The 21-year old: “Daddy looks like a woman…”
The 11-year old: “Where? I want to see!”
The 55-year old: “See! I told you this is a woman’s jacket! I’m not wearing it!” (Attempts to march back into the house.)
The 52-year old: “It is not a woman’s jacket! Don’t you dare take it off! You are not wearing the same jacket you wore all week to the restaurant!”
The 21-year old: (Aside to The 11-year old) “Daddy still looks like a woman…”

Do you ever feel that you ought to change a certain aspect of yourself and, yet, are reluctant to do so because it stands at the core of your identity complex? Let alone, you’ve grown emotionally and mentally attached to the trait such that dismissing it is equivalent to shattering a fragment of one’s soul. Alright, perhaps that was a bit melodramatic. The combination of an overactive cerebrum and the unhampered time provided by Spring Break tends to result in over-over-analyses of anything and everything. It’s a good thing Spring Break is over in this respect.

I’ve concluded that I may be a bit overly kind and am a mental masochist — there’s a tendency to feel guilty in situations where I am actually not at (what the general public would define as) fault, e.g. –
Bought lunch (chicken), saw famished homeless whilst driving back to condo, gave him small piece of my chicken, got back to condo, couldn’t eat lunch because I felt miserable for not having given him bigger piece. Why didn’t I? He obviously needed the food more than I.
Went shopping at grocery store, saw elderly man 4 customers ahead in the check-out line, his welfare card must not have allowed certain items to be purchased so cashier, deaf and mute, took them (3/5) away. I felt every moral fiber in my body screaming for action and wanted to push the 4 customers in front of me aside to buy those 3 items for him…but I didn’t do anything, just stood idly watching the somber expression on the poor man’s face. When I finally made my way back to my car with the question “Why didn’t I help him?” flowing incessantly through my mind, I just sat in front of my steering wheel and cried.
– …and the list goes on.

Reverting to the original question, it’s as though I am governed by two distinct and, perhaps, mutually exclusive perspectives.
On the one hand, the savior archetype seems to be prevalent. Being cynical of the moral direction in which society as a whole is heading, I feel the need to act as constant Sherpa to civilization’s problems in hopes that 1) my tiny efforts will in some way “make the world a better place” for everyone else and 2) people will learn vicariously and do personally. Plus, I get a happy, fuzzy feeling when I am of assistance to someone.
On the other hand, my faltering hope in the general public has left me questioning the plausibility of the aforementioned proceeds of my actions. Additionally, failure to perform my self-proclaimed duty has led to consequential and unnecessary guilt.

Is it time to recalibrate my current mindset or keep on keeping on? Whilst the former will lead to less, if any, guilt (+), less kindness (+/-), and less altruism (-), the latter will lead to little to no change in guilt (-), same level of kindness (+/-), and more self-fulfillment (+) — i.e. Protect oneself or protect everyone else? That, perhaps, is the fundamental dilemma individuals face on a day-to-day basis. With the “right” formula, an egocentric, opportunist pitted in a laissez-faire society would become the perfect modern Machiavelli. I don’t think I’m mentally prepared to see little Niccolo, Jr.’s running around.

Maybe the best decision involves not scrutinizing the situation with such a black-and-white demeanor. Maybe I simply shouldn’t think so much. Maybe I should start learning to forgive myself. Maybe…
I bore thee. Such self-indulgent and dizzying musings should be done solely in my head, anyway.

So, on another note — I finally bought one of Betsey Johnson’s wonderful dresses. It’s burgundy and mauve colored, velvet, with spaghetti straps. Her dresses tend to run in abnormally small sizes (relatively speaking) so I had to buy a large, otherwise my bust wouldn’t fit, and I certainly don’t want to look like Dolly Parton – blegh. I’ll take a picture of it when I stop feeling lazy – Ha!


WordPress decided to test my patience and deleted the entry I was in the process of finishing earlier. But no matter, it had little significance anyway, merely a frivolous documentation — for self-indulgent, analytical purposes — of the ridiculous affairs I manage to find myself in time and time again. For example…

Several years back, I met a guy with whom I grew extremely close. In order to uphold anonymity, I shall refer to him as “Hayden” here. I had always had commitment issues, but, strangely, that did not hold true for him. I adored him and the adoration was reciprocated. He was intelligent, good-looking, and kind, with a bit of a dorkiness to his dynamism, which I found charming. Unfortunately, though, unexpected family issues caused him to have to repeatedly uproot his home from city to city, whereby we would have no contact for months on end. But as Miyazawa alleged, “We must embrace pain and burn it as fuel for our journey.” Without seeking any explanation or prospect for that particular future, I chose to move on. I decided that I didn’t need a significant other to make me happy; and although I now dispense an excessive amount of care and devotion to all those I deem worthy, I also recoil at the very thought of being in a relationship at this point in time. Not only do I have commitment issues towards romantic relationships again, my capacity to commit to certain objectives, beliefs, and so many others have also become infected with recreancy.

