I wrote an entry on this topic and I implied a discomfort with it. I still do.
I was called "gorgeous" and "beautiful" by someone and seriously, it gave me a sense of unease. I believe it was based on outer beauty, which I clearly lack. The only reason I can think of is racial perception. At the same time, it undermines professionalism, if only the other party realises it.
On the contrary, what comes naturally over time creates an impression. It is part of being a partner, I feel. The best thing is that it shows care and concern even as a friend, and is not limited to a specific gender.
I've a new perspective on being called such names. The tour guide in Turkey called other girls and I "sweetie" but I know it is from an older person's point of view. He is a father and I can sense no intention to give advances, which is the opposite of the person who called me "gorgeous" and "beautiful". I felt comfortable, surprisingly.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Saturday, August 23, 2008
A beautiful death of an animal
Chris Erskine's article on his beloved dog touched the core of my heart. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that I am a dog-lover.
His dog was a quiet and lovable pet who never whimpered. I would love this dog to bits too. His dog's eyes just melted his heart. Indeed, the face of a dog can create havoc in a seemingly cold heart, what more in mine. Dogs with droppy ears, like bloodhounds, do me in too. My stuffed dog is one.
When he agreed to take Lucky in, Lucky went into spasms. Dogs do have feelings and that's why they are man's best friends. Lucky was probably afraid that he'd be homeless when his Korean owners left. With Chris agreeing to keep him, he knew he'd have a home and be loved. He'd not become a stray dog. Lucky was like the head of the house, making sure all his family members were safely back home before he could rest in bed. Such a sweet dog who was atypical as well. Dogs usually don't do that.
To Chris, Lucky was grateful and contented. Dogs are that. They don't ask for much except for love. A simple and yet profound request. Sometimes humans are even more demanding, myself included. How ironic that humans are associated with the greatest emotion - love and they are like that. Most females demand not just love but material goods too. They are allegedly more loving than males are but oh well..... Love isn't just buying things for your partner but doing little sweet things for him or her too.
I can sympathise with Chris's pain when Lucky didn't wag his tail anymore and just flopped on the grass, inert. My heart is filled with pangs too. To see your loved one withering away and losing weight, not eating well anymore, in misery and confusion, and just awaiting death, is a traumatic experience. Death thus becomes a release from such intense suffering. It's better for death to claim him or her then.
Lucky could have whimpered in such a condition but he didn't. Such strength in a dog just makes his loss to the family all the more tragic and greater. Strangely though, it also gives a sense of beauty to his departure. The sorrow they must have experienced is something I understand. He was indeed the best dog, from Chris's point of view.
His dog was a quiet and lovable pet who never whimpered. I would love this dog to bits too. His dog's eyes just melted his heart. Indeed, the face of a dog can create havoc in a seemingly cold heart, what more in mine. Dogs with droppy ears, like bloodhounds, do me in too. My stuffed dog is one.
When he agreed to take Lucky in, Lucky went into spasms. Dogs do have feelings and that's why they are man's best friends. Lucky was probably afraid that he'd be homeless when his Korean owners left. With Chris agreeing to keep him, he knew he'd have a home and be loved. He'd not become a stray dog. Lucky was like the head of the house, making sure all his family members were safely back home before he could rest in bed. Such a sweet dog who was atypical as well. Dogs usually don't do that.
To Chris, Lucky was grateful and contented. Dogs are that. They don't ask for much except for love. A simple and yet profound request. Sometimes humans are even more demanding, myself included. How ironic that humans are associated with the greatest emotion - love and they are like that. Most females demand not just love but material goods too. They are allegedly more loving than males are but oh well..... Love isn't just buying things for your partner but doing little sweet things for him or her too.
I can sympathise with Chris's pain when Lucky didn't wag his tail anymore and just flopped on the grass, inert. My heart is filled with pangs too. To see your loved one withering away and losing weight, not eating well anymore, in misery and confusion, and just awaiting death, is a traumatic experience. Death thus becomes a release from such intense suffering. It's better for death to claim him or her then.
Lucky could have whimpered in such a condition but he didn't. Such strength in a dog just makes his loss to the family all the more tragic and greater. Strangely though, it also gives a sense of beauty to his departure. The sorrow they must have experienced is something I understand. He was indeed the best dog, from Chris's point of view.
The journey to Mr Right
Simone Heng wrote about finding Mr Right in her column 'Sexless in the City'. She cited her experience of bringing her date to a BBQ and leaving him alone. I think that's rather mean of her. If you decide to date him, you should not feel uncomfortable holding his hand. It is just holding his hand, your date's hand, not anything more than that. She could have at least introduced him to her friends, so that he would not feel so left out. She should have thought of his feelings and how he saw the two of them. Keeping a distance from him was definitely hurting him.
She claims that she has gotten used to going to outings without a partner. In that case, she could have chosen not to bring him. Who says you have to bring your date on an outing with your friends? After all, she had her old friends to talk to.
She mentions her girlfriend as being one that cuts off contact with her friends for her partner. I guess most girls are guilty of this. Both of them find security with their partners and that is normal for girls. We always see men as the epitome of strength and safety, who can take care of us and protect us against harm.
