writing never wanted me back

finally, after barely two months of hiatus, i get the chance to write something way off the legalese paradigm.

first off, i do not like the way i write. it has been this way since i stepped out of college, consequently out of the college paper. i am a failure in my conscious struggle to reinvent the way i write. as i have said, the old style is passé and devoid of whatever juice of creativity i can muster. but i cannot seem to develop a better one. it is correct when people say that you write what you read, and i do not like it since most of the material i read are all about the law and judicial decisions, and a lil thing they call fhm, on the side. there was this assignment in my legal research class wherein we were tasked to make a pleading of dismissal on the case that was given to us. basically the case was about two consenting heterosexual adults. the guy seduced the woman with marriage to get his way to her thingy. i defended the guy and much to my dismay, my arguments were this way:

"it is quite impossible to believe that a woman as bright and intelligent as the plaintiff is easily fooled by the defendant. i say that she is intelligent enough that she consented herself to undergo such misery. volenti non fit injuria excuses my client from moral damages arising from contra bonus mores simply because the plaintiff consented to the carnal knowledge. and who knows, SHE MIGHT LOVE THE STEAMY NIGHT OF SPIT AND JUICE SWAPPING"

gees, talk about being FHMish in my formal legal pleading.

perhaps ill stick with old self