Thursday, July 12, 2007

席慕容 一棵開花的樹

如何讓你遇見我
在我最美麗的時刻

為這
我已在佛前求了五百年
求佛讓我們結一段塵緣
佛於是把我化做一棵樹
長在你必經的路旁

陽光下
慎重地開滿了花
朵朵都是我前世的盼望

當你走近
請你細聽
那顫抖的葉
是我等待的熱情

而當你終於無視地走過
在你身後落了一地的
朋友啊
那不是花瓣
那是我凋零的心

a flowering tree by: Shi Mu Lung
translation: Grace Chang
How may be we meet
in my loveliest moment?
For this
I have prayed
before Buddha
for five centuries
that we may forge an earthly tryst
So Buddha turned me into a tree
growing by a path you would pass through
carefully decked with blooms under the sunlight
each blossom the yearnings of a past life
When you come near, pray listen
the quivering leaves are my anticipating passion
and when you finally pass in oblivion
the shower that litters the ground -
Friend! they are not petals
but my withering heart!

第一次的約會

海是
看不盡的寂寥
孤傲的身影
等待的是背後一個
溫暖的擁抱

excerpt from wiki concerning female genital cutting/circumcision

Was reading up on this issue when I noticed that the approach a applicable to other issues as well. First thing that comes to mind: honor killings.

Despite laws forbidding the practice, FGC has proven to be an enduring tradition difficult to overcome on the local level with deeply held cultural and sometimes political significance. For instance, prohibition by the British of the procedure among tribes in Kenya significantly strengthened the tribes' resistance to British colonial rule in the 1950s and increased support for the Mau Mau guerrilla movement. Thus, colonial efforts to stampe out the practice had the contradictory result of making it even more common, as it was seen as a form of resistance towards colonial rule.

A significant difficulty lies in the fact that the practice, as an identifying feature of indigenous culture, is intimately associated with the endogamous potential of young women. Thus for only one or a few families within a given locale to "deprive" their daughters of the operation is to significantly disadvantage them in finding husbands. This damages the survivability of their culture in a hostile, "globalizing" social environment.

Because the practice holds such cultural and marital significance, anti-"circumcision" activists increasingly recognize that to end the practice it is necessary to work closely with local communities. What must happen, some have noted, is that members of a marriage network must all give up the practice simultaneously so no individuals are handicapped, as happened, for example, under similar circumstances with the rapid abandonment of foot binding among the Chinese early in the 20th century.

Often activists working for the practice's elimination offer a universalizing psychological rationale. Working from an axiom of a "normal" psyche, they commonly assume that female genital cutting rituals represent deviance from a transcultural behavioral norm. Of course, these rituals are seen in these cases as violent disfigurement, likened to child abuse and rape. They seek to bring practitioners and "victims" of such "barbarism" to reason by convincing them that the practice is indeed a wrong-doing. This attitude is an echo of the colonial and missionary campaigns against the practice in the first half of the 20th century.

An example of successful efforts to end the practice is occurring in Senegal, initiated by native women working at the local level in connection with the Tostan Project, directed by Molly Melching.[36] Since 1997, 1,271 villages (600,000 people), some 12% of the practicing population in Senegal, have voluntarily given up FGC and are also working to end early and forced marriage. This has come about through the voluntary efforts of locals carrying the message out to other villages within their marriage networks in a self-replicating process. By 2003, 563 villages had participated in public declarations, and the number continues to rise. By then, at least 23 villages in Burkina Faso had also held such community wide ceremonies, marking "the first public declaration to end FGC outside of Senegal and showing the replicability of the Tostan program for large-scale abandonment of this practice". Molly Melching of TOSTAN believes that in Senegal the practice of female genital mutilation could be ended within 2–5 years. She credits the approach of education versus cultural imperialism for the rapid and significant changes which have occurred in Senegal. The approach going into Senegal was one of non judgment which allowed the men and women of Senegal to question their own traditions and make change as opposed to being put in a position where they would have felt the need to defend their traditions against the criticisms of others.

