Ramblings: Are we scots really all that bad?

This may very well result in a little backlash, but I did say I wouldn't be hiding things anymore.
At one lunch time last week, I found myself reading through the Gaudie (the student newspaper for Aberdeen). Usually I find the newspaper a nice relief from the regular old boring paper, being a nice mix of funny and sarcastic, and serious news and articles.
The newspaper in question this time had a article meant to be taken seriously, written by an international student on the subject of whether Aberdeen was welcoming to the large number of international students that attend the universities.
Being truthful, I have no problem with the start of the article - the university is open to international students, and there is an array of activities meant to ease the transition into university life in an unfamiliar country. It's the light that other people are shown in within the article I have a problem with.
It is made known in the paper that most international students tend to hang out with other international students. Ok fine, if that's what you see from your side, I won't question that. And that Scottish people spend most of their time with other Scottish people. Perhaps, though personally I find the international students in my course to be great to be around. Just like in my out-of-uni activities, there is a plethora of international students that I get on with very well. The article points out that there is no discrimination felt, when the author asked other international students how welcome they felt in Aberdeen.
However, regardless of this result, there were a few other sentences which I definitely did take issue with. One was from a psychology student - "When I told my Scottish classmates I was going on holiday in Bali, they gave me this strange look like; 'you're from the Czech Republic, where did you get the money from for that.'" Now perhaps I'm the only one out there, but I would be wondering where, as a student, you got the money from. Country doesn't even come into the equation. I would love to be able to afford a holiday, but I just can't, and I'm about as Scottish as you get. Why put the emphasis on country? No matter where you come from (be it the Czech Republic, the USA, Scotland, England, Malaysia, France - whatever), if you're able to afford to live away from home, get all the way through uni, and then afford a holiday in your fourth year, I would be pretty shocked. It's not about people from another country not having money, it's about the awe that someone else can afford to go on holiday when we could only ever dream about affording it.
The piece makes some very valid points, but I dislike the portrayal of the cause of the barriers between Scottish and international students. Sure cultural differences has a massive part, but I think the biggest problem is actually attitude, on both sides. Sure we don't have a new language to learn, but that doesn't mean we have it super easy either. The culture in Aberdeen is massively different to that at home, which is in turn, massively different to that in either Edinburgh or Glasgow. There's a reason I tend to get on better with the OTC-ers in Glasgow or Tayforth than I do in the majority of the Aberdeen OTC, as you may well tell from my previous posts. Different cultures, different personalities, different ways of communicating. Yes, we DO need to discover new cultures, it is difficult for us to meet new people and establish a rapport with them.
Then again, perhaps as someone with a reasonable number of international students surrounding various aspects of my life my experiences are different, but I don't think so.
It isn't necessarily to do with experiences and understanding, but rather attitude and a fair quantity of ignorance on both parts. Aberdeen can occasionally not be the friendliest place. People tend to keep themselves to themselves, which can sometimes be misconstrued as being "up themselves" or egotistical, which is not necessarily true, but can make it seem difficult for those not used to the culture. I don't find Glasgow to be so much like that (perhaps with the exception to the Celtic/Rangers debate/dilemma/fighting that goes on - I never will understand, but then, I'm not a football-type person..) which could be why I find it easier to make friends in Glasgow. That said, usually Aberdeen is fine - all it takes is for you to take the lead and speak to them. If I listened to my introverted self all the time, I doubt I would get on so well with the people I do. It takes work from both sides, though. The other side just sometimes needs a bit of a push.
Has this gone off track?
...Oh, never mind...

