Its still 12:50, a bit more than 4 hours to go. The office has this anesthetic impact on me, as soon as I enter I feel like sleeping. I have strategies now to pass time quickly. First, I check my emails (both gmail and yahoo addresses) and my facebook account. Second, I search for new online games which I can play together with my coworkers. However, these are all like spoons full of sugar to help the medicine go down. The work however interesting seems boring. There is something about having to sit 8 hours in a closed room. Whether you have too much work or too little it doesnt matter, you are still stuck there! Internet becomes your best friend and your best buddies are those who spend their day on msn. The problem now is, after two years in this office, I have exhausted my relationship with those friends on msn. There is one msn friend who is always talking about which girl he has recently messed up with (most stories are probably exaggerated to make him seem cool). There is my ex-boyfriend (also on msn) who repeatedly asks me, jokingly, when we're planning to get married (me and him), thinks its hilarious and goes on nagging about it for 15 minutes (just as he is doing this very moment).
I AM BORED OF THIS AND I CANT TAKE IT ANYMORE. Good thing is, I start my holidays on Thursday!!!
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Ahmadinejad visiting Columbia University
President of Iran Mr. Ahmadinejad was invited by the University of Columbia for an open debate. An American Journalist covering the event said that tickets for his lecture sold more than a Bruce Springsteen concert, that is how big the event was. Reading the whole article, I am not sure which was more unnerving, the journalist's comments, Bollinger's (Head of Columbia University) comments or the comments of some of the students. The article I posted below (which was sent to me by a friend living in the Netherlands) is a perfect example of the problems present in both the mainstream Western, especially American, media and academia.
The article starts with a typical American representation of Ahmadinejad's character as a homophobic Jew hater while disregarding all the other topics and issues of concern which he has talked about, most importantly the Palestinian issue, by starting with the following sentence " He said that there were no homosexuals in Iran — not one — and that the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews should not be treated as fact, but theory, and therefore open to debate and more research." Then the Journalist continues by saying that Ahmadinejad "aired those and other bewildering thoughts", to discover later on in the article that those "other bewildering" thoughts actually include the fate of the Palestinian people, wars waged by America as well as Ahmadinejad's real stand on the Jewish issue (where he refutes the accusation of him being a Jew hater)
However, the journalist got one thing right when he said "his appearance also offered evidence of why he is widely admired in the developing world for his defiance toward Western, especially American, power." but then failed to explain why!! Why does the "developing world" by nature need to defy Western and American "Power", as he put it. I would have preferred to use the word Imperialism instead of Power, then it makes more sense why the Iranian president is gaining popularity.
One of the most important "bewildering" statements the Iranian president has made was that Iran could not recognize Israel "because it is based on ethnic discrimination, occupation and usurpation and it consistently threatens its neighbors" I can imagine that this would indeed be a "bewildering" piece of news for the journalist especially coming out of a president's mouth, since we are all accustomed to the statements of the miserable rulers of our neocolonies (Such as those of our dear president Mubarak). Ahmadinejad also added that "if the Holocaust did occur, the Palestinians should not pay the price for it." A very logical statement, so the man is not too crazy after all!!
Then, very expectedly, comes the very patronizing "we are the, unlike you, liberal Westerners" part where Mr. Bollinger praises himself and Columbia for showing they believed in freedom of speech by inviting the Iranian president. Mr.Bollinger here assumes that he not only represents his own view but that of Columbia, who despite their hate for the Iranian regime and specifically the Iranian president, have accepted his presence because of their strong belief in freedom of speech. Thus, the university is not a neutral body nor is Columbia but they have a political view and a clear political stand BUT will kindly allow "different" views to be included!!!! In that case Columbia's argument was that "it was "well documented" that Iran was a state sponsor of terrorism, accused Iran of fighting a proxy war against the United States in Iraq and questioned why Iran has refused "to adhere to the international standards" of disclosure for its nuclear program."
Ahmadinejad , who is supposedly not acquainted with the manners of freedom of speech, since he "exhibits all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator" as one student put it, replied that "In Iran, tradition requires when you invite a person to be a speaker, we actually respect our students enough to allow them to make their own judgment, and don't think it's necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of complaints to provide vaccination to the students and faculty." Never mind if that is true of Iran or not, I dont know, but it definitely is a blow to Mr.Bollinger's patronizing speech.
