I was gonna start this post earlier today. Well, I was gonna get up at 9:00 am but ended up getting up at 10:00 am. Got some MOS burger for brunch and then watched some Kim Iversen. And here we are, 15:02 already. Damn. I have absolutely no idea how to live... to the point that I was about to take out my old Nicomachean Ethics and reread the first parts of it. The part on happiness. I was gonna read Marcus Aurelius, since I never read it before. I should be ashamed, considering that I am a Stoic scholar, albeit having only completed a Master's. I'm starting to think that I'm extremely stupid. In the sense that I'm not wise and unintelligent. Perhaps I shouldn't aim to be better than others; I should just aim to be mediocre. I'm not sure. I don't have any talent whatsoever. I'm living off being slightly better than high-schoolers on math. I'm not particularly people-oriented. My research in philosophy was a bore. That's not even the point. I overanalyse everything and it's not doing me any good. I need a reason to do pretty much everything, including socialising. I've struggled to make myself look nicer as I think ultimately makeup is a barrier to women participating in the public world (particularly the political world) 'barefaced'. I think fundamentally makeup is oppressive. I will admit that I still draw my eyebrows and sometimes use concealer before going to work. Occassionally even lipsticks. I've wanted to make my stasnce by being completely makeup-free, but, the irony is that to become political, to be seen in the public space, women must have some makeup. That's the bare mininum for participating in the public sphere. Either that, or youll need to resort to the President Tsai or Chancellor Markel kind of 'non-feminine' look--although, both of them still wear makeup. I'd be kidding to my self if I said that with makeup, I could participate more in the public sphere, be more outspoken. My point is simply that even in day-to-day interaction, women without makeup are seen as, simply put, ugly, or unbearable. The standard of beauty for women is simply higher than men. I'm not even talking about seeking a partner--it's just that the society is so sexist that a woman without makeup would essentially be stripped of her voice. Even in a professional setting, people tend to first perceive your gender than anything else. And moving on to the private realm, you kinda just need to abide by the rules. Being without makeup is just like being over- or under-weight. Yes you can continue to tell yourself that, 'I'm going to find someone who loves me for me, not for my makeup or appearance.' For one, that's just not true. Appearance is simply the frontdoor of the house which is the person you are. A broken door or an ugly door simply won't attract any guest. For another, I'm starting to think that...... well, you can't exactly use the mind-body duality argument in this case. What does it mean to say that your appearance is not part of you? It may not be everything about you, but are you really to argue that your 'mind' could function completely without the host of your body? It is also the case that appearance is also part of the work of you. It takes work to look a certain way you want. There are certainly several aspects of your appearance determined by your genes, but isn't this true for every aspect of you? If you could work hard to overcome some of the natural barrier in non-appearance related aspects of you, I would say that you have the same ability work for a better appearance. All of this is not to deny the superficial nature of 'appearance-working' and the unfairness of having a higher standard for women than for men in terms of appearance. But if one is to live as part of the society, this horrible, superficial society, then there are certain unwritten laws to which to abide. Somehow this has turned into a tiny thesis. Which was completely not my intention. I was simply trying to rant. Oh well. My point is, I have to admit that, as superficial as most of these rules are, I'm starting to feel a tinge of anxiety. With regards to being totally alone and not sure what I can do. I could suppress my desires and thoughts, and 'go with the rules' or the common way to do things-- live the rest of my life as as high-school IB teacher. I'm pretty sure I'm going to be fine. I'll survive, even be able to meet an expat teacher and live happily ever after. But this life seems completely meaningeless to me. Of course perhaps in the beginning of the career I can still find some joy or excitement when a promotion came or when I get to move to Germany or even Israel. But to teach for 20 years and more, I can only imagine getting desparate and bored when I'm 35 and decide to become a mother to divert my attention from the existential boredom. I probably won't kill my child(ren) or my husband but I'll feel empty inside most of the time. It's not going to fare well in the long run--although I can live a life that seems 'normal'. But I'll be writing the exact same thing 15 years later. Or not even that, perhaps in 2 years. That time, with less time left and even more desparation, as there will be even fewer choices. I need to prevent that. But fundamentally, I think instead of finding some 'meaning' in the job itself, I should think of 'meaning' with 'life' as a unit instead of 'job' as as unit. I don't think philosophical pursuit is the ultimate happiness one should strive to achieve. I think being free from anxiety and emotion, the Stoic way, is closer to the answer. And yet, they're not advocating for an emotion-free life; they're only advocating for having the wisdom to recognise things worth fussing over and things not worth fussing over. It's about wisdom, not so much about howyou feel superficially. Which is kind of a problem. Because all of this is ultimately second-order. They tell you that you should become