Hello, world.

Who am I and what am I doing here? How often must we ask ourselves this question before we get an answer?

Hello, internet.

I’m just a person, like you. Trying to figure out my place in life, possibly like you. Keeping a journal has been a habit of mine for the past ten years. Having a public blog is different though (hopefully); I can’t (or shouldn’t) just vomit out everything that’s in my head– better expression and structure and more well thought out entires is what I hope I’ll achieve here.

This blog was born from a breakup, but it has grown and will continue to grow beyond that, as will I.

I love nature and I love rain trees. They are pretty ubiquitous here in Singapore and I love how grand and awe-inspiring they look when you stand under them, their umbrella canopy spreading out in a huge, beautiful intricate pattern of branches. One picture made out of a trillion details and a trillion different perspectives, possibilities. Order in chaos, simplicity in complexity, untold beauty in the commonplace and unity with variety. Life is nothing but paradoxes.

Who am I? I’m me. I wish that were enough, but it’s not. Not for you and not for me either. I need to get to know myself better too. Yet anything I can tell you here is only shorthand, a clumsily applied label, each with the potential to expand into essays detailing the nuances of my relationship with that single label. I’m… female; gay; singaporean; an animal lover; a nature lover; an ex-biology student; a photography enthusiast; a musician wannabe; an artist wannabe; an atheist; an introvert; a daughter, sister, friend… do these labels help? are any of them truly me, are some more me than others? I bet even with more labels, you could still easily be imagining someone who is nothing like what I actually am.

Well, at the very least, all this that I’ve written can tell you that I’m quite fascinated and occasionally confounded by an issue that would seem the simplest and most fundamental: identity. Back where we started: Who am I?

Thanks for stopping by and feel free to follow, drop me a comment, email or anything at all. :)

updated 3rd November 2013

10 thoughts on “About

  1. I just watched this video clip the other day, and while reading your ‘about’ page I thought it might be of some interest to you (tree related, kinda). Of course I could be wrong; wouldn’t be the first time.

    I have another link you might find interesting, but I’ll hold on to that one for another time. I enjoyed your two most recent Gandhi posts, which made me think to share this other link. It doesn’t have much if anything to do with Gandhi, but I think it follows in his footsteps to some degree. Let me know if you are interested. ;)

    Oh, and thanks for stopping by my blog and taking the time to check it out a bit. I’m not usually one to follow links or comment much (I keep myself pretty busy), but felt compelled. Take care. :)

    • Hey, thanks for sharing the video! Sorry I didn’t see your comment till now, wordpress marked it as spam for some reason. O_O

      Yeah, gotta love fibonnaci numbers and their patterns in nature. XD this person has a great 3 part video that explains it in a really cool, quirky and awesome way, if you’re interested. really love her videos:

      Sure, I’d love to see the link. :)
      And no problem, I really like the messages you’re advocating in your blog. :)
      You take care too, and have a great day!

      • I’ve seen those videos, very cool, but I’ve never watched the movie “Gandhi” before. I think I’ll give that a try next. Here is that link I mentioned before:

        Enjoy, and I’d love to hear your thoughts. :)

    • Hey, I’ve just finished watching the zeitgeist: moving forward. Thanks very much for sharing. I really liked it and have to agree with most of the general ideas it’s promoting, although I feel my knowledge about economics and politics is way too lacking to make any proper critiques or in depth comments. (although i’ve NEVER understood trading/stock markets, that has always seemed to be a bafflingly huge thing where people bought and sold nothing.)

      I feel slightly dubious about some of the things they say though. especially their blue print for the ‘perfect’ society on a new earth. Don’t get me wrong, it sounds like a fantastic ideal, and many parts of it sound feasible and should be implemented asap (or bits of it have already be implemented in certain places).. like the idea of public commodities ie having a system of cars/transport the way we have libraries: you only ‘own’ them when you need to use them. But on the whole it has a ‘too good to be true’ kind of feeling.

      Another example makes me want to take what they say with a pinch of salt: the film starts out by warning against false dichotomies (ie ‘it’s genetic’ doesn’t mean it’s predetermined) but later on seems to do the same thing in the opposite direction: put a lot of emphasis on environment while not talking about genes, stressing that we’re the victims of our environment and upbringing. Also, at one point they say that ‘human nature is competitive’ is a myth and what we need is compassion and love etc. I think we need for compassion and love probably IS a bigger part of our human nature (ie it’s a greater need), but I think saying our competitive nature is a myth is falling into the false dichotomy trap: we’re NOT either all love and altruism, NEITHER are we all selfish with dog-eat-dog-world mentalities.

      Another, possibly more significant thing (after watching) that made me feel more dubious and made my guard go up even more: i realized that i’ve seen parts of the first zeitgeist movie before. Have you seen it? I saw the section about the christ myth, and i was really excited when watching it. but, when I tried to do more research on some of the claims it made, I realized that a lot of it was just… complete bullshit. So I was pretty disgusted that people could and would make up such outlandish claims and make it into a ‘documentary’. So… I find it quite difficult to really trust this film now, although I do like its message and ideas a lot and on first impressions felt the urge to share it with everyone I know.