So, 4.5 years and a highly fortified heart later, what am I doing typing about all this? He came back, in all his shining glory, he came back barging into my life again yesterday. I was largely unaffected until be brought on an assessment of the concept of “love.” He proposes that humans use the word too naively, that it is often mistakenly associated to be an emotion when, in fact, it is not an emotion at all. Instead, it is an abstract goal for which people strive through a variety of actions with a culminated ramification of emotions. That proposition and the subsequent conversation that ensued quenched my withered heart’s desire for something sensational, something I hadn’t experienced in what felt like millenia — an intelligible conversation that proliferates into a vast array of questions unfathomable for the mere human mind… like a system of trichomes on a vascular plant root, intertwining and diverging at various points of interest. Perhaps this is the type of person who attracts me, one who can deliver tete-a-tetes that require more than the average number of neurons.


Whether it’s due to the fact that I saw him again or because of the brilliant conversation we had yesterday that contributed to the extra bounce in my step I experienced today, I do not know. Whether I want to be thrown into that chaotic world of dating again or live my peaceful life, I do not know… although my brain is a bit biased towards “Nay” for the former.
…or maybe it’s all a side-effect of “that time of the month.” Silly little hormones, I shake my fist at you.

Many elements of our universe function in algorithmic patterns, such as philosophy — The Turing Test; mathematics — The Sieve of Eratosthenes; pastimes — Chess (MTD-f, specifically, in reference to computer programs); economics — Algorithmic trading; psychology — The Thurstone Scale. These are only a few examples. What if, say, each individual’s degree of generosity could be characterized based on a formula, or a graph?

Bacteria multiply by binary fission after reaching a certain size. Their maximum growth rate in a given medium at a certain temperature is consistent from trial to trial. In other words, if you put the same bacteria into the same conditions, they will always take the same amount of time to double in number. A growth curve can be constructed to denote the “doubling time” or “generation time.”

Typically, three stages are observed. “Lag” phase, the first, represents a period of adjustment for the bacteria after they are introduced into the new medium. It takes them some time to “gear up” their own enzyme levels, metabolic precursors, etc. to make full use of the newly available nutrients. The growth is low but increases steadily. When the growth rate hits its maximum, the bacteria are said to be in “log” or “exponential” phase. Bacteria will stay in log phase until nutrients begin to run out and, thus, enter “stationary” phase, a time of declining growth rate. Sometimes a fourth stage is observed, “death” phase, where the number of bacteria decreases dramatically as cells begin to die off due to crowding, lack of resources, etc.

Because the growth of the bacterial culture is exponential in nature, semi-log paper is utilized in order to represent this trend.

Note: Different species of bacteria have different doubling times; however, the general trend of “lag,” “log,” “stationary,” and “death” phases are similar for all.

Growth Curve

As observed in the graph above, there are two curves present — The absorbance curve corresponds to the amount of turbidity present in the samples of bacteria taken at each consecutive time interval whilst the cell number, i.e. titer, illustrates the actual number of living bacterial cells present at each consecutive time interval. The concept is that as growth progresses, the sample would become more turbid due to the opacity of cells, as would the cell number; thus, the absorbance and titer curves are parallel to each other under normal circumstances. Additionally, the actual number of cells can never surpass the amount of turbidity.

This general “growth curve” idea can, thus, be adopted to depict human opportunity and willingness for generosity.

Each individual’s degree of generosity varies depending on their personality and the presence of extraneous variables much like a bacterium’s doubling time is dependent on its species and other factors, which will be discussed shortly. Using bacterial growth curve as reference, the absorbance curve symbolizes one’s opportunity for altruism whilst the titer exemplifies one’s willingness for altruism. One’s willingness will never surpass one’s opportunity to contribute. You may argue that in a circumstance where a certain person is someway impaired, hindering his/her opportunity to succor, but wills to help, that person’s willingness surpasses his/her opportunity. That, however, is not the case. If said person were truly willing to contribute, he/she would devise a way to overcome the obstacle(s), even if s/he would be helping indirectly. Willingness, which indicates desire and completion of task, would equal opportunity in such a situation.

