Hmm. April 11th was the last time I wrote. Kind of strange... but as I said before, it's just because I've found so many alternate avenues to express myself. But right now I don't have much of an avenue. I've just been writing a memo for psychology on a video we saw about um, a bunch of teenagers who liked to have orgies. It was a mess of a situation. And then I wrote a bit for my book. But watching that video and realizing the mechanical lifestyle they had, made me glad for the tender memories I have from my past.

Although I don't usually value them daily, I am very happy to have that intimacy and tenderness between friends and lovers. I'm nostalgic for the warmth of the experiences. But I'm not just missing them, I'm happy to know that they exist in my past, that my past is not the same as the teenagers from the video. And I'm eager to have new experiences... I just want to kiss somebody. Somebody who I feel tenderly for.

Which brings me to John, not that I care for him tenderly, but tenderness reminds me of him because he's so damn endearing. I don't particularly like much about him, not to be spiteful or resentful - it's just the simple truth that I'm not attracted to very much, I dislike or disagree with most of his behavior and beliefs. Except for when they're infused with that tenderness that just speaks to me. It just latches on to my heart.

I hesitate to say sweetness, because in my experience, sweetness has been false sentimentality. Or sentimentality that turned out to be false, in any case. But this is not sentimental, it's just tender. It's just something that I'm warmed by witnessing and soothed by participating in. It's drawn me to him ever since the very first conversation on aim.

I think I'm attracted to the idea that he feels tenderly for me. His emotions are not stable, but it's not really about his emotions. It's just about that tender quality. I don't even want to describe it because describing the actions won't describe the sense of it, the tenderness that can only be experienced not explained.

I've said a lot of things about John in the past, and I've given a lot of reasons or justifications as to why I was attracted to him. I haven't wanted to date him. I did, before I really knew him. But I haven't wanted to date him since. But when he was interested in me, there was just something that grasped my focus, and I didn't want to pass up the opportunity to experience it. And it wasn't attention or sentimentality or sex. It was just that tenderness. As sweet as when Isis hugs me, only John is conscious of his actions so they're infused with intent where Isis is missing it.

What I'm trying to say is, I don't want John, but he seems to be the only one with that tenderness. I don't know where else to get it. It doesn't seem ideal, intellectually or spiritually. I don't really know what it has any value for me. But there's something soothing about it. I think it's not even wrought with emotions, per se. Emotions usually stem from an analysis and a conclusion, sentimentality associated with situations and people. It's so drawn out like a map, identified. It's about purpose.

Perhaps tenderness surpasses emotion. Because emotion is based on conclusions but tenderness is based on something you simply accept and feel for because of it. For instance, Dan always makes a big deal about his love for me. It's a serious issue, seemingly. But it's based on conclusions, so I suppose if the circumstances changed, he may not want to be with me as much.

Truthfully, the circumstances have already changed for me. There isn't a necessity for Dan in my life. I can live without him. It doesn't mean I don't love him, because it's not longer an emotion based on a conclusion for me to love him. It's not about what situation I desire to experience. It's just a tenderness that I feel for him sort of independent and unconditional of the realistic circumstances. I don't feel tenderly for him, because I want to have his babies, or I want to spend every moment with him. It used to be that way, more directly tied to my emotions and my needs and wants.

But now it's just something I've accepted as a sort of unconditional fact. I just feel tenderly for him. The moment is not worth anything because of it's emotional ramifications. It's just a loving tenderness that is expressed in the moment, but largely independent from reality.

I didn't care about John in the larger sense. But I wouldn't trade holding hands with him while I drove him home for anything. It was just a tender moment. It wasn't like, I LOVE YOU, YOU MEAN THE WORLD TO ME, NEVER LEAVE ME! It was just a, granted, expressed but simple tenderness that meant something for the moment itself.

I like those tender moments. As I said, they soothe me.

I don't want to be alone this summer.

It's a good thing, you know, that I don't write in here as much. Because my blog is, for me, a communicational outlet. I can say what I want. When I need to say it. It feels like I'm talking to someone, but I'm really not, and that's why I don't need to worry about them. Just about me, and that's the point. To worry about yourself when you need to.

