Not gonna be in any coherent order. Is there ever any order? Ok, onward with the flow of consciousness haha...


Q: What is love?


A: Oh baby, don't hurt me. Don't hurt me no more... :P

I'm assuming this question is about romantic love. Well, I'm not sure what love is. An emotion? An attachment to another? An irresistible desire to be irresistibly desired? :P Robert Frost ftw!

I don't think the love I'm looking for can really be described haha. Or I just don't know how to find the words to describe it. But I'm sure love is what most of us are looking for though. I just don't really know what it is. It's too abstract for me to be able to define for myself. But since it is a known concept, I can't help but think about it often.

Since I can't define it quite how I want to, I'm just gonna tell you what I think of it. I'm not sure I know anything of it haha.

To feel wanted would be nice. Not just accepted by friends, but to be really wanted and needed by someone. To want and need someone as well. To be with someone who cares that much about you. To know you're not alone. To not feel lonely.

Love is a give-and-take kinda thing, isn't it? Unless you include one-sided love; then never mind. But yeah, you give a part or all of yourself to someone special, and they do the same for you. You both talk, listen, care, and take the time to make things work. Both must put effort into the relationship. You give what you can, and you take what you need. It's a kinda process of sorts.

Love invites trust. And with that, vulnerability. Reminds me of a quote. If I could only find it... "Love is giving someone the ability to destroy your heart... but trusting them not to." That is a lot of trust. Just saying.

Oh, there's a difference between loving someone and being in love. Remember that. Haha I know there's a difference even if I can't define love in absolute terms. To love someone means you care about them (Does this mean you can love strangers?). To be in love with someone means... what?


I have questions about love for you:
Is love something that you find? Or is it something you build up? I mean, is it just there when you meet someone? Or do you have to know the person and wait for love to find its way in later?
Are there such things as soulmates? What is a soulmate?
Is love predetermined and guaranteed? Or is it something you're supposed to keep working on together?
How do you know it's love?
Is love a decision or something you can't control? Compulsion? Obsession?
If you rush into love, are you likely to rush out of love?
When you're in a relationship, do you think about the long-term or do you only think about what is there at the time of the relationship?
Why does it seem so easy for people to fall out of love?

Oh, I have so many questions haha. I'm curious as to what you have to say.


I've been talking to Robert B on AIM. I asked him what he thought love was. His answer:

"That warm fuzzy feeling inside, just being around someone. Where just thinking about them can make you smile - if you let yourself - and when the thought of them being happy is enough to make you happy"

I wish I could keep my answer as simple as that because I do agree with his answer. But you know me; I gotta think and rethink it.


Whatever love is, I hope I can find/see it, have the courage to pursue it, and believe that I deserve it.

I only know what it is to like someone. A lot. I don't know what it means to be in love with someone. I'm afraid I won't get it right. But eh, I suppose I am willing to take a chance? Maybe? If someone's willing to give me a chance, mm...

I wonder how I will be if and when I decide to take a chance. Should I take a chance? haha...


Ooh, quotes haha. Just a collection of many that resonate with me, I suppose. And I'm sure some would resonate with you too.


Haha well, I don't think I answered that question at all. Instead, I rambled. And I still didn't say much.

And why do I feel like people are going to continue to ask me about love and relationships? Hmmm... I suppose I don't really mind talking about this stuff, but I'm not sure I have a whole reservoir of things to say on this topic. I'm already repeating myself, you know.


Anyway, five days of classes left. Then a week or so of finals. Then SUMMER BREAK. It seems Disneyland might not be happening ): nor is Expo happening 'cause it's just too expensive for me x_x but hey, that just means Mother and Brother are willing to pay for some other trip(s) I might take this summer. I'm still not sure if I want to take summer classes so that I can apply for Justice Studies. I might not declare that. I might change my mind. To what, I do not know yet. Will also try to find a friggin' job.