This indigenous movement began with a few women who had participated in a literacy program that taught women skills in research, project management and social advocacy. The program also included neutrally presented facts about female reproduction and the health effects of female circumcision (see Obermeyer above for counter-point to presumed "neutrality"). Students did group projects as the culmination of their 18-month training and one such group chose the topic of FGC for their project. Having received assurance from their local imam during their research that the practice was a custom and not a religious requirement, they went on to create dramatic reenactments of the suffering and deaths the practice had brought to their own lives and to share them throughout their village. At the end of a year, their entire village of some 15,000 people joined in a public ceremony to collectively reject the practice for their daughters and prospective daughters-in-law. From there, the imam and other leaders in their village began visiting other villages within the local marriage network and sharing their story. As a result, the new practice began to spread.

a pedantic existence

a pedantic existence

crawls

from one page to the other





and falls.

Thoughts on the rules of killing ... a jihadi guidebook

The Guidebook for Taking a Life

By MICHAEL MOSS and SOUAD MEKHENNET
Published: June 10, 2007

We were in a small house in Zarqa, Jordan, trying to interview two heavily bearded Islamic militants about their distribution of recruitment videos when one of us asked one too many questions.

“He’s American?” one of the militants growled. “Let’s kidnap and kill him.”

The room fell silent. But before anyone could act on this impulse, the rules of jihadi etiquette kicked in. You can’t just slaughter a visitor, militants are taught by sympathetic Islamic scholars. You need permission from whoever arranges the meeting. And in this case, the arranger who helped us to meet this pair declined to sign off.

“He’s my guest,” Marwan Shehadeh, a Jordanian researcher, told the bearded men.

With Islamist violence brewing in various parts of the world, the set of rules that seek to guide and justify the killing that militants do is growing more complex.

This jihad etiquette is not written down, and for good reason. It varies as much in interpretation and practice as extremist groups vary in their goals. But the rules have some general themes that underlie actions ranging from the recent rash of suicide bombings in Algeria and Somalia, to the surge in beheadings and bombings by separatist Muslims in Thailand.

Some of these rules have deep roots in the Middle East, where, for example, the Egyptian Islamic scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi has argued it is fine to kill Israeli citizens because their compulsory military service means they are not truly civilians.

The war in Iraq is reshaping the etiquette, too. Suicide bombers from radical Sunni and Shiite Muslim groups have long been called martyrs, a locution that avoids the Koran’s ban on killing oneself in favor of the honor it accords death in battle against infidels. Now some Sunni militants are urging the killing of Shiites, alleging that they are not true Muslims. If there seems to be no published playbook, there are informal rules, and these were gathered by interviewing militants and their leaders, Islamic clerics and scholars in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and England, along with government intelligence officials in the Middle East, Europe and the United States.

Islamic militants who embrace violence may account for a minuscule fraction of Muslims in the world, but they lay claim to the breadth of Islamic teachings in their efforts to justify their actions. “No jihadi will do any action until he is certain this action is morally acceptable,” says Dr. Mohammad al-Massari, a Saudi dissident who runs a leading jihad Internet forum, Tajdeed.net, in London, where he now lives.

Here are six of the more striking jihadi tenets, as militant Islamists describe them:


Rule No. 1: You can kill bystanders without feeling a lot of guilt.

The Koran, as translated by the University of Southern California Muslim Student Association’s Compendium of Muslim Texts, generally prohibits the slaying of innocents, as in Verse 33 in Chapter 17 (Isra’, The Night Journey, Children of Israel): “Nor take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for just cause.”

But the Koran also orders Muslims to resist oppression, as verses 190 and 191 of Chapter 2 (The Cow) instruct: “Fight in the cause of Allah with those who fight with you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out, for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. ...”

In the typical car bombing, some Islamists say, God will identify those who deserve to die — for example, anyone helping the enemy — and send them to hell. The other victims will go to paradise. “The innocent who is hurt, he won’t suffer,” Dr. Massari says. “He becomes a martyr himself.”

There is one gray area. If you are a Muslim who has sinned, getting killed by a suicide bomber will clean some of your slate for Judgment Day, but precisely where God draws the line between those who go to heaven or hell is not spelled out.


Rule No. 2: You can kill children, too, without needing to feel distress.

True, Islamic texts say it is unlawful to kill children, women, the old and the infirm. In the Sahih Bukhari, a respected collection of sermons and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, verse 4:52:257 refers to Ghazawat, a battle in which Muhammad took part. “Narrated Abdullah: During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah’s Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.”