When asked "Do you or your government seek the destruction of the state of Israel?" he replied "We are friends of the Jews. There are many Jews living peacefully in Iran." That, However, was considered an irrelevant answer of course and according to the journalist the Event Moderator was trying "to get him to stop rambling and answer questions directly." by telling him that he could " answer that question with a simple yes or no." Well, someone who asks a stupid superficial question demands an answer as superficial!!!! As Ahmadinejad said " "You ask the question and then you want the answer the way you want to hear it"
Finally a righteous student ends the debate by saying how proud she is of her university today and that she does not " want to confuse the very dire human rights situation in Iran with the issue here, which is freedom of speech. This is about academic freedom." I wonder what is the use of academic freedom for people who hear the opposite view with a blocked mind. Their only conclusion from this debate was that
1. It was a very big event (even bigger than Bruce Springsteen's concert)
2. Ahmadinejad is a homophobic Jew hater as "we already knew"
3. Americans support freedom of speech
My conclusion was
FUCK Western, especially American, Media!!
This man is brave and deserves respect
Long live the developing world which widely admires him
Ahmadinejad, at Columbia, Parries and Puzzles
The article starts with a typical American representation of Ahmadinejad's character as a homophobic Jew hater while disregarding all the other topics and issues of concern which he has talked about, most importantly the Palestinian issue, by starting with the following sentence " He said that there were no homosexuals in Iran — not one — and that the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews should not be treated as fact, but theory, and therefore open to debate and more research." Then the Journalist continues by saying that Ahmadinejad "aired those and other bewildering thoughts", to discover later on in the article that those "other bewildering" thoughts actually include the fate of the Palestinian people, wars waged by America as well as Ahmadinejad's real stand on the Jewish issue (where he refutes the accusation of him being a Jew hater)
However, the journalist got one thing right when he said "his appearance also offered evidence of why he is widely admired in the developing world for his defiance toward Western, especially American, power." but then failed to explain why!! Why does the "developing world" by nature need to defy Western and American "Power", as he put it. I would have preferred to use the word Imperialism instead of Power, then it makes more sense why the Iranian president is gaining popularity.
One of the most important "bewildering" statements the Iranian president has made was that Iran could not recognize Israel "because it is based on ethnic discrimination, occupation and usurpation and it consistently threatens its neighbors" I can imagine that this would indeed be a "bewildering" piece of news for the journalist especially coming out of a president's mouth, since we are all accustomed to the statements of the miserable rulers of our neocolonies (Such as those of our dear president Mubarak). Ahmadinejad also added that "if the Holocaust did occur, the Palestinians should not pay the price for it." A very logical statement, so the man is not too crazy after all!!
Then, very expectedly, comes the very patronizing "we are the, unlike you, liberal Westerners" part where Mr. Bollinger praises himself and Columbia for showing they believed in freedom of speech by inviting the Iranian president. Mr.Bollinger here assumes that he not only represents his own view but that of Columbia, who despite their hate for the Iranian regime and specifically the Iranian president, have accepted his presence because of their strong belief in freedom of speech. Thus, the university is not a neutral body nor is Columbia but they have a political view and a clear political stand BUT will kindly allow "different" views to be included!!!! In that case Columbia's argument was that "it was "well documented" that Iran was a state sponsor of terrorism, accused Iran of fighting a proxy war against the United States in Iraq and questioned why Iran has refused "to adhere to the international standards" of disclosure for its nuclear program."
Ahmadinejad , who is supposedly not acquainted with the manners of freedom of speech, since he "exhibits all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator" as one student put it, replied that "In Iran, tradition requires when you invite a person to be a speaker, we actually respect our students enough to allow them to make their own judgment, and don't think it's necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of complaints to provide vaccination to the students and faculty." Never mind if that is true of Iran or not, I dont know, but it definitely is a blow to Mr.Bollinger's patronizing speech.
When asked "Do you or your government seek the destruction of the state of Israel?" he replied "We are friends of the Jews. There are many Jews living peacefully in Iran." That, However, was considered an irrelevant answer of course and according to the journalist the Event Moderator was trying "to get him to stop rambling and answer questions directly." by telling him that he could " answer that question with a simple yes or no." Well, someone who asks a stupid superficial question demands an answer as superficial!!!! As Ahmadinejad said " "You ask the question and then you want the answer the way you want to hear it"
Finally a righteous student ends the debate by saying how proud she is of her university today and that she does not " want to confuse the very dire human rights situation in Iran with the issue here, which is freedom of speech. This is about academic freedom." I wonder what is the use of academic freedom for people who hear the opposite view with a blocked mind. Their only conclusion from this debate was that
1. It was a very big event (even bigger than Bruce Springsteen's concert)
2. Ahmadinejad is a homophobic Jew hater as "we already knew"
3. Americans support freedom of speech
My conclusion was
FUCK Western, especially American, Media!!