Let’s now adjust the graph to fit the new conditions, shall we?


Lag Phase: Recognition*

During the lag phase, the individual becomes aware of his/her new environment and will slowly adjust to his/her surroundings. The term “environment” may denote any atmosphere — A small group gathering, a city, a library, etc. Once the entity becomes comfortable, s/he will begin to acknowledge his/her potential to assist those whom occupy the same environment. The duration of the lag phase is dependent on which individual is being observed, but the same individual will always take the same amount of time to adapt to each new environment, extrinsic factors aside.

Log Phase: Progression*

Increasing opportunities for charity will be thrust upon the individual as time progresses. Initially, the individual may feel reluctant to succor but a gradual escalation in willingness will be observed as more resources and contingencies for selectivity are offered. This phenomenon resembles a ball cycling downhill — Once it [the rolling] starts, conscious effort must be exerted in order to stop it.

Stationary Phase: Deliberation*

There comes a point when one realizes how much effort has already been invested into a subject(s) and begins to evaluate whether future sacrifice ought to be proffered. During this time, one may feel compelled to finish his/her current beneficences but remains ambivalent towards further benefactions.

Death Phase: Declension**

If the individual decides to remain philanthropic, then a downward curve representing that environment [the environment the individual is currently occupying] will not be observed. However, if the alternative decision is made, the death phase will be observed on the graph.

* Under the null hypothesis that no extraneous variables are present.
** Not always observed. Presence of death phase is dependent on outcome of stationary phase and extraneous variables.

The scenario below summarizes the aforementioned stages of generosity in a more comprehensible manner. (Please excuse the names — The author was having a little fun.)

Mary Anne Lou attends a party in celebration for Bobby Joe’s twenty-first birthday. Unaccustomed to the drinking atmosphere, she feels remotely aloof at first but soon finds the company enjoyable. Billy Bob, Jr. (one of the guests) manages to consume so much alcohol he is physically and mentally incapable of driving his tractor home. Mary Anne Lou, the only sober invitee, volunteers to drive Billy Bob.

Upon returning to the party, Mary Anne Lou is bombarded with a myriad of requests for transportation back to their [the intoxicated guests] homes as well. Realizing that the party has, thus, ended and that these dipsomaniacs are a hazard to themselves, others on the road, and the unsuspecting cows, she escorts each of them to their home. Much to Mary Anne Lou’s dismay, the last passenger has an esophagogastric dysfunction, leading to all sorts of different aromatic souvenirs in her truck. Guess who gets to clean up the mess?

The subsequent morning, the exhausted Mary Anne Lou receives a call from Betty Sue and Earlene — They had left their purses at Bobby Joe’s house and request she fetch and deliver the purses to them. What will Mary Anne Lou do?

Up till now, we’ve only delved into the variable-independent aspects of human generosity. However, the outcome of everyday occurrences is, indubitably, governed by a myriad of extrinsic factors. Hence, let’s now examine bacterial growth taking these extrinsic factors into account.

Many people have heard of ampicillin, chlorine dioxide (bleach), and/or chloramphenicol, but few understand their significance other than “they’re antibiotics/disinfectants that… help people stay healthy?”

Bacteriostatic agents stop the growth of bacteria but do not kill them, e.g. chloramphenicol. In the event a bacteriostatic antibiotic is added to microorganism sensitive to it, both turbidity and titer would level off and stay constant. For bactericidal non-bacteriolytic agents, e.g. bleach, which simply kill the bacteria, a drastic decrease in cell number would result whilst the turbidity would level off and stay constant. Finally, bactericidal bacteriolytic agents such as ampicillin kill bacteria by lysing their cell envelope; thus, both turbidity and titer would drop drastically.

The amount of turbidity and the number of cells observed within an allotted time is dependent on (1) the type of antibiotic and (2) when the antibiotic was administered. A variety of different growth curves can, thus, be obtained through altered combinations of agents implemented at different time intervals.

Extrinsic variables that act on our original model of generosity work in a similar manner. Take the Mary Anne Lou scenario once again for example, but this time noting extraneous factors.