But militant Islamists including extremists in Jordan who embrace Al Qaeda’s ideology teach recruits that children receive special consideration in death. They are not held accountable for any sins until puberty, and if they are killed in a jihad operation they will go straight to heaven. There, they will instantly age to their late 20s, and enjoy the same access to virgins and other benefits as martyrs receive.

Islamic militants are hardly alone in seeking to rationalize innocent deaths, says John O. Voll, a professor of Islamic history at Georgetown University. “Whether you are talking about leftist radicals here in the 1960s, or the apologies for civilian collateral damage in Iraq that you get from the Pentagon, the argument is that if the action is just, the collateral damage is justifiable,” he says.


Rule No. 3: Sometimes, you can single out civilians for killing; bankers are an example.

In principle, nonfighters cannot be targeted in a militant operation, Islamist scholars say. But the list of exceptions is long and growing.

Civilians can be killed in retribution for an enemy attack on Muslim civilians, argue some scholars like the Saudi cleric Abdullah bin Nasser al-Rashid, whose writings and those of other prominent Islamic scholars have been analyzed by the Combating Terrorism Center, a research group at the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

Shakir al-Abssi, whose Qaeda-minded group, Fatah Al Islam, has been fighting Lebanese soldiers since May 20, says some government officials are fair game. He was sentenced to death in Jordan for helping to organize the slaying of the American diplomat Laurence Foley in 2002, and said in an interview with The New York Times that while he did not specifically choose Mr. Foley to be killed, “Any person that comes to our region with a military, security or political aim, then he is a legitimate target.”

Others like Atilla Ahmet, a 42-year-old Briton of Cypriot descent who is awaiting trial in England on terrorism charges, take a broader view. “It would be legitimate to attack banks because they charge interest, and this is in violation of Islamic law,” Mr. Ahmet said last year.


Rule No. 4: You cannot kill in the country where you reside unless you were born there.

Militants living in a country that respects the rights of Muslims have something like a peace contract with the country, says Omar Bakri, a radical sheik who moved from London to Lebanon two years ago under pressure from British authorities.

Militants who go to Iraq get a pass as expeditionary warriors. And the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks did not violate this rule since the hijackers came from outside the United States, Mr. Bakri said.

“When I heard about the London bombings, I prayed that no bombers from Britain were involved,” he said, fearing immigrants were responsible. As it turned out, the July 7, 2005, attack largely complied with this rule. Three of the four men who set off the bombs had been born in Britain; the fourth moved there from Jamaica as an infant.

Mr. Bakri says he does not condone violence against innocent people anywhere. But some of the several hundred young men who studied Islam with him say they have no such qualms.

“We have a voting system here in Britain, so anyone who is voting for Tony Blair is not a civilian and therefore would be a legitimate target,” says Khalid Kelly, an Irish-born Islamic convert who says he studied with Mr. Bakri in London.


Rule No. 5: You can lie or hide your religion if you do this for jihad.

Muslims are instructed by the Koran to be true to their religion. “Therefore stand firm (in the straight Path) as thou art commanded, thou and those who with thee turn (unto Allah), and transgress not (from the Path), for He seeth well all that you do,” says verse 112 of Chapter 11 (Hud). Lying is allowed only when it is deemed a necessity, for example when being tortured, or when an innocuous deception serves a good purpose, scholars say.

But some militants appear to shirk this rule to blend in with non-Muslim surroundings or deflect suspicion, says Maj. Gen. Achraf Rifi, the general director of Lebanon’s internal security force who oversaw a surveillance last year of a Lebanese man suspected of plotting to blow up the PATH train under the Hudson River.

“We thought the story couldn’t be true, especially when we followed this young man,” General Rifi said. “He was going out, drinking, chasing girls, drove a red MG.” But he says the man, who is now awaiting trial in Lebanon, confessed, and Mr. Rifi recalled that the Sept. 11 hijacker who came from Lebanon frequented discos in Beirut.

Mr. Voll takes a different view of the playboy-turned-militant phenomenon. He says the Sept. 11 hijackers might simply have been “guys who enjoyed a good drink” and that militant leaders may be seeking to do a “post facto scrubbing up of their image” by portraying sins as a ruse.