This man is brave and deserves respect
Long live the developing world which widely admires him
Ahmadinejad, at Columbia, Parries and Puzzles
Damon Winter/The New York Times
Ahmadinejad, at Columbia, Parries and PuzzlesDamon Winter/The New York Times
He said that there were no homosexuals in Iran — not one — and that the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews should not be treated as fact, but theory, and therefore open to debate and more research.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, aired those and other bewildering thoughts in a two-hour verbal contest at Columbia University yesterday, providing some ammunition to people who said there was no point in inviting him to speak. Yet his appearance also offered evidence of why he is widely admired in the developing world for his defiance toward Western, especially American, power.In repeated clashes with his hosts, Mr. Ahmadinejad accused the United States of supporting terrorist groups, and characterized as hypocritical American and European efforts to rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions.
"If you have created the fifth generation of atomic bombs and are testing them already, who are you to question other people who just want nuclear power," Mr. Ahmadinejad said, adding, pointedly: "I think the politicians who are after atomic bombs, politically, they're backwards. Retarded."
His speech at Columbia, in advance of his planned speech today at the United Nations, produced a day of intense protests and counterprotests around the campus. It was a performance at once both defiant — he said Iran could not recognize Israel "because it is based on ethnic discrimination, occupation and usurpation and it consistently threatens its neighbors" — and conciliatory — he said he wanted to visit ground zero to "show my respect" for what he called "a tragic event."
And he said that even if the Holocaust did occur, the Palestinians should not pay the price for it.
He began the afternoon on the defensive.
Lee C. Bollinger, the president of Columbia, under intense attack for the invitation — one protester outside the campus auditorium where Mr. Ahmadinejad spoke passed out fliers that said, "Bollinger, too bad bin Laden is not available" — opened the event with a 10-minute verbal assault.
He said, "Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," adding, "You are either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated."
The Iranian president, who was seated 10 feet away from him on the stage, wore a frozen smile. The anti-Ahmadinejad portion of the audience, which looked to be about 70 percent of it, cheered and chortled.
Mr. Bollinger praised himself and Columbia for showing they believed in freedom of speech by inviting the Iranian president, then continued his attack. He said it was "well documented" that Iran was a state sponsor of terrorism, accused Iran of fighting a proxy war against the United States in Iraq and questioned why Iran has refused "to adhere to the international standards" of disclosure for its nuclear program.
"I doubt," Mr. Bollinger concluded, "that you will have the intellectual courage to answer these questions."
Mr. Ahmadinejad did not directly answer the questions, but he did address them. Before doing so though, he said pointedly:
"In Iran, tradition requires when you invite a person to be a speaker, we actually respect our students enough to allow them to make their own judgment, and don't think it's necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of complaints to provide vaccination to the students and faculty."
He added, to some cheers, "Nonetheless, I shall not begin by being affected by this unfriendly treatment."
Mr. Ahmadinejad's much-talked-about appearance at Columbia was the opening act of a week of dramatic theater here as the United Nations General Assembly opened its annual session. He and his nemesis, President Bush, are scheduled to address the General Assembly today.
Mr. Bush, asked about Columbia's decision to invite Mr. Ahmadinejad, told Fox News that it was "O.K. with me," but added that he might not have extended the invitation himself.
"When you really think about it," Mr. Bush said, "he's the head of a state sponsor of terror, he's — and yet an institution in our country gives him a chance to express his point of view, which really speaks to the freedoms of the country. I'm not sure I'd have offered the same invitation."
Mr. Ahmadinejad is allowed under international law and diplomatic protocols to travel freely within a 25-mile radius of Columbus Circle. But the police said last week that he would not be allowed near ground zero.
Inside the auditorium, the Columbia students laughed appreciatively when Mr. Ahmadinejad pushed back against the attempts by Dean John H. Coatsworth, the event's moderator, to get him to stop rambling and answer questions directly.
"Do you or your government seek the destruction of the state of Israel?" Mr. Coatsworth asked.
"We love all people," Mr. Ahmadinejad dodged. "We are friends of the Jews. There are many Jews living peacefully in Iran." He went on to say that the Palestinian "nation" should be allowed a referendum to decide its own future.
