Labels

Before I go on explaining this, I want to make sure you all understand that much of this is not based on actual fact - it is merely speculation and thoughts/ideas from my own mind. That being said, I will talk about it as though it is fact, because in my mind this is what I've come to know and regard as fact. But I like to keep an open mind, so some of these "facts" are subject to change.

I believe that putting labels on things encourages the mind to see the labeled things in a certain way, and makes it difficult to see past the label. When someone cannot see past the label, they see what the label implies and nothing more.

The mind learns in a funny way. We learn in concepts, and those concepts give birth to new pieces of knowledge. It's like a web, where at the very center are the most basic concepts we learned at the youngest points of our lives. By default we compare newly learned concepts and experiences with previously learned ones that are similar because comparing them makes it easier to learn and remember. You aren't really learning something entirely new if you can compare it to something you already know. It's like starting a progress bar that's already at 46%.

That being said, slapping a label on something is similar to this method of learning we have. If we don't totally understand something, we label it and categorize it to make it more familiar. If we discover a new species on Earth with feathers that lays eggs, we compare it to the other species. Obviously if it lays eggs like a chicken, it must be a bird, right?

This works all well and good for many things, but there are some things that should not be given labels. I believe that the label "corporation" can be a bad one, for example. "Corporation" implies a singular object or being, and the very word itself feels mechanical or non-human. The reality is that "corporations" are people who work for a "group" or a "company."

But here we encounter more labels. "Group" and "company" are two labels that can mean the same thing, but also have different sounding meanings. A "group" sounds like there are a number of human beings working toward a cause of some kind, whereas a "company," despite is earlier root meanings of being basically the same as a "group," sounds like a singular entity again. A smaller company is often referred to as a "business." But I think I digress.

Corporations being referred to, and treated as a singular being leads the mind to categorize it in the wrong place. Rather than comprehending that the corporation is made up of hundred or thousands of people who work for a living, paying bills, raising families, each with their own personalities, problems, abilities, and set of friends, we instead identify that the corporation is a single, non-human life form.

When something with the company name branded on it doesn't work effectively, then the company is to blame, right? Is that to say that every single one of the thousands of people working for that corporation did something wrong? When somebody files a law suit against a corporation, are they thinking about taking the money from the corporation, or are they thinking about taking money from the thousands of people who work there?

The people in power who make decisions in these corporations should also be considered. When they make big decisions, are they making those decisions thinking of how it will affect the corporation as a being, or are they making those decisions considering how it will affect the thousands of people working for them?

We go to a chain restaurant. Subway, for example. Let's say you've never been to a Subway. You're on your way to work and order a sandwich for lunch. You find out at lunchtime that the sandwich you got was sub-par (no pun intended). There wasn't enough meat on it, or not enough olives, or something. Now do you blame the company and say that Subway makes bad sandwiches, or do you blame the server? 

It's your first time going, so I bet you blamed the company without even considering that maybe different people behind the counter means different quality sandwiches. All of the people making those sandwiches are human beings, just like the rest of us, with personal backstories just as detailed as ours. It just so happens that this particular person was having a bad day, or just got yelled at by his/her boss for giving the previous person too much meat on their sandwich. Or maybe they were new to the job and you didn't realize it.

The Subway you walked into was given a label: "Subway." And that label made your mind run a comparison check with the other similar concepts you know. I don't know how your mind works, but mine would go like this: 

Subway = brand name.
Brand name = company/corporation.
Company/corporation = non-human entity or small group of rich people.

Now because there wasn't enough meat and/or olives on that sandwich, (if I didn't know to look past the label) I would immediately think that the corporate fatcats were trying to put more money in their pockets by cutting back on the most expensive part of the sandwich, rather than consider that maybe the server was lazy or having a bad day.