Yep. Scary fast, this semester. Can't believe it's almost over O: What shall I do during the summer? Not like I can hang out with people every day ): I can't use school as an excuse. Blah. We'll see what happens. Maybe Mother and I will move this summer. Who knows?

Question 1

I'm gonna try this new thing. Ask me a question and I'll answer it publicly in an away message or blog. I won't answer all questions, but I'll try to be completely honest for whichever I do answer.

This is a step toward honesty, I guess.


One person has already asked me this today. Several other people, including Brother, have asked me these questions before.

Q: You're in college. You need to start dating. Why haven't you asked anyone out on a date already? Why aren't you dating or in a relationship now? When are you gonna START DATING?

A: Because that's how my life has gone so far? Or maybe I'm just too picky? haha I don't really know why I haven't dated anyone. Just never got a good opportunity, I suppose.

I'm not dating now because I don't feel like it? Really, I don't like the whole "dating system." I prefer getting to know each other as friends and then taking it from there. I like the slow progression in friendship and relationship without the official dates. That just adds too much pressure on me -_- because I'd think about it too much.

Of course, this hasn't worked for me much because I seem to like the impatient types D: They don't want to take things slow. They just want me to ask them out, just like that -snaps finger- But that's not how I operate. So I'm waiting for someone who wants to take things slow.

And I'm also very good at being "just a friend" :P Soo good at it that I'm always eventually put into the Friend Zone hahaha. How sad.

Plus, I don't just ask someone out because I really gotta feel like I know them well enough. We gotta connect on some level. Both emotionally and physically.

And I dunno when. We'll see what happens. If I meet someone I really like, if they make it obvious (and I mean really obvious) that they want something more. Only then would I even consider trying anything haha. You already know I'm really shy. I don't wanna do something without feeling some sense of security before I embarrass myself.

And really, I'm still scared. I've had more than enough of those yes-then-no answers, ok? (Two times is enough to hurt my pride, you know) Not only do I want to be sure of my own feelings for someone, but I want them to be sure of theirs too. I don't want someone to change their mind about me so quickly 'cause that hurts like fuckin' hell. I'm not gonna put myself through that again.


And damn it, why am I expected to be the one to ask someone else out? D: You're putting pressure on me!


Seriously though, I'm not sure if I would be ready for dating or a relationship haha. I'm too chicken to try anything with anyone if there was someone. And you know, it's likely gonna be a girl who I wanna be with haha. And I want things to go a certain way. Like with family and stuff. I wanna be able to introduce her to my family, but I know that won't happen. Well, she could probably meet Brother. I don't think I would ever introduce her to Mother, not even as a friend, because Mother gets too suspicious about my female friends. She won't say anything, but the way she talks lets me know she's thinking the wrong thing.

So part of the reasons I'm not trying to date anyone is family.

Another part is really I don't think I'm worth it. You could always possibly find someone better than me. Hm.

Haha I think about this too much. If I could boil this all down to the most basic thing, I would say I haven't dated and am not dating because I'm too afraid of so many different things that could happen. That's how it feels like. Afraid of family, afraid of heartbreak, afraid of my own insecurity, afraid of anything that could go wrong.

And I've already said, I wanna get this stuff right the first time. But chances of that happening are slim, so I'm not really trying all that hard for anything. And this makes me feel like a loser. And then I think, "Who would want a loser like me, who thinks so negatively of herself, who is too afraid?" -sigh- Yeah.

Haha besides, I always feel like I'm misinterpreting signals anyway XP I did misread signals every single time I liked someone in high school. Girls are so hard to read. It's not always that fun to figure them out 'cause I'm always thinking what-if's and that-can't-be's. I'd like to think that I'm somewhat easy to read compared to most other people. But then again, I dunno how people see me, so -shrug-


See? I wrote a lot about something. Though, I kinda wish I wrote a lot about some other thing XP But yeah, ask me a good question and let's see if I have much to say in reply, yeah? haha