you would probably find this difficult to understand if you don't know me well

Ah, I suddenly feel like an annoying person.

I mean, surely people have become tired of my ongoing Adrien-related ramblings? My housemates, and close friends especially. It's not like I have anything interesting to tell them about him anyway, most of the time it's about how I walked past him while on my way back home/ in a lecture and failed to utter a silent hello. That goes on for a number of times already.

If I'm not talking about him, I would probably talk about a few other guys I fancy here. That's so pathetic.

It's like I don't have any other things to be said. Well, I do, but who would listen to me babbling about the complex layered sounds produced by Simon Posford anyway? Or about how I found MRSA highly interesting, about the books I found at Scribes today, about my lucid dreaming-related hypotheses, about my desire to take up debating once again, about how I wish I was pretty, about how bummed I would feel if i couldn't get my hands on a lolita dress for next month's Dunedin Armageddon Expo, about ADHD and Ritalin, about pineal glands, melatonin production and circadian rhythm.

About how lonely I felt here in Dunedin.

Why would I feel lonely anyway? I'm not going to blame frustration phase, since I've been through that two months ago, surely there are no such things as recurring frustration phase aite? Not going to blame PMS either, since a girl can't be in her PMS stage for the whole 3 months. I guess it's my neurotic nature, but I'm not sure. Most of the time I would end up blaming myself for every single thing I deemed wrong, so I don't think I want to blame anybody/anything this time. Of course, that also means I would probably never find the culprit behind my feeling lonely whatsoever, but meh.

People ask me why I keep talking to myself. This is the reason.

But then, I guess I should be grateful. I could still get along with people here. I just hope things would not go wrong later - I have a long history of making things go wrong in terms of my relationships with people.

*********

Last month marked my 2nd anniversary of being sober from cutting. Not going to say "sober from self-harm", because within that 2 years I think I did some stuffs that could be considered as 'self-harm'. Taking excessive medication, for example, although that's solely for the purpose of alleviating moderate pain (it's self-harm because I'm fully aware of the risks, yet I still did it). I'm quite proud of myself for being able to take control over the thing that I once thought could never be controlled, but I guess that's not really enough. Surely, I have stopped cutting myself, but have I stopped myself from viewing things in a pessimistic way?

*********

On a somewhat related note (or perhaps not related at all), I can't seem to understand how some people thought it's best to ignore your emotions, and regard them as something of lesser importance. "You're not supposed to tell others you're pissed off/hurt/deeply upset. For God's sake find something else to distract you, keep those things to yourself", they would say. Dude, surely there's a reason why God gives us emotions - so that you know something's not right and that you need to take action on it. And just because you can't see them doesn't mean you should put them aside.I know some people have the amazing capability to control their emotions, but please, just because you could do so doesn't mean everybody else have the same capability. Keeping things to yourself is bad for your health - it increases your cortisol level and stuffs.

********

Apologies to people who are sick of Adrien or List of Guys Alice Like in Dunedin - I know you're not interested, so I shall stop.

Shit, I'm such an insensitive person. Should've noticed about this eons ago.

Alice

Bersihkah?

I personally think both sides overreacted. If it was meant to be a peaceful rally, treat it as so - there's no need for people to flood the streets making KL look like freakin Thailand. Siap baju kuning baju merah semua. For all I know a peaceful rally is not supposed to look like what I saw on my news feed last Saturday/Sunday. You don't bring weapons on a peaceful rally, that defeats the whole purpose. And triggers unnecessary action from the authorities.

And what's with the excessive number of police force employed as if there's a war going on, deploying water cannon and tear gas and all? You guys are not Israeli soldiers! This is not Palestine! For God's sake itu semua tak perlu, unless people began to act violently, bakar2 kereta pecah2 kedai semua like the riot in Vancouver.

And with that much people you would expect there would be sufficient medical help around in case of emergency. I don't know if it's otherwise (Bersih supporters chose not to portray the good side of the 'riot control'? Who knows?), but from what I've been observing through videos and news, that's not the case. Someone even died in the rally after receiving late medical treatment post-tear gas exposure. Please tell me if I'm wrong.

Why can't people pick a group of people large enough to get the message across, but small enough so as to avoid triggering panic-induced actions by the authorities? A few hundred is enough. Assign several police to monitor the rally, just in case. You don't have to gather police from all over Malaysia to control them, itu sangat menyusahkan semua orang termasuk polis sendiri. I didn't say that a rally/street protests/whatever you might call it is a bad way to make your voice heard - Mahatma Gandhi also employed this method, and it was successful - but if you are going to make one, at least make it properly. Properly, true to what people claim it to be - a peaceful rally.

Or was it just impossible to be done? Malaysians are too rebellious to do anything in control? Authorities are too paranoid to let people's voice be heard (especially one that involves things like 'SPR', 'pilihanraya', 'telus' and 'adil')? I know that similar rallies under the same name had been done in different countries last Saturday, but I am yet to hear reports of violence/ things getting out of control like what happened in Malaysia.