Case #1:

Mary Anne Lou attends a party in celebration for Bobby Joe’s twenty-first birthday. Unaccustomed to the drinking atmosphere and lacking good company, she wishes Bobby Joe the best, bequeaths to him his presents, and leaves before she has to endure another conversation with a foul-breathed drunkard.

Extrinsic factor: Undesirable atmosphere/company
When factor took effect: Onset of lag phase
Conclusion: Because Mary Anne Lou did not successfully overcome the lag phase, no Progression resulted. Both opportunity and willingness curves flatlined at their initial stage.
Case description: Benefactostatic


Case #2:

Mary Anne Lou attends a party in celebration for Bobby Joe’s twenty-first birthday. Unaccustomed to the drinking atmosphere, she feels remotely aloof at first but soon finds the company enjoyable. Billy Bob, Jr. (one of the guests) manages to consume so much alcohol he is physically and mentally incapable of driving his tractor home. Mary Anne Lou, the only sober invitee, volunteers to drive Billy Bob.

Because of the time, Mary Anne Lou decides not to return to the party, instead, selects to drive back home. Half-way home, however, she receives a phone call from Bobby Joe who implores that she takes his plastered friends home for safety purposes. Feeling too exhausted at this point to take care of others, Mary Anne Lou declines the request and suggests they spend the night at Bobby Joe’s house instead.

Extrinsic factor: Time, personal exhaustion
When factor took effect: Log phase
Conclusion: Though Mary Anne Lou surpassed the lag phase, extrinsic factors contributed to her subsequent decline in willingness to continue sacrificing herself for others. The opportunity to assist was still provided to her; hence, incline and later stagnancy are observed for that curve. Note, however, that the curve is not as steep as that of the original. This is due to the fact that the extrinsic variable was dealt before completion of the log phase.
Case description: Benefactocidal non benefactolytic


Once again, a variety of outcomes may ensue — These are only a few simple examples. Typically, though, a depressed willingness curve is observed. This can be explained with one of two opposing, yet strikingly similar, perspectives.

As has been implied throughout this entry, humans are inherently good. It is due to the numerous extraneous factors that one becomes selfish and hostile. Those who are obstinately able to overlook these negative, extraneous factors are, then, capable of assisting others ad infinitum. Such individuals, unfortunately, are on the brink of extinction.

The alternative school of thought, which proposes that humans are inherently evil, is likewise justifiable. The aforementioned extraneous factors are good in this case. Those who are persistently able to recognize these seemingly subtle but more often than not blatantly obvious extraneous factors and respond accordingly are, then, capable of assisting others ad infinitum. These individuals are also on the brink of extinction.

Whether you hold the former perspective or the latter, the general idea remains the same — We reside in a macrocosm where the majority of people give little to no thought for others, and even if they do, it would only be a short-term affair. Once they tire of their dependability, previous acts of compassion can no longer provide “warm-and-fuzzy” feelings, or these feelings are no longer worth the effort. Furthermore, few of these short-term affairs are altruistic in nature; most are conceived from ulterior motives.

So, before you go off on a rant about how dismal the world is, how unlucky you are, and/or how rapacious the current society is, ask yourself — What can I change about myself first to make the world a better place before criticizing everyone else? It’s impossible to make others perceive the condition of world in the same manner as you see fit.

You can’t make others see, especially when doing so is against their will.

And on that note, I shall depart for bed. Au revoir until next time, my little munchkins.

Life has been rather strange lately — I can’t quite muster the appropriate words to describe it. The intangibility of my current state of mind is unfathomable, but I shall try my best to elucidate it.

What I’ve thus realized from my old personality is that I tended to shift between extremes. One minute, I would care too much to the point of profusion and the next minute, I would feel beyond irascible or apathetic. This affected multiple aspects of my life:
When dealing with people — If you caught me on a “good” day, I would readily give you my right arm, whereas if you caught me on a “bad” day… Well, then let’s hope you have exceptional health insurance or a heart of teflon.
With regard to activities — I either found a field of work that (metaphorically) “took over my life” or became the notorious couch potato embracing a tub of ice cream.
In reference to academia — Consecutive days of procastination and nights of no sleep were numerous.

I seemed to be incapable of finding balance, or in a scientific sense, equilibrium.

For the longest time, I thought that that is perfectly normal and acceptable, but in retrospect, I never want to return to such a life again. The elusive question that, for the life of me, I am unable to answer remains, though — How or why had I handled situations in that manner? Usually, when resolving complicated issues, people delve into their past in an au courant attempt to uncover any significant disturbances.

