最好的自己不在未來,就在現在。
認真回想,以前我好像在每一段關係中都是在扮演某一個角色,不由自主的在為每個對象做調整。不只有在戀愛上,有時候可能跟朋友、工作夥伴都是,尤其是在前輩面前,常常我都會本能反應似的改變自己。聲音要甜一點嗎?笑話要低級一點嗎?從穿衣服就可以看出,我今天是要跟誰吃飯。雖然是微調,但透露出了一件事,我好像不夠喜歡真正的自己,所以才會擔心大家也不會喜歡真正的我。我告訴自己即使累,但如果持續努力,有一天就能變成大家都喜歡的Lara。
久而久之我和世界的相處模式只有「由外到內」,會依照別人對我的反應去斷定我的下一步。大家會覺得我很好相處,我卻越來越不快樂。現在我慢慢開始懂了,原來我把順序弄反了。我該優先處理的是自己內心的感受,其他人買不買單,其實跟你一點關係都沒有。就像找另外一半,如果我跟夢中情人在一起,但我根本無法在他面前做自己,最後還是會走不下去。
我現在33歲,So What? 終於懂,「當下的自己」才是人生時間軸上最重要的!
對了,有人好奇這次「{}」的意思嗎?簡單說是「大括號」,在數學運算式中稱作「空集合」。數學不好的人就想像一個清空的行李箱吧。「空」不是無,而是無限可能。括號還有另外一個更好懂的意思,就是「優先處理」。將過去整理過後的自己,回歸純粹,態度成熟自信!(失戀後重新出發的人應該很有感觸吧!🤣)
Your best self is not in the future, but in the Now.
Looking back, I seem to have been playing a role in almost every relationship I was ever in. I'm not just talking about romantic relationships. Whether it was with friends or colleagues (especially seniors), I would modify myself almost instinctively. Should my voice be sweeter? My jokes dirtier? If you wanted to know who I was eating with that day, all you had to do was look at the clothes I was wearing.
The changes were subtle, but they still reflected a truth: I didn’t feel like the real me was enough so I was worried that other people would also find her lacking. I told myself that if I just kept working at it, I would someday become a version of Lara that everyone accepted.
Eventually I only knew how to get my cues from the external world. I would always base my next step on feedback I got from others. Most people considered me easy to get along with, but I grew more and more unhappy.
I think I had it all wrong. My first priority should have been listening to my inner voice. Whether or not other people agree with it is not in my control nor of my concern. Take looking for a partner. Even if I found the person of my dreams, it would never last if I couldn’t be myself around them.
I am 33 years old. So What? I finally understand that "the present self" is the most important thing on the timeline of life! It’s time to prioritize me!
By the way, is anyone curious about the meaning of "{}" this time? Besides the more commonly known representation of parentheses as prioritization, these curly brackets are called “the empty set”. The empty what? If like me, math is not your strongest suit, think of it as an empty suitcase. "Empty" doesn’t mean nothing, but infinite possibilities! What will you fill your life with this time?
2021全新專輯《來者何人{}》
數位收聽:https://LaraLiang.lnk.to/DearYou2
<再也沒有你> 陳勢安 Andrew Tan
數位收聽:https://kkbox.fm/Iss26l
#Lara梁心頤2021全新專輯二部曲 #來者何人{} 全球發行
#再也沒有你 #NoMoreU #SoWhat30
andrew meaning 在 通勤學英語 Facebook 的最佳貼文
【#每日跟讀單元 K132】成年旅客新趨勢-有意義的旅行
👉老師唸給你聽: https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/3hyqse
摘要:
Older travelers often want to continue to learn and have an impact on the world, said Andrew Gordon, who founded the company Diversity Abroad 12 years ago. “They want their travel to have meaning,” he said. Gordon’s company connects and does advocacy work for nontraditional students who want to study overseas.Road Scholar, which organized the Sullivans’ program, began as an organization offering not-for-credit classes on university campuses for adults age 60 and over.
12年前創立「海外多元文化」公司的安德魯.戈登說,年長旅行者往往希望能繼續學習,並對世界產生影響。 他說:「他們希望他們的旅行能有意義。」戈登的公司專替那些想到外國學習的非傳統學生負責中間的連繫與宣傳工作。主辦蘇利文夫婦出國學習計畫的「道路學者」成立之初,是個提供60歲以上成人大學校園非學分制課程的組織。
------------------------------
🏆通勤學英語15mins.Today榮獲
-Apple Podcast 2020年十大熱門節目
-KKBox 2020年十大Podcast風雲榜 (唯一語言學習Podcast)
-Himalaya 人氣票選播客總冠軍
💪每日只要15分鐘跟讀世界各地時事趣聞,
累積提升英語口說與聽力!
⭐️想收到節目Email 通知?在通勤學英語官網用email訂閱!