Well, I hope she finds that "man whose hand (she) cannot resist taking in (hers) to tell the world that (they) are together." That will be a paradisal experience for her.
She claims that she has gotten used to going to outings without a partner. In that case, she could have chosen not to bring him. Who says you have to bring your date on an outing with your friends? After all, she had her old friends to talk to.
She mentions her girlfriend as being one that cuts off contact with her friends for her partner. I guess most girls are guilty of this. Both of them find security with their partners and that is normal for girls. We always see men as the epitome of strength and safety, who can take care of us and protect us against harm.
Well, I hope she finds that "man whose hand (she) cannot resist taking in (hers) to tell the world that (they) are together." That will be a paradisal experience for her.
Smsing between parents and children
Cheong Suk-Wai attributes the improved communication with her mother to the invention of smses. I use smses to communicate with my dad for the same purposes as she does. My mum's smsing skills are atrocious. :P
I use them when I have had a fight with my dad or when we are too hurt to speak to each other. Somehow written words are easier to bring out my feelings as I don't have to face him. The phone becomes a wall of protection till we are ready to break it down. In the process, our true feelings flow out and I treasure those smses.
At the same time, we sms each other to ask after each other and for other "mundane" things like household duties. It is much cheaper than a phone call and we get a number of smses free too. It is also more suitable for just a few words to be exchanged.
Of course, the main reason is that I prefer to sms rather than speak, even on normal occasions. I guess I'm more of a writer than a speak-er.
I use them when I have had a fight with my dad or when we are too hurt to speak to each other. Somehow written words are easier to bring out my feelings as I don't have to face him. The phone becomes a wall of protection till we are ready to break it down. In the process, our true feelings flow out and I treasure those smses.
At the same time, we sms each other to ask after each other and for other "mundane" things like household duties. It is much cheaper than a phone call and we get a number of smses free too. It is also more suitable for just a few words to be exchanged.
Of course, the main reason is that I prefer to sms rather than speak, even on normal occasions. I guess I'm more of a writer than a speak-er.
Arranged marriage vs love marriage and honesty in love
Simone Heng posed these questions to her readers and this is my take on it.
I feel that love should be the essence of a marriage. With love, emotional intimacy comes in and that is more important than physical intimacy. The marriage will then be emotionally stable. As for monetary abundance, the man will be just like an bank account and he will resent it sooner or later. The lack of feelings for each other will adversely affect the children who will come into the picture, who will be born for lineage purposes rather than out of love.
If a person were to be simultaneously dating two partners, he or she should have the courtesy to choose one. The truth will hurt but that's being ethical and fair in love. The one who will be dumped will be angry and hurt, but at least he or she won't be deceived any longer. The one who will be lucky enough to be chosen will feel the same but will ultimately be relieved that he or she has become the only lover in the person's life.
Dating is not just a casual outing with someone but encompasses romantic feelings for that person too. One should not play with those feelings. Staying with the one you don't feel as much for as well, so as not to hurt him or her is not being benevolent but being insincere and unfaithful to two people. Your heart is not fully with one and is split between two. Thus, each one gets just half of it. Make it clear to both of them.
Keeping the two partners hidden from each other isn't going to work in the long run. The truth will always reign. Uncontrollable factors will come into the picture. It is very tiring having to make up stories to cover up for your whereabouts and to think of remote places to go to so as to avoid bumping into one another. Besides, Singapore is so small. Where can you run to? By the time hearts are broken, it will be too late to mend them and salvage the friendships.
I feel that love should be the essence of a marriage. With love, emotional intimacy comes in and that is more important than physical intimacy. The marriage will then be emotionally stable. As for monetary abundance, the man will be just like an bank account and he will resent it sooner or later. The lack of feelings for each other will adversely affect the children who will come into the picture, who will be born for lineage purposes rather than out of love.
If a person were to be simultaneously dating two partners, he or she should have the courtesy to choose one. The truth will hurt but that's being ethical and fair in love. The one who will be dumped will be angry and hurt, but at least he or she won't be deceived any longer. The one who will be lucky enough to be chosen will feel the same but will ultimately be relieved that he or she has become the only lover in the person's life.
Dating is not just a casual outing with someone but encompasses romantic feelings for that person too. One should not play with those feelings. Staying with the one you don't feel as much for as well, so as not to hurt him or her is not being benevolent but being insincere and unfaithful to two people. Your heart is not fully with one and is split between two. Thus, each one gets just half of it. Make it clear to both of them.
Keeping the two partners hidden from each other isn't going to work in the long run. The truth will always reign. Uncontrollable factors will come into the picture. It is very tiring having to make up stories to cover up for your whereabouts and to think of remote places to go to so as to avoid bumping into one another. Besides, Singapore is so small. Where can you run to? By the time hearts are broken, it will be too late to mend them and salvage the friendships.
Feedback on a diamond determining love
Some readers wrote in to comment about Sandra's article and I'm glad they did.
