Got a C+ for the memorial, significantly higher than what I was expecting (F on a bad day, D on a good day). Flipping through the 15 pages, though, is the most perfect method to adopt if you suddenly feel like ripping your self-worth to shreds.
Ugh. Apparently I messed up the stupid table of contents (which I bloody sacrificed Project Runway for) but I still don't get how I got it wrong; all I know is that if I ever need a solid reason not to practice law, that will be it, without a doubt. Also, I did slightly better for my common law issue, but since I'm doing the statutory issue for moots, it means I have to write a whole new argument! Argh!
The re-write is due this Saturday. ARGH. Time to rip out my hair. And I just realised that mooting is next Saturday. So, in a span of a mere two weeks, I have to attempt to pull my LAWR grade up somewhere around last semester's B-.
Judging from the grades I've received so far though (a C and a C+), I don't see how that can be humanly possible, especially when I'm the human being in question.
To the kids out there, take it from me: Do not slack off on your work for 80% of a semester, thinking that you can catch up as the exams draw nearer; more likely than not, you'd end up choking excruciatingly on your arrogant words. It's happened to me before, it's still happening to me, and I think it will always happen to me.
Well, then again - leopards and spots; you know what they say.
OMG Veronica Mars returns this week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am, like, sooo excited!!!!1111!!!111!!~~!!!
I am still downloading the freaking season finale of Project Runway and the practically non-existent download speed is driving me mad. I need to know who won!
As a side note, as the season progressed I found Daniel Vosovic more and more attractive. At 23 (or 24), he's one of the youngest of the group. He also has this delicate fair complexion that makes me swoon, pretty puppy-dog eyes, a killer haircut, and most importantly, he's lanky. So hot. He's also extremely nice and caring towards most of his fellow contestants, and he hardly ever bitches about other people to the camera (or, at least, if he did, those footage(s?) ended up on the cutting room floor). He's this sexy and hot sweet, gentle guy, almost everything a girl would want in a boyfriend.
He's also gay.
I was quite surprised when he talked about coming out of the closet in one episode. My gaydar isn't the strongest ever, but it's still pretty effective; and yet, I didn't get the feeling that he's gay at all. Some people thought Daniel Franco was gay but I knew all along that he's straight, and people like Santino Rice (who wore stiletto heels in the Nicky Hilton episode) and Nick I can't spell his last name and my lovely Andrae are obviously gay.
But Daniel V? Him and his hotness and his gentleness and his incredible niceness? The guy you'd definitely want to bring home to meet your parents because he's total boyfriend material? The guy that injects some sort of hope in you and makes you think, maybe not all is lost?
How sad it is for straight girls like myself.
Thankfully, I still have Joaquin to fall back on. (And I would love to do that, literally; any excuse to have his arms around me. Hahaha.)
Speaking of Joaquin, I found what is supposedly his playlist.
I'm viewing it with sceptism and I question how reliable it is, but all the same, going by the assumption that it's really his playlist, it only goes to show even further that he and I are meant to be.
#3. We Used to be Friends - The Dandy Warhols
#16. Paradise City - Guns and Roses
#20. I Wanna Be Sedated - The Ramones
#2. Clocks - Coldplay
And other assorted alternative bands whose names I know but whose music I don't. (Well, except Soundgarden, but to be quite frank I bought a CD when I was 14 but never quite got into it.)
You know how I tend to judge people by their taste in music and use it to sieve out the desirables from the not-desirables? Well, if his taste in music resembled that 20-track playlist that is purportedly his, it's a sign - another one, yes - that I'm meant to spend the rest of my life with Joaquin Phoenix.
And speaking of marrying Joaquin, I had a great time with Mag at Macs (HAHA Mag at Macs) today. She felt like eating nuggets so we walked all the way to the dowdry Engineering faculty and squeezed ourselves into a couple of stools facing the window just so she could have nuggets.
And okay, I felt like having fries, so I didn't mind too much. But mostly, I'm just so very nice.
There were a bunch of Japanese students in McDonalds. Most of the guys had super fair skin and straight 30 degrees eyebrows. If you've ever read Takehiko Inoue's Real manga series, most of them had that wheelchair guy's features.
Of course, the wheelchair guy looks a lot better than the guys in McDonalds. I'm just saying.
Anyway, Mag was - can it possibly be? - even lamer than usual and started calling me Mrs Phoenix and herself Mrs Wang (as in Lee Hom) and adopting the American mispronounciation of the surname, and it was the funniest thing ever. According to her, I will convince Joaquin to move back to New York (he's SO a New Yorker and so NOT an LA-er) where she lives with Lee Hom and we will meet up often to have taitai tea and go to functions with our famous husbands.
HAHAHA. What the hell. Mag is a riot.
Also had a nice chat about guys and relationships in general. I won't say much; I'll just say this: I can never think of the word 'heartbeat' without laughing anymore. Thank you Mag. You're so kind!
We also talked about SNGS and PE teachers and psychotic PE/Math teachers. Her story about SL and her long long hair was hilarious. I told her that one of my PE teachers in Jurong was SL's teacher (or some instructor or something). He always called me "St. Nicks girl". And ironic how I responded to that nickname too, because I've never liked being labelled such.
As much as I hated SNGS, it's nice to know that I've made some really awesome friends there. And somehow, SNGS doesn't seem that shitty anymore.
TSH posed a bloody hard question in Legal Theory today. She was talking about abortion and the liberal view that, since we can't come to a consensus on when life begins, we should let the individual choose. If a person holds this view, she contended, because we can't come up with an answer to such difficult questions, an answer that everyone can agree with, then when faced with the question of whether Jews are equal human beings or whether the disabled have equal dignity as the rest of us, this person should step aside and let another person kill a Jew or a handicapped person because that person thinks that they aren't equal human beings.
I realise that that was a very long sentence. Basically, if you're for legalising abortion because you think it's difficult to answer complex questions about when life begins, then you're for not criminalising the killing (I'd say murder) of a person of a certain race or disability because we disagree on their worth as human beings.
When I was listening to that I was stumped. I'm of the view that abortion should exist as a choice, but TSH's latter proposal is manifestly absurd. That made me think: Do I really believe that abortion should be legal because we don't agree on when life begins?
And to be honest? I have no idea. Is it self-refuting to be anti-death penalty and pro-choice at the same time?
But then again, the real question is: Are human being always consistent? Do our views and opinions always have to converge and be constant? How can we etch in black and white our responses and inclinations to some difficult moral questions when there are so many variables in a given situation to consider?
I don't know. A part of me leans towards the notion (largely mine, I think) that consistency is overrated; that inconsistency isn't always hypocrisy; and that our responses are never, and can never be, constant to ever-changing situations. The other part of me...well, the other part of me is unsure, period.
But one thing is for sure: Legal Theory is infinitely more stimulating than things like Contract and last semester's Torts.