官網: www.15mins.today
🎧Apple Podcast收聽: https://pse.is/DLMCK
🎧Spotify收聽:https://pse.is/DQQHL
🎧Himalaya收聽:https://15minstoday.pse.is/SLAZG
#15minstoday
#英語即戰力
#學英語 #podcast
#每日收聽好吸收
andrew meaning 在 李怡 Facebook 的精選貼文
Primaries and Disqualifications (Lee Yee)
Elsie Leung said, not disclosing all of the provisions of the National Security Law (NSL) is to prevent invoking clashes in society, and that the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) has already conducted sufficient consultations with different sectors.
Without disclosing the provisions of the NSL, what was used to consult these different sectors? This point alone discloses how absolutely absurd the so-called “sufficient consultations”, “different sectors”, and frankly, her entire statement are.
There have been commotions in the online community around the suggestion of achieving international sanctions through large-scale disqualifications, focusing mainly on the contradictions between the pro-democracy camp’s primaries and a large number of candidates. Primaries mean an aggregation of votes, to avoid an overextended list of candidates who would be dividing up the votes and possibly leading to the reduction of the number of elected seats. Most of the pro-democracy camp, including young candidates, are supportive of having primaries. The primary selection mechanism stipulates that only the winners are able stand for election. Some suggested that even the losers from the primaries should go ahead and stand for election, and were criticized for violating the principles of primaries.
These principles, however, were drafted before the NSL. It was when the legal profession and some Democrats still believed there was room for negotiation, when the retired former Chief Justice Honorable Andrew Li Kwok-nang proposed to protect the implementation details within Hong Kong under the premise of accepting the NSL. Some Democrats also suggested to bring back Article 23 in place of the implementation of the NSL by NPC, or to adopt the sunset clause. If the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is willing to bargain, the red line for disqualifications of candidates could be drawn at the absolute “anti-NSL”, while turning a blind eye towards the Democrats who are willing to negotiate, such that LegCo would continue to have “decorative” Democrats.
The CCP categorically rejected all bargaining, and Andrew Li accused the Hong Kong NSL as completely undermining the independent judicial power guaranteed by the Basic Law. Martin Lee stated that “the Hong Kong NSL must be resisted fully”, and “people whose attention is being diverted to the devil in the details have already fallen into the trap devised by the CCP”. Moderates who wish to main the current system, to avoid “scorching-earth”, are already at a dead end.
The complete societal rift induced by the NSL is simple: on one side, you have people who blindly support an NSL without any disclosed provisions, including the pro-Beijing camp and the voluntarily “visually-impaired”; on the other side, you have citizens who support democracy. According to a poll conducted by the Hong Kong Institute of Public Opinion at the end of last month, 96% of the “supporters of the pro-democracy camp” opposed the NSL, and only 1% supported the law; Among those who are “non supporters of the pro-democracy camp”, 62% expressed support towards having the NSL implemented by the NPC, but those who opposed still amounted to 29%.
This was a poll done a month ago. With those who were willing to negotiate being rejected at this point, the societal rift should be more apparent. The situation is clear: any participant of the pro-democracy camp’s primaries, given that they have not been too vocal about opposing the NSL, even if they do win the primaries, have are able to join the election without being disqualified, they could still end up not winning the election. If citizens are to woefully cast their votes for candidates who do not oppose the NSL, looking at the poll, there’s only a 1% chance among the “supporters of the pro-democracy camp”.
Another situation that is clear: those who have openly and clearly opposed the NSL and somehow escape the fate of disqualification of candidacy is almost impossible. Even if there were, the voters would be doubtful of the candidates’ true stance, leading to a slim chance of getting elected.
As such, for the pro-democracy candidates, it is almost impossible to either oppose the NSL or to be disqualified for opposing. This, is precisely why the original intent of an aggregation of votes through the mechanism of primaries is likely to fail.
Disregard the results of the primaries. Flood the election with a loud and clear message of anti-NSL from a whale of candidates. This is the only way out. Having all or the majority being disqualified would be an obvious deprivation of Hongkongers’ right to vote, a guaranteed way to get international attention.
How much of a shockwave will international sanctions send to the CCP? An opinion piece published in Taiwan suggested that a senior Chinese official who may be sanctioned by the US because of the Hong Kong NSL has hidden assets in the US that are worth as much as US$3.1 billion. In 2013, Snowden, a former CIA employee who is now in Russia, announced that Chinese officials’ foreign deposits amounted to US$4.8 trillion. In normal circumstances, cash holdings account for only one-third of total assets, meaning that the total assets should amount to tens of trillions of US dollars (Hong Kong’s foreign exchange reserves are only about US$440 billion). And these were figures from 7 years ago.
International sanctions are, inevitably, internationally “earth-scorching”, where the side carrying out the sanctions will also suffer immensely. Freezing the assets of sanctioned officials in foreign countries will not help the sanctioning parties at all. Senior Chinese officials could care less about the Basic Law and Hong Kong’s human rights, but to laugh off one’s own properties? This is Hong Kong’s “earth-scorching” bargaining chip.
andrew meaning 在 Andrew Meaning - YouTube 的推薦與評價
... <看更多>