Mr. Coatsworth persisted: "I think you can answer that question with a simple yes or no."
Mr. Ahmadinejad was having none of it. "You ask the question and then you want the answer the way you want to hear it," he shot back. "I ask you, is the Palestinian issue not a question of international importance? Please tell me yes or no."
For that, he got a round of applause from the students, who had lined up four hours before the speech to get into the auditorium. Online tickets evaporated in 90 minutes last week, they said, almost on par with a Bruce Springsteen concert.
"I'm proud of my university today," said Stina Reksten, a 28-year-old graduate student from Norway. "I don't want to confuse the very dire human rights situation in Iran with the issue here, which is freedom of speech. This is about academic freedom." (just to give themselves credit not to actually listen to what he has to say!!!)
It remains unclear whether Columbia's leaders were able to mollify critics through their critical treatment of Mr. Ahmadinejad. But they made some headway: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee sent out an e-mail message shortly after the speech with the subject line, "A Must Read: Columbia University President's Intro of Iran's Ahmadinejad today."
Inside was a transcript of Mr. Bollinger's introduction.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
I feel like escaping. I don't want to face things. I want to hide myself but I can't. I dont even know how to, it's not in my character to do so. Every time I get away I find the guilt pulling me back to where I was.
Certain topics suffocate me. I watch people repeat the same sentences over and over again, and
the more they do the less genuine they become. One can see their enthusiasm fading, theyre faces tired and in their eyes one can see no true belief.
I watch the others repeating what they hear with no thinking. They try to convince themselves that all is good when its not, and make me sick with their hypocracy and their lying. They defend what they know is wrong to the extent that they say the most inhumane things and defend those who are most cruel and violent.
I feel week and useless. My line of thought is no longer straight or clear. Instead, all different thoughts jump to my mind, leaving my head buzzing with too much noise and too many pictures.
Certain topics suffocate me. I watch people repeat the same sentences over and over again, and
the more they do the less genuine they become. One can see their enthusiasm fading, theyre faces tired and in their eyes one can see no true belief.
I watch the others repeating what they hear with no thinking. They try to convince themselves that all is good when its not, and make me sick with their hypocracy and their lying. They defend what they know is wrong to the extent that they say the most inhumane things and defend those who are most cruel and violent.
I feel week and useless. My line of thought is no longer straight or clear. Instead, all different thoughts jump to my mind, leaving my head buzzing with too much noise and too many pictures.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
مش عايزين تعديل دستور .. عايزينك ترحل وتغور
يوم الاثنين فيه استفتاء على تعديل 34 مادة في الدستور المصري دستور بلدنا اللي بيقول البلد تمشي إزاي وبيحدد حق وواجب كل واحد فينا, التعديلات دي الحزب الوطني عملها بمعرفته .. تعديلات تفصيل على مقاس جمال بيه , عشان محدش يتكلم أو يعترض أو يطالب بحقه أو يرفع راسه , مش كدة وبس كلنا هنكون مهددين في الشارع وفي شغلنا وبيوتنا وأكل عيشنا .
تعديل المادة 179 بيدي الحق لأي أمين شرطة إنه يدخل بيتك ويفتشك ويراقبك ويراقب تيلفونك ويسجلك صوت وصورة ويحبسك وكل ده بمزاجه من غير إذن نيابة ولا دياولو وبعدين يوديك محكمة عسكرية لأنك إرهابي ؛ يعني مفيش حصانة لمحامي ولا صحفي ولا قاضي ؛ يعني مفيش عدل ولا صحافة ولا قانون , وكله بالدستور يا بيه !
أما بقى تعديل المادة 88 فده بيلغي الإشراف القضائي على الانتخابات ويسيبها للداخلية وبتوع " نعم نعم يا مبارك " يطلعوا النتيجة اللي هما عايزينها . التعديلات كمان هتمنع أي مستقل يترشح للرئاسة يعني انكتب علينا وعلى ولادنا رئيس من الحزب إياه لحد ما نموت , ورئيس الجمهورية بقى من حقه يحل مجلس الشعب من غيرحتى ما يستفتي الناس ؛ يعني احنا ننتخب مجلس شعب هو ييجي يحله من دماغة ويطلعلنا لسانه .
يعني من الآخر البلد هتبقى عزبة مبارك وولده , واحنا عبيد وأنفار عندهم مالناش حقوق وكتّر خير ناظر العزبة إنه سايبنا قاعدين .