Rule No. 6. You may need to ask your parents for their consent.

Militant Islamists interpret the Koran and the separate teachings of Muhammad that are known as the Sunna as laying out five criteria to be met by people wanting to be jihadis. They must be Muslim, at least 15 and mature, of sound mind, debt free and have parental permission.

The parental rule is currently waived inside Iraq, where Islamists say it is every Muslim’s duty to fight the Americans, Dr. Massari says. It is optional for residents of nearby countries, like Jordan.

In Zarqa, Jordan, the 24-year-old Abu Ibrahim says he is waiting for another chance to be a jihadi after Syrian officials caught him in the fall heading to Iraq. He is taking the parental rule one step further, he said. His family is arranging for him to marry, and he feels obligated to disclose his jihad plans to any potential bride.

“I will inform my future wife of course about my plans, and I hope that, God willing, she might join me,” he said.

Even though you say that innocents and children go to heaven after their deaths, do you not consider that their lives on earth are a right that they should be allowed to enjoy?
What I don't understand is why people are willing to cause each other so much pain, especially by pretending to know the will of God. Those pretentious mullahs and religious scholars who train militants are even more at fault, to use authority and status in learned arts to convince people of their righteousness and use people to complete their ideals.
It is as though their lives are less worthy than theirs.
It's such a painful world. It gives those who enjoy making others suffer an excuse to do as they wish. (reflected in 'the kite runner' also) Can the extremists ever understand what they are doing? Just because they are willing to sacrifice themselves does that mean that others are willing too?
DO NOT PRETEND TO KNOW WHAT OTHERS THINK!
DO NOT PRETEND TO KNOW WHAT GOD THINKS!

it makes me want to cry.
May God forgive us for our sins.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Indoctrinated Palestinian 3 Year Old

????How can the woman keep on smiling?

Monday, July 09, 2007

Prisoner of Tehran

From Publishers Weekly
Starred Review. Nemat tells of her harrowing experience as a young Iranian girl at the start of the Islamic revolution. In January 1982, the 16-year-old student activist was arrested, jailed in Tehran's infamous Evin prison, tortured and sentenced to death. Ali, one of her interrogators, intervened moments before her execution, having used family connections with Ayatollah Khomeini himself to reduce her sentence to life in prison. The price: she would convert to Islam (she was Christian) and marry him, or he would see to it that her family and her boyfriend, Andre, were jailed or even killed. She remained a political prisoner for two years. Nemat's engaging memoir is rich with complex characters—loved ones lost on both sides of this bloody conflict. Ali, the man who rapes and subjugates her, also saves her life several times—he is assassinated by his own subordinates. His family embraces Nemat with more affection and acceptance than her own, even fighting for her release after his death. Nemat returns home to feel a stranger: "They were terrified of the pain and horror of my past," she writes. She buries her memories for years, eventually escaping to Canada to begin a new life with Andre. Nemat offers her arresting, heartbreaking story of forgiveness, hope and enduring love—a voice for the untold scores silenced by Iran's revolution. (May)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.


scraps of thoughts scribbled in journal during reading this book:
Revolutions that happen overnight rarely spell the peace and prosperity that it originally meant. Religion and politics is a bold mix. Any deterrent to freedom of expression beyond what is reasonable is to be feared, and the standards ow what is reasonable should not be dictated by any one religion.
If the western civilization has any core merits, it lies in the recognition of the individual and his rights.
Why are muslims so afraid of sexuality? For it certainly has played a vital part in their myths (i.e.: arabian nights). And yet some who say they follow the creed can still act in contradiction to what they are taught because 'new rules' and exceptions can be made for certain rules to be able to function.
Can some rules be more important than others? To the extent that they can even overshadow them?