1) Whilst carrying my stroller and me, my grandfather slipped on a stairstep, sending both my stroller and me tumbling down the stairs headfirst.
2) As curious as ever, I managed to unlock my own cradle hatch and fell to the wooden flooring headfirst.
3) During an ice-skating party, my friend Joseph swung me around and let go; I landed on the ice… headfirst.

Do I see a trend? Perhaps having been dropped on my head multiple times is a factor, but I highly doubt my antecedent mental instability was a direct result of the ball-like characteristics of my skull. Alas, maybe I shall never know. However, pondering about my abandoned dispositions left me subconsciously feeling hollow. This is the feeling for which I can’t quite grasp the appropriate terminology. Though I had shed a layer of myself that I loathed, it was still an aspect of me. I felt as though I’d lost a substantial component of myself, as if without that component, I no longer recognized myself. An internal debate thus transpired as to whether those characteristics should be recouped or kept in the wastebasket until the sanitation engineer comes to collect it.

Although the obvious answer would be the latter, I cannot deny that I still hold slight attachments to my comfort zone. Forsaking those components of myself would require a considerable amount of conscious effort. And albeit I’m already half-way to triumph, the remaining moiety will be that much harder if I allow my retrograde idiosyncrasies to tempt me.


Some time ago, I came across a dessert called “Pavlova” on Australia’s Next Top Model (Shhh! Guilty pleasure!), and being the curious person that I am who’s up for a new challenge anyday, I decided to experiment. Pictures can be accessed as follows:

here              here              here

I have only one thing to say about the dessert — It tastes simply heavenly.
Thanks Wendy for separating the eggs!

Before I let loose on my rant, I’d like to tout a picture of the brownie I made last night — Walnut chocolate chunk brownie with vanilla ice cream and a cherry on top. Era muy deliciosa.

Now, onwards to today’s main topic.
An interesting quandary emerged as I was chatting with my friend Phil on messenger. As friends or acquaintances of someone in a relationship, can we truly be objective in an advisory sense? The below conversation is provided for simplicity purposes:

Phil says:
     I was discussing with a friend of mine
Phil says:
     her predicament with her bf says:
     Mmhm? says:
     Go on.
Phil says:
     she placates him about his job says:
     Is there more?
Phil says:
Phil says:
     like he always complains about his job
Phil says:
     and she just listens to he thinks she cares says:
     But she doesn’t truly care, or what?
Phil says:
     well, no
Phil says:
     she doesn’t. says:
     Well, my evaluation of my matter has several different perspectives. says:
     1) She doesn’t care for him *that* much.
     2) She doesn’t have the backbone to ask him to stop complaining about it.
     3) He’s rather insensitive if his job is all he cares about.
Phil says:
Phil says:
     he doesn’t treat her even half right
Phil says:
     2, … that’s not the case at all
Phil says:
     3, and he is a dick. says:
     Phil, what I’ve managed to understand from your character these past couple of years
     is that you always skew the situation in such a way that your friend (usually the
     girl of the relationship) falls victim to a “dick.” You have to consider that you only 
     view the circumstance through the eyes of your friend and not the counterparty.
Phil says:
     that’s true. says:
     Wow, I was expecting a negation on your part.
Phil says:
     why ? says:
     Because that’s what people do — They vindicate themselves and/or their actions if
     their character is, in the slightest, being attacked.
Phil says:
     i guess i’m ready to be chastised ? I dunno. says:
     The previous only applies to certain circumstances, anyway. says:
     But you do understand what I was saying before, right? About your perspective, I
Phil says:
     yeah I know
Phil says:
     I skew it says:
     Besides what she says of her boyfriend, what else do you know about him?
Phil says:
     if she’s crying or something and just needs to be held
Phil says:
     he’ll try to rationalize away her tears
Phil says:
     he doesn’t know much about women. says:
     I said besides what she’s told you of him.
Phil says:
Phil says:
     nothing. says:
     Well, there’s your first mistake. says:
     …and keep in mind that the majority of women are overly emotional. She may be
     crying about the most ridiculous situation. says:
     I don’t think you can judge him in toto until you manage to comprehend both
     views, of hers and of his.

When someone is emotionally involved in a situation, it is almost impossible to be objective. And yet, objectivity and compassion are the most important qualities necessary when dispensing advice. In the case presented above, Phil allowed his compassion for his friend to overcome his objectivity. However, even if he had been objective, his perspective of the situation would be malapropos and askew because he failed to apprehend standpoints of both parties.

