Appassionato

Jump to Footer

Pages

Site Love

Search


A gl0bAl fenomenen: dclin3 in IQ

If tertiary students these days have dif­fi­culty not abbre­vi­at­ing every one-and-a-half words they type, what type of people do you suppose will even­tu­ally govern our country? Imagine our gov­ern­ment author­it­ies doing just that. Imagine legal rules governing our actions sntnsing theifs 2 3 mths imprisenmt.

We don’t even have to go that far. Just imagining someone who has 1% text abbre­vi­ations in their reports and remaining in a respect­able job position is a joke — at least in the current world.

Don’t try to argue that (immensely) abbre­vi­ated writing is cool, quick, efficient, etc. It simply displays a lower level of your intel­lec­tual capacity.

Don’t try to argue either, that 1337 and immature tYpInG lYk d1s is oh-so-sexy. They simply are nothing but stupid. I don’t need to have to read at three words per minute due to your under-developed brain. And it’s not because I’m the one with a low level of reading ability either. If five year old kids are being taught in primary how to spell words the correct way, then surely you need to upgrade your IQ if you tYp3 L1k3 aN iD10t after a whole decade of schooling.

Feel free to use “standard” abbreviations/acronyms such as uni, HTML, Mr, MSN because they are agreed, con­sen­sual and standard.

I also under­stand how some abbre­vi­ations have grown to exist in our main­stream com­mu­nic­a­tions as a result of instant messaging e.g. lol, lmao, asl. Fine. They’re also standard. (And because I use them too, of course.)

N im nt gona deny d fact tht abbrs sav char usage in txt msgs evn if — I don’t per­son­ally use them.

Bt u srsly mk urslf luk lyk a dUmBaSs in com­par­ison with someone else who can actually type and spell.

If you actually found the annoying abbre­vi­ated writing in this post easier to read than the rest of my writing, you might like to consult a doctor regarding your mental cap­ab­il­it­ies (or lack thereof). And I may have to finally recognise the fact that this powerful wave of back­ward­ness will no doubt take over the world by 2030 and drown out the bare remnants of human intel­li­gence. In which case, Amen.


New view on beauty

Last year, I looked down on fake cake faces. This year, I have begun to bow to the mag­ni­fi­cent powers of pro­fes­sional make-up and Adobe Photoshop.

When you cut off a model/celebrity’s access to godly photographing/photo-editing skills and knock off their powders, how many of them still look so stun­ningly mouth-gapingly attractive?

What’s physical beauty nowadays? Fake eyelashes, fake boobs, million-dollar noses and what else? It’s because you can’t see at first instance into the inner content contained within this outer shell that physical appear­ances do matter so much to a certain extent. Pretty people do receive extra benefits. People often (at least) begin with treating good-looking people better. And hence, I’ve changed my views.

With the latest make-up tech­no­logy, it makes no dif­fer­ence in the end whether the person had natural beauty initially or not. It is time to recognise that super­fi­cial beauty prevails over natural beauty at least in the short-term. It is time to succumb to routine face-caking and eye-painting sessions.

Just because I can’t spare enough money for a full set of Chanel and Christian Dior make-up equipment, laser treat­ments and regular beauty therapy, I’ll have to live with my flawed shell and get used to unfair treatment.

Bottom-line: Money = Beauty. Once again, money makes the world go ’round dammit.