Before I move on to the next part, I would like to add that, in my experience, places like Subway do vary greatly in quality based on which branch you visit. I have had awesome servers in one town who would give me extra at no charge, and crappy servers in another town who think when you ask for pickles/olives it means you only want 3 or 4 of them on the entire sandwich. And I was an equally polite and friendly customer to all of them.

So there's one example of how labeling something can be destructive. By sticking to the concept that a label means one thing, you could be making yourself blind to the fact that in reality it is actually something else.

By labeling a person as "gay," you are limiting your comprehension to only what you grew up understanding from that label. For example: If your parents thought being gay was a bad thing, you could grow up associating that particular label with the same negativity. Though that example might not even need a label to be true.

We need to understand or explain things that we aren't familiar with in order to feel comfortable with them, because we're uncomfortable with the unknown. But in some cases, it really is best to simply let something go. Let it remain unknown. Come up with your own brand new concept to explain it in your own head, without the outside interference. Add a new node to the center of your web.


The following is the thought that triggered this rant:

When people ask me about my sexual preference or gender, I don't like to answer with labels like boy, girl, transsexual, transgender, transvestite, straight, gay, bi, or whatever. I just am. I am whatever I am. I be how I feel most comfortable, and slapping a label on it just make things more complicated because it makes me feel like whatever I am has to conform to the available labels. I am me.

Life is less complicated when you just let yourself be who you are. It's learning to stop being someone else that's the hard part.

If you read this all the way through, I thank you for indulging me in my thoughts. It turned out much longer than I intended, and I didn't proof read it to condense its size.

Beating Depressive Thoughts. In Poem!

Emptiness fills my head.

It's almost like I'm dead.

I lay here hours,

trying to sleep,

but all I can do

is lie here in a heap.

Thinking so hard about nothing at all.

Makes it hard to convey a message.

I'm surprised that any of this rhymes at all,

I'm just bored,

Cannot think,

Cannot form proper words,

Cannot work,

Cannot move,

Can't stop using that word.

Everything seems so much harder right now.

The world starts feeling so negative.

My realization of that makes me think

What would happen if I turned it positive?

I've accomplished so much;

I have many skills.

I have a warm house

To prevent outside chills.

I have all my family,

I have some close friends.

All of them love me

Through the odds and the ends.

I live in the woods

Where I feel most at home.

Fresh air all around me,

Wherever I roam.

My life's pretty good

When I put it like that.

I can think again. 

Funny.

How about that?

I Can't Sleep

To sleep or not to sleep... That is the question... Whether 'tis healthier for the mind to suffer the penalties of insufficient sleep, or to take pills against insomnia, and by opposing, end it? 

Ah, but what light through yonder window breaks? It is the sun, out to stay the hand of the moon from granting me rest? Arise Sun, and stimulate me, who is already sick and pale without sleep, that I might remain conscious through the day and end this chain of weariness.

But wait, star, hide your fire! Let not light hinder mine rest; thou shalt not stay the hand of the moon's desire! If chance may have me sleep, why, chance would not have me remain asleep?

To wake, to sleep no more. To wake... To sleep... To sleep, perchance to dream? Aye, there's the rub, for what thoughts may come once I have fallen to unconsciousness must give me pause... But if by a sleep I may end this weariness? 'Tis an action devoutly to be wish'd.

Companionship Thoughts

People say that children don't become lonely for a romantic partner or physically attracted to other people until they start hitting puberty. I am living proof that this is not always the case, as the earliest memory I have of longing for a partner was at approximately the age of 4, and there's no way I was hitting puberty that early in life.

Now whether my longing for a partner has something to do with my parents' divorce I cannot say. It might also have something to do with the chemical imbalance I have in my brain, which would make sense because my father once told me that he was the same way. 

I cannot remember a time where I would have refused having a partner. I actually remember a time before my parents divorced, I was at the house of some friends of my parents, and they had a bunch of kids. I was playing with their daughters in particular, and I have a vague memory of rolling on the floor with one of them in a blanket, and I secretly wanted, very badly, to kiss her, but I was too shy, and we ended up having to leave too soon. Being that this was before my parents divorced, I had to have been younger than 5 years old.

