Karma is a dreadfully selfless bitch.

I can't really understand it but I have this constant feeling of dread. I can comprehend why, but the reality is there is no logical cause. My comprehension is my general grasp on the idea of karma. Things have been going well recently, infact too well, and so I can conclude I am fucked in the near future unless I lose a leg or do something so selfless I elevate to a level of enlightenment only known by Buddha himself. The problem with selfless acts is I am so aware of what I'm doing and what the outcome will be that nothing can be considered selfless when I've already considered the outcome and therefore concluded that is what I want - 'I' being the key letter/word there.
So how is a selfless act conceived? I have come across a female with the same elevated irritation by the general population of humans as me, same travel aspirations (I.e. Everywhere) and just general awesomeness that I am quite frankly enthralled by, and she seems to be interested in me too, so unless I come up with something quick, I'll start going at my leg with a rusty saw.
Again back to the general issue of the idea of something being selfless - I will be hopefully accomplishing this act, even with the knowledge that within the success of such an act I will be karma-neutral once again to plow on with happiness. Therefore, un-selfless be this act lest I do it unconsciously, or without immediate thought or inspiration to the general outcomes provided by such an act. Basically by becoming mentally redundant I could accomplish such an act, so I think I may have to go crash a car without the seatbelt. Either that or somehow get unknowingly (even though I want it to happen, and have therefore now plotted it as such) robbed, then decide to not press charges or something.
I think my problem might be in that I'm so used to a negative input at some stage that my melancholy nature cannot comprehend anything half decent happening. Essentially anything could happen and all will be well, without the loss of a limb or selfless acts impossible to achieve in their previous acknowledgement.
In other news, don't you hate that point on a train journey where you sit down and notice there is someone sat maybe across or a seat away, but in the reflection of the window it would seem as if they are staring at you? They could simply be staring constantly out of the window without blinking, or they are infatuated with you. I mean, what can you do? You can't suggest anything. Staring back may aid them into a) thinking you are infact the weirdo staring at them or, b) give them even more reason to stare due to your obvious (though unexpected even to yourself) infatuation of them also. So what do you do? You just sit there and idly type away on your shitty little blog, hoping the problem will disappear - maybe they'll get off the train before you (even though you get off before the epicentre of the general commuter journey) or you just pray there is enough light through the window to dispel any sort of reflection for the vast majority of the journey.
Paralysation - this would surely give me the ultimate in negative karma, to go by forever unheeded? Christopher Reeves must be rolling in it right now.

Run rabbit.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Femality

; A regular and persistent occurence developed by the female sex.
The way in which a female (singularly, or as a whole) affects often, and with persistent regularity, the life and/or actions of a male/partner which generally applies to the development of feelings for and/or between the two parties in question.
E.g:- "the femality of Lauren in my mind is alarming".

Indeed I think I may have made this up. Either that or I have completely butchered its original meaning as a word - the latter being the more likely. I like it though, it simply relates a necessary fact, female activity appears often and with alarming effect in my life. The femality of certain individuals affects many departments in my life; friendship, work, the varying grey areas that are linked between these and so on.
I recently watched Simon Amstell performing a worldwide acclaimed stand-up act, I've seen it before but this time around there were many themes that intrigued me. One particular theme played throughout the act was that of 'fear and love'. Amstell brings it to the jury of a stand-up audience that life is plagued by the opposing forces of 'fear and love'; the love and adoration we may feel for another, counteracted by the fear of even contemplating talking to them, or even the suggestion that said person may or may not feel similarly back.
I figure most of my life has been led by fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of rejection, fear of the truth. I don't like this fact and I don't quite understand it as of yet, but I now acknowledge it, which is atleast a step in the right direction.
Of course this also suggests quite rightly, that love has played a major part in my life also. I've been in love and ruined it, I've been loved and ruined it, I've adored and never shed light on it, I've openly adored and had it dismissed. I suppose the general theme there is that of ends. Alot of people seem to get stuck on that fact, everything ends. The problem with that is, we don't know what ends until after, what about the things we are currently involved in? We can't necessarily ever know when something is going to end, we can only know when it began, and celebrate every present day. Most people have friends. Some of those friends we like, adore, love, and I am no stranger to this. But as the La Dispute song goes, 'if I can't love you as a lover, I will love you as a friend'. Goodnight.