But perhaps I've gotten more communicative. I think, in the past, I may have shared things with other people, but it wasn't enough. I still felt like I hadn't told who needed to be told. Like if you tell your teacher that you're pregnant but you really feel it's more important to tell your sister, so you're unsatisfied until you've shared the news with her. My journal was always the person I NEEDED to tell, and I was unsatisfied until I did that. Partly, perhaps, because of the people who read it. In this past year it was definitely Dan. I told Dan everything, through my blogs. Because I felt that he was the one person who could understand me.

But I don't communicate with Dan very much anymore. Hard to say when that happened. Probably over the summer when we split a little bit. We aren't as close when I'm doing the "platonic" thing. He's not as close to me, anyway. And then when we're not doing the platonic thing, all we seem to be doing is talking about relationship things. Like love, sex, affection. I guess it's the texts, because you can't say more than 160 characters. Do you know how much that is?

"taught myself today and I realized that the fingerings are very similar to the flute so it became familiar and automatic quickly. just a few new things to learn"
That's my last 160 text message. Imagine if every blog could only be 160 characters, where would I get myself? We've gotten into this miniature communicative thing, where we talk but we say only the minimum.

So I feel distanced from him, in that sense, and therefore I don't crave sharing things with him the way I used to, the way I did with my blog. It just doesn't feel like we're connecting the way we did over the summer.

And I've learned to be satisfied sharing things with my dad, even my mom, Amelia, Loren, professors, Tijana sometimes. (I figured I'd spell her name right for the first time ever.)

I've also learned to be satisfied with internalizing things. Probably because there was a part of myself that was extended through my writing, and I've learned to get in touch with that part of me more and more on my own.

But despite all that, I really do regret not sharing some of the major things with you. Like the small car accident I had, although I'll probably always remember that. And what about seeing Mike the other day? Loren and I went to Walmart and low and behold, there was Mike. Shocked me at first and I hid behind a thing before he could see me. We were walking to the checkout lines anyway, so we snuck in one of the lanes, if that's the word, and started checking out.

But it was late so there were only a few lanes open, so Mike checked out on the one next to ours and by the time we got to the bag end we could see each other and he saw me. I don't think he saw me when I first saw him, and I hadn't noticed him again until he'd seen me, so we both had time to react privately. He did try to make eye contact with me and I gave him an awkward smile, cause what could I do? I didn't want to be hostile, but I couldn't do much else.

As much as I was shocked in the first place, after we'd seen each other, it felt really normal. Partly because, although I haven't seen him physically in a year and a half, not a single glance anywhere, and all that time I didn't know what he looked like, what style had changed or hair color or whatever it may be. That was not a good sentence, but anyway, partly because despite that fact, just recently he added me to myspace. So I saw his profile for the first time in a year and a half.

And therefore, his pictures for the first time in a year and a half. And although I only looked at a few, I knew the jacket he kept wearing, the checkered one. The one he was wearing at the store. So it was like there was a familiar element, I knew that his hair was pretty short, another familiar element. I hadn't seen the girl, and, in fact, I didn't look at who he was with once, even though in my peripheral vision, I knew he was with someone. I assumed a girl, but I honestly didn't see.

In any case, he's also familiar to me because we dated. So I'd grown into the reality of not seeing him around town and the like. And that was reality. But as soon as the new reality set in, seeing him again, I adjusted very quickly because of familiarizing myself with him recently on myspace - even though we haven't talked very much, it's been enough. And also, having old memories of who he is and what he's like. It was a mix, of feeling that strong familiarity, as well as, having an impression of who he has become to be - what his lifestyle now is, the friends he has, his Catskill life.

It seems like I'm overanalyzing, but although I told people of seeing him, I didn't go into this detail. But, it's what I've been thinking so I've got to get it out so I can stop reminding myself of it.

Truthfully, I was only really shocked because I had a zit. Yeah, I'm serious, some zits are okay but when they're in particular spots on my face, it makes me self-conscious all day long. I had just come from Psychology and I had thought of it every single time someone looked at me, seriously. So the very first thing I thought of when I saw him down the way, in Walmart, was the damn zit. I didn't want him to see me unless I looked my best. And I even told Loren, "damn, and I was going to look hot today, but I decided not to." I was going to wear my hair down, but I was too lazy to wash it, since I was busy convincing Loren to come with me to the school and hang out in the library so we could go to walmart straight from class.