I have always felt as though no matter what age I've been, I have never been however old I was physically. With the exception of when I was 3, I have felt as though some part of me has already lived through many, many lives. I have this feeling like I have had so much experience living out so many lives, but I have no memory of those lives, so I cannot utilize that experience in this one. I feel old and tired. I have had too many lives, and all I want to do with this last one is find love and settle down. I want to pass my memories and experience onto someone else, and share whatever wisdom I might have.

I feel like I've experienced too much. I feel like too many of my previous lives have been lonely. I feel that my need for a special companion starting at such a young age is a sign of this loneliness my soul has been feeling for so many years.

I don't understand the games people play on this subject, toying with other people's emotions for their own short-term personal gain. I don't understand people who don't become attached. I don't understand people who treat their companions badly. I don't understand how some people can betray trust as they do. There is so much hate in the world today. So many people who don't stop and think about other people. So few simple acts of random kindness.

With the combination of how much distrust and hate there is in the world and my depression and isolated early upbringing, it makes it very difficult to find someone. Every time I find someone and it doesn't work out, it shaves more and more off of my resolve to continue trying. But I'm still here trying, as hard as it has become. And along the way I hope that even if I don't achieve my goal of happiness, I might make other people happier, or otherwise make a positive impact on their lives.

[Update from 2017: Since this post I have found many companions, and I have had a massive amount of personal growth. So don't feel sorry for me; I'm doing great now.]

Cancer vs Kittens

I just saw a picture of a child with cancer on Facebook.

The top caption said:

"I have cancer & I'm fighting."

The bottom caption said:

"1 like = 1 salute <3

1 share = 100 salutes <3"

(Example picture below. Original picture taken down from source.)

I generally don't like to clutter up my Facebook page by sharing stuff that my friends will find uncomfortable, or by sharing things that aren't funny, thought provoking, or otherwise uplifting. So instead of "liking" or "sharing" this picture, I did what probably so few people would do. I saluted the picture itself and said a few words out of respect. Rather than glancing by and clicking a button while distractedly scrolling the page, I stopped and wished the child well, commending his struggle. Chances are this child doesn't know his picture is being shared on Facebook, and chances are the person sharing this picture has no intention of letting the child know how many people are supporting him with "likes" and "shares." But I thought I'd say something anyway, which feels more meaningful than a "like" or a "share."

What is the meaning behind clicking the "like" button on a post like that? Does clicking it signify that you truly feel empathy for the child, or are you clicking it simply because you want to satisfy that part inside yourself that said you should click "like" or "share" after reading the bottom caption? Or better yet, are you clicking "like" or "share" because you want other people on your friends list to see what kind of person you are?

Just below that picture of the child with cancer I see a picture of what appears to be a baby cheetah.
(Example picture below. Original picture taken down from source.)

"Like = cute"

"Ignore = ugly :("

I think this helps to demonstrate my point a little more clearly. Honestly, I find this picture pretty adorable. But I ignored the captioning. Why? Because I don't want to clutter my Facebook page with another one of the thousands of random kitten pictures.

The only real goal I see in showing us what ignoring this picture would signify is to make more people feel obligated to click "like." The more "likes" this picture has, the happier the person who posted it becomes, because the number of "likes" reflects their popularity, right?

So if you really think about this, what's truly in it for you if you click "like"? The peace of mind that your friends don't think you find this kitten ugly? Your friends likely wouldn't even notice that you ignored it, being that ignoring something wouldn't notify them. If you clicked "like," does that mean you like the picture enough to save it? And if not, then why not? 

