T9 - three two four five

There is a continuous dilemma of whether you should call a girl cute. Cute has various definitions and ideals. Those which could lead to you breathing out of a straw for the next two months and for some weird reason, a remote that was surgically removed from your arse. Cute is a label to which guys propose or possibly to impose ugliness in a more appeasing manner. It is by no means appeasing to the victim (because they remain to be tagged ugly). It should at least offer comfort and truthfulness to the girl that they are ugly. It is not such a bad word, though ironically ugly isn’t exactly a “pretty” word to hear or read either.

Another supposed word to try and produce the same effect as CGS is labelling a girl as okay. Okay does not cut it. It is void of emotive reactions and may be equivalent to saying “yes or no to having fries with your burger”. It is a greater wonder that one word could dramatise the simple notion of replying with okay. Cute on some occasions can appropriately imply a girl is ugly but has a personality. These girls unfortunately will not be valued in their teenage years where beauty is superficially linked with ability. Beauty is an aspect aspired to at youth but lost to botox and make-up that age soon succumbs. Their age is probably given away with their fascination and obsession that 80s rock stars were hot with their tight spandex pants and hairy chest hair.

However, this word still unravels still just mystery and probably angry girls trying to find a pitchfork to poke me with. The main theme currently addressed thus far, is the word usage of “cute”. Cute is a dejected part of the English vocabulary and draws representations of a person nice to look at but at the same time, not really.

Cute complements are projected as an okay looking girl. Funnily enough, it can be concurrently used as an insult wrapped in the bow of a complement. It is easier than telling a girl that she is hot but in fact looks fat – clearly notice that cute can replace the insult tied together with the false complement. It is kind of like being on board a peak hour train. Your hand slaps the hot-as girl on the arse, but not really at the time since blame can be laid to the jolt between stops.

It seems there are two other reasons that suggest you should not date a cute girl. There is the type of cute that reminds you of the children that you tutor in their Gretel tails. It isn’t exactly a good idea to walk out holding the girl’s hand  in public when people mistake you for a massive paedo-bear.  There is the second version of cute where she is the fugly girl you would not touch even with a 10 foot pole. The cute girl syndrome is a problem when brought out of hibernation. It is unspoken and is knowledge that should become innate. If the issue is not addressed, and like curry, no curry no diarrhoea.

Like the human dilemma of selecting the right cheese to accompany which cracker or wine to food, it is personal and at the same time requires our parental attention. It becomes like the secret that lives under your pubic hair. There are unknown motivations that form the basis of uncertain constructs of subjective physical attributes. Simplicity instead settles into n different forms and decides to attach itself to a book wrapped in a mass of packaging just because it felt like it. it is a complex and sensitive issue. Just don’t use it unless you “mean” it.

The next part in this series is in regards to the classification of appearances.

Is it familiar that some people or even yourself shudder each time the lens is pointed at you? It is even more intriguing as I write this that passers-by stare at me or even dare to stare at my book as I write. It seems everyone is conceited into believing that they are a celebrity like “the Truman show”. But this raises another question. Everone wants to believe they are a celebrity, whether they play the extroverted party animal or the at home introverted genius. It is one question followed yet by another question.

There is a familiar and well-documented scenario of a lens pointed at the average individual. We freeze, pose and wait for the flash to disseminate our vision for the next two seconds. It seems to avoid the consequences of the flash cue to cover yourself. Those who practise such practices tend to pro it out (one might say that road-kill on the road should learn the elementary lessons towards not freezing on the road to become the flattened mess of red tapestry on the road).

What is the general problem with allowing your picture to be taken? An important lesson must be learnt. A common case of women or girls in their early twenties realise something about their photos and age. Their photos are often a collage or wallpaper of their supposed best years of their life. They vividly admit to such thoughts yet always tend to hide in case photos are incriminating and allow strangers to perform strange sexual ads with. Sure, each picture may not be a perfect picture or a glorified “dream” picturesque of oneself, but nonetheless it is you.

It is important that every moment of life should be treasured. Each is a snapshot of who, what and where you were at that particular point in time. It is not what a person is, but what a person thinks they are. Age acts as a restraint what you can do but does not constrain us to who we believe we are. There is a reason why pictures do not have words. Each are up to one’ own contextual bias.