So Loren and I checked out and left, we walked to my car and packed all the groceries away, there were quite a few. And Mike came out. I think he wanted to catch up with me. I don't want to sound presumptuous, I don't know why he wanted to but his body language sort of suggested that he was eager to get out to the parking lot. Whereas, when I saw him coming my way, my first impulse was to stay outside of the car, waiting for Loren to come back from putting the cart away, but I realized that in any other circumstance I would just get in.

So I did, even though I kind of wanted to see Mike. But Mike walked fast, and he came to the car in front of us, a really hot yellow car, and Loren and I laughed at if it was his. He had paused in front of the driver's door and then he turned to wait for his friend to catch up. Then he finished walking to his car which was on the left of me. (incidentally, not as hot as the yellow one, who Loren says was owned by 'the fat chick') So Mike made eye contact with me again, but I was talking with Loren, so I appeared nonchalant. Even though we were talking about him. :)

I'm glad I appeared nonchalant. It helps when you're with someone. So I drove away and left him there. And we didn't say a word to each other, nor have we on myspace about it.

Loren and I both remarked that he was probably wondering who I was with, my new boyfriend or something. Although, in the checkout line, it might not have seemed like Loren was with me because he had a few things that he paid for on his own, after I was done. In any case, I don't think my brother is very hot, so although I'm not afraid that Mike will misconceive that Loren is my boyfriend, I don't actually prefer that he thinks that Loren is a love interest, cause I wouldn't be particularly proud of him. No offense to Loren's looks. It's a good thing that I don't find him attractive. He's alright, he's just very tall and gawky, or something. (and Mike might have seen pics online that said that Loren was my brother, if he paid attention anyway.)

So that's my story. I'm not ashamed of my car either, cause I've also put pics of it on myspace for a short time, Mike may not have seen, who can really say how much he pays attention. But if he had, he would have known. I'm a little proud that I paid for myself (although I was two dollars over, $84 and I only had $82, so I borrowed $2 from Loren. :) And that I drove myself, even though I felt I came out of the parking spot too reckless and I was glad that I didn't slam into somebody's car or something, cause that would have been embarrassing.

I'm just ashamed of the zit, really. :) But he didn't get close enough to see it. :):) That's just one of those things, you need your exboyfriend to see you and, at least, not say to himself "she's not looking so good." Even though looks aren't everything. It's really a silly thing anyway.

If it's true, that's fine. But if it's not true, if I really do have a zit, I may as well accept it and find a way to be confident despite the fact. But, please, let's just not have zits at all. Cause I really don't like them, on my upper lip anyway. Right below my nose. That's the one place I really don't like them. Most everywhere else, if they're not huge, I don't mind them. Also don't like them on my neck. I just find them most unattractive in both of those places...


I'm sad that I haven't been sharing all my crazy dreams lately. :( Ones about flying and James and Tim and Mike and Isis and I can't remember what else because I didn't write them down and I forgot them.

I don't really have much to say on this subject, but, in the spirit of telling my blog big things, I may as well say that I'm considering dropping out of college. If you wanna know what brought it up, I asked my mom to ask my higher self what to do my psychology report on, because I felt so limited and I wanted something sensible that I could work with.

Well, my higher self gave me Astrology. Astrology? Yeah, if you think about it as my mom explained it: the planets pull on a child magnetically over their lifetime and affect their development. My class is Child Development. I don't know a lot about how astrology works, but that would be a major affect on their development. Not any of this nature, nurture bullshit. (hate that debate, cause both options suck) If you understood how the planets were magnetically affecting your child's development, you wouldn't clash with that, you wouldn't try to make them conform to your standards because you would understand what they need, when they need it.

