Details

I think that attention to detail is important. I would say that this blog gives a decent insight into my thought processes. Other people may not think that all the intricate details of someone's thought processes are important/interesting, but I do, so I like to put down all the little things that led to me having an idea, that kind of thing. 

On two different occasions I have been curious about, to say broadly, what went into the making of something. One is some lego masks that were featured in a men's fashion show. (ADD PICTURe) Another is regarding the chrome theme I use. Both of the people who designed these two things have social media accounts, so I contacted them that way with my questions. Neither of them responded and that is something I resent. Ugh. Maybe I'll try to email them. If I become some kind of designer/otherwise end up producing something that people may have questions about, I would make an attempt to explain my thoughts behind something if someone happened to inquire about it. Apparently other people do not feel obligated to do that. Boo. 

Over the coming weeks/months there are some things that I would like to do/accomplish. One of the things is to indulge in creative pursuits, like crochet, screen printing, embroidery, and other things. Something semi-related to those things is that I would like to see some art in art museums. Another thing is that I would like to practice journalism for my own self-enrichment. Hopefully I can find some people who are willing to be interviewed. I may make a separate blog for the practice journalism, or I may publish it here. I haven't really decided yet. The next thing is that I would like to learn about and become familiar with Andy Warhol in minute detail. There are some books I think that would help me with this. I would like to know as much about Andy Warhol as I know about Law and Order. 

Since starting this blog post the other day, I have now acquired a copy of "Andy Warhol Diaries," so that should be an interesting read. It's very long; a review of it on Amazon said that it was the size of a phone book which is a pretty accurate description. It has caused me to consider the idea of keeping a meticulous record of the things that I see/do/etc like Andy Warhol did. So I think I'll give it a shot. 

Today, 8th of May. 
I was on the bus this morning at 11, just past then and I was maybe 5 minutes away from the bus stop. There was a little old lady driving a turquoise car and I thought that I would want to have a car in that color. I like bright colors. 
Then later in the day I was on the bus again and some dude sat next to me and he was large and squished me which I also resented and I got fairly enraged in my head. I wanted to punch him but that would've been a good way to get arrested or something. 
I don't have any candy left so tomorrow I think I would like to get some candy. Sour worms and caramels. 
In the future I would like to go to an art museum and see the art as well as the other people in the museum.
I listened to that David Bowie song that I sort of like, even though I don't like any of the other songs I've heard of his. This one was used over the credits of a movie I watched which is how I came to know it. 

Since I had a conversation that was not via text message and therefore cannot be backed up and archived, I would like to put down some of the ideas that I said in that conversation so they are not lost.

"Do you think some subjects are more conducive to critical thinking than others? This is another semi-rhetorical question.

I'm trying to think of a subject that isn't very conducive to critical thinking. Maybe algebra/other math. Who knows. Maybe I'm just saying that because I don't like math."

For me I would say that sociology causes me to think. I don't know if the thoughts that I think about sociology are considered critical thinking, but I think sociology is more interesting to ponder than math.

Apparently this is the definition of critical thinking: the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment

So I think my conclusion about sociology vs math is correct. My judgement that I've made about math is that I don't like it and don't want to think about it. I don't plan to become a mathematician so I think I'm all set already with all the math I need to know for my life.

I wonder what it would take to become the next/a modern day Andy Warhol. And by that I mean (whoa am I getting distracted!!) someone who has a similar cultural impact as he has had, not necessarily someone who does paintings of soup cans and silkscreen artwork.

Maybe if I start a meticulous diary it will put me one step closer on the path to becoming a modern day Andy Warhol.

Have protester ever killed anyone?? 

TV review: Black Mirror

I just watched an episode of a new (to me) show. I thought it was mediocre, for a few reasons. The show was a Netflix show (which aren't necessarily my first choice of viewing material - I'm just not really that interested in the stuff they put out) in the genre of sci fi, which I don't have strong positive or negative opinions about. The episodes are self contained so I picked one that seemed interesting (which... it wasn't, really) and watched it. 

I don't think it's necessarily the sci fi aspect of the show that I didn't like. There are some older episodes of Doctor Who that are plenty sci-fi-y that I have enjoyed (10th Doctor era). One of the things I wasn't a fan of was the dialogue. There was something about it that I didn't like the way it was written. Something. I can't really say exactly what.

I also think it's possible that I wasn't hugely thrilled because of the characters and that I wasn't familiar with them. A show that you know the characters of (in my case, Law and Order) I would say is inherently more compelling because you care more about/want to see what happens regarding the main characters. 

