Just look at how “deformity” is treated in trees and humans, for example. I’m usually very politically correct (the influence of public school I guess) and so this isn’t what I’d say just anytime. But deformed humans are often looked at with disgust sometimes. Sure, you can say that when I get to know them they’re usually as wonderful as normal people are (which may or may not be a compliment) but I’m going to be brutally honest. I’ve been revolted by people because of their physical characteristics, but that usually passes. Hypocrites and idiots, well, the revulsion stays, whether the person in question is handicapped or not. But I have never, ever been physically revolted by a tree, no matter how “deformed”. Does my even considering describing a tree as deformed feel funny? It should (unless you’re an idiot) and the reason is we can’t imagine any tree as having a “deformity”; it’s “just Nature”. Uh huh, and aren’t handicapped people “just Nature”? Of course they are, as is my perfection (hehe) but even the most intelligent among us rarely put this maxim into practice when we meet people. We don’t sit there and think, hmmm, this person is so beautiful, he has a huge hump on his back and three moles on his nose…gosh, isn’t Nature beautiful? Of course we don’t. The liars among us say they don’t think about the appearance at all. They lie. I have yet to meet a truly good person who wouldn’t think it. I assume this though; because of course I can’t read your thoughts, or anyone else’s. But a tree with a huge hump on one side that’s growing kinda crooked with bent branches and no beautiful birds nesting on it because all the beautiful birds have either been hunted past existence and made extinct by cruel, cruel humans, or flown south for the winter…that tree is still considered beautiful even by the most unbeautiful person (I meant on the inside as in pure and sensitive, but of course the idiots were scratching their heads wondering why physically ugly people can’t consider a tree beautiful).

I suppose that first part of this thing I’m writing (which would make this the second part?) made it seem as if I’m bitter against trees because they’re considered beautiful by everyone without having to try while I, no matter how hard I try can never be considered beautiful because people have to think that even though I’m better at Algebra than they are, it’s ok because they’re nicer looking than I am. Trees don’t have to worry about that. But I’m not bitter, I’m just showing all the idiots out there how much even they, despite their idiocy, love trees, even if they weren’t aware of it. And that’s really stupid, to not be aware of what you love without trying because there are actually so few things that someone can love without trying. I’m trying to show you what you can see despite the depth of the blinds that someone pulled over your eyes so you wouldn’t think what they decided wasn’t “normal”. So what on earth is wrong with hugging trees to save them? They’re considered beautiful by even the most insensitive, obtuse people. So I’m sure you think them to be that, even if you weren’t aware of it. Wouldn’t you go hug a person who is in danger of being killed if that will prevent the murder from occurring? Yes, of course you would, and you probably wouldn’t love this person. It’s more likely you feel revolted by this person. That’s not fair…this double standard. Why isn’t it appropriate to hug a tree?