Location:Kings College, Aberdeen University, Aberdeen

Ramblings: Gossip

In relation to my worry about the poems at the Burns dinner I mentioned, I guessed it was time to go through my feelings on gossip properly.
I have to admit, I am bad for gossiping sometimes. Not so much for starting it, but for repeating it, but then, there wouldn't be gossip without the repeaters in the line. However, as guilty as I sometimes am, I hate gossip. I hate how something can start off as one thing, then progressively turn into something else as it goes around, a bit like a massive game of chinese whispers. I guess in the last few months, I've been less involved in gossip itself, and sitting back to watch. And now that I no longer have the want to know who likes who or who slept with who, I almost find it annoying that there is this apparent need to know the juicy details of other peoples personal lives.
I guess the reason I've been finding it annoying, is that I know that people only catch snippets of information, and if the receiver barely knows the person, or people involved, they can sometimes build a whole persona based on the information they have heard. Not even the people who start the gossip often know the whole story upon which it is based. And this can very often be hurtful to others without people realising it. How often have people been hurt that some secret they have told someone ended up no longer being a secret between two people, but rather the story of the day amongst a whole room-full of people. Certainly, in my case, though I do not say anything, as most people don't (for there is no way to deny it, or even soften the blow without seeming guilty of whatever charge has been placed on your head)the gossip spread amongst my fellow OTC-ers is very hurtful. I guess to them, it is just a story to tell, and I guess in a way it is, and amongst those who have known me throughout the time I've been there, it is little else, but these people they tell now, while being a part of the group of us that are officer cadets, are newer, and don't necessarily know me, and are forming impressions of me before they actually meet me because of the stories that are being told of a person I no longer am.
And for me, more than that, it hurts, more than they can know, because they are linked to things none of them know about, in ways none of them can imagine. Important, and sensitive subjects I will someday go into. Just as it very well could for many others too.
That's why I don't like the gossip. I guess if any of them were ever to come across this post, I would ask them to think about what they say about people, but what would be the point? Everybody gossips, and, like I said, I am guilty of it too, but that doesn't make it hurt any less. Maybe its time to speak to those I have found most guilty of doing it to me. Perhaps they need to know the reasons why I would prefer not to be talked about; go into the important and sensitive subjects it brings up. Perhaps it would make a difference, or perhaps not. I don't know, and can only hope I can pluck up the courage to try. Maybe It'll work, or maybe I'll be labeled as stupid, or having no sense of humour, but both of these terms would perhaps seem a slightly better term to place me under than those I am already getting filed under in the minds of the freshers. Everybody can develop a sense of humour, but its much more difficult to shake off preconceptions.

Ramblings: Extroverts vs. Introverts

So, as I mentioned in "Ramblings: Who really has the power over school social status?", I am, fundamentally, an introvert. Many people in my life since starting university might think me to be an extrovert - I always seem to be doing more things with more people than I can actually fit into any given space of time, I seem to speak reasonably easily to other people, and I love a good party. But really, I'm not an extrovert.
For every night I spend out with others, I spend one inside, not being able to face another night out with people. Most of the time, when a big night out is planned, I would much rather just have a chat over a pint at the local pub. I would generally rather kick back and watch a movie with my flatmate, or write some poetry, than head out to a nightclub. Being out with lots of people, all the time is, to put it plainly, hard for me.
That is not to say that I dislike social situations. In fact, I like people, and I like being around people, but it can be exhausting. And it is not to say that I don't like parties. In fact, I love a good party, if even a group of the people are familiar, and faces are friendly. Eventually, I'll even venture into the nightclub scene if I've already had enough of the party to get me fired up for the night. But whether I have been drinking or not, Iseem to find myself huddling away somewhere in an effort to get away from the exhausting effect of just people.
Over the last term, I have found myself moving slightly away from the regular drinking of the OTC-ers in a bid to more easily recharge myself in time for uni, and even at weekends away, I rarely spend more than £5 at the bar unless there is a big do on (such as the big dinners). Then I find myself going all out in true night-out extroverted-type-fashion.
The thing is, being introverted isn't about being shy, or even hating social situations, its about the exhausting effect that people can have on you if you are around them too long. Sure, shyness, or hatred can appear the cause, but more often than not, is just the effect of the difficulty from being around people too much. I believe at one point that there was some research done on the differences in brain pathways between introverts and extroverts. I can't remember the exact details, but it concluded that the thoughts of introverts involving the external world followed a less direct pathway than those of extroverts, potentially producing more internal thought, and also, their sensitivity to the brain-chemical dopamine. Extroverts are apparently less sensitive to this chemical, and so need plenty external-input to produce adrenaline to keep them happy, but introverts are more sensitive to the hormone, and so too much external sensory input overwhelms them, meaning they often prefer to keep out of very social situations or large crowds.
In my case, the thing that keeps me sane, is balancing my social life and my quiet time. Too much quiet time, and I can feel lonely and depressed, but too much social time and I get tired and depressed. Somewhere in the middle is a happy medium, and I'm a better, saner person to be around then.