But it's not a science, therefore psychology will ignore it. How could I write my report on that? No way. But I realized that I expected my higher self to give me a sensible, practical topic for psychology. But why would it? I mean, my higher self is infinite, it's beyond the laws of our society. Why should it conform to the standards that my psychology professor or the psychology profession puts on it?? Exactly, it didn't. If you asked my higher self its opinion on what topic is important in child development, it would say astrology. At least that is one important topic. And that's that.

So why am I limiting myself just to fit in their small box mindset? Why should I adhere to the rules of their limited perspective? What would be the point? I'm I trying to earn their validation? No. Am I trying to earn their respect? Well, I thought I was, but no, I've decided I'm not. Am I trying to earn their labels? No, who cares about what kind of labels they give me.

As I told my dad the other day, I feel, when I'm in class, that I'm up against psychologists. Truth be told, scientists in particular, but people in general really, will not see what they don't want to see. You can't force someone to. We know that the mind has a powerful denial ability. Serious denial. You think you can give someone evidence and prove to them the truth, but evidence doesn't even do that because it's the connections, it's the logic, it's the conclusions that make sense and relevance to evidence - and those are all done by humans. I can't force someone to believe in what I believe in. I can't force someone to see the truth the way I see it, with the same relevance.

Nor, should I always. I won't admit that they're right to believe what they believe. They are ignoring truth. But I will allow them the freedom to ignore truth. Perhaps they won't have it forever, that's not my decision to make. But they have it now, and I can't take that away from them, nor should I try. And it's freakin futile anyway. I CAN'T take that away from them, so why try? Why try to convince them of such a thing?

Truth be told, I want to speak to the people. Not the scientists. But the people who want to learn about themselves. Not the psychologists who want to study the psyche in an objective way, not the psychologists who don't even want to study themselves, really, they want to study other people. No, I want to talk to the people who want to learn about themselves, who want to grow purposefully.

I feel like I won't be doing that if I'm in the field of psychology. I don't want to deal with the people who are going to psychologists, because I don't really think psychologists can help them. Especially because they reinforce the notion that people NEED other people to solve their problems, dependency. And this is something that my psychology textbook has acknowledged. It's unhealthy to teach people to be dependent on a professional.

I will admit that a lot of my perspective on psychology and psychologists comes from my psychology teacher. There have, in fact, been moments of truth in psychology. Clarification that I find delightful, even though it's small and rare. But the truth is, all the major theories are just simply lacking. I look at the theories and I'm not satisfied with any of them, they just don't solve anything. They see the psyche in such a way that people cannot make any significant progress. Seriously. Anywhere from disorders to just people in their every day lives. The way that psychology sees us is lacking, significantly.

I don't want to try to go into psychology and expose all their flaws. Hell, I would be there forever just arguing and arguing with people. As my dad says, the major flaw of science is their materialistic grasp on reality. They NEED to believe that everything comes down to materialism, to the materialistic world. And that is one of the biggest lies that govern the western world. It's the shallowest of the shallow. I almost prefer superstition.

In my opinion, science is good for one thing - rationalizing to expose untruths. I know that if I take a look at what I believe in a rational manner, I often expose the misconceptions that are strung along by false logic. By logic that is nonsensical. However, rationality cannot give you truth. It can't. It can expose the most illogical, but it will always be a victim of the tangle and twist of words and logic, which is limited in, if you want to name one of the major things that makes it limited, its absolutist view of things. It's hard to say anything without making things seem absolute. You have to say a lot of skeptical words like "maybe, sometimes, almost" to be fair.

What you really have to do is keep an open mind, always. No matter what you believe, you have to keep an open mind that it may change tomorrow, for the better. That it may expand, because as long as we are confined to our words and our logic, it will be limited truth. And of course, we see what serves our psyche's growth. Sometimes we see what doesn't serve our psyches growth, but if we get past the ego, we still sometimes see what serves our growth, so our perspective is influenced by relevance. We don't see truth objectively because there's no relevance in that. We see it in how it relates to us, that helps us grow, and that's the entire point, to grow.

So, to make a long story short, for once, we need the leap of faith to experience real truth, fuller and fuller truth. Perhaps we can never fully know it on earth but we don't need to fully know it. Because as I said, that is not the point. This is not about knowledge, this is about progress. We don't need to know how everything works, we need to know what helps us progress.

