a sense of self

what a peculiar sensation. they sit you down. shove a needle into your arm and the little machine spends about an hour sucking blood out and putting it back in. i have to say. didnt too much like the [putting back in] part. it made me cold. and feel weird. actually. the whole process is a tad weird. after six hours at the center I walked away with $40 cash. all spent on groceries later that night. hm hm hm. money is a joke. selling body fluids is more of a joke.

i cant decide which is more absurd. my addiction to caffeine/lattes. or the idea that our culture puts a taboo on becoming addicted to any substance. maybe thats what makes me want to stop the habit. what makes it wrong to be physically dependent on a substance? the fact that it empties our bank accounts/wrecks our bodies/possibly creates relationship problems? aren't we all aware of these complications? i am. i don't think my little coffee addiction has caused any problems to relationships. but i definitely feel the bodily side effects as well as the noticeable dip in my monetary possessions. is this enough to cause me to cease? this? or maybe the fact that the whole coffee industry is saturated with exploitation, oppression, and destruction?

am i a walking contradiction. standing against animal cruelty. animal exploitation. what is a human but another animal. isn't that what i attempt to advocate the most. the idea that humans are just another species that inhabit the earth. that they too--should be able to live in a world that makes sense to them. without fear of pain/injustice/oppression. i guess one can only boycott so much before she becomes a nihilistic non-functioning piece of crap...er. part of society.

what makes it alright/not all right for one to live a life that makes best sense to them? is it not alright as soon as everyday comforts and normalities (such as food/clothing/COFFEE) cross the line that separates what is ethically acceptable and what is cruel/inhumane. of course. who decided that the murder of another individual is wrong? is this not the "survival of the fittest"? yes. it is. has survival been given a new definition? is survival now the idea of success in our world? surviving high school and moving towards secondary education. surviving that and moving "up" in the world. to a full-time/with benefits career that helps one reproduce/raise a family/and retire comfortably to live the rest of their lives in bliss and relaxation. is this survival. are those who are dying actually just slipping below the radar. those living at or under the poverty line? is death the idea that ones life has no meaning/no importance? are the people who slip behind in school/work/life dying a slow unimportant death? i suppose this will go back to the idea that who decided that some individuals have the right to live while others deserve to die?? what defines an individual? a conscious? a sense of self? it it our responsibility to pick these dying individuals up? to better their lives? (so they might just use up the resources to rise and fall back under the radar?)



im going to go back to the question of what is ethically right or wrong? my questioning of this subject is probably the appearance of the idea in both of my classes this quarter. im continuing to be caught up in the idea that this universe is only so old. that ideas that people have considered over the years have evolved and advanced with changing opinions and beliefs. many of these beliefs were probably the spawn of religion, overwhelming influential leaders, and other factors that many fall accustomed/slave to. again. who says what anyone should or should not think. if people choose not to think for themselves, I guess that is their own problem. er. choice. i feel extremely lucky to live in a country where i am able to think what i want. write what i want. believe and act (to an extent) how I want. why are there still many countries without this freedom. are these countries not "civilized" for not allowing their citizens basic rights. what are these basic rights that we should--as humans--have access to? to live free of pain/exploitation? to live being able to speak up against supposed injustices? to live being able to say/dress/believe what we want?

I am a freaking hurricane of thought today. and not really able to write coherently or in a straight line. they took all my plasma out. and i feel somewhat enlightened. i feel a need to understand this world. and the people that inhabit it. i feel that truth is relative. a personal journey that we all should be able to experience in a way the best makes sense to us. is this way of thinking closed minded? is anyone really "open-minded" enough to accept all forms of thought and thinking? is such a concept fathomable? my mind is open in that I accept and enjoy hearing others take on the world. i want to hear what you live for. what are you about. but am i closed minded in the sense that my set of morals beliefs and opinions are set as of this second. right now. this instant in my head. or [are they set?] i am an indecisive flaky speck upon this earth. i guess i can't say i am 100% in anything i believe. maybe 100% sure that I will never be 100% sure. and i am completely ok with that. maybe this is the idea of an "open mind". that i am open to learning and changing my thought process and opinions based on what i learn and believe is true/what is right/what is wrong/what matters or doesn't matter. as i move forward in time.

this is lengthly and wordy. i dont blame you for not reading it all. i am indecisive piece of shit. whose mind is a freaking war zone right now. we have irrational impulsive crazy ashley attacking level-headed forward-thinking sane ashley. i want them to get along. i think that makes best sense for me.