Pride and Pretentiousness, do you know one?

We all know someone pretentious, usually in the form of a “hip” University student, whose sustenance is the WiFi in Starbucks, writing a blog about bloggers who blog about blogging, enjoyed over a steaming cup of extra foam-non-dairy-split-shot-sugar-free-caramel-swirl-minus-the-caramel-touch-of-hazelnut-put-it-in-a-venti-cup coffee, which they neglect as they harp loudly to their equally pretentious friends about utilitarianism and Zeitgeist.

You know who I’m talking about, they look like they’ve stolen their Grandad’s unwanted clothes, and wear big framed glasses with no lenses so they can better see just how inferior anyone with a differing opinion to theirs is. They preach about the environment and Fairtrade then light up a Mayfair and puff about how corrupt the Government is man, it’s all a conspiracy dude, that’s why they’re an Anarchist, who also happens to like hybrid genre music like crunk-house-dub-classical, and is the only vegan so strict they think lentil soup is morally wrong.

Oh, and their parents are totally bang out of order because they won’t let them get the new Apple Wafer-thin Craptop, so just to show them up they’re going to have that massive “off-the-rails” house-party and show off their mad-DJ skills mixing vinyls from the 70’s with electro, alcohol is totally last century they’re T-Total now, but crystal meth is just fine.

 

Image via Wikipedia

Advertisements

Living and Dying on Death Row

I admit Death Row has always been something that made me curious, as have murderers, serial killers and the justice system itself. But it goes beyond morbid fascination into my desire to understand why people do what they do; a lot of it comes down to neurology, biopsychology, as well social and cultural forces. But this post is not to argue Nature Versus Nurture. This is my ethical consideration.

Title capital punishment

Is Capital punishment ethically sound? I don’t think so; an eye for an eye or a ‘life for a life’ does not equate to justice, it is bloodlust the same as in the Middle Ages. Besides, death is a way out; life in prison is a longer punishment, protecting the general public without having to murder the convict.

I think the real reasons (or excuses) behind Capital punishment are:

1) To reduce overcrowding in prisons.

In other words to save costs and the time it would take to find alternative solutions. This is also the reason many non-capital offenders are released early; it’s not just for ‘good behaviour.’

2) Outdated primitive bloodlust, where ‘justice’ is synonymous with revenge.

You would be amazed how many people call for the torture and death of a criminal, so long as it is not blood on their hands. The executions are generally performed in white tiled rooms by stoic prison staff, legalised murder under the pretense of justice in a clinical sanitary environment. A viewing room is separated by glass so the onlookers can see every bit of gore, but remain clean and separate from any feeling of responsibility. We live in a voyeuristic culture, where we can absorb information from behind the safety of a computer monitor, television screen, windows, the glass panel separating us from the wild animals at the zoo, or a criminal about to have his or her life taken, exposed under the stark lights and glare of onlookers’ eyes.

Many murder victims’ families do not seek this level of revenge and argue: ‘”MVFR (Murder Victims Families for Retribution) knows that – in spite of that pain vengeance is not the answer. The taking of another life by state killing only continues the cycle of violence.” One member writes, “To say that the death of any other person would be just retribution is to insult the immeasurable worth of our loved ones who are victims.”

3) To deter others from committing the same crimes.

At least read this article before making up your mind. The deterrent effects of capital punishment are based on opinion only, not facts, and are therefore not a logical or actual reason to maintain this barbaric practice.

Prevention is a good idea, but this is not the way to do it. Another problem is that most murderers probably aren’t thinking about the consequences of their actions when performing them, a lot of murders are in the ‘heat of the moment’, or driven by anger. But also some are the cold, calculated decisions of psychopaths whose biological makeup disallows them from feeling compassion or guilt, no matter how long they are forced to rot on Death Row.

4) In some countries executions have resulted in nonconsensual organ ‘donation’.

The theft of the convict’s organs regardless of their consent or religious/cultural beliefs still happens today. It has been common practice in China, where they are now allegedly moving to stop transplants of organs after executions due to a global outcry, see here in NYTimes. But why was this allowed to happen in the first place?