Per universal intendment, people tend to consult their friends for advice on a regular basis, which poses complications:
     Firstly, the advisee expects the adviser to be reassuring, empathetic, and gracious. The majority of the time, blunt and unpleasant truths offered by the consultant will, thus, render the consultant to be judged as harsh and callous. In order to avoid such bearings then, people mince their words, resulting in a disortion of the truth (and consequently) leaving the advisee with a counterfactual implication.
     Secondly, the confidant who cares for his/her friend and who has only a glimpse of the entire situation by mere conspectus of this friend may misjudge the subject because only one viewpoint is offered. The confidant then advises based solely on that perspective, which causes the friend to believe his/her comprehension of the matter is correct.

How, then, can we avoid these quandaries? (Granted that you genuinely want veracious advice.)
1. State that you want the truth, even if it may be harsh
2. Don’t ask friends who are emotionally involved or who can’t offer objectivity for advice
3. Talk to the person of the problem (if the problem is a person) to obtain a better understanding of his/her disposition
4. Seek psychological help if deemed necessary

Oh, and Phil — You don’t entirely have a superb understanding of the female psyche yourself. Men who propose they have exceptional knowledge of the female species are nonsensical. Furthermore, generalization of the female species such that you can obtain a “better understanding of women” is both moronic and a lost cause. You cannot understand women (pl.) unequivocally — There are far too many shades to be reckoned with. Apologies for being harsh and callous.

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

I’m looking forward to tomorrow evening. A group of friends and I are going to a Greek bar called Byzantio that features belly dancing on Thursday nights. It’s definitely an atmosphere I have yet to experience — I’ve been to clubs with hip-hop music raging in the background, but Mediterranean music? It simply sounds delightful. The bar also doesn’t ask for your ID when ordering alcoholic beverages so I expect my friends will be drinking, perhaps a lot. So the question remains — Who will be the designated driver?

Unlike most of my friends, I’m not an ardent alcohol consumer — Every once in awhile, I’d have a glass of Cabernet Sauvignon or, even less frequently, some beer. Hence, I don’t mind being the designated driver again; however, I don’t want to be restricted to not being able to have any alcohol due to the predisposition that I am always the responsible one. What if I’m inspired by the environment and am compelled to indulge in a fruity margarita? Or if someone offers to buy me a drink, would my response have to be “Sorry, I’m baby-sitting my friends you see intoxicated and disoriented in that corner over there?” I suppose their safety matters more to me than a glass of fermented carbohydrates, which is why when Elena called about the driving contention, I volunteered without hesitation.

Tonight, 9 high school friends and I enjoyed a catch-up dinner/chat at Panera Bread. The main topic presented was how absolutely old we are getting. The feeling of old age doesn’t quite hit you with a WHAM until you realize “Wow, so-and-so got married this past Saturday” or “Yadda-yadda is engaged to blah-blah-blah.” One-forth of my life is over! Hopefully, the remainder of my life will be more productive than the rut I’ve been leading thus far — More fun, more mirth, more loving, more living.

What proceeded was a discussion of plans for tomorrow night to Byzantio. I was advised to wear a “figure-hugging” outfit, preferably a dress or skirt, because I have a “bombshell hourglass figure” that they “would give anything to have.” They demanded that I find an outfit tonight and send them a picture and added, “We’re going to make sure you look hot.” Although I appreciate their concern, I’m capable of sprucing myself up. Ah well.

Since my revelation that my mother’s skewed conviction of my body image should not become my assessment as well, I haven’t had the chance to purchase any dresses and/or skirts, and unfortunately, I left many of my accouterments at my friend’s apartment in Austin. I did, however, find 2 ensembles that I think are potential contenders.

The first one appears to be slightly flashy and juvenile with all the butterflies on the bottom. I did, after all, purchase this dress back in 7th grade. Perhaps it’s even a bit unchaste, to put it lightly, since I know my younger sister reads my blog.

The other ensemble seems more sophisticated but almost too austere. Although, wearing this would ensure that no one will attempt to importune me or buy me a drink! There’s undeniable evidence that the majority of men who step inside a bar scan through the entire scene for the most lascivious female character for a quick fix; few actually look for a lasting partner in such an environment.

Thus, the latter dress seems to be more appropriate. Wouldn’t you agree?

Alas, it is time for bed. Au revoir until next time!

Next Page »