Friday, July 06, 2007

Wuthering Heights

Upon first perusing the abridged version of Wuthering Heights I was sure that the rendering was done crudely, for how else could there be such difficulty in feeling the delicate turns of situations? Unconvinced of its legitimacy, I set out and purchased the book in its original. Here I learnt that I had wronged the abridger, for indeed the original was every bit as crude as the shortened version. Perhaps because I had been holding high expectations for it, and had become spoiled by the variety of feeling and depth that Jane Eyre had provided. Added to this Wuthering Heights lacked a definitive main character of virtue. Rather, those with a consistent merit were shunted aside to make way for the parody of cruder, more passionate characters. It is indeed shocking to note the differences displayed in the sisters, and I wonder how Emily Bronte would have turned out if she had survived to write something more. For as noted by her sister, it is more difficult to discern a ‘feminine hand’ in writing this volume than otherwise.
I am not saying that I can do better than the author, or even create something close to it. Indeed, if the setting was harsh and lacking in tendresse, it holds merit in its originality, in a flame that would sit most oddly on the misconceptions woman’s nature was considered to be at that time. It is a triumph in everything but the coarseness. And perhaps I am prejudiced to call it so. For the style has been accepted elsewhere as great. I am simply naturally disposed to dislike the feeling such a setting and plot gives me. As I’ve never much like ‘catcher in the Rye’ either, and that tale is in a sense the true reflection of a raw spirit.
I have reflected upon starting something that is considered ‘modern’ as well, and decided not to. It is not because I am without the inspiration to do so, but that for one I fear what such an endeavor may wreck upon my persona, for I am many things, and one thing a story requires is that one maintain a level of consistency in tone throughout. This I cannot do, for if I were able to be inspired by any note of a cheerful temperament than I would go ahead. One cannot lose in being cheerful. But if I can only spout depression, then it does me no good trying to do this project. Besides, I know that I shall hate my own work if I adopt that tone.

Unhappy books

It seems that truly I have not read many 'adult' books in my life. I have read some of the classics, and young adult books: fantasy, vampires...etc. But rarely books like 'the mermaid chair'.
Let's talk about how I got to read this book. I noticed that one of my english teachers had a lot of novels. His table was piled with stacks and the cabinet behind his chair was full also. So I asked if I could borrow one to read and he said yes. I chose the mermaid chair because of its intriguing title. And read it through because I had borrowed it. Hoping that it would get better as I read on.
It didn't, not really.
But going on. When I think books like 'the mermaind chair that deal with adultry, I feel my mind trying to dis-remember the odd, unhappy sensation that settled in my stomach when I read it. (the main character is an artist, as if that could be excusable)
It's almost the same as when I think of the kite-runner, and my mind seems to purposefully dis-remember the sexual abuse that's in it. Not that it's not important. Not that I don't recall it happens. But that I don't like recalling the painful details. It was done masterfully, I believe, by not going intrusive into descriptions. But still, it was very painful.
That's why I don't watch horror movies.
Though I do not regret reading the kite-runner.
I would not like to read something like 'the mermaid chair' again. Please, forgive me from turning away from certain realities in this world. They just make me so unhappy.

Where am I?