The third thing is that the episode seemed like an amalgamation of a variety of concepts with some sci fi thrown in, which the end result was actually fairly cheesy. I think the idea of the show was for it to be profound/avant-garde or something like that, but I didn't find it to be that way. A few of the concepts that made up this episode: Nazis/genocide, mind control, war - dehumanizing the enemy/the horror, the horror. I think the sci fi aspect mixed with those concepts had the end result of a cheesy episode. I'm not sure if any of the other episodes will be better. I may give it another chance of one episode, but if I don't like the next one I watch, I'm not going to waste more of my time. 

In other matters, I rewatched Shutter Island today and that was fun. Mark Ruffalo had really short hair in that movie compared to other times and it was different. However, he has a hairier chest than Leonardo DiCaprio. I have actually watched a decent number of movies he's been in - Shutter Island, Reservation Road, Zodiac, Spotlight. Shutter Island is the only one of his movies that I found to be particularly good. The others were somewhere in the range of mediocre. I wonder if there are any other good movies he's been in. I wish Vincent had been in more movies that I think I would want to watch, but alas, I guess he was busy being in Law and Order for around 10 years which didn't leave him time to be in a lot of movies. 

Subject matters

Having just finished my post about Lionel Messi's habit of pulling his sleeves over his hands, I realized that this blog has covered a variety of fairly odd/obscure topics. Including the previous one. I did a whole post about that. In addition, I think the post about the facial cuts should be mentioned here. And all the various posts where I have gone on at length about eyelashes guy's eyelashes and/or political views. 

Aside from that, I have done movie reviews which are kind of more normal. I wrote quite a long review/commentary on Saving Private Ryan after watching that movie. Oh! And teeth. That's another interesting and unique subject matter specific to me. And hands. 

If any readers have suggestions for other topics that would fit with the existing content of this blog, I'd be open to considering them as possible future post subjects. 

Messi's sleeves

A couple years ago, after having watched the World Cup while stuck in a bowling alley, I decided to attempt to get interested in European football, what the uncultured Americans call soccer (I say this somewhat sarcastically). Since Germany had won, I started with a team that a number of the players for the German national team had come from - Bayern Munich. So there was that. I also dabbled in watching some matches from the Premier League. Then I got distracted from football by a then-newfound obsession, Law and Order. 
Fast forward to now. My Law and Order frenzy has subdued although I still like the various shows a substantial amount.

The other week, I found out that Bayern was playing against Real Madrid in the Champions League. So I watched that game which was an absolute injustice as the general consensus is that the referee was biased in favor of Real Madrid. Then a few days later I found out (I maybe should keep better track of these things if I'm going to be interested in the sport) that Real Madrid would play Barcelona. Anyone who is vaguely familiar with the sport would probably know that Real and Barcelona have a very strong rivalry, so any times they play each other it's a big deal. So naturally I had to watch. Which I did, and I was pleased that Barcelona pulled off a pretty stunning win. And Messi scored his 500th goal. He also got jabbed in the mouth with the elbow of a Real player, causing him to bleed and play the rest of the game with a bandage in his mouth. There are rumors online that he lost a tooth, but I can't verify those and the official team website/social media hasn't said anything about him losing a tooth from that. I would hope that he hasn't sustained severe dental damage. 

In any case, onto the main topic of this post. I noticed that in a number of pictures of him where he's wearing a long sleeved shirt, he has the sleeves pulled over his hands a little bit. I'm not sure why this is - is it because he's short and the sleeves are too long? Is it a persistent and unique quirk of his? Do a good number of other players do it? These are the things that I would like to find out and this post is going to be the process of my research where I look at pictures of other players and Messi to try and determine the answers to these very important questions. So here goes. 

First of all, in the game against Madrid, after he got jabbed in the mouth and was bleeding, he wiped some of the blood on his pulled-down sleeve. See below. You can see the stain of blood, even. 

*spits blood*

Then later, after he had scored the winning goal, he took off his shirt to taunt the Real Madrid fans and you can see that his sleeves are pulled down while doing that as well. 

Here is an example from some time in the past; I'm not sure how long ago since I'm not particularly familiar with those details at this point. I know it's from the past since Messi has a different number and his hair is long. 

"Can I touch your hair??"

Here is a picture from the Wikipedia page for Messi; it is also from sometime in the past. 

Not sure when this picture was from.

So, in an effort to discern if this is a Messi thing or not, I'm going on to look at various other players. For one, I looked at Robert Lewandowski. He is Polish and plays for Bayern Munich. I couldn't find any pictures of him where his sleeves were pulled down like Messi does. However I thought this one was cute so here it is. Does anyone else think he kind of looks like American political urchin Paul Ryan??

"For me?? You shouldn't have!"

Now on to another Bayern player, Mats Hummels. He kind of looks like a character on Grey's Anatomy and/or an actor in general (you know, he actually looks kind of like two characters from that show). Nice face on him (which is evidenced by the fact that the majority of the first image results for him are head shots, not of him playing). It looks like he doesn't do the sleeve thing either. But here, enjoy his good looks. Who needs a boyfriend when you have models, actors and sports players' looks to admire??