احنا بقالنا كتير بنتكلم عن الحرية والديمقراطية وحقوق الإنسان والشفافية وتداول السلطة والنهب والفساد والقطارات والعبارات والسرطان والعنوسة والبطالة والفقر والجهل والمرض و عندنا استعداد نفضل نتكلم ونحاول تاني وتالت , بس التعديلات دي هتحرمنا حتى من أبسط حقوقنا كبني آدميين وهو حق الكلام والتعبير, الموضوع مش المعارضة والناس بتوع السياسة بس , الموضوع هيضرنا كلنا , أي حد هيفتح بقه دلوقتي ممكن يبقى إرهابي مفيش حرمة ليه ولا لبيته وعرضه وحريته وكرامته , من حقنا نكون زي كل شعوب الدنيا اللي واخدة حقها والحكام بيشتغلوا موظفين عندها , من حق ولادنا يعيشوا في مصر أحسن من اللي احنا عشنا فيها , كل واحد فينا هيجيله يوم يسأل نفسه أو ولاده هيسألوه كان فين يوم ما البلد اتباعت وبقت تكية لمبارك والعصابة اللي معاه ؟!
دي آخر فرصة نتكلم واحنا لسة بني آدمين نرفض الاستعباد والذل اللي عايزينا نعيش فيه , يمكن تكون دي آخر مرة نقدر ننزل الشارع فيها نعبر عن رأينا ما هو بعد كدة اللي هيتكلم هيبقى إرهابي .
يوم الأحد 25\3 الساعة 6 هنكون كلنا في ميدان التحرير , كل الأحزاب والتيارات والاتجاهات , رجالة وستات , ولاد وبنات , هنبات ليلة في الشارع نقول كلمتنا ونوصل صوتنا ونبقى عملنا جزء من اللي علينا قدام نفسنا وولادنا وقدام ربنا , مهما يعملوا هننزل الشارع ومش هنخاف ومش حنسيب بلدنا عشان احنا أصحابها .
شباب بيحلم ببكرة
تعديل المادة 179 بيدي الحق لأي أمين شرطة إنه يدخل بيتك ويفتشك ويراقبك ويراقب تيلفونك ويسجلك صوت وصورة ويحبسك وكل ده بمزاجه من غير إذن نيابة ولا دياولو وبعدين يوديك محكمة عسكرية لأنك إرهابي ؛ يعني مفيش حصانة لمحامي ولا صحفي ولا قاضي ؛ يعني مفيش عدل ولا صحافة ولا قانون , وكله بالدستور يا بيه !
أما بقى تعديل المادة 88 فده بيلغي الإشراف القضائي على الانتخابات ويسيبها للداخلية وبتوع " نعم نعم يا مبارك " يطلعوا النتيجة اللي هما عايزينها . التعديلات كمان هتمنع أي مستقل يترشح للرئاسة يعني انكتب علينا وعلى ولادنا رئيس من الحزب إياه لحد ما نموت , ورئيس الجمهورية بقى من حقه يحل مجلس الشعب من غيرحتى ما يستفتي الناس ؛ يعني احنا ننتخب مجلس شعب هو ييجي يحله من دماغة ويطلعلنا لسانه .
يعني من الآخر البلد هتبقى عزبة مبارك وولده , واحنا عبيد وأنفار عندهم مالناش حقوق وكتّر خير ناظر العزبة إنه سايبنا قاعدين .
احنا بقالنا كتير بنتكلم عن الحرية والديمقراطية وحقوق الإنسان والشفافية وتداول السلطة والنهب والفساد والقطارات والعبارات والسرطان والعنوسة والبطالة والفقر والجهل والمرض و عندنا استعداد نفضل نتكلم ونحاول تاني وتالت , بس التعديلات دي هتحرمنا حتى من أبسط حقوقنا كبني آدميين وهو حق الكلام والتعبير, الموضوع مش المعارضة والناس بتوع السياسة بس , الموضوع هيضرنا كلنا , أي حد هيفتح بقه دلوقتي ممكن يبقى إرهابي مفيش حرمة ليه ولا لبيته وعرضه وحريته وكرامته , من حقنا نكون زي كل شعوب الدنيا اللي واخدة حقها والحكام بيشتغلوا موظفين عندها , من حق ولادنا يعيشوا في مصر أحسن من اللي احنا عشنا فيها , كل واحد فينا هيجيله يوم يسأل نفسه أو ولاده هيسألوه كان فين يوم ما البلد اتباعت وبقت تكية لمبارك والعصابة اللي معاه ؟!