Ramblings: Who really has the power over school social status?

I don't know what general stereotype my group of friends came under when I was at high school. We seemed to range from arty to academic and everywhere in between. In fact, most of us seemed to fit into both of these categories. Most of us played music of some sort, and five of us got weekly lessons in school, but that wasn't totally exclusive either. I look at where we all are now, and out of the eight of us, one has a full time job, one is applying to go to college next year, two are studying art, one is studying divinity, one is studying law, and one is doing pharmacy in the same city as I'm doing pharmacology (albeit not in the same university, but who cares). Most of us haven't seen each other in over a year, and some of us have stayed close, while others of use have drifted apart a bit. The point is, we're all different people, interested in different stuff.
I guess in that sense, we didn't fit the stereotypical image of a school clique - we weren't science geeks, nor were we particularly any other kind of clique - but nevertheless, we had our own space for lunch, we spent most of our time outside classes together, and we were just generally a well-established group at school by the time we had been there a couple of years together. We didn't consider ourselves popular, but that's just it - the people who considered themselves popular in my school very often weren't. The people who were considered popular by others rarely if ever actually believed themselves to be popular.
That's one thing about all the high-school based movies and shows that never fitted my experience of secondary school. In my experience, people who acted entitled, as they often do in these shows, never actually stayed popular very long, if they ever got there in the first place. School really isn't like how it is portrayed in the movies and tv-shows. Because lets face it, no-one likes being talked down to, especially not teenagers who are trying to break their own way into the adult world, not even by their peers. And if people don't like you, it's very difficult to claim that you're popular, as much as people may try.
Teachers can, to an extent, prevent the extreme side of cliques happening, where bullying occurs. And this is a good thing. It prevents a great deal of hurt on all sides. But as much as these groups might like to think that they are popular throughout the school, they rarely get the chance even amongst their peers.
I don't think anyone really believes that teachers can make all that much difference to the social happenings in school. That lies with the pupils themselves. I think the larger that schools get, the less difference certain groups of people can make over the whole school anyway. Even in my high-school, of a little over a thousand people, most groups of people had little effect on those outside their own year, or a little to either side, with the exception of the head-boy and girl who, even then, rarely knew very many of those they stood for outside of the senior years.
Within the year though, its true that people do form groups, but you could never never expect them not to - people have a tendency to make friends with certain kinds of people, and they tend to stay together throughout their time in school, perhaps with someone occasionally drifting away or working their way into a new group, but for the most part, they stay the same. That's just the way of friendship. Even the most popular people likely have a smaller group of close friends around them.
But what makes popularity? Having been through the process of starting school, and again at starting uni, I believe that there are three fundamental things which contribute to how easily people make friends at the start of their time somewhere. Most people only get this chance once in secondary school - when they start their first year, because after the initial impression, changes in peoples beliefs about you happen more slowly - but some get this chance a few times over, if they happen to move schools.
Anyway, for me, these things are:

• The willingness to speak to people you don't know, no matter how shy or worried you are about what they will think. It's important to know that this has nothing to do with being an introvert or an extrovert. I am, fundamentally, an introvert, even though I speak to people easily enough, and because of misconceptions about introverts, people may think I'm an extrovert. (More on that in "Ramblings: introvert vs. extrovert", which I'll hopefully have up shortly after this.)


• Confidence in yourself, the way you think, what you do, and who you fundamentally are, and,
• Kindness

I don't think any person can become truly popular without at least the majority of people seeing these traits.