If you want to learn more about legalised execution around the world, it is worth visiting Amnesty here. And watch this new series on 40d, where Werner Herzog meets convicted criminals on Death Row, including Hank Skinner who, guilty or not, was not given a fair trial and had to fight for pieces of evidence to be DNA tested. His execution date has been rescheduled three times, and he was even sent to the ‘Death house’ where he ate his last meal, in a cell that overlooked the room where he would meet his death, only to have the phone ring and be told that the execution date had been put off. I question whether anyone deserves to have his or her life not only ended, but also toyed with in this manner.

Something I Wrote

Stylistic clown eyes track you from the frames on the faded wall. You lay dormant, stagnating on your mattress prison. The sweet and acrid smell of the plastic waste bag hanging from you fills the room. The carpet is dusty, more flecks of dirt gather each day and you realise you have counted, your head lolling atop the cushioned domain. In the blurry corners of your senses the Television babbles, the faded movies of your youth that “they just don’t make like that anymore,” as William says, or maybe used to say.

Your tongue is swollen and clumsy as you try to reach out, try to tell them that you must get back to the house and collect the children. That woman is treating them all wrong, and there are only so many times one can eat chicken soup with stale bread. You would give them anything just then, open wide the sweet jar from the shelf only you could reach, never mind it being bedtime. To hell with beds, to hell with the linen sheets that clasp the cold sweat of your flesh, and the Venus flytrap depths of the sinking duvet dragging you deeper with each struggle.

But you are forty years too late, and it is “time for your medication, Evelyn.”

 

Note:

I don’t share much of my creative writing, I get worried that it will reveal too much, or that some fool will steal parts of it for whatever reason. So please don’t.

Facebook as Prosthesis

Image representing Facebook as depicted in Cru...

Image via CrunchBase

Facebook as Prosthesis by Ruth Noakes 

(snippet from from my dissertation when I was a student in London)
Facebook, the social networking website, was launched in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg, Chris Hughes and Dustin Moskovitz from their dormitory room at Harvard, and within just two years it had twelve million users, which increased exponentially in 2008 with sixty-seven million users, and over fourteen million photos are uploaded daily[i]. Social networks can be seen to give people some control over projecting perceptions of themselves, and affirming current ideas of what the self consists of; ‘online social networks free us, in some sense, from the requirements of “real world” circumstances and permit us to try out various self conceptions to find ones that fit with what we would like to be’[ii]. Concedingly, Waters claims that ‘for the posthuman, there is no autonomous self that is given, because the self can only be made’[iii]

As a result of my research methodologies I was able to gather up to date, and currently relevant information to aid my case study. Therefore I needed a current media and technology example to illustrate my findings, and decided that the most prominent case within my research thus far was Facebook, because it remains somewhat mysterious and ever changing. I deem that Facebook acts as an interface, which enables common ground for people from a wide range of age groups and social backgrounds, and having gathered primary information from my participant observation, it seemed logical that this area deserved more focus and could aid me in answering the initial research question; to what extent can technology be seen as an extension of the human body or mind. If Facebook can be deemed a form of prosthesis to the human, then perhaps the same can be applied to other technologies.

Using the perspective gathered from having my own Facebook account, this primary research and participatory element should grant an accurate and detailed view of the current uses of Facebook, and the extent to which people allow it to represent them. However, I shall use other contemporary examples of human and machine interactivity to demonstrate how the ‘prosthetic impulse’[iv] affects modern society as a whole as well as in terms of individual identity.

From the detached yet directly involved perspective of my Facebook page, I was able to see why members of the focus groups I conducted spoke of how addictive they found it, and why going without technology was often mostly difficut because of the inability to connect with friends on Facebook. The Facebook ‘news feed’ updates automatically and perpetually, filling with status updates posted by my ‘friends’, including what their current actions are, who they are with, or where they are, this can be seen as ‘contributing to the creation of a permanent present whose intense pace knows no tomorrow’[v], and relates to Heidegger’s ‘presencing’ of what is present[vi], because the constant bringing forth of information, regardless of its purpose, holds meaning, a pre-existing need to share. Virilio is concerned with this speed, and need for constant information and entertainment, and deems that the distorted ‘time span is destroying the rhythms of a society which has become more and more debased’[vii]. If society is thus debased and flattened by technology, this seems to contradict the act of extending or adding prosthesis to the human self; rather Virilio seems to hint at the destruction of life as we know it.

Figure 1, (Permission from Ruairi Glynn) ‘Dancers 2008’ Emergencia Exhibition, Itau Cultural, Sao Paulo Brazil 2008.