  2. “…I feel my knowledge about economics and politics is way too lacking…”

    If you watch the second movie “Zeitgeist: Addendum” it doesn’t go into detail on economics and politics, but it does a great job of explaining the monetary system (more too it that the average Joe/Jill realizes):

    “…blue print for the ‘perfect’ society…”

    Not ‘perfect’ just better.

    “…‘too good to be true’…” It’s not a ‘today’ goal, but more of a tomorrow mindset. We can’t hope for a better tomorrow if we’re not doing something to get there.

    Nurture vs nature: we are products of our environment (thoughts, actions, likes, dislikes, beliefs…). Genetics determine our physical appearance and little more (regarding who we are). There is little to no human nature; mostly human responses to environment. The whole concept is a slippery thought exercise that requires a lot of that ‘thinking outside the box’ stuff. It’s a lot to take in. Don’t toss it over your shoulder (like “…a pinch of salt…”) never to look back. ;)

    I have seen “Zeitgeist The Movie”:


    Keep in mind that just because you can’t find proof of something doesn’t automatically make it false or doesn’t exist, and even if you do manage to prove a detail false, it doesn’t make the concept as a whole false. Facts aren’t always the easiest things to find in this world. There are almost always at least two sides to every story and the truth tends to be found somewhere in the middle quite often. Add to that some people would prefer the ‘truth’ be their truth. To help you with your fact finding mission I ran into this “ZEITGEIST: THE MOVIE COMPANION SOURCE GUIDE” PDF file:

    Click to access Zeitgeist,%20The%20Movie-%20Companion%20Guide%20PDF.pdf

    One last link I’d like to share with you is “Who Is Peter Joesph?”:

    It does a great job of explaining what “Zeitgeist The Movie” is, isn’t and how it came to be. As with any and all information, it’s best to understand it as best you can, take it for what it’s worth, questioning everything along the way.

    Sorry to be hogging up your ‘About’ page. Feel free to delete all of this if you like. Might I suggest a ‘Contact’ page? :)

    • Hi, thanks for your reply. :)

      I think you give genetics too little credit, as well as human nature. I personally don’t think that humans are ‘by nature good’, or ‘by nature bad’, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have tendencies or are prone to certain ways of perceiving things or certain ways of doing things due to our evolutionary history. genes do more than determine your mere physical appearance (but they also aren’t the ONLY things that determine physical appearances), they determine all the workings of your cells and the way your brain develops and production of hormones and neurotransmitters and nerve signals which determines/influences everything from your mood to whether you feel hungry/thirsty to how you learn and remember new things.

      the video warns against making a false dichotomy (you don’t have to choose between nurture and nature! in fact, you shouldn’t!), but then makes the same mistake in the opposite direction (giving too much credit to nurture and ignoring nature).

      “Keep in mind that just because you can’t find proof of something doesn’t automatically make it false or doesn’t exist, and even if you do manage to prove a detail false, it doesn’t make the concept as a whole false. ”

      When you watch the first zeitgeist, did you attempt to do your own research to double check what it’s saying first? What I found wasn’t unverifiable or controversial things with different people claiming different ‘truths’, but simple, verifiable things like… does this story of this god exist? and… does the stars/sun actually do that?

      For example, he listed so many gods which shared characteristics with the jesus story, I thought it was incredible, I thought it was great. I watched the video clip once through, and then on second viewing, I’d pause it and googled every single god he mentioned. And… some stories lined up, some sort of lined up if you want to look at it that way, but a many were outright not true. I felt cheated. Same for the astrological claims. I can’t remember the details now, but I can look for critiques of it online if you’re interested.

      of course a few false details doesn’t mean the entire concept is false, but it does mean that unless i have OTHER reasons for believing in that concept, I should put the concept aside because there’s nothing to support it. Finding fIt also means that I’ll find anything he says harder to trust. If the video can make claims that are patently false, it shows either negligence (the maker of the video didn’t spend enough time researching the topic) or manipulative (the maker knows his claims are controversial/are not 100% true but states them like they are undisputed facts and neglects to mention the other side) or downright deceptive (the maker knows they are false but presents them anyway to make his case sound stronger). I don’t have the time to research and verify everything for myself, so if the maker does present some false information (for whatever reason), this means I wont be able to discern truth from falsehood.

      but thanks for the links and the pdf, i’ve give them a look. :)

      • After proofreading this I’ve decide to add a disclaimer:

        The following may sound judgmental, but that is not the case. I’m just stating facts. ;)

        A Google search does not qualify as research. There’s lots of information out there that isn’t available with a simple search (ie: scholarly sources/journals), and what information is available will surely come with conflicting views and opinions. Add to that the fact that there is no 100% static truth. Everything changes, including facts. Sometimes facts don’t live up to our expectations, but that doesn’t make them any less factual.

        If you want to be knowledgeable on any given subject, you’re gonna have to do some digging, comparing your findings, using reason, logic and common sense. Question everything, because there are no ultimate sources out there. You may find some more reliable than others, but no one is perfect and everything is open to interpenetration. I strongly recommend watching “Who Is Peter Joseph?” and reading that PDF file. I’m on page 39 (no promise I’ll finish it) and I’m finding it very enlightening.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s