دي آخر فرصة نتكلم واحنا لسة بني آدمين نرفض الاستعباد والذل اللي عايزينا نعيش فيه , يمكن تكون دي آخر مرة نقدر ننزل الشارع فيها نعبر عن رأينا ما هو بعد كدة اللي هيتكلم هيبقى إرهابي .
يوم الأحد 25\3 الساعة 6 هنكون كلنا في ميدان التحرير , كل الأحزاب والتيارات والاتجاهات , رجالة وستات , ولاد وبنات , هنبات ليلة في الشارع نقول كلمتنا ونوصل صوتنا ونبقى عملنا جزء من اللي علينا قدام نفسنا وولادنا وقدام ربنا , مهما يعملوا هننزل الشارع ومش هنخاف ومش حنسيب بلدنا عشان احنا أصحابها .
شباب بيحلم ببكرة
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
لبنان
كتب صديق ان هو في هذه الظروف لا يستطيع سوى ان يتذكر أغنية أميمة خليل شوارع بيروت و كتب الكلام
" يا يا يا.. يا شوارع
بيروت الحرب اليومية
يا مدينة يا يا مخزن هم
يا هيصة ووحشة جمرية
كانوا يتباهوا فيكي يناموا في حضن المرايا
وجوهن صفرا تعاديكي وإنتي ست الصبايا
أعز الأهالي
اللي وضعن بالي
ببيوت جواري
خيراتك يا مدينة إلنا نحنا زرعناها
وعالساحة لما نزلنا كلمتنا قلناها
جنوب وشمالي
بواريق بتلالي
وصوات عالعالي
يا يا بيروت"
و رغم ان الأغنية ليست جديدة بالنسبة لي و كثيرا ما استمعت اليها فعندما قرات كلمات الأغنية اردت ان ابكي
" يا يا يا.. يا شوارع
بيروت الحرب اليومية
يا مدينة يا يا مخزن هم
يا هيصة ووحشة جمرية
كانوا يتباهوا فيكي يناموا في حضن المرايا
وجوهن صفرا تعاديكي وإنتي ست الصبايا
أعز الأهالي
اللي وضعن بالي
ببيوت جواري
خيراتك يا مدينة إلنا نحنا زرعناها
وعالساحة لما نزلنا كلمتنا قلناها
جنوب وشمالي
بواريق بتلالي
وصوات عالعالي
يا يا بيروت"
و رغم ان الأغنية ليست جديدة بالنسبة لي و كثيرا ما استمعت اليها فعندما قرات كلمات الأغنية اردت ان ابكي
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Contradicting Thoughts
He touches me often and kisses my hands. I dont really like it but I dont always mind it. I dont understand why he acts the way he does but I like that he takes care of me.
It angers me when he controls everything but I also like it when things are controled by someone other than myself. I feel relaxed for a moment, free of the responsibilities... then I feel as if I am paralysed with no control over things, and I become tense again.
We tend to ignore discussions, we know where they lead... but he started a political discussion last time for no specific reason... I wonder why? Was he trying to understand something or was he trying to make me understand something?
I feel I am living seperate lives but I dont mind it. I can escape from one life, when I get sick of it, to another. Sometimes I feel like a hypocrite and at other times I am simply tired, I feel I am not me and I am exhausted. Sometimes I dont care and I dont change skin with changing places, but then I feel out of place.
With him, I talk without thinking. I dont care what he thinks of me, and he doesnt judge even when its clear that he doesnt like a lot of what I say, think or do.
It angers me when he controls everything but I also like it when things are controled by someone other than myself. I feel relaxed for a moment, free of the responsibilities... then I feel as if I am paralysed with no control over things, and I become tense again.
We tend to ignore discussions, we know where they lead... but he started a political discussion last time for no specific reason... I wonder why? Was he trying to understand something or was he trying to make me understand something?
I feel I am living seperate lives but I dont mind it. I can escape from one life, when I get sick of it, to another. Sometimes I feel like a hypocrite and at other times I am simply tired, I feel I am not me and I am exhausted. Sometimes I dont care and I dont change skin with changing places, but then I feel out of place.
With him, I talk without thinking. I dont care what he thinks of me, and he doesnt judge even when its clear that he doesnt like a lot of what I say, think or do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)