The relation between biological matter and immaterial thought and meaning, which Merleau-Ponty explores, emphasises that our actions are not merely for survival, but shift to a figurative meaning that ‘manifests’ through bodies ‘a core of new significance: this is true of motor habits such as dancing’[viii]. Using Merleau-Ponty’s perspective, I deduce that dancing could be described as a secondary action, unnecessary for survival but elaborated or extended from our inner thoughts as a means of perceiving the outer world. A contemporary example that illustrates this ‘new significance’ is Ruairi Glynn’s ‘Performative Ecology’ project ‘Dancers 2008’[ix], as shown above in Figure 1. The Dancers, or robots, are built to intuitively react to human facial expressions, dancing in accordance to the emotions they detect through facial recognition software. They have the power to learn new dance routines as well as teaching other Dancers the movements they found to be most successful in inciting response from the human crowd. The Dancers are granted a significant degree of autonomy and intuition, yet remain dependent upon human attention, and reactive to human emotions that they cannot ever feel themselves. Similarly, Facebook seems to grow in its autonomy, as it is programmed to intuitively detect a user’s preferences; I discovered that whatever you type is detected by Facebook, which then proceeds to place advertisements on the home page, related to your words. Facebook encourages you to click ‘like’ on brand pages, and asks you to engage in polls determining your response to certain products. Facebook institutionalises culture to an extent; marketing ploys tell us to invite more friends, to perpetuate the Facebook brand. Facebook is about profit, but beneath the material profit lays meaning, of which Merleau-Ponty and Heidegger would encourage the exploration.

Niedzviecki states that ‘from Facebook to WebCams to blogs to Reality TV we are actively involved in trading our privacy for community, shared meaning’[x]; this was also the concession I gained during the focus group methodology. On the most part the older age groups claimed to use Facebook for business reasons or nostalgia, for example, some claimed it was to reconnect with lost friends or family, and reminisce on the past, whereas the younger age groups all emphasised the uses of Facebook as being for plan making, current updates and learning what events were happening in the future.

Figure 2, Dancers 2008, courtesy of Ruairi Glynn.

What if technology has created a secondary or tertiary impulse, which I term as one that is not primary to survival, and has thus subverted our nature? During my participatory observation I noticed that mobile phones, such as the iPhone, encourage the use of Facebook through an application that is just one button click away, and introduced a new feature whereby you can ‘check-in’ to locations. Firsthand I observed, on the news feed, a person check-in at location tagged as their home, and also tagged was the person’s girlfriend. I was shocked that someone would go to the extent of revealing their home’s location on the Internet, but also including a link to the Facebook page of their girlfriend, and publicising such a seemingly private or intimate occasion. This would indeed support the notion of extending our sense of sharing, the Internet representing an interface where sharing too much matters less than it would if it were done face-to-face, and is exemplary of Niedzviecki’s term ‘overshare’. His book ‘The Peep Diaries’, describes our recently evolved ‘Peep Culture’, where we often interact more through machines than directly, essentially spy on others, and allow ourselves to be spied upon by ‘oversharing’ personal information via networking websites; ‘Apple released the iPhone 3G, and global capitalism teetered…yet that single ungainly word, overshare, may prove to be more significant’ for we ‘ushered in a new era: the Era of Peep Culture’[xi].

But perhaps the impulse to over-share is not one of prosthesis, and instead needs a new metaphor more befitting to its context. In ‘The Prosthetic Impulse’, Sobchack recognises Kurzman’s concern regarding the use of prosthesis as a metaphor in modern anthropology[xii]. Kurzman, who is an amputee deems that theorists situate an issue, then retroactively define it using prosthesis and artificial limbs in an attempt to expand ethnographic material, and emphasises that actually it is a reductive term when thus removed from context[xiii]. I am not entirely in agreement with this, because I think a word can be reconceptualised, granted new meaning or context, without having to change the word itself. Facebook certainly extends awareness in terms of current occurrences; as a participant observer I began to learn things about my ‘friends’ which I would not otherwise have known, or would ever before have had the desire to know. Perhaps Facebook is exemplary of the desire to transcend corporeality[xiv] in the paradoxical fashion Grosz demonstrated, and is powered by our desire to share and escape into voyeuristic digital interface. From a posthuman understanding, and the admission of dependency, and interactivity on the part of my focus group members, it seems likely that Facebook acts as a form of prosthesis, in that it offers functions the body could not attain alone.