In any case, psychology needs to be revolutionized. I'm way beyond their methods. I'm much deeper in tactics, if you want to put it that way. I would hate nothing more than to slow down to a snails pace in solving problems, a slow evolution of finding the way out of the dark. Not my thing, honestly. That's not what I'm here for.

So that's why I'm thinking of quitting psychology. I'm tired of limiting myself. I have to do it in all areas of the academic world. I have to do it with the mass consciousness because if I say too much they look at me like I just told them I was abducted by aliens an hour ago. No, that's more believably silly. They wouldn't take me seriously and they've heard that one before.

There's just way too much I don't say. And I'm tired of it. I'm tired of writing reports for school that I have to hold myself back with. I thought of writing for my book, writing in here even, at how I have an amount of freedom to say what I feel, whatever the costs. I say an extraordinary amount of what's under the surface, and that is exhilarating. The surface has been done before. Let's take a step forward. Get on with it.

If my "IS" self or my "Is" self, can't be sure which because there is a distinction, sees no reason to hold itself back, neither do I. I shouldn't be afraid to be who I am. I shouldn't try to be who I'm not. Whatever reason I wanted to get a psychology degree, is not worth the costs if I have to sacrifice myself. Dad says, you have to jump through hoops, but once you get to the end you have a certain amount of freedom and respect.

But you know what? I don't respect those who jump through hoops. Just the opposite, I see "phd" and I'm like, ugh. The more labels I see, the less I want to listen to someone. Because I don't care what anyone has to say if they identify themselves with a label. If they consider themselves a Christian, they're not going to have the whole truth. If they consider themselves a Doctor, they're not going to have the whole truth. It isn't to say that Christians and Doctors can't have valid perspectives, up to a point. They can have valid truths, but they have limited truths. They're not whole. And the smaller truths they are, the less satisfying they become.

If you want to consider yourself part of a bigger whole, you'll always be lacking. I don't want to be lacking, and I don't want to deal with people who are lacking.

You see, the problem with labels is that they are defined by standards. You can't be a labeled a doctor just because you dance. You can't be labeled a dancer just because you do heart surgery. They are defined by standards. And if you're trying to be a doctor, if you're trying to identify with a label, you will limit yourselves to those standards. If you want to be an empiricist, a behaviorist, an existentialist, you're going to limit your focus, so that you can adhere to the standards given to you. Otherwise you simply won't be those things.

You can't call yourself a neurologist, but believe that neurons simply don't exist. Therefore, if you WANT to be a neurologist, you have to believe in neurons. And then there are exclusions. You can't believe that the body is made of putty that can be molded into whatever form if you squeeze hard enough - not if you want to consider yourself a neurologist. And it's obvious that people search for identities through their genders, their ethnicity, their culture, their countries, their families, their religions, their careers, their beliefs - we want identity, we want self-worth, we want self-definition, validation etc.

These types of identities only limit us from seeing ourselves as a whole. It's like, if you ask the question - is God a man or a woman, you're acknowledging that he's incomplete either way. Because if you're a man, you're lacking female qualities and if you're a female, you're lacking male qualities. Those of the gender try to pretend that one or the other sex is superior, but they are dependent on each other, they are both valuable. Women give birth, but can't give birth unless they're fertilized by men. Each is lacking each other's attributes. And to say that God is one or the other is to claim that he is incomplete.

That's just inconsistent with most people's perceptions of the almighty creator, the absolute higher power. It just doesn't make sense. It's the same for us, when we identify with one or the other of anything, we limit ourselves. We only associate with a piece of our true selves. We need to see ourselves as more than our basic identities, more than even our sex because in past lives we've been both sexes. More than our families because in past lives we've had many different families. More than our labels, they should not define us. We've been doctors in past lives, but we're no longer. We've been singers in past lives, but we can no longer sing. We've been teachers in past lives, but we know longer have that knowledge to teach.