Lonely with a side of braun ala brain.

Last night I hugged myself to sleep. Now to the outside world this would seem like a very lonely activity - and yes indeed I am slightly alone having no partner to account for, however I am working on that - but consider simply, that it was comfy. I know I am indeed ever hopeful to fill a void, and maybe subconsciously this was a way in which to do so. However, I was genuinely comfy, and so I am just wondering at what point does your subconscious start playing an active role? Granted I'm sure we can test it with a variety of head apparatus, but I'm not so sure I'd be all that comfy then, therefore changing the environment and essential nulling the validity of the test in itself. Society - that loving, wholesome place that we live in - will always point to it as some sort of loneliness, something wrong, a weakness. We are so degradatory en masse against our own species, its hard to see how we have made it so far other than via the simplicity of 'the strong shall prevail'.
Now, I want to be stronger. Not by much, just as a warning. I'm an avid gamer, biker, filmaholic, bookworm and I do like to think, I'm generally of a fair intelligence (I acknowledge any, if not all of these blog posts could count as evidence against this portrayal). However being 6 foot 1, athletic, I think I could be more. I'm not saying I'm heading for the tops of everything, what I'm trying to suggest is I could help with the conveyance of equality in society. Why is it so often our brutus maximus friend is pitted against our fellow four-eyed physician? We all have so much in common, I hate hearing about inequality, and yet this is often such an easy thing to elevate ourselves above, and onto better pastures. Mental and physical strength I see so often as clashing entities, and granted, some people just want to watch the world burn (oh yes Alfred, we know), but a simple understanding of each other can lead to a much brighter future.
Anyway this blog was too bright and wholesome, so go fuck yourself San Diego, and have a shitty morning.

Donkey spewing tequila times.

Wahey train time! Maybe I should create a theme tune for this poor excuse for a blog. it could be a cross between bruce's price is right and suckerpunch, like a melancholy donkey spewing its guts up after a night on the 'quila (i like to call it that, because it kind of resembles 'killer', and I hate tequila).
Segue into a topic; I got into work last night still shaking like Micheal J Fox after a sugar overdose, having consumed many an alcoholic beverage the night before. Specifically, there is a free bar for an hour at the start of the night at this lovely little dive I like to frequent, and I topped off 11 and a half whiskey and cokes wuthin this alotted time. That may sound like quite an achievement, however my record is 17 in my first year of uni at a different establishment. All I'm going to say is, there was blood.
Anyway, picking up this blog, did I tell you (because I have followers that actually read this, lulz) that I am some sort of creative type? Recently I have designed a wedding invitation, and a logo for a singer, aint that something! I am soon to do a cd cover aswell. How pleasant, not that I'm getting paid for any of it mind, but it is good to be doing something creative once again. I hope to be able to get on with more, as it is most certainly a fun experience for someone like myself. I may even upload them cheekily on here for you, the non-existent viewer, to have a gander. Oh, goody goody.

Immorally justified

There is a place called Salford on my train journey. Or atleast I thought it was called Salford, my brain is actively convincing me it's Salfold. I mean, who actually pronounces the 'r/l' anyway? Logically I know it's Salford, not Salfold, because ford's appear in names for places, a ford is a geographical entity unlike a fold, and my fingers type it subconsciously with an 'r' - logic therefore dictates it as such. Why does my brain want it to be Salfold so much then? Who knows.
Onto a fantastic topic, how big an age gap does a couple have to have for it to be considered morally 'wrong'? Now I know what you are thinking, why am I discussing morals, what a joke, where have I shown them upto now! But here me out.
Naturally speaking, any male with the ability to ejaculate, should have equal opportunity as all others, to get with any female who can menstruate, and vice versa. No matter what your parents, family, friends, physician, doctor, minister or that dude you sat next to that time at the walk in clinic, this is the natural order. That is how animals behave, and we are animals, no bigger nor better than the lowliest sentient life form are you than Joseph Kony (lulz I made a 'current events' joke).
What prevents an 80 year old on viagra pumping a 12 year old early bloomer is morality, society, what people think essentially.
Now before I go any further than this I am not suggesting at 80 I'm going to be pilled up and looking for love, my stance will become known soon enough, I'm just stating that I acknowledge the natural order, of which we as a society disagree with - is that the correct way to think?
Now what avout something more socially acceptable, an 18year old with a 20 something, as is portrayed in the film 'pineapple express' - I didn't see an issue with any of that, did you? But if we knock both candidates back a couple of months each, say to when the female is 17, is that the moment when we get our hump up? Still the same age gap, the same mentalities, just a couple of months out of whack.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone or anything, I'm just stating facts as a generality for the lovely society we all live in and cherish. Much like this Kony thing, a one man army against a one man army I see it. Kony deserves to die, and if I could I'd pop his head off myself, but as it stands Kony 2012 is pushing for military action - the killing of more people by backing an army that has often been accused of various unjust exploits, rape, looting and so on - which has been tried and has failed numerous times in the past, and as a generality I'm rather against military action as a whole anyway, no matter how angry I can often seem.
Granted there has to be justice, but at what cost? We replace Kony with the simplicity of looking through rose tinted glasses at the ugandan army? Somehow, that doesn't cut it for me.