I never cared about being popular, but what I did worry about was feeling alone. What was lacking for me in high school was both a willingness to speak to people and confidence in myself. What was lacking for the start of my university life, once I had found a willingness to speak, was confidence in myself. Indeed, until a few months ago, while I was confident enough in myself to make an impression, a part of the person people saw when they looked at me as was not the same person I actually was. In the last few months I have realised that was because I wasn't so much lying to other people as lying to myself. Now, I have realised myself. I know who I am, and what I stand for, but it may take a while longer before my fellow students and OTC-ers see that I am not that person both they, and I, thought I was. And true it hurts that trying to change that opinion is not having the desired effect. I guess it is difficult to change a first impression. It only hurts when that first impression is already there, and wrong, before I meet them because of gossip, and a reputation I can't seem to quench or shake off.
Now, I have realised that I don't care whether or not people like the person they see in front of them, because that person in front of them is now, perhaps for the first time, truly me. Nobody can change who I am, and I am worth the same as everybody else in this world. I will always have people who care about me. It took losing two people very, very close to me, and almost losing a third to make me realise that. There are so many people in this world who wish me well, as I do them. And knowing that means that I can be myself in this world without worrying about being alone, and so people can see the real "me". If I speak to someone new, and they don't like me, then it doesn't matter. We can both go our separate ways without grief over something lost that was never actually found.

Ramblings: Mobiles, communication and social situations

On one of the first weekends of the academic year away with the OTC, the rules of the mess were explained to the first years. There are two major rules to help the sociability of the place. These involve, respectively, no PDAs, and no mobile phones in the mess. I remember during my first year having a few free glasses of port going around courtesy of those caught, which well serves to get the rules into your head, especially as a broke student.
However, recently, outside of OTC, I've found myself quite stunned by the sheer number of people who go around on their phones, with headphones in and such. It's worst when someone does it in the pub, because it almost seems to form a wall between the people on either side of him (unless of course, those two people don't care about talking over people. Personally, I find it quite uncomfortable."
In any case, I found myself faced with the question the other day as to whether people spend too much time on their phones, and not enough speaking face to face with people, and I have to say, I agree to a point. I myself find myself guilty of it. I often listen to speakers through podcasts as I walk to uni in the morning, and I've occasionally found myself not realising people in the real world are waving to me or saying hello until they've already passed me.
I do think that texting, or using social sites such as facebook or twitter does become antisocial in certain situations. It is as if the online personas of people sometimes seem to become more important than those they speak to, although in reality it is likely not true. Some people even text or facebook people in the same room. Sure, it might seem funny between the people involved, but it can make the other people in the room feel put out and unimportant.
That said, even though texting in social situations is a sure-fire way to kill the atmosphere, phones have very much become a great way to communicate with people who are not nearby. Of course technology now allows face-to-face interaction over long distances, via wi-fi using applications such as Skype or Face-time. These prove to be a great alternative for long conversations, and are often preferred over regular phone-calls to familiar people. However, these applications are not always practical. Most people would prefer to either phone a person or see them in person. Skype and Face-time are almost some grey area in the middle, and something I would probably only use for friends and family, but then that's just me. Certainly a normal phone call has definitely not out-grown its value as of yet.
Texts on the other hand have some entirely different advantages. They give you the opportunity to contact people if you are not sure whether or not they are available to speak on the other end of the phone. They do not require someone to answer immediately, and so people can take the chance to think about what they are actually saying. They are also a great chance to get an answer to a question if you don't have time to phone, or are involved in a social situation, and a phone call would be inappropriate or antisocial.


Anyway, this is just a little post on my views on the issue. Can you tell I'm stuck somewhere in the middle on this one? As always, let me know your thoughts if you happen to pass by.

Ramblings: What if you suddenly had to move?