We let go of these qualities throughout the lifetimes so we know that these are just faces for a deeper identity, aliases. We can't associate ourselves with the wig we're wearing. The wig does not define us, it's actually merely a status, if anything. It seems ridiculous to even think of a wig defining us, but that is really how we often, metaphorically, see it. People with blonde hair are even called "blondes" with tons of connotations, good and bad. We do define ourselves by those kinds of things. But they're just masks.

So you see, I don't want to be a psychologist, and I don't want to deal with people who see themselves as psychologists. It's as simple as that. The academic world is a reflection of some of these qualities and I'm not sure I want to have a place in it. I'm not saying I want ever get a degree, but I am saying I want to take a break and deal with what I know.

I'm not going to waste my time on some abstract goal, especially now that I'm doubting all the goals I've had for the past couple of years. I no longer see the purpose of them. So I'm going to concentrate on who I am right now, what I have to work with right now. Not try to acquire more and more, but just work with what I have.

I do have an enormous amount of faith, I've just realized. Faith that has transformed my perspective of how the world works. I am a little scared still, to be anticonformist. I was nervous about dropping out of high school but it was the best decision of my life. I've never regretted it. I need to eradicate my fears of this college issue.

It did help, when I was leaving high school, to think of my siblings that had also left high school, and hadn't died or anything. lol. If you want to give the worst case scenario. It helps to know that none of my siblings have ever finished college. Actually, I really don't know about Neils and Yohan. I know that Yohan went into the army. I don't know about Neils. I really know nothing about them, it's really sad. In any case, the other five haven't graduated from college. Amelia and Stephanie are doing it now but Stephanie has already quit once or twice, mostly because of her kids and her lack of motivation.

And I'm freakin 18. I've already had three semesters. Most of the people in college are at least 19 on their first year. Many of them are in their mid20's. Many of them are also in their mid30's. And let me tell you there are still some who are in their 40's. I am at a community college afterall. The point is, I have a lifetime to change my mind.

But speaking of change. I think that's what I'm afraid of. See, I had this path set - graduate high school. And I had to say, hey, this isn't working, and leave the path, start over. Essentially, if my goal was to get a diploma, all the work I'd done was a waste, because I didn't get it so I couldn't reap the rewards of the diploma. Not that I care, and that's why I could leave.

But then I went to college. And part of the reason I did is to prove that I wasn't just some lame "high school dropout". I wanted to prove that I was intelligent and that I could do well in school and that I was productive. So my course was to finish college. But I have proved that I'm not just a loser who dropped out. That I am smart. That I got A's, not even B's and that I should even have an H next to one of those A's, by the time the semester is up. Is that good enough? I think so.

But now I need to acknowledge that this path is not working for me. That this goal is not satisfying, that it will not help me achieve what I ultimately want to achieve. I thought it would, but it won't, at least not the way it's heading. (I can't fully foresee the future, but as I said, I have plenty of years to change what needs to be changed.) For now, it's not working. And meanwhile, I'm ignoring my talents and my initiative. Putting them aside because I'm told I need to work for this goal.

I need to fearlessly leave this path. I'm afraid to start anew. Their was a sort of promise in college, a relative guarantee that said that this would make life better for me. If I got this, I would have a bit of security. So now I'm leaping into the exact opposite. Society tells me, just as they did with high school, that I will be a failure, or that I'm at least in very much danger of being a failure if I don't go to college, if I don't get my high school diploma. The latter was a lie, I found out I can still go to college and override any necessity to get a high school diploma.

Well, we'll see how it goes not getting a degree, at least for the time being. Truth be told, the thing I mainly see in my future is writing. And writers don't necessarily need degrees. They need to have writing knowledge and talent but I've gained a lot of that over the years.

In any case, I won't argue the pros and cons, because I know them and I know their validity. I won't predict the future, because absolutes are lies (even though that was an absolute) and because this isn't about planning the rest of my life. This is about what's best for me now. And what's best for me now is to finish my book. I need to know what direction that will lead me in. What avenues it will open up in careers, in societal directions, in identity. And this is a big dissatisfaction. I've often been impatient to finish my book.

I feel that this is important for me to do, that I've got to get this done. I realize now that college will not give me what I need to get this done, I have all the tools I need. Growth will always be made, but I can do that independently. I don't need professors to make me grow, or teach me how to grow.

