"You will always attract to you the appropriate match. If you are a client who seeks a healer, you will find the one that is appropriate based on their vibration, not an accreditation. If you find yourself working with someone whose energy is not of the highest vibration, then you were not ready to be in that higher frequency. There is another lesson to learn. Through the Laws of Attraction and Resonance you always find the match or increase your vibration to match that which you seek. The fear that you will encounter a charlatan or that you will be perceived as such only occurs when a corresponding fear is present. As a Creator Being you manifest the experience to encounter the fear, observe it and release it. You are not a victim. As you see yourself in the driver’s seat, attracting the vibrationally appropriate people into your life, you breathe deeper as you no longer see yourself in the victim role."


“Use what talents you possess; the woods would be very silent if no birds sang there except those that sang best.”
Henry Van Dyke


Many people who come to understand that we create our own reality in each moment of our lives, find it confusing when I tell them that we also have destinies that we came to fulfill, destinies that are almost impossible to thwart. Here's a great passage from a channeled lecture by one Darryl Ankar, channeling "Bashar":

"Walk down that path, you will, as a physical being. That is a choice you have made from another level, and it will be felt like 'destiny' on the physical world. But how you walk down that path is up to the free will of the physical mind. You can walk down it anyway you want - happy, sad, backwards, forwards, upside down, rightside up, with whom you want, without whom you want. How you walk down it is up to you. But walk down it, you will!"


I actually don't know what Doug Glanville is trying to say in this piece, entitled "LOVE AND BASEBALL," but just the fact that someone is talkin' baseball gives me a lift as I shovel the snow drifts in front of my home!

You can read the piece HERE.


In an article entitled "DOCTOR PEDOPHILE" on THE DAILY BEAST, Jan Crawford writes about the case of one Dr. Earl Bradley in Delaware:

"The Bradley case may be the worst in history, but it is not an aberration. Our investigation for the CBS Evening News With Katie Couric has revealed that dozens of pediatricians, in towns and cities across the country, have been arrested for sexually molesting child patients. In the last decade alone, at least 20 pediatricians were charged—often years after initial complaints were made. And those are the criminal cases. Most complaints, child advocates say, never get past state medical boards. Child advocates like Dr. Eli Newberger, a professor at Harvard Medical School, compare pediatric pedophilia to the priest scandal that rocked the Catholic Church. People trust their pediatricians instinctively, he says, and simply cannot process the idea that they could abuse children. But the evidence has become too great to ignore. 'We're dealing, I think, with a systemic problem, in which there is a reluctance to act on the part of colleagues for the various business and collegial reasons, and an organized coverup,' Newberger told us."

You know, I have written a lot on this blog about sexual repression and the damage it causes. The scandal of rampant child abuse among religious people and their leaders has been so widely exposed at this point that priests barely have any defenders left. I have also written a lot about our western medical profession, which for all intents and purposes is a hot bed of psychiatric disturbance. Like priests, doctors know that they are lying to their "flock," and exploiting a gullible and childish population by the self-aggrandizing assumption of omnipotence and omniscience, ultimately for their own gain of wealth and/or power.

There is another angle that I have talked about, though not as much. That is, the priesthood and medical profession, as traditionally practiced here, are perfect shields for those disturbed individuals employing the defenses of "sublimation" and "reaction formation." (I would include the police here as well, but I don't want to get "Rick" started!)

Here are some simple (hopefully) definitions: "sublimation" is a defense by which an unacceptable impulse, such as the desire to slash or dismember someone, is expressed through socially acceptable means, such as performing surgery by a doctor. "Reaction formation" is a defense in which a socially unacceptable impulse, such as the desire to rape children, is hidden by adopting a persona or profession that seems to express the opposite intention, such as taking vows of celibacy in a priesthood.

Needless to say, or perhaps, necessary to say, defenses sooner or later always break down, and the festered impulses take over with a vengeance. What is suppressed will never stay suppressed indefinitely.

I have advocated for a long time that those in positions of responsibility for the well-being of children - and that includes parents and teachers - are being incredibly irresponsible by not engaging in a period of deep self work as a prerequisite to taking on such as role.

There are no exceptions to this, folks, and no end runs around it. Meanwhile, if you are still foolish enough to be taking your children to church or a traditional doctor (and I presume a fair percentage of readers of my blog do not), at least don't leave them alone there!

Repost: Is Depression Good for You?

Here's an interesting one from 2 years ago -

British researchers made headlines with their report that antidepressants are for the most part ineffective. (
But in a fascinating development, now researchers point to growing evidence that depression might actually be good for you. (

Interesting. I have very often told people that their "problems" were not their problem, but rather that their judgments of their problems were their problem. And when I taught my class on psychopatholgy, I felt that the best moments were when we examined our "disorders" and "dysfunctions" as adaptations and devices that perhaps regulated the pace of our unfolding into our higher life path. The caterpillar's coccoon is an apt analogy. Created to protect the caterpillar while it is maturing into a butterfly, the coccoon is quite functional, but to the butterfly needing to spread its wings and fly, it is dysfunctional, something necessary to get out of in order to survive. So, too, with our human emotional and psychological defenses. They are created to help us survive the vulnerabilities of childhood, but then we need to shed them in order to soar as adults.