References and Sources below:

We are like machines?

Cover of "The Cyborg Experiments: The Ext...

Cover via Amazon

I am writing a 10,000 word Dissertation about the cultural and psychological effects of technology [Embodiment, Prosthesis, Cyber Culture]. I’m adopting the attitude of an author, just acting like I’m releasing a book soon, and my publisher has tightened the deadline. And who knows, maybe if it’s good enough at the end I can make it an Internet PDF eBook that you’d like to download?

On my reading list, number 8), the author Joanna Zylinska, is the lady I met last week to discuss my writing. She will be personally supervising my Dissertation, so it’s nice to know I have the advice of a well published author. Her topics on our relation to technology, as well as the ethics and issues, are completely relevant to my interests. But I want to attempt a fresh angle, not mimic the authors below.

My reading list so far:

1) Materializing New Media: Embodiment in Information Aesthetics (Interfaces: Studies in Visual Culture) – Anna Munster

2) Facebook and Philosophy (Popular Culture and Philosophy) – Dylan E. Wittkower

3) How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics – N. Katherine Hayles

4) TechGnosis: Myth, Magic & Mysticism in the Age of Information – Erik Davis

5) Internet Culture – David Porter

6) The Body (Key Concepts) – Lisa Blackman

7) The Prosthetic Impulse: From a Posthuman Present to a Biocultural Future – Marquard Smith and Joanne Morra

8) The Cyborg Experiments: The Extensions of the Body in the Media Age (Technologies: Studies in Culture & Theory) – Joanna Zylinska

9) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man – Marshall McLuhan

Have you read any of these? What did you think of them?

Aloe can help survival during severe blood loss?

Heart diagram with labels in English. Blue com...

Image via Wikipedia

Just found one of my older LiveJournal posts, it was just a DRAFT of thoughts:

Jan. 16th, 2010 at 6:41 PM

Aloe can help survival during severe blood loss?
www.nationalreviewofmedicine.com/issue/2004_09_15/clinical11_16.html

I initially searched into this mainly because I was wondering whether panic/increased heart rate sped up blood flow (and therefore blood loss), (and therefore one’s demise), OR, does the quickened blood flow aid the situation, seeing as the heart’s natural response to blood loss is to speed up and release adrenaline as a reaction to lower available oxygen and/or volume of blood itself. Does speeding up of heart rate and blood flow enable the remaining oxygen to be distributed in a way that attempts to simulate the regular amounts.

It is mentioned that aloe increases circulation, and the rats that were injected with it during severe blood loss lived longer than rats that were injected with regular saline. However, the improved circulatory function does pose the risk of obstructing coagulation. Therefore aloe could be useful to prolong a patient’s life, whilst further treatment/aid/procedures are taken to stem the blood flow, or a transfusion is made.

So, is the natural rush of adrenaline, which is automatic in the situation of severe blood loss, helpful? Or is it an inevitable symptom, induced by hemorrhagic shock, which essentially speeds up one’s demise?

Heightened heart rate and blood flow BUT lower blood pressure.

Heightened
blood flow but lower oxygen and blood volume.

If the heart slowed dramatically rather than speeding dramatically once heavy blood loss is induced, the lowered blood pressure would have an intensified impact…therefore it could be theorised that the over-compensation the heart makes in speeding faster is an attempt to normalise the body and pump oxygen to the parts that need it most.

HOWEVER, with wounds, such as those on major arteries, like the jugular, the heavier blood flow would result in a quicker death.

(Original post can be seen here: LiveJournal)

I can’t update, fear of failure :(

The All-Nighter

Image by Spitefully via Flickr

Not properly anyway. Until Monday’s disastrous clinical aptitude exam is over. I’m not expecting to pass because it was years ago that I had to do any maths, and even with these past couple of months revision, the time limits in the exam are the real problem.

I can do the calculations, I’m not thick, but with 1 minute per 4 questions, I need more time to prepare.

Really nervous about Monday, but all I can do is keep studying like I have been. UKCAT just isn’t my thing, give me a proper medical exam and I would do better, or a complex analytical essay. I’ve done more challenging things than this before, but it’s sometimes the “simple” but very time-limited things like this that get to me.

The thing that lets me down is the panic when it comes to time limits and maths. I came out of school years ago with a very good grade, but even so, I still feel hopeless.