It's as simple as that. Although, judging by the length of this blog, and all the things I didn't say meanwhile, I'm going to guess that it's probably inappropriate to call it simple. Ha.

Incidentally, I'm very happy that it's raining. It's very lovely. I feel at peace just by hearing it, and by resolving all of these inner conflicts.

By the way, irony of irony (even though the universe probably does ironies on purpose), the day that I first discovered I wanted to drop out, I went online to my psych memo, which is just a weekly response to the topics we learn about in class, and my teacher had put "please see me" in a response to my memo. He usually responds with "excellent memo". In any case, the next evening I talked to him during the break, he said I wasn't in trouble or anything but that after reading a number of my memos he felt that I had very good insight into psychology and that I could do a lot with the field of psychology. He wasn't necessarily saying that the field would benefit from me, he was more saying that I could use my talents in the field of psychology, that it was a career that would suit me.

He basically told me that he just felt he needed to tell me that, that I was special (love that), that he really saw something in me. It sounds creepy when I say it. Honestly, it was all things that I tell myself all the time. lol. I always wanted someone else to acknowledge my talents, but when it finally happens, it's anticlimactic cause I've already told myself - and believed - all of these compliments already.

It's not conceited, of course. I just know that I've always shown an iniative in the field of psychology, or at least in the exploration of psychology. And I do have, always, my own analysis. I don't just repeat the definitions or theories that are given, I apply them to my own view of reality, in an in-depth analysis, in my own words. And yes, I do have a lot of good insight. He said that I have a good hold on concepts, and yes, I do think that I have an adeptness for concepts, that's just the way my brain works. It views things in concepts, as most people probably do unconsciously, but it also then examines the concepts and analyzes the concepts that it views. So then my concepts are always expanding and becoming more defined and I become more self-aware, so that provokes deeper understanding. etc etc.

Of course, one could say that it's a sign. A sign that I should stick with psychology. But, I've been tested before, in listening to my own direction, instead of being persuaded by others from the outside. I have, generally, always been an independent person. If anything, the test is not what people think I should do - that will persuade me. But my own view of what I feel I'm obligated to fulfill, in order to satisfy my desires of image, if you will. Meaning, I went to college because I wanted to prove myself not just another "rebellious or stupid teenage drop out." That was me, making a decision based on my perception of what I needed to be for other people. Not what other people told me to be, but what I told myself I needed to be based on other people.

And I have to realize that I need to be myself. I need to stop basing my actions on my relation to other people, whether it be out of fear or need or lack of self-worth, I don't know. It just needs to stop. Part of my biggest stress in the academic world is not wanting to appear a lunatic. I don't want to rub people the wrong way. I don't want people to look at me like I have three heads, or I just claimed, in all honesty, that I'd been abducted by aliens. Okay, I'm not Kurt Vonnegut. (ugh, we're reading that in modern fiction at the moment - trafalmadore.)

I don't say things in school because I don't want to have that animosity and that "you're crazy" look or the fierce disagreements. I want to appear rational, sane. Honestly, I am rational and sane. But you have to open your mind to what being rational and sane entails. If you think that being rational is believing that there is nothing more to the world than the material aspect, then I'm not going to fit your standards. So I hold myself back based on the standards put before me. I don't change, but I don't say all that I want to say.

I have to admit that a part of it is my grades. I'm not going to get good grades if I'm nonsensical, you know. And I do get good grades, I like that. But it's also just a matter of shame. I don't want to be rejected like that. I don't want to be who I am and just get it thrown back in my face. I've seen it, when people can't handle the truth, they throw it back in my face. I can't change their reactions, but I can change the way I handle it.

You might say that running away is not the best option, I should face who I am in the academic world. But it seems futile. It may not be, but it seems that way. I don't see any benefit. I will be myself, and I will do it publicly. And I will face any rejection or opposition that comes my way. I promise that. But I don't know that it's my purpose to try to fit into the academic world. Maybe it is, but because I'm unsure at the moment, I need to do what I can do to figure out whether it is or not.