In some things, I do not know where I am in the world. It is a strange feeling… unfettered. As though I have the freedom to be everything and anything I want, to think anything and everything I want, without being reprimanded, without being judged, without being degraded by my inferiority or puffed up by my consequence. These things that I am, and that I have no idea of: so I just go ahead and think what I think, believe what I believe, and let the thoughts that pass in my mind wantonly settle and grow root in my mind. And I allow people to say, without knowing what they themselves are saying “Perhaps it’s just the Western way, she’s very westernized.” Or “She’s from Taiwan, perhaps that’s the way they are there.”
I do not know. Perhaps I am lucky, to be somewhere where I cannot be estimated in what I am exactly, that there is still this breach wide enough between cultures that would make them unable to pinpoint where I am exactly. And that I have not been given proper training to think what should be thought.
But there is a danger in this. Sometimes I wonder what would happen if I were given structural training. I wonder if it would tame me, make me more orderly, give my thoughts a perch – perhaps help me grow? It is, after all, the tried and true system? Or has the system structured itself to the point that all the masters are left in the past when the system was not yet perfected? I do not know what the system is like, I can only guess. And thus, I am given more freedom in the ignorance of what can be. And the danger lies thus – that I lie in perfect ignorance of what can be thought. That I shall never grow, but remain the same, and only the wording shall be different from time to time, but all the thoughts will be the same. And once in a while I shall discover, by accident, that someone else had thought these thoughts before me, and it shall make me feel belittled that I did not know, and thought these thoughts were mine alone. Yet it would gladden me, when I thought myself alone in these musings with no one to reflect back what I said. And we are all inadequately trained, in a sense, to cope with our heritage. For it is too huge, so we have the freedom to choose not to learn it, and thus are unable to stand on the shoulders of giants who are there and whom the space with which to stand is not an issue.
And sometimes I fret. I fret with this insane fear that I shall become inflexible in my growing. For daily I am finding in myself something that is gradually becoming fixed. And we all know that in the nature of becoming fixed it is natural that we shall not notice it. We are most blind to the timbers in our eyes. So I fret that I have not a mirror; and that I shall grow ugly and twisted without knowing that I am. And when I am older than I am now I shall become someone detestable to whom I am now, and I cannot know it. The things that I find becoming fixed are sometimes things I cannot adjust, little nuances of habit, tendencies…etc. Sometimes I see them in others – my bad habits, my imaginations molded in my actions, my misperceptions… and it frightens me badly that I am this way, and I grow more desperate for a mirror, to see myself, to mend myself before it is too late…
I have long longed for a teacher, but they only come by a lucky stroke of fate, I have heard. And sometimes I follow some for a while until I find that they are not ahead of me anymore… there is no measure to tell me if they are further ahead than me and whether it is I who, by the random steps of my foot, have turned around in the path and am going elsewhere, with my back to them. There are always faults in us, however perfect we may seem. So we are made equal, in a sense. Those with great wisdom do not have all that they desire, or have flaws in character. And those with great beauty are often doomed to an unhappy life without knowing that it is their greatest source of pride that is causing them this grief. And the happiest of men – they are not remembered.
I read without judging too harshly, because I was not taught to despise this book or know the faults of this author. To me, every book is a superior, and I look up to them all. I do not learn that this book is boring before I read it so I read it with interest. And thus I am ignorant to its faults, but learn a little of its merits.
Where do I expect to go with this then? I do not know. But so far it gives me pleasure, though a lonely one. So I will continue, and see what I can see, and learn what I can learn. For I cannot stop wanting to know. And I shall look back rarely, because I do not have time to look back. And that is good as well, for knowing what has already been thought, even by myself, discourages me from tasting that path again.
I am, after all, extremely forgetful.

Women's leadership

A thought had seeded in me, more than three years ago, of the natural disposition of women, the expectations from society; and that these things fostered the disadvantage and high standards women face when taking the role of leadership. Women cannot seem to assert the role the way men do, do the same things and receive the same amount of obedience and admiration. It seems that either a woman must be matronly in her leadership, or a harridan. Asserting a masculine role of leadership would bring obedience, but also cultivate disrespect. Catherine the Great was not known for her beauty but her iron will. During her time she was given many dishonorable nicknames by the press, most notably ones that disparaged her inability to act like a woman should and critiques on her suspected wantonness. Neither Peter the Great nor Alexander the Great received such attention, and if they had any sexual indiscretions it would not have been considered a fault worthy of name calling in their time.
Of course, since the feminist movement, standards have changed. Clinton was ruined by the Lewinsky scandal, and Condoleeza Rice is a role model. Still, some things haven’t changed. Women need to work harder and be more excellent to be able to gain the leadership roles of men, and the harshest critics are women themselves. For Hierarchies are different from Matriarchies. For men, once you have gained an advantageous position, it is easy to maintain it (sometimes through tales of honor…etc). For women, that advantageous position can be maintained by the lack of confidence in other women, by virtue, but not simply by what you have done in the past. Men like status, women like equality. An intelligent woman is always scrutinizing the leader to understand what he/she has that she does not. That is why it is difficult to form women armies, but once they have bonded and share a consensus they would excel. (This also puts into account that though for some countries women are now given the opportunity to join the army, the disinclination to do so is highly apparent in the imbalance of gender ratio.)
Of course, the degree of freedom women receive in government still varies from culture to culture. Women in Taiwan are the first to criticize our current vice president for her lack of beauty and tact in dealing with diplomatic issues (and she immediately ceased to be active diplomatically, at least up front). Men wonder why she hasn’t married yet.
Below is an excerpt from an article by Simone de Beauvoir called ‘The Second Sex’. De Beauvoir (1908~1986) was a French philosopher and feminist. Some of her complaints have been corrected by time, some have not:
Man is accustomed to asserting himself; his clients believe in his competence; he can act naturally: he infallibly makes an impression. Woman does not inspire the same feelings of security; she affects a lofty air, she drops it, she makes too much of it. In business, in administrative work, she is precise, fussy, quick to show aggressiveness. As in her studies, she lacks ease, dash, audacity. In the effort to achieve she gets tense. Her activity is a succession of challenges and self-affirmations. This is the great defect that lack of assurance engenders: the subject cannot forget himself. He does not aim gallantly towards some goal: he seeks rather to make good in prescribed ways. In boldly setting out towards ends, one risks disappointments; but one also obtains unhoped-for results; caution condemns to mediocrity.
…What women essentially lacks today for doing great things is forgetfulness of herself; but to forget oneself it is first of all necessary to be firmly assured that now and for the future one has found oneself. Newly come into the world of men, poorly seconded by them, woman is still too busily occupied to search for herself.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

