Monday, July 23, 2007


scene: my apt. 1230am pacific time 330am eastern, sitting in a chair in the dark typing

i'm all about effective communication, but i'm starting to loose sight of what that really means

for example:
are you effectively communicating with someone who you make feel extremely uncomfortable?
are you effectively communicating if you leave little room for a response?
can you effectively communicate with someone without saying anything?

rhetorical questions of course

things i'm currently pondering.
not bad not good just annoying.

i'm really enjoying the people i've met in san diego. they remind me that you can be fabulous and conscious.

i wish nat was here. she would really enjoy california. she has a californian spirit (truly compassionate, layed back, and thoughtful.) it's weird because i've never questioned our friendship. i just know it's real. she's pretty fabulous and very conscious. i also, feel we can effectively communicate with one another.

ldub called me tonight and confirmed all my feelings and opinions on nat. it's weird how that stuff happens. i was thinking of her and receive a phone call from a friend actually in california confirming my feelings.

feelings are complicated because they are so personal

i dont think people empathize enough
i need that empathy gun from the movie "a hitchhiker"s guide to the galaxy." an empathy gun. the thought of that humors me. something as violent and forceful as a gun to tap into an emotion space that would really access effective communication among us beings to promote peace and love.

but the empathy gun has to be small enough to fit into my tote. cute, practical, and functional. that's to perfect :)

oh, and what exactly is the rule to calling someone you just met? i mean, how many days i'm i really suppose to wait?

that isnt a rhetorical question.
i really want to know.


1 comment:

danny beaux banny said...

the rule is two days. any sooner and you're too eager. i know it's silly but trust me -- its a rule for a reason.