I killed your partner, so The Tournament begins

After watching The Tournament(2009) I am left mostly unaffected. But the film wasn’t trying to be emotionally powerful, so I suppose this near impartiality is acceptable.

It’s what you expect an average gun-slinging assassin movie to be; without any of the awesomeness the Kill Bill movies had, but with a prompt pacing, vendettas, and a slight twist. Despite being predictable, and not exceeding any expectations, it was nicely cast, acceptably made, and there were no drastic errors.

DON’T watch if you’re looking for something stylistically new, emotionally/intellectually engaging, or rivetting enough to hold you on the edge of your seat.

DO watch if you appreciate guns, lots of them, and explosions. Also if you’re familiar with The Vampire Diaries, you would be pleased to know that Ian Somerhalder plays an assassin called Miles Slade. I do genuinely think he’s a really good actor, and of course Kelly Hu and Robert Carlyle are great.

Erm dude, where’s your skin? Cabin Fever 2 and American Movie

American Movie

Image via Wikipedia

Cabin Fever 2 was just what I expected; boring, amateur, and dragged on too long. That having been said, the animation/cartoon snippets in the title sequence and at the end were very good. I also liked the gore, and enjoy seeing bratty High School teens die (who doesn’t?).

The best part by far was Mark Borchardt as Herman the cab driver. At first I thought I was going mad imagining that it was him, but no it’s definitely Borchardt from American Movie (you have to see it if you haven’t already, truly one of the most hilarious films).

In Cabin Fever 2 he just basically plays himself, he is such a character in reality. “Dude” being the most heavily used word in his vocabulary. He belongs in way more movies, don’t you think?

Are you sick?

Music at Camden Market [I love London]

Image by sara.musico via Flickr

Well, so are the rest of us. Everyone seems to be ill at the moment. My cure this weekend has been lots of alcohol, going to Camden with my boyfriend, and sleazy rock’n’roll. I’m exhausted, moderately down, and dreading my upcoming clinical aptitude exam. This week is going to be one tough week of study study study. But nothing I can do will take away the feeling of uselessness and nerves wracked up like badly mixed drugs in my veins. I’ll most likely delete this post before the day is done.

You think Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is just hype?

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Image via Wikipedia

I deliberately resisted reading the whole book before watching; I read enough chapters to love the book, but avoid clouding my judgement of the film. I was hoping for another Swedish gem, something I could enjoy as much as I loved Let The Right One In (not the remake).

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (“Män som hatar kvinnor“), was directed by Niels Arden Oplev and based on Stieg Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy. I loved the story telling within the film, the tale itself is irresistible, as is the heroine Lisbeth Salander (played by Noomi Rapace). But again that is mainly credit to the book, not necessarily the filmmakers.

I admit the film was atmospheric, held my attention, and the story seduced me. But some chunks of the tale felt like they were included only to appease the book’s fans. For example, we probably didn’t need such routine intervals of Lisbeth’s past. Her past is vital of course, it grants context, but so much of it added nothing to the plot, and felt like it was there just to break the pacing between sub-plot and main-plot.

We could have instead been teased with briefer hints and flashes to her past. But I suppose they wanted to find a balance between her tortured past and tortured present. It felt too prescribed, too calculative, trying too hard to force us to see everything of what she is, rather than letting us interpret. I suppose I found it mildly patronising.

I was not offended by the more graphic scenes, which I won’t reveal as I don’t like spoilers. I actually liked the fact that she was portrayed as a strong, independent female. Her dynamic with the journalist Mikael Blomkvist (played by Michael Nyqvist) was effective, and there wasn’t anything startling wrong with the film. It just wasn’t everything I had hoped for.

I should refer back to the film I mentioned before. Hoyte Van Hoytema was responsible for the cinematography in Let the Right One In, his style is subtle but irresistible. Whereas The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, despite not being poorly filmed, certainly had no distinctive style or anything visually new to offer.

I think The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is living proof that the books are always better than the film. But I am glad they made it into a film, because it means more people are encouraged to read the books, which I have found to be excellent. I would recommend watching this film, but don’t do so if you’re expecting something groundbreaking or revolutionary.

Eat shit? The Human Centipede

Promotional poster for The Human Centipede (Fi...

Image via Wikipedia

One of my best friends, Marie, stayed over this week and watched The Human Centipede (directed by
Tom Six) with me.