Anti-white United Nations Advertisement

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Edgar Allen Poe

From the grave I call
your name
is it the soul that answers?
I have buried myself to be with you
and many nightmares walk the tomb
In this continual night induced by spirits
I seek you
From the grave I call
your name
you, whom seraphs dare take away
I feed my lonely wound with
your name!
your name!
Answer me! Dearest beloved!
or is it my
mistake!
mistake!
That echos back at this tortured soul
this presumption that I can seek you here
you, whom only that airly place
beyond those pearly gates can hold
and I, in my dejected state
dare seek you among the rotting bones
Forgive me, I cannot reach higher
love uplifts, but despair brings lower
my soul
into the grave I go
calling, still calling
your name!
your name...
(is it the soul that answers?)

On Madeliene L'Engle's works

You can only understand the nature of darkness

once you see the light

but once is not enough for one to remember.


the abyss:

there is always something darker and more base than darkness itself

but the opposite has a limit

I would rather explore that than never find answers to life's questions

For there are journeys that mean less than the goal

and chasing the shadows is one.


If I want to have a child

it is to share the beauty of M.L.'s thoughts with

and observe the innocent face light up with wisdom

that no great melancholy philosopher can teach


Even if I were to hold little faith in God

I still want to say

God bless you. May peace be with you.

May you learn the meaning of love.


'I think, therefore I am' is losing force

Even if are souls are contentious

I pity those who are born with the inability to feel.

Sunday, July 01, 2007

the upsetting of one's stomach: one's own vision may suffice

Roquentin's bout with the mirror is familiar to me. I have felt this dissimilarity to myself, and I cannot understand it. How everyone seems familiar with their faces, but everytime I look into a mirror I am a stranger to myself. In a shop I happend to glance up and for a moment I am shocked because someone is staring at me, and then I realize it is myself. And strangely, I can never make myself familiar with my face, ro recognize myself. For if I look in a mirror too long, I grow to hate myself. I 'turn into a monkey'

fame

When we give too much fame to something that was originally beautiful in itself, we make it garish. We all want to claim knowledge of it, rub our hands over it, exclaim and praise it, though often those who cry the loudest have the least idea of the exquisiteness of these things. And those who may truly value it turn away because they do not like to admire or take a look at what the crowd surrounds, like hens squabbling over a worm.

And so what has extravagant beauty is tarnished by fame.

I wish these things were appreciated in muted tones, perhaps that shall fix it. Quietly, with dignity and beauty.

abandon

Sometimes I am seized with a great passion, and I anger myself with my poverty. There are so many books, so many pieces of art I want to hoard, and I have not the means to do it.

Perhaps it is better for the world that I'm thwarted in these desires.

Please just let me dance among what is beautiful in this world. Sometimes, I feel as though I can live for nothing else. The constant pleasures of words, of images, of form. How precious, yet how -

I just want it. And there's nothing beautiful in this hunger.

My greed may destroy me. I no longer know what is right.

still experiencing nausea

I must admit, I am not orignal. All that I can 'create' can be found in the culmulative human experience. And all that I can do is transform these things and make them different in form, but not in content.

For example, I had an idea, and last night I found Satre had the same idea before me. So my originality was negated. The only thing for me to do is find usefulness for myself in someother pursuit. Research, perhaps.