If Patrick Dempsey had an alternative life as a German football player

Here is Cristiano Ronaldo. It seems like he prefers to push his sleeves up. 

This is David Beckham, from before he retired. It doesn't look like he does it either. The sleeves do look kind of long, but not pulled down over his hands to the extent that Messi does.

Thomas Müller doesn't seem to do it either. 

ooh, wait... au contraire. Here is one picture. I couldn't find any others.

To close, I looked at Zlatan Ibrahimovic. He doesn't do the sleeve thing. That was about the last of the football players that I could think of off the top of my head. I tried for a decent variety, ie not all from the same team. 

Some miscellaneous things to end with... tvtropes has a page on this but no mention of Messi under "real life" examples. In googling "sleeves over hands," I found that this guy does it too somewhat. He doesn't seem to be particularly well known compared to the people I've mentioned here. Here is a picture of a kpop star that came up in that google search. I don't know if the sleeve thing is a regular habit for this kpop star. Ed Sheeran seems to do it a little bit.

When I google "sleeves over hands messi" I found a few snippets of discussion about it. One here, where some people are discussing some fashion blogger on a forum and one poster tells the woman to stop "pulling your sleeves over your hands, Messi". You can ctrl-f to find it. 

Here is a quote from something some person wrote about Messi, much like I'm doing now. "The first thing I notice about Messi on chilly evenings at the Camp Nou is his jersey. No, he doesn’t wear a special colored jersey which says “Yo Soy Dios” on the back. Rather, his jersey never fits him. Barcelona, despite being on the Mediterranean, still gets chilly in the winter and most players don long-sleeve jerseys. Messi is no exception, but his long-sleeves stand out: they are too long. They cover about half of his palm and thumb. He often hides his hands in the sleeves, clinching the lining as you would a handrail. Combined with Messi’s relatively small height as compared to other players, the impression is simple: what is this kid doing on the field? And why not just wear gloves?" 

His conclusion is similar to one that I made - that it's because Messi is kind of short so his sleeves are too long. I think it can be seen as endearing to have ones sleeves like this, particularly when it's a man doing it and when that man is one of the greatest football players to exist. 

There was also a comment on a reddit post in the Barcelona subreddit that mentioned how Messi likes to put the sleeves over his hands. It mentioned that another barcelona player likes to wear long sleeves, so I looked him up but he doesn't seem to pull the sleeves over his hands. 

Oh yes. One more thing. In the process of looking at all these pictures of (in the European sense) football players, I noticed that they seem to have rather thin arms. I guess that makes sense because it's not a sport you need to have strong arms for.

If my conclusions in this post are wrong, feel free to correct me. For example, if you have images of any of these players aside from Messi or other players who pull their sleeves down like so, let me know. 

In closing, if I ever had the chance to ask Messi a question, I would ask him about this habit. I wonder if he speaks English, and if he does, how well/badly. Even if he doesn't, I could ask him in Spanish. "¿Por qué pone las mangas sobre sus brazos?" And I would hope that he gives me an answer. 

Edit: I felt like I should give some of the pictures amusing captions.

Edit 2: Apparently he doesn't speak English very much. So I would have to theoretically ask him in Spanish. Hopefully I would be able to understand his accent when he answers, theoretically. 

From a future starving linguist

First, an explanation of the origin of the term "future starving linguist." I would like to be a linguist, ideally. At the very least, to study linguistics even if I do not end up being a linguist specifically. Linguistics is not on the level of say, mechanical engineering or computer science or something like that in terms of demand in the job market. So, theoretically, if I am to become a linguist, I won't be able to get a good job and I'll be a starving linguist. Kind of like the concept of a starving artist, but instead with linguistics in place of art. 

Anyways, on to the main topic of this post. As the reader may be aware, last weekend there was a march for science in DC, the ideals/goals of which were to promote the idea that science/facts backed by science is important. Which is fine and good, mostly. I agree that facts are important and that our current president is fact-challenged. And sure, science is important and has done lots of good things to improve society, like making innovations in medicine to treat diseases. However, it's also worth thinking about the not so beneficial things that science has given us. (I use science broadly to include innovation and technology and all that as well) Science has developed ever more powerful weapons which allow us to kill people with more efficiency and effectiveness. Machine guns, nuclear weapons, drones, all that. 

On to another point. My impression of science as a field in general/the march is that it is heavily focused on the so-called "hard sciences" (is that because they're difficult and tedious to understand/learn about??), meaning chemistry, biology, physics, etc. In other words, areas that I have no interest in and don't care to study. For people who do have an interest in and a passion for these things, more power to them, but it's just not for me. I think that the "soft sciences" are not taken as seriously - psychology, sociology, linguistics (three areas which do interest me). In addition, as far as I'm aware people in professions relating to hard sciences get paid more. I do understand that there are reasons behind this, economical stuff, which I'm not super knowledgeable about and that it may not necessarily be plausible for linguists to paid as much as chemists. 