virtuous, wise, good, without pointing out the 'contents' of virtue, wisdom, or goodness. I think this may be the very point of a philosophy--it's a guide, not a dictionary. Oh but for laypeople like me, for unwise and lazy people like me, we need exactly a dictionary. At least a pamphlet. Oh well. I'm rambling. The point of this article is really about the lack of a dictionary in my life right now. If I were wise, I'd know that all of these are really beyond my control and hence should not worry me the way they do right now. (Got a cup of tea!) I think the one guideline that does help a ton here is Oscar Wilde's 'Be yourself, everyone else is taken.' I think my misery mostly stems from envy. And I too rarely live in the moment. By that I mean I'm always calculating-- thinking about how to be effective, or rational. The last time I truly lived in the moment was writing the long-ass letter. I had to get it off my chest. And it felt pretty damn good, time passed quickly. But most of my moments are not like this for me. I'm constantly questioning and doubting myself. Both for the 'short run' and the 'long run'--although I think these two are fundamentally the same. By that I mean I'm never sure if I'm making the best use of my time by doing this and that. If I've wasted a day. If I'm not productive enough. I bought a bunch of Japanese learning material because I thought I'm going to self-learn Japanese. I am. But I don't enjoy it, and I see it as a chore, in reality. I am ashamed if I don't know enough Japnese. I'm ashamed if I cannot pronounce a Kanji. Although I'm starting to realise that there's no need to be ashamed for not knowing enough, or not doing enough, for that matter. There are multiple people on Earth for a reason. Let the other people who are better, who are professional, to do the work for you. That's why Oscar Wilde's quote comes in handy. To me, it means that I need not be good at everything. I need not push myself into learning so damn much. I don't have to be a femininsm activist plus a math teacher plus a Japanese reader plus a coder plus an 'educator' plus a person with some mysterious devoted hobby just to attract a hubby. Ya know, you don't even have to be that good a math teacher--since there are a million ways to teach math other than being at school. So far as I can see, being in a private school, the only thing you have to do well is to be at work on time, execute whatever task is assigned, teach math, contact parents. That's it. They don't even have to be good. Since we don't know what that means anyway. Which is also to say that ... perhaps I should just let it go. Stop using my standard in the workplace. Just do what to me is the 'bare mininum' and I should pass just fine. In the meantime, it also means that I should realise that I'm noone special in this workplace. It's not a place to show 'your talent' whatever that may mean. It's a place to be exactly like a student--be 'good' and you'll be fine. In fact, I think most workplaces are like this. No one expects you to shine, particularly when 'shining' is not going to get the company more cash. That's the reality. Which is to say... if one wants to 'be themselves', the best thing to do is to become a parent and if you're strong enough to insist on your own way, you can pretty much be any kind of parent you want. The second best thing is to open up your company and you can then dictate the 'style' of your company however you want. How in the world did I get here. Yes, no shining. The idea is that unless I can become a true activist, I'd better live according to the unspoken rules as much as possible. I have to put myself out there, at the very least. No one's met me before. It doesn't matter that I went to a semi-okay universtiy or whatnot. To most people, I'm just a stranger. If you truly want to enlarge your social circle, you've gotta start with adhering to the more or less artificial and yet standard social rules. It's only after people's known you a bit more that you could become 'more and more like yourself.' Or you could opt out of all of these and become truly isolated. Even as an academic, you've gotta get used to the jargon and follow some standard formatting and give speeches and whatnot. It's just a less complicated society, but a society nonetheless. Worse come to worst, you become a housewife and the rule will be determineed by your family. Or you determine the rules for your family and torture everyone around you. I think all of us are potential tyrants, given the chances. I'd like the first option. But I'm very certain that this place, this country is not the place whose rules I'm willing to succumb. I've experimented with it for a few years and I often feel suffocated. I have a tiny circle, that's for sure. But I have not much a desire to really expand this circle, for I can pretty easily and quickly guess what everyone's gone through-- people's experiences here are still pretty uniform. School, university, family issues. I don't think I've made progress in this post, exactly. But I guess I've come to the conclusion that I need to be 'less authentic' in public places and not speak my mind all the time. I also need not learn so much. I should also realise that there's nothing special about me. Although, finally, this also means that I ought to simply live how I'm the most comfortable living, and it's no use to strive to be like someone else, because they're all taken. I think there are just too many suggestions on how to live. There are too many options, and people are thinking in global terms. Which makes things even more confusing. Anyway. The point for now is to keep an open mind, be completely professional, no need to mingle with colleagues. Be aware of the unspoken rules and their hidden implications (what these rules are leading to) and then decide if you're to abide to them.
Not An Avocado Life 