Sleep deprived too much to drive?

Later train than usual, extra money in the bag.
Two nights on the trot in work and I'm feeling pleasant - though I think a breakfast is in order as I have a driving lesson, which leads me nicely to the idea, whether I should let my instructor know or not.
I'm tired, though cheerful, is it delusion or the excited uneasiness that could be associated with roughly 9 hours of sleep in 3 days? I'm wondering what are the legal levels of sleep necessary to drive. At what point am I unfit to do so? Studies suggest that sleep deprivation accounts for between 16 and 60 percent (by primary or secondary association) of america's road accidents. Scare tactic or no, it's interesting; the suggestion that it can provide a person with the same reaction constraints as a person with an alcohol level of 0.5 or above (it could be 0.05, but give me a break, this train doesn't have wifi for me to check) which is the legal limit in europe, is alarming. what are the police able to check against this? I will notify my instructor either way, upon his head this shall rest.
I feel as if I shouldn't be behind a wheel, and bed is a necessity doubly (sp?) so as I'm out later, and in work again at 10 tomorrow.
This brings me neatly back to the idea of checks. What makes someone fit to drive? I can safely assume my reactions are still better than some on the road, even unhindered by a lack of sleep or alcohol consumption. I could most certainly walk a line and touch my nose etc, but I would like some checks to do myself, maybe stand infront of a tennis ball machine? I'll have to purchase one, that would be hilarious; 'but I'm fit to drive honest!', 'these tennis ball sized bruises suggest otherwise sir, please step away from the vehicle'.
I've recently permitted a friend to these ridiculous blogs, hopefully not hindering the content, but instead enlightening someone else's day with my deluded strife. Has this bllg changed from the others? I don't know. I haven't elaborated on the female content embellishing this Sardine Tin on the Tracks (I like that as a name for a cocktail), but then my eyes only fall on a somewhat neanderthalic specimen and two on my table that fill me with indifference.
So moving on nicely to female underwear, am I high maintenance or merely misconstrued (i feel sorry for the underwear stood in the aisle next to me either way, I think she just followed through. My appreciation knows no bounds right now).
I recently came across an incredible female in an incredible set of knickers. A female counterpart of mine suggested that it's probabky because the underwear is £50 a pair, and so my contrary nature kicked in. I tracked them to topshop online, for a mere £4 sterling. That led me to the conclusion that given the store's popularity, women of this nation as a generality, specifically go out of there way to look shit.
Now you are probably inclined to arsine that this underwear be a skimpy, stringy lace ensemble, better for flossing than wearing. Look up the satin floral designs in the topshop underwear section titled 'minis', and tell me what its impractical? Overall you are provided with silk like feel (comfy), a full piece of underwear (practical), at £4 a piece (affordable); I get the whole ' big knickers at a time of the month', but what about the other 23+/- days? Now if you're a feminist please go back to your pantaloons and kindly gtfo, I've lived with my mother and sister most of my life and my sexuality its not questionable even if your actual sex often is, you were not repressed from voting, you are not a suffragette.
Anyway back to my point; if I can choose a good looking, cheap and comfortable waterproof coat over a piece of tarpaulin I would, so why so often are people happy with tarpaulin? Yes this is an acceptable way to present it.