I look at the march with... I don't want to say disdain, but perhaps bitterness is a better word. It disappoints me that certain types of science are not as respected/valued as others. In addition, "science is already seen by society as something that's more valuable than the arts," - A Very Fantastic Artist which is a whole nother can of fish. If I were a biologist I wouldn't be worrying about being a starving biologist, probably. Science is already valued in society even if the particular president doesn't have a very good grip on reality. If it were up to me, I would organize a march/protest to promote valuation of the arts and linguistics/other soft sciences. 

And to the next thing. Science/similar fields are heavily dominated by men, which is a documented issue/fact. It's been recognized that (isn't this an interesting sentence structure right there?? Sort of??) there should be more women in those fields, which is something that I agree with - it would be good for that to happen. However, I also personally have minimal interest in being in such a field, so I will not be contributing to having more female scientists. Which I sort of feel slightly bad about, since I do think it's important, but I also don't have an interest in those subjects. Alas. 

The thing I wanted to add here: it's possible that my lack of interest in science is because of how I was socialized (this is the sociology class talking). It's not possible to know if/how things would be different (meaning would I be interested in and enjoy science) had I been socialized differently since I can't go back and time and live an alternate universe where somehow I am socialized differently and come to like science. I am trying to figure out how I came to have the interests that I do have, however. I don't really know what could have been done differently, say, 10 years ago in my life or whatever that would have made me like science. I remember in elementary school we grew plants in science class, which was nice. I like plants. (fun fact: the German word for weed (not the marijuana kind, by the way) is "Unkraut") But that's quite different that studying science at a college level. Maybe I should do a sociological study of what causes people to like science... huh. Could be interesting. It might end up being an informal study and draw more upon the area of journalism than scientific research though. That's a possibility. Hmm. Now I just have to find some scientists to study. Studying the scientists - scienception.

An ending thought... My only chance for success as a linguist would be if aliens come to earth. Then maybe I could make it big as a linguist. If only. 

Edit: The previously mentioned Very Fantastic Artist complained that I hadn't properly attributed the quote. So I have fixed that. I hope that's enough to prevent any lawsuits. 

Songs

Songs that I dislike with a decent amount of passion:

Creep, by Radiohead. This one is a perfect description of that horrible thing, so therefore I don't like it because I would prefer not to listen to music that is reminiscent of that horrible thing.
Every Breath You Take, which is a creepy song if you pay attention to the lyrics.
Pumped Up Kicks, which I dislike because it sounds annoying. It isn't necessarily because of the subject matter, seeing as I enjoy other songs about murderous matters.
A cover of Love Will Tear Us Apart by Fall Out Boy, since it is an awful cover that butchers the original song.
David Bowie gets an honorable mention because he looked weird (for the very most part) and his music was weird (also for the very most part). However, there are two exceptions - one song of his that is actually fairly decent is Something in the Air, and (very surprisingly) he looked... good, at least compared to how he usually looked, in some science fiction movie he starred in back in the 70s.

In addition to these, an assortment of annoying pop songs that have been on the radio in the last 5 to 10 years.

Have you ever considered online dating?

An alternative title: why are people on the online dating website so ugly/otherwise unappealing????? (maybe it just means that I am too picky? I mean, I have standards, you know) 

Have you ever considered the idea of using an online dating website? If yes, my candid advice to you is... don't. If you absolutely must, don't go into it with high expectations at all. Go in to it with the mindset that it is a somewhat unique/more in depth form of people watching (and the people that you see will most likely be no more than average looking at best), which is what I treat it as currently. 

Most people that you see on there will probably be ugly, or no better than average looking (based on my experience) and therefore, they are not particularly appealing to me. This might make me shallow (a topic I have mentioned in the past) but I think it is somewhat important for a person you date to be good looking (meaning better than average at least by somewhat). 

If you are me, you have a certain person with very blonde margarine-colored hair in mind who is definitely good looking and could be a model (not to mention various actual European models that I know of, or certain favorite actors); the appearances of the people on the online dating website will certainly pale in comparison. 

Alas. Anyways, I have pretty much mostly given up on the idea of actually finding someone that I would actually want to date on the online dating website and I use it mostly out of boredom here and there. 

Here is a theory: all of the good looking people have already found people to date in real life without the help of an online dating website, so therefore all the average and below average people end up on the online dating website. Does this therefore mean that I'm below average looking?? I think at the very least I am average looking. I certainly am better looking than that horrible thing, for one.