And should EVERY single movement in this country be affiliated with political parties and specific ethnicities? Maybe we are so accustomed to obsessed with fighting under the name of 'Melayu/Cina/India etc' and 'BN/PAS/DAP/Keadilan etc' that every other things we fight for must have connections with these. Bersih was supposed to be a neutral rally, away from the controls of specific political parties, be it Opposition or Government or whatever. What was supposed to be a movement for a clean election had morphed into a battle of the races, not to mention a battle between BN supporters and Pakatan Rakyat supporters. Just keep scrolling down. Malaysians, are we that narrow? Remember 13 May?

I may not be able to witness everything first hand, but I do know one thing - don't bother dreaming about Bersih 3.0 if you still don't know what's the real definition of a 'peaceful rally'. Don't bother having another Bersih rally until you have trained yourself to be more civilised. DON'T EVER attend a rally just for the sake of being rebellious. That's just stupid.

If everybody stop themselves from overreacting, Malaysia would be a much nicer place to live. This applies for both sides, the people and the government.

Alice

why do people fall in love

I've been wanting to ask this question for a very very long time, but I just didn't know to whom should I ask. Definitely not my mom, coz I don't share lovey dovey stuffs like this with my family members. Why do people fall in love? How can people love each other? What makes a person willing to devote their everything for a particular person? (Note: for convenience purposes, 'love' in this entry refers to romantic love, that feeling towards a person you barely know for how many years or even less than that, not maternal love whatsoever)

I always thought that guys don't have the emotional capability to love another person. After romantically involved with several guys throughout my life, I came to the conclusion that among these XY chromosome possessors, love simply exists in the form of lust. What other explanation do I have, after knowing several guys who demanded sex from me, and harassed by several others? Although I realize that my statement here is severely biased, I still can't see how that very idea of love can be applied to a guy. Even if lust does not take place here, how can a species associated with dominance, assertiveness, strength and ego could give in to something as gentle as love? When you say you love a particular girl, do you love her because she's beautiful, or because she stirs up something on your groin, or because she loves you first? Or for some other reasons I might fail to see? For guys in their teenage/ young adult years, what makes you willing to say "I love you" to a girl when you are still unsure of your own future? Do you say so because your peers challenged you to go and confess to her? Some sort of game among your guy friends, to see who can tackle the most number of girls? To avoid yourself from being left out because everybody has a girlfriend or two already?

To girls my age who are 'in love': was it really love? How can you be so sure? It could be merely loneliness, or jealousy. You may simply want someone to understand your thoughts and your emotions, or someone to be your conversation partner, perhaps. For all I know, you don't need a boyfriend in your life for that. Most of the time, XY Homo sapiens are terrible when it comes to understanding girls and stuffs. I effin know very well, I could relate to girls my age when it comes to this. Being girls, there would be moments when we simply feel like having someone to 'fill the emptiness in our heart', whatever that means. That's not freaking 'love'. That's something else.

It baffles me how people who are practically teenagers could utter those three sacred words to their 'significant others' so easily. When you say you 'love' someone, it means so much more than sending morning messages, going out for dates, having romantic conversations on MSN/Skype, exchanging gifts every once in a while, stuffs young couples always do. Loving someone means you would sacrifice yourself for that someone, even when you have to die in the process. How could you possibly do that to a person who's practically a stranger in your life? A person whom you have just known for several weeks/months/years? I won't do that, personally. That would be too bizarre.

One more thing. If mutual feelings are required in a relationship, how can two persons possibly fall in love with each other at the same time? I mean, how can A fall in love with B at exactly the same time when B falls in love with A? Wouldn't the probability be so small? From what I've been observing, a romantic relationship usually starts with someone 'falling helplessly in love' with a person, who later agrees to be his/her lover. If that's the case, don't you think it will practically be a one-sided love? When you say yes to a guy's proposal to make you his girlfriend, were you in love with him at the first place, or do you simply say yes because you don't want to break his heart? Because you were thrilled to finally have someone confessing his love to you (as in my case)? Because you were lonely and want to have someone to 'fill that emptiness in your heart'?

I have never been in love, so I may not be the right person to write something like this. No, having a crush on someone is not freakin love. That's infatuation, and infatuation won't last long. I haven't been to the point where I could sacrifice myself for a freakin XY Homo sapiens. But I'm curious, you know, to hear something from people who claim to be in love/have been in love. So please, answer me. I need to know.

Don't you effin misconstrue me or anything. I am not desperate/being extra androphobic/have given up hope on love. I just want to know.

Alice

bitchin'

We live in a world where physical appearances are much better appreciated than 'what's behind the curtains'. That's why we have girls putting their duckfaced pictures on their blog headers, trying their best to look like HanaYunaTajimaWhatever in every single shots. No, I don't have any specific opinions regarding these girls, although sometimes I do feel they have gone overboard.