We need people to come into these organizations and shed light, expose the fallacies and strengthen the truths, expand the perceptions. We really do. But I don't think that you can do it by shock methods. It needs to be an adjustment. You can't revolutionize someone's entire perception and way of life in a few hours of explaining the truth. It would destroy them, I think that that's just the way humans are. That we're protected from such shock, physically and emotionally and mentally - perhaps spiritually as well. We need to take steps. I would have to ignore so much of what I believe to administer baby steps.

I don't want to babysit, appropriately. I don't want to guide these people in slow little baby steps. There are people who want to, and will. I'm too exploding. I make too great of leaps every day. I don't think it's impossible for others to make these leaps. But they have to want it, and they have to be ready. I don't want to hold myself back, trying to guide them through that. I want to be who I am, and attract the people who are ready. Because there are people who are open, who are progressive, who want the truth. And they're the people I want to deal with. Not the opposition. Not the stuck mindsets. I want to deal with the people who are moving forward.

And I hope that by raising the consciousness, by working with the "best," so to speak, that it will improve on greater than just the best. That it will make significant advancements.

As I said in that last psychology memo:
My goal, as a psychology major, is not to take the dysfunctional (autistic or whatever it may be) and help them become average in their functioning ability. Because although I don’t want to be pessimistic, there’s an obvious block that keeps them from functioning. It makes me feel hopeless, very quickly. I guess you could sum it up by saying that I don’t have the patience. I’m the type of person who likes to believe that anything is possible. I go to bipolar people and tell them to consciously work towards no longer being bipolar and they tell me they can’t because they’ve got a problem in their brain. [that's you, Dan.] (That could certainly be a self-fulfilling prophecy).

But whether it’s true or not that there are impossible cases that can’t ever be fully cured, I don’t like to work with these cases. My life goal seems to stem from a dissatisfaction with the average functioning ability. The standard is that these people are healthy. But to me, a healthy person is not perfect or complete. What it means to have a healthy psyche is that you can adapt, learn, assimilate, and grow - and that you have the willpower to do it even consciously, as well as subconsciously. That’s a healthy psyche, which means that a healthy person should be adapting and learning and assimilating and growing, which are all things that I personally study. Less of how things work in the mind and more of, what capability we have to progress.

That’s an astounding part of the healthy mind, progression. Disabilities and disorders are blocks from progression, they are essentially the concept of being stuck in one place, to a point where you can’t function any longer, because you can’t adapt. So when I think of psychology, I don’t think of abnormal psychology, I think of how we can improve on the healthy psyche. How we can take the average functioning of an individual and make it stronger. Because I’m unsatisfied, looking around me, at the incapability for people to be happy, healthy, progressive and etc. They don’t have disorders. They are by some abstract standard, healthy. But they still need to grow - it's obvious. So instead of taking dysfunctional people and trying to bring them to an average level, I’m trying to take functional people and raise the bar, raise the average level to something stronger.


That's a different way to say what I was saying about the academic world. I don't want to try to change the people that are stuck. Ultimately, I'm not the one make the decisions for each of these people. I can stimulate them, I can teach them, I can influence them, they can influence me - but only if they're willing. They will always be making the decisions - either the decision to grow from me, or to deny the truth that I live by and share with people.

When they're ready, "when you're ready to learn, the teacher will appear." You'll need someone like me, with a revolutionary perspective. So why not work with those that ARE ready? I want to help people progress. It's as simple as that. It's a compassionate quality that enables some to have the patience to work with those who have disabilities and disorders and dysfunctions, those people that are by my terms, stuck, in whatever way. But, in my, admittedly, black and white view of "ready or not," I'm going to concentrate on those that are ready. In short, those that are willing. Not just those that will accept me, because this isn't about me. This is about what I represent, and the fact that I no longer need opposition to what I represent.

I've dealt with it all my life, I wanted to because I wanted to face my fears and my self-worth and rejection issues. I mistakenly wanted, at that point, to convince people to see things my way so that I could be validated. But I no longer want to convince or argue. I am what I am. Truth is what it is. I'm going to concentrate on what IS, and stop trying to validate it, stop trying to convince others to validate it. I'm just going to believe in it. And I intend to find others that are ready to believe in it too.