The worst (best) part was Dr Heiter, played by Dieter Laser. He was truly creepy looking, and his acting made you feel like perhaps he was this scary in reality too. The film was about his being a surgeon; he used to separate conjoined twins, but then becomes fixated with joining living things.

Naturally, this leads to his ideal of a human centipede, connected by sewing their mouths to each others butts, so that they share one digestive track. Implausible in the long-term, and hilarious, so I was glad when one of the three victims died from infection. That was the most medically accurate part.

The film was not scary, but hilarious. I just couldn’t stop laughing at what idiots the characters are. One of the two female leads had the chance to escape, but hides instead of smashing the window to escape straight away. And the Japanese guy, played by Akihiro Kitamura, who is also a captive, actually stabs Dr Heiter with a scalpel, but only in the foot and leg. He goes crazy and bites him, but instead of using his chance to kill the crazy Doctor, or knock him unconscious at least, he chooses to just attempt to run away (difficult with two girls surgically attached).

I had no real sympathy for the characters because their survival instincts were poor, I like it when characters truly try their best and are beaten down, but these three were mainly moronic and therefore deserved it. The very few chances they had to escape they wasted completely.

As ridiculous as this film was, it’s worth watching because it’s one of the funniest films I’ve seen in a long time, and wasn’t too badly shot.

“Paris Hilton mauled to death” [Terrible Thursdays]

Mug shot of Paris Hilton.

Image via Wikipedia

“I’d punch Paris Hilton in the face, she’s so far up her own arse, and her voice is the most annoying I’ve ever heard.” – Gill, at lunch today.

Many people share Gill’s view, because Hilton is famous for being famous, which equals infamous. This means we have to hear about her new love interests; her most recent being Cy Waits. And we have to see her smug smile all over the magazines as she laughs off the recent Las Vegas cocaine bust. And don’t even mention her attempts in the film industry.

Just by writing this blog I am hypocritically perpetuating her infamy. And these little facts I’ve included are things I know but simply never wanted to know. Because I absorb media, and she’s all over it, I am forced to hear about her.

I really don’t care about whether she’s a nice or deep person inwardly; her vapid media presence is what bugs me. I can’t hate someone whom I do not know, but I can see why Gill and many others can.

So, on this Terrible Thursday, my evil thought is about the funniest ways in which Paris Hilton could die. Note: I do not wish anyone’s death, I’m just thinking about the funniest titles that could crop up in the media announcements of her death.

Example: ‘Paris Hilton mauled to death by pet piglet’

So, if you dare, what do you think is the best way she could die, or funniest news headline?

What’s the most expensive object you’ve ever touched?

Moche Ear Ornaments. 1-800 AD. Larco Museum Co...

Image via Wikipedia

It has to be an object, not housing or actual money.

I just held a £12,000 ring in my hands, and I’m not sure if it’s the most expensive thing I’ve held. I’ve probably touched more expensive art work or museum pieces, maybe even other jewellery I have forgotten, because none of it is my own.

So, what is the most valuable object you have ever touched or held?

Who am I?

Raindrops

I’m a person who doesn’t write personal posts, other than my personal opinions on movies, media or events. Someone suggested yesterday that I might give it a go, so here goes.

I’m a young woman born in Essex, raised in Herts, whom attended college in Cambridge and University in London. With each year I become less tolerant, of everything, less patient with the world. This is because my whole life has felt like waiting. I see life as a giant hospital waiting room where all we can do is fill the time until the inevitable end.

I don’t think about the end all that much, just what I should fill the wait with. I chose movies, magazines, music, books, and making things. But I am also torn between that and my medical interests. I’m very good with Neurology and cardio, for someone who has never been taught. In less than two weeks I’ll be taking, and probably failing, my medical entrance exam.

I work as a trainee carer for senior citizens. I have a wonderful boyfriend who literally means more than the world to me, and is my best friend. We’ve been together for years. I don’t want that to change.

I realise I’m only really writing about practical things here, but that is because I’m incapable of writing about emotional issues, my patience with that kind of thing expired long ago, and I like my privacy too much. I’m not the kind of girl who cries on my friend’s shoulders or gushes about every drama. Especially because the only people in the world that I have any level of trust for are: my family, my boyfriend, and the lovely girl I wrote about a couple of posts back, Katie Baugh. The post was titled ‘My best friend’.