But that's not my point. My point is, how often do you find a person attractive due to his or her quirkiness? Or, since quirkiness may only appeal to a small subset of the community, his or her charisma? Flair? Attitude? Most people would definitely go for what they could perceive with their naked eye. Having said that, if you are born pretty, or somehow found a way to make yourself look pretty, you will most likely be the subject of admiration for many people. Yep, I know, I'm merely restating an obvious fact; there's nothing new here. But how about those who did not have beauty (or physical attractiveness, at least, considering the word 'beauty' is so damn subjective) as their asset? Sure, someone would eventually notice that hidden, skin-deep beauty within them, but can you guarantee that they won't suffer from serious inferiority complex/ lack of self-esteem before that happens?

And guys still question why girls wear makeup and Hana Tajima-inspired outfits.

While we're at it, is quirkiness a turn-off?

Alice

bibliophile me?

Okay, I admit. My love towards classic literature is a newfound love - started almost immediately after I discovered lifestyle lolita (like, reading Bram Stoker is sooo Elegant Gothic Aristocrat, and reading Jane Austen is sooo Classic Lolita). But I always love books, really, even though I started with cheesy Disney Princesses back when I was four. I always think that reading Michael Crichton during a boring Monday assembly will make you appear way cooler than your peers with their Alaf 21 romantic novels (pardon me, I have to mention XD).

But of course, I don't read books for the sake of being a lifestyle lolita, or for its 'cool factor', or even to 'improve my vocabulary and my sentence structure' or any other nerdy reasons you may fancy. I just love reading. It's the best thing since Dance Dance Paradise (mwahahahaha).

And for that, I need more books. Mine is a pathetic collection (pathetic in terms of quantity, not quality). I even have fricken Twilight Saga in my collection - all four of them (I felt grateful to fall out of love with Twilight before I manage to buy the Official and Unofficial Guide, Twilight Men/Women, Robert Pattinson biographies, those Twilight Saga Diaries in a Tin, Team Edward/Team Jacob T-shirts/mugs/bedsheets, Midnight Sun, Senjakala, Cinta Baru, etc.). Most of my books fall under the vampire romance category - and by 'vampire romance' I mean Christine Feehan-type vampire romance, not those teenage vampire flicks like Vampire Kisses or whatever.

And, ehehe, since I'm so fond of wishlists, I present you:

Alice's Ultimate Bibliophile Wishlist

1. Through The Looking Glass (hardcover) by Lewis Carroll. Of course I have read this, but I need the hardcover version to express my undying love to Lewis Carroll :x
2. The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett. Because tales of little girls from the Edwardian period are so lolita :D
3. A Little Princess (hardcover) by Frances Hodgson Burnett. It reduced me to tears, so I NEED IT. NAO. MY BIRTHDAY.
4. Emma by Jane Austen. Collector's item.
5. Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen. Again, collector's item.
6. Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. Uh. :D
7. Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte. Preferably that one with the freaky cover design I saw at Borders some time ago :D
8. Anything from Edgar Allan Poe. However, if you give me The Black Cat, I swear I'll tear you apart (me is an animal lover. The Black Cat itu melampau. Kesian kucing tu.)
9. Hans Christian Andersen's Fairy Tales. Because I can.
10. The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery. I think it's interesting :D
11. Frankenstein (hardcover) by Mary Shelley. As an aspiring Elegant Gothic Lolita/Aristocrat, I am a big fan of Gothic literature.
12. The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux. Oh the Gothic romance... oh my lovely Erik...nuff said.
13. The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. Yes, I have a copy, but not the one with Ben Barnes on the cover XD
14. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. I love the Bronte sisters~
15. Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. While it may not be my kind of lolita, I think Nabokov's style is exquisite, and therefore deserves to be in my collection :D
16. The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton. You see, I live in the Victorian era.
17. Pirate Latitude by Michael Crichton. Hahaha, not classic literature, but I adore the late Michael Crichton. I have The Andromeda Strain, Prey, State of Fear and Next, but not this. And the fact that its manuscript was found after Crichton's death makes it extremely valuable XD
18. Nightlight by the Harvard Lampoon. Aku suka gelakkan Twilight. The Harvard Lampoon makes the best parodies ever (read Bored of the Rings!). Belle Goose and Edwart Mullen FTW
19. The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas. Love the book, love Dumas, love the anime, love guys with the title Count (as in Count Raphael Edward Adams tee-hee XD)
20. The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Really, I've read the manga version, and I was hooked since then.
21. Life of Pi by Yann Martel. I need to own it. Reading the borrowed copy from the library is not enough.
22. Interview with the Vampire by Anne Rice. Borrowing from Leana doesn't count XD
23. Angels and Demons by Dan Brown. IDK, somehow this whole Illuminati thingie sparked my interest.

of course there will be more, and of course I'll update later, but for the time being, these are my wishlist for my birthday (ni wishlist buku jek, wishlist penuh kat sini)

Happy Shopping! XD

Alice