Sharini sympathises with the man with average earnings. A kindred spirit! Indeed, a woman who truly understands her lover will not be unhappy with the size of the gem. If the ring is just meant for her to show off, then it somehow undermines the fact that she does cherish this symbol of commitment. She should be keeping it close to her heart(not in a literal sense) since it is between she and her lover.
Siew Lynn has similar views about how a ring doesn't guarantee a lasting relationship. "It will take more than a big diamond ring to keep it all together." She makes us think about the man's point of view, a good strategy to jolt the selfish women awake. If the man is as particular about the material possession he gets from his partner, how would she feel?
A man finally wrote in to lambaste such materialistic women. Kudos to him! Frederick expresses his unhappiness over women who ask their men to "blow their money" on a diamond ring. The money men earn is also meant for themselves, not to be wholly spent on their lovers! It is true that we should give others a positive impression about ourselves through our deeds and even character, instead of through our possessions. We can't bring the latter with us to our graves, can we?
Sharini sympathises with the man with average earnings. A kindred spirit! Indeed, a woman who truly understands her lover will not be unhappy with the size of the gem. If the ring is just meant for her to show off, then it somehow undermines the fact that she does cherish this symbol of commitment. She should be keeping it close to her heart(not in a literal sense) since it is between she and her lover.
Siew Lynn has similar views about how a ring doesn't guarantee a lasting relationship. "It will take more than a big diamond ring to keep it all together." She makes us think about the man's point of view, a good strategy to jolt the selfish women awake. If the man is as particular about the material possession he gets from his partner, how would she feel?
A man finally wrote in to lambaste such materialistic women. Kudos to him! Frederick expresses his unhappiness over women who ask their men to "blow their money" on a diamond ring. The money men earn is also meant for themselves, not to be wholly spent on their lovers! It is true that we should give others a positive impression about ourselves through our deeds and even character, instead of through our possessions. We can't bring the latter with us to our graves, can we?
Does the diamond's size define his degree of love
Sandra Leong penned an article on how she wants a good engagement ring. I beg to differ on her thoughts regarding the importance of an expensive ring in a love relationship. Indeed, the materialistic forces of this world has influenced her, especially the women's magazines out there.
Basically, the quality of the ring doesn't determine how much a man loves you. He can give you a huge gem but it cannot guarantee his undying love for you. There is still a chance that the relationship won't last. It seems to me that romance is more important than love in the mind of Sandra. Love doesn't have to be ruled by such rituals.
There are other things that are sweet and less materialistic that he can do for you. What if he is not a millionaire and can't afford an expensive ring, but he treats you as a queen in his own special ways? Do you dump him because he is a pauper? Travelling a long way just to make sure you are safely home, wanting to spend more time with you at the expense of that with others and taking good care of you when you are with him, are also gestures that show his love for you. Call me naive at being touched by such small things but little drops of water make a mighty ocean, don't they? No wonder men who are not rich but not poor either feel ostracized.
Her friend J defined marriage as boring. I find that difficult to fathom. Marriage needs work and is not perfect, since it is between two humans. It is probably boring in that sense.
I am more into the wedding gown when it comes to the wedding. The design must be personally appealing and flattering, but more importantly, it must be appropriate for my church's dress code and not overshadow my husband's suit. The bride is usually in the limelight on that day but won't her husband feel small as a result? I must think of my husband's feelings too.
At the same time, money is an issue too. The dresses don't have to be from a designer and the reception as well as dinner can do without fancy food, the dummy cake and the champagne pouring. One evening gown or at the most two, will do. Another reason is that if I keep going out to change during the dinner, I won't get to eat much and it will be physically tiring too.
Basically, the quality of the ring doesn't determine how much a man loves you. He can give you a huge gem but it cannot guarantee his undying love for you. There is still a chance that the relationship won't last. It seems to me that romance is more important than love in the mind of Sandra. Love doesn't have to be ruled by such rituals.
There are other things that are sweet and less materialistic that he can do for you. What if he is not a millionaire and can't afford an expensive ring, but he treats you as a queen in his own special ways? Do you dump him because he is a pauper? Travelling a long way just to make sure you are safely home, wanting to spend more time with you at the expense of that with others and taking good care of you when you are with him, are also gestures that show his love for you. Call me naive at being touched by such small things but little drops of water make a mighty ocean, don't they? No wonder men who are not rich but not poor either feel ostracized.
Her friend J defined marriage as boring. I find that difficult to fathom. Marriage needs work and is not perfect, since it is between two humans. It is probably boring in that sense.
I am more into the wedding gown when it comes to the wedding. The design must be personally appealing and flattering, but more importantly, it must be appropriate for my church's dress code and not overshadow my husband's suit. The bride is usually in the limelight on that day but won't her husband feel small as a result? I must think of my husband's feelings too.
At the same time, money is an issue too. The dresses don't have to be from a designer and the reception as well as dinner can do without fancy food, the dummy cake and the champagne pouring. One evening gown or at the most two, will do. Another reason is that if I keep going out to change during the dinner, I won't get to eat much and it will be physically tiring too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)