Here's some excerpts from the article on depression:

"A leading psychiatrist, Dr Paul Keedwell, an expert on mood disorders at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, says that depression is not a human defect at all, but a defence mechanism that in its mild and moderate forms can force a healthy reassessment of personal circumstances.
'There are benefits and that's why it has persisted. It's a tough message to hear while you are in depression but I think that there's a life afterwards,' Keedwell says. 'I have received e-mails from ex-sufferers saying in retrospect it probably did help them because they changed direction, a new career for example, and as a result they're more content day-to-day than before the depression."
"One woman left an abusive relationship and moved on, he says, and might not have done so if depression had not provided the necessary introspection. Similarly, unrealistic expectations are revised when depression sparks a more humble reassessment of strengths and weaknesses. Psychological unease can generate creative work and the rebirth after depression brings a new love affair with life.
"Aristotle believed depression to be of great value because of the insights it could bring. There is also an increased empathy in people who have or have had depression, he says, because they become more attuned to other people's suffering."


Finally saw the movie "FROST-NIXON" last week.


Aside from the really taut performance by Frank Langella that expertly demonstrated the paranoid, grandiose, roiling disturbance that riddled Richard Nixon, what Frost-Nixon really showed me was how things have really changed in the world of politics and the media, and of course, therefore, in the collective consciousness, in the last forty years.

Nixon's criminal behavior - illegal secret bombings, trying to steal an election, etc., these things are now commonplace activities for White House inhabitants. Think about it. The Supreme Court condoned a stolen election in 2000, and gave carte blanche to corporations to steal elections in 2010, and just this week, the Justice Department gave carte blanche to officials committing the war crime of torture.

And the media?! Forget it! Can anyone think of a journalist for a major news organization who would do the investigative work of a Woodward and Bernstein or a James Reston, and receive the support of their bosses, despite the complaints and threats from politicians? Today, we get our most penetrating looks at the malfeasance in our government from comedy shows like Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" or Steven Colbert's "The Colbert Report." Matt Taibbi is the closest thing we have to a real investigative journalist out there, and he works for Rolling Stone Magazine, not the New York Times.

So, what gives? Where are we heading?

Well, let me go pretty far out there. Where we're heading is to a place where the very notion of having someone "governing" us is obsolete.

Now, I understand, that seems to fly in the face of the obvious need for corrupt corporations and banks to be regulated (and if you read this blog, you know I love Elizabeth Warren on this subject), and it seems to contradict the clear need for Baby Souls and Young Souls to have limits set on them for the common good. Yes, it is odd on the surface for me to be saying that our current system of government needs to go. [And PLEASE, don't mistakenly think I'm joining the Tea Partiers! By no means. The groups calling themselves Tea Partiers, who I think more aptly should call themselves "The Frontal Lobers," are Baby Souls being manipulated by Young Souls to encourage mayhem and lawlessness altogether among folks who are full of fear and hatred and don't want to govern their own base impulses.]

No, where we're heading is to a division along the lines of consciousness. To grasp the meaning of this will require some metaphysical understanding here, so any readers who can't go there can switch over to a different article at this point.

Okay, here we go -

Everything is energy and consciousness. Not just "spiritual" teachings, but physics and quantum physics have demonstrated those facts. Everything (and everyone) is made from the same vibrating sub-atomic particles and waves of energy. Anything placed under an electron microscope will show that. In other words, nothing is truly solid, and nothing is truly separate from anything else. We are all just particles and waves of energy living in a sea of particles and waves of energy. And quantum physics has demonstrated that the consciousness of an observer observing something alters the thing being observed. So, our minds determined the shape and form of the reality we encounter.

Finally, add into the mix Einstein's discoveries about the relativity of time - or as James Taylor would put it: "Time isn't really real" - and you've got something that, well, flies in the face of conventional three-dimensional thinking.

And that is my point. The Baby Souls and Young Souls - i.e. - our current crop of politicians, Teabaggers, CEO's and media folk - are locked into a three-dimensional perspective and a linear time line. So, for them, conflict, competition, secrecy, greed, hatred and separation, and ultimately, death, all make sense. They see those elements as just part of human nature and life as they know it.

To someone evolving to a fourth dimensional perspective - where all is one and where linear time is an illusion - cooperation, collaboration, openness and oneness are what makes sense. I suspect that is where many of the readers of Full Permission Living are heading, or are already in transition to.

Back to - what does it all mean?

Okay, way out there now!

It means that we are entering a phase where there will be essentially two (or more) different Earths being lived on. Parallel realities is not a new concept, of course, but in fact, it is more than a "concept." If enough people shift their consciousnesses to a fourth dimensional perspective, they will in effect create an earth to live on that will not need primitive systems of government, or money, or weapons, etc., because that level of corruption and separateness will not exist there. On the third-dimensional earth, there will continue to be war and hunger and regular catastrophes, etc., in accordance with those beliefs.