And what's in this for the kitten? Probably the same amount that's in this for the child in the previous picture, except that the child might be able to find and see his picture online. Personally, I'd feel a little weird about seeing a picture of me in a hospital bed spread through the internet without my consent; though the intent of support represented by the numbers of "likes" and "shares" would be kind of uplifting for a minute or two. I don't think impersonal numbers mean much to children with real health problems though.

There are, as of this moment, 1,098,041 people subscribed to the Facebook page that posted both of these pictures. Being that so few of those million viewers actually interact with the page in any way, I'm just going to take a wild guess and say that about 80% of those people only subscribed to this page because of its name: "I randomly walk up to my fridge, open it, look, and walk away."

Now here's an interesting observation... Can you guess which of these pictures has more "likes"?

Simply because I asked that question, you probably guessed the kitten. And if that is the case, you are correct. The kitten has 10,087 "likes" and the cancer child has 4,894. These results are surely caused by the fact that if you ignore the kitten, then you obviously find it ugly. But if you ignore the child with cancer, then no harm done, right?

I have news for you Facebook users out there. If you ignore posts that aren't a request/cry for help from a real person in real life, then chances are good that no harm will be done.

The cancer child does, however, have more than twice the number of shares. And that is probably because the kitten doesn't have a "Share = absolutely adorable <333" caption added onto it.

So what I'm seeing here is a direct crossover from those annoying chain letters we used to get in our mailboxes and email inboxes. "Pass this letter on to 10 people = success in your life. Ignore = death." And apparently it still works. The thought that so many people probably clicked "like" simply because they're easily manipulated sheep makes me sad. However, I could be wrong, and it is possible, though extremely unlikely, that every one of those 10,087 people clicked "like" for reasons other than proving that they don't find that kitten ugly.

My point in this rant is to demonstrate how many people don't think, and they simply do as they're told. Please, do not be one of these people - these sheep who only react. You have a brain, and that brain is an amazing tool. Use it to the best of its ability, and keep a watchful eye for marketers and other manipulative sources who would subtly steal and change your thoughts. The more often you let them manipulate your thoughts, the easier it will be for them to continue to do so successfully.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go "like" this picture about a man who has a date with his bed.

[Edited to add new images, since originals were taken down from source]

Ice Cream!

Another misc project I did for one of my college classes:

Bonus Stage

Bonus Stage is the only Flash series I know of (and like) that has over 80 episodes, and some episodes that are actually ~15 minute specials. From what I've seen, usually Flash webtoons are short, and their creators tend to either get bored with the series or busy with life before they get anywhere near 80 episodes. I believe Bonus Stage started on keentoons.com, though I could be mistaken.

It is a strange series with little details here and there that make it interesting. I'll see what I can do to summarize it. Bonus Stage is based on a world created by a brilliant inventor, whose goal was to create the greatest webtoon of all time by using three of his friends as guinea pigs in a virtual simulation of the entire planet. 

-Joel (on the left) is supposedly the genius who created the world. Though hyper-intelligent with technology, he is actually an insane numb-nuts who makes little sense. But his comical hijinks and sheer stupidity make him work wonders for the show's plot device.

-Phil (the middle one) is one of Joel's friends. He's an ex-superhero who, unfortunately, is stuck in Bonus Stage. He's a generally rational person, and he provides many of our comic reactions from Joel's insanity. Phil's super-powers and generally not shown, despite the repeated states of peril the group tend to end up in.

-Elly (on the right) is the girl. Phil has a crush on her, she has a crush on Joel, and apparently Joel has a girlfriend (though she's rarely shown). Love triangles aside, Elly also plays the part of Evil, one of the show's antagonists. Who would've known, huh? Cute little Elly, a maniacal chaos-thriving madwoman...

There are plenty of other characters, but at this point I think the best way to get a feel for this show is to see an episode. I recommend this one in particular - Episode 84. It was the first episode I ever watched, and it had me in stitches. Note however that since the above picture, Elly has been redrawn to have a more publically appealing chest.

More episodes can be found either on youtube or here.