So as I find myself moving quickly from place to place, squeezing past small gaps between people on the pavements, marveling at the seemingly slow movements of many of those around me, and the sheer difference in speed between those who were ambling gently along, and those who were, like me, in a rush to get somewhere on time, I began to wonder about the ability to move quickly.
Of course, the movement of people on the street is an unusual thing in itself - dictated by peoples schedules, attitude, a love for the scenery in a new place, amongst other things, so I quickly found myself going off on a tangent, and finding myself thinking on something I have seen in my time away with the OTC.
One of the weekends just passed, many of the freshers were out being taught various skills for working out in the field. They learnt how to set up bashers (the shelters we use whilst out in the field), cook rations, use camouflage effectively, amongst other things. And in watching a little of the activities of each of the groups, whilst going about my own activities, I saw there were vast differences in some of the sections, and even in the people in those sections, in their ability to do, quickly and effectively, what they were told to. Some people did things almost immediately, and others took much longer.
In the OTC, and the army in general, the ability to move quickly, and accurately, is exceptionally important to the welfare of all the people involved. Going out on your first exercise or two, you very quickly learn that you have to be ready to move at all times, and if you're smart, you'll pick up ways to do things faster, and vastly reduce the time it takes to get things done.
You keep things all packed away when you aren't using them. You sleep with your webbing and rifle next to you so that you can throw them on in seconds if you're attacked in the middle of the night, and you learn the fastest way to throw on all your kit  Leaving enough space in the middle section of your bergen to shove your sleeping bag in without the need to roll it. Using the time it takes for your food to cook to shove some extra polish on your boots to help keep the water out, or change your socks, or dry out your boots, and feet if water has already found its way in. You buy extra bungee cords to tie your bashers up with so that if you need to run in the middle of the night, it only takes seconds to take down and stuff away, and you don't have the palava of cutting down strings. All these things are done so that we can move immediately if the need strikes, and so we try hard to learn.
When we were on annual camp, against one of the other OTCs, the plan, and the harbour area changed very quickly. Our ability to move quickly as a platoon, and as a company served us very well throughout the course of the exercise, and made a massive difference to the way the exercise turned out, even though we were a much smaller company.
I guess, being used to this kind of preparedness, and ability to move quickly over bad terrain, or just move quickly in general, you find yourself pushing the new freshers to move quickly, and getting annoyed at those who either ignore your advice, or don't seem to be able to move with any amount of speed, as both my colleagues and I found at the weekend, although we know that those who last in the OTC and enjoy being there will be the ones who eventually pick up tips, and indeed come up with their own ways of speeding up, because being able to do things at the speed people want them done means exercises become much more enjoyable, and in camp, you end up with more time to do as you want once the important stuff is out of the way. In short, the people who learn to do things faster will have more time to enjoy themselves.
So in the field, we can all learn to be quick, on time, etc. but how does that translate into the real world?
Well for a start, I hate to be late. I've always disliked it somewhat, and made an effort to be on time to everything. Now I truly can't stand it, and I don't like it in other people either. That's why you can find me pounding down the road between campuses in an effort to make it to my next lecture on time, even if I do usually end up being there 5 or 10 minutes early, before most of those with bicycles or cars have even bothered to come into the lecture theatre.
Usually, its also obvious when the fire alarm goes off. My stuff if almost always packed away all together in a bag at my feet. It doesn't take two seconds to grab when the alarm goes off. As much as you're told not to take your stuff when the fire alarm goes off, who doesn't grab their most prized possessions if they're close at hand, be it their phone (which is usually in my pocket as it is), their laptop, or something more personal. I generally think that what they mean is "don't grab your stuff if it will take time, and don't go back for something you've left." Most people can grab a bag and jacket at their feet as they stand up, and not take any more amount of time to do it. That said, people, please do what your fire drill says: Never go back for something if the fire alarm goes off.
On the other hand, this is in no way true for my flat. If I had to move out immediately, it would probably take me a good few days to do. If not much longer. My flat is my haven from time constraints. The only thing I've to ever worry about is what time I have to leave. There is no way I could apply the same high energy speed techniques as I do to the OTC to my home life. I need time to relax, rewind and reboot. My home is time for that.
Of course, flat-time is not my only reboot-time. Most Wednesdays, after lectures have finished, I will take a wander around the botanical gardens, regardless of weather, and have some down-time in nature. I'll wander aimlessly, and watch others do exactly what I do during the rest of the week - rushing around - and enjoy the gentle quietness of free time.
I guess you could say I'm hard-wired to work hard, play hard, but that wouldn't be entirely true either. I work hard, then relax. There is rarely a reason for me to play harder. Sure I socialise, and go out with friends for a pint often, but thats only part of my relax-time. My time off (when I'm not doing OTC or uni work) is often spent carving miniatures from wood, sewing, painting, or writing, often to gentle music. In otherwords, doing relaxing, gentle, time-wasting, slow things. And I love it like that.

Ramblings: I can't deal with scientific inaccuracies...

Really, I can't. It's on a par with my inner spelling- and grammar-nazi. I can not copy out lecture notes without correcting all the spelling mistakes and incorrect grammar I notice. Neither can I write lecture notes without adding asterisks and arrows with references and inconsistencies between different subjects.
I remember getting the distinct impression my music teacher at school hated me when we came to the Scottish section, because I had grown up surrounded in the music and was adamant she was teaching us wrong, when in fact it was just being vastly oversimplified. I remember fuming at being told that a march was a jig, because it was in a 6/8 time signature, and jigs were 6/8s. (except the problem with the analogy is that jigs can be in any compound-time, and marches can be 6/8s too)

I'm not vain. Really I'm not. I know I'm not right all the time. In fact very little of the time. There is a great deal I don't know. I make mistakes here, on my own blog. I only change my own lecture notes, I only fume silently in my own head (and now, apparently, here), and I try to avoid conflict about it. But I'm not sure where the line starts or ends. I like people pointing out my mistakes, because I can fix it and there's one less on the page, but other people may take offence if I were to tell them.

Anyway, this particular reference happened to occur just a few hours ago. It was in reference to "ketones" or rather, as it was meant to be, " ketone bodies". Basically the problem with mixing them up is that they are different things. Ketones are derived from oxidation of a secondary alcohol. Ketone bodies are triglycerides. Well it was in reference to a "carb free diet" so I was hesitant to say anything, also knowing full well that both ketones and ketone bodies are, technically, carbohydrates.
Really, had the tone of the article not been rather derogatory, I probably wouldn't ordinarily have become so annoyed. After all, it is a widely accepted phrase. Usually it's easy to brush it off without a thought.

I'm going straight to sleep when I get back. I likely will have forgotten in the morning and more than likely hating myself for some silly mistake in my essay. As much as I'm ranting, I do make mistakes too.

- Posted using eBlogPress

Location:Meston Walk,Aberdeen,United Kingdom

Ramblings: Collecting instruments

So the other day, my friend told me she was buying a cheap violin she found on eBay. (How cheap, or worth it, it is, is as yet unknown to me. You never know with eBay auctions. It could be an undiscovered gem, or totally useless) Upon a whim the decision was made that she would learn to play on this instrument, having never picked one up in her life before. Each to their own...
One of my other friends (who rather has a perfectly good excuse, being at university to study music) has found herself gaining more and more instruments in her little room at the halls. From what I gather, she currently has all her percussion stuff, a stand-up electric piano (her 18th birthday present), a bugle, an oboe, and various other bits and bobs.
Mind you, I can't talk either. I currently have a clarinet, a violin, a bugle, tenor sticks, and bass sticks in my little room. I can only be glad that singing requires no instrument, and that other people look after the drums. I have four that I play spread across the country, mostly staying with other band members/in a store where we practice. Dad also gave me a bagpipe chanter. It seems to be a common trait among musicians to constantly attempt to play, and own, more and more instruments. You would think I would know by now, especially as it is hard enough to keep a regular practice schedule with my main 3. Yeesh. I guess inside I just hope to one day be able to pick up pretty much anything and play something, anything, at a decent standard. Ah well, I'll never understand it myself, so I don't know how to explain. For now, my friends and I will plod on and share our musical silliness with each other.
Maybe someday I will share some musicians silliness, but it might take a bit of editing to make it publishable ;) certainly most of our songs are far from tame, and even some of the most well taught comrades can never quite out-sing the band. To quote a friend of mine with similar roots and band-times: Many's a time I have sat on a train or bus listening to a bunch of men singing football songs, with a wry smile on my face, knowing that, if I could be @r$ed, I could totally out-coorse them with some of the songs I know.
And really, that is the truth of the matter. We're slowly encapsulating our comrades in arms on nights out too, so things are just getting more-so like that. With more people singing drunkenly in the bar, it can get interesting very quickly, especially with some of the made-up verses.
Anyway, I'm totally off topic now. Doesnt matter. See you soon.

PS. For those who don't know, "coorse" is a Scottish word, generally taken to mean, rude or bad. Hence out-coorse, in this sense, means to be worse than they are in terms of singing rude songs. Yeah, things might need heavily edited if I ever get around to giving you the band-banter.

Again, see you soon :)

Location:Meston Walk,,United Kingdom

Ramblings: Lies and Secrets

So here's a little thing to ponder on. We are always led to believe that to tell a lie is bad. And truly, from my childhood, even to now, I feel uncomfortable telling a lie. Sometimes, rather often actually, to the point that I hesitate, deciding whether the lie would really be worth it, then go and tell the truth, by which time the gap in my sentence makes anything I say look like a lie anyway. I don't like lying, and I think many others would likely be in the same position. Lying is inherently seen as bad.
On the other hand, we have good things. Secrets between two people. Generally seen as a bond between two close people, and, more often than not, a good thing.

But the question is; what is the difference between lying and keeping a secret?

Indeed, keeping a secret can often involve lying to someone else. If lying is inherently bad, and keeping secrets inherently good, then where does that moral line stand? And what about white lies and secrets which cause more harm than good. I'm talking blackmailing and such. How do we decide what is good and what is bad, and how can we ever agree? Because everyone from a different standpoint has a different view. If a person keeps a secret, it may seem good to the two people who share that secret, but bad to the one who discovers they're being left out, and might breed distrust - why? Because they likely feel they're being lied to. So we're back to the bad again.
But what about white lies? Telling little lies to make people feel better. But, then, they are still lies. The other person is still likely to be annoyed to find out it was a lie, and it could backfire as easily as any other lie.

Ugh. I should really stay away from philosophical questions. I don't like not getting anywhere.

- Posted using BlogPress

Location:High St,Aberdeen,United Kingdom

Ramblings: what would you do with £1000?

I would save it, likely. I'm that kind of person. How I manage to save, I don't know, because I'm penniless, but somehow I manage. I like saving. I dislike spending, especially overspending. I hate going out of budget, and more than anything, I hate spending the money that I have already saved. Like, I probably have enough to get the tattoo I want right now, but I won't let myself get it until I have at least twice that, so that once I pay I will still have a few hundred in my savings.
So I know I would save, but what if I had to spend it? Let's say I was content with the money in my savings and got to buy what I wanted, as long as I spent all the money - what would I buy?

Well first of all would probably be my tattoo. That would be something I've wanted for a long time, and I could tick it off my list of things to do before I turn 21.

I need a new pair of drumsticks and a new pair of trainers or running shoes, so that's another couple of hundred spent.

There's a gorgeous glass octopus hair stick on etsy that I'm really tempted by. I'd need to get a custom made though, because it's much too long for my hair. I'd no doubt buy some more forks and the like while I'm at it.

Then I'd get materials for making a dress or two. If I have money left over I might make one for a good friend too.

Well that's what I would buy. What about you?


- Posted using BlogPress

Ramblings: living with allergies

Yes, I have allergies. Not the most common, nor all that bad, as far as allergies can go, but I still have them, and they still affect my life.
I think allergies seem to be becoming more common. People can be allergic to all sorts of things, to various degrees. I think is something exists, then more than likely, someone in the world has an allergy or sensitivity to it.
The common ones I've heard of are things like nuts, pollen (hay-fever), bee-stings, cats, and dust. I know people who have small irritations, blistering rashes, right down to anaphylaxis.
Personally, I have a few. I have an allergy to pine nuts. Just to confuse things, they're actually seeds, not nuts, so a proportion of those with nut allergies can eat them, but I appear to be the other way around, being able to eat nuts without trouble. Thankfully, they're pretty easy for me to avoid. Generally, if food is bought from somewhere, pine nuts are included in the description of the dish, and with my own cooking, I don't buy them. I just have to avoid pesto, and things with pesto in them.
Secondly, I have a nickel allergy. It's probably one of the more common allergies out there. At the start, I wondered why I would get itchy ears, or weeping bumps at the bottom of my abdomen. It was only when I began to develop blisters from cheap jewellery that it clicked. It was earrings irritating my ears, belt buckles and buttons on jeans on my stomach, coins in my pocket leaving rashes on my hips. You know how in some Hollywood movies or TV shows about vampires (because there's been loads the last couple of years) a silver chain will kind of stick to the skin and leave blistering, weepy welts? That's what my skin was like after accidentally falling asleep with a new necklace on. It was painful and weepy for days, and stuck to the collar of my shirt at the band competition at the weekend. I've been wearing the same pair of sterling silver hoops almost constantly for a year and a half. All my regular-wear jewellery is hallmarked sterling silver. (as a side note: if anyone knows where I can buy a pair of 16g plain titanium studs (ie. no stones), drop me a comment - my hoops are starting to wear out, but I can't find what I want)
Then we have my sensitivity to rapeseed pollen. It bothered me for years, but last year the replaced the field beside my parents house with an experimental GM crop, and my symptoms practically disappeared. Sure, I was all weepy-eyed and snot nosed as soon as I was around the normal stuff again, but that bit of peace was nice. Plus, not being in the country anymore looks like it may just make a vast, vast difference.

Then there's the one thing that makes the biggest difference to my life, because it's practically impossible to avoid: PERFUME! All the other things just take a little bit of preparation, or awareness, to avoid a reaction. Just like anything else, with allergies, preparation,and avoidance are key. I can't prepare or avoid perfume, because I never know when I'm going to be exposed to it. I can never know if the person who is walking behind me is about to top up her perfume. I can never be prepared for the girl that sits next to me in the tiny, cramped lecture hall when she comes in with a cloud of scent surrounding her, and staying well after she leaves. I can't even enter some of the shops I would like to visit. But the thing is, it's not just a case of me moaning about someone spraying a little too much, or about the nasty mixture of different smells in the changing rooms. I have both contact, and airborne allergies. I get rashes if the spray lands on me, I get hives from some, bruise-like marks from some of the strong eau-de-parfums. My breathing gets progressively more uncomfortable, my nose screams, my eyes weep, within minutes I have a thudding migraine. And its not just perfumes. Body spray, deodorants, air fresheners. Even various fragranced cosmetics/body products give me the contact allergy if I use them/get them on me.
What's even harder is that it is not all which do that. It must just be a few common fragrances, because there are two perfumes I have so far not reacted to, along with various cosmetics. But with the lack of specificity on the ingredients label, I can never figure it out.
It's does make me wonder though, how some people with really bad allergies, or even just much more of them, manage. What about people with really severe nut allergies who are affected merely by someone else having touched a surface earlier? I don't think about mine all the time, because a lot of things have become habitual, but that doesn't make things any easier when you can't avoid it.

Anyway, rambling over, though rather conclusion-less. No matter. Speak again soon.


- Posted using BlogPress

Ramblings: I used to be the shy girl

It's a funny thing, the difference between university and high school. In high school you have a reputation, even when you just arrive, because you're moving in with all those kids who grew up with you. The way people know you is magnified and added to. So if you were quiet and reserved in primary, that's how people generally perceive you in high school. Over time, some perceptions may change - you may be known to be great banter outside of school, but still seen as the quiet academic in school. I was always seen as the quiet girl, except with my close group of friends. I knew most people in my year, but they were outside of my comfort zone, and I never had a night out with them until prom, so they never knew the loud, boisterous side of me when I wasn't in school. In fact, there was only a very small group of people who knew that side of me. To everyone else, I was shy, rarely spoke to people I didn't already know, found it difficult to phone someone, and hated large groups with a passion. I was a picture of innocence in a lot of matters to most people.
So what happened? How did I become the girl who never misses a night out, who is doing everything she can possibly fit into the calendar, with lots of different people, who openly flirts with guys in the nightclubs, and still surprises people who have known me for months, or even years.
The reality is that I was always that girl. I was never the innocent, quiet girl everyone expected me to be. Not really. Sure, at times, I thought I was, and certainly acted like it, but the person everyone else saw was not the same as what was inside. My two best friends could tell you that years ago. My other friends began to realise that the closer they got, and some stuck, while others clashed or drifted away.
How did my true character come out? Well in high school, it was at prom, over a bottle of champagne, when no-one cared what anyone did, because few of us would ever see each other again. But the main difference was coming to university. No-body knew anyone. There were no reputations, preconceived notions, or categories to fall into, because no-one knew you. Or if they did, you rarely saw them. For a change I had no pressure to be anything other than me. I could flirt with guys if I wanted, dance the night away, drink far too much, whatever. No one cared, because as far as they were concerned, that's just who you were, and there were plenty other people doing exactly the same thing.
Even now, when I head back to my hometown, or just visit family, that quiet, shy side appears again, but Aberdeen has become my haven for just being me.


- Posted using BlogPress

Location:Aberdeen University Kings Campus, Aberdeen, UK