One thread that runs through everything I write on this blog, folks, is the necessity of working on yourself to shift your consciousness in accordance with who you really are and who you really want to be. I try to make it clear that this is not a luxury item or a leisure activity, like taking tennis lessons. If you are truly not fully satisfied with the life you are living, or with the way you see the collective around you living, there is only one high speed train out - do the work necessary on yourself to open up your minds and connect to your emotions. You will shift then. I see it every day in my practice. It is beautiful and amazing, but totally doable. We have free will here. You have free will. If you like, you can exercise it!

See you in the fourth dimension!!


Although this episode, like many from the City Rock series, includes some tragic events from the streets of New York in the early 1980's, this particular scene is a light-hearted and uplifting one in which the upstart band of misfit warriors beats the perennial champs of the league, the Bella Blu Stars, led by the take-no-prisoners, ex-con, "Pete."

Enjoy! Spring is almost here!!

Oh, and the next CITY ROCK reading will be held on Friday, March 12 at 7 PM at Shetler Studios in Manhattan. For more information, contact PL at


Marcel mows down every player on the Stars. The Stars’ pitcher, Hank (50’s), a clean-looking accountant-type, keeps City Rock at bay as well for the first 6 innings. Pete is fuming as the last inning begins with the score 0-0. His team is up. He huddles for a conference with his batter. The batter gets up and bunts the first pitch from Marcel down towards the surprised G.C., who can’t get it in time. The next batter bunts the other way and Bird can’t get to it in time. 1st and 2nd, no outs. Mitch is up.
Jennie and Sam are yelling their support from the bench.


(to the Stars)

Sam looks at her aghast.

Damn, girl. You really know how to razz!

Mitch is not bunting. He’s been timing Marcel and now he feels ready. He goes after the first pitch and rips a line-drive up the middle. It whizzes by Marcel’s head, looking like the game-winning hit... but Rick is on the move. He zooms across the infield and before it escapes, he snares the ball for the first out, runs across 2nd base for the second out and is slammed into by the runner from first for the third out. An unassisted triple play!! Pandemonium erupts!

(hooting, making a jerking-off gesture towards the Stars)


City Rock is up, last licks, still 0-0. Hank dispatches Rick and T handily with low, heavy fastballs. Bird is up, the last hope to avoid extra innings. Pete calls time and goes out to talk to Hank.

Don’t give him nothing to hit.

Hank just nods. He sets up as Pete jogs back to his catcher’s spot.

(quietly taunting Bird)
I heard about that knee slam you took uptown in ‘76, ruined your shot at the big leagues, huh? Tough break. Bet the guy who did it was a real scumbag, too.

(nostrils flaring)
That guy don’t live uptown no more.

Hank delivers one pitch way outside of the strike zone and another one way high. Bird sniffs.

Oh, well, guess you ain’t gettin’ nothin’ to hit this round, Birdman. It’ll just have to be up to the other pebbles on the Rock!

Hank delivers a pitch so low it hits the asphalt just before home plate... BUT... Bird, running way up in the box, golfs the ball on the bounce. It takes off like a 3-iron shot... soaring, soaring, gaining speed until it clears the fence, bounces off a car, setting off the alarm, and lands in the back of a garbage truck driving by.

Home run! Game Over! City Rock wins 1-0!!


(Lyrics by Ysaye Maria Barnwell (c)1992)


There were no mirrors in my Nana’s house,
no mirrors in my Nana’s house.
There were no mirrors in my Nana’s house,
no mirrors in my Nana’s house.
And the beauty that I saw in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun).

I never knew that my skin was too black.
I never knew that my nose was too flat.
I never knew that my clothes didn’t fit.
I never knew there were things that I’d missed,
cause the beauty in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun);
…was in her eyes.

There were no mirrors in my Nana’s house,
no mirrors in my Nana’s house.
And the beauty that I saw in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun).

I was intrigued by the cracks in the walls.
I tasted, with joy, the dust that would fall.
The noise in the hallway was music to me.
The trash and the rubbish just cushioned my feet.
And the beauty in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun).
…was in her eyes.

There were no mirrors in my Nana’s house,
no mirrors in my Nana’s house.
And the beauty that I saw in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun).

The world outside was a magical place.
I only knew love.
I never knew hate,
and the beauty in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun).
…was in her eyes.

There were no mirrors in my Nana’s house,
no mirrors in my Nana’s house.
There were no mirrors in my Nana’s house,
no mirrors in my Nana’s house.
And the beauty that I saw in everything
was in her eyes (like the rising of the sun).


"Why are you surrounded by the largest crowd you'll ever again see in your life that consists of nothing but people who look exactly like you?"
KEITH OLBERMANN in his Special President's Day Comment on the Tea Party Movement


Here's Caseydancer:

"Oh hell yes. Put him in your movie then let me know if he needs a date to any awards ceremonies. ;)"


I hear you, CD!


This is from "THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER" last week, a piece entitled "Put Elias Koteas in your movie, now!" by one Jay A. Fernandez.

This is very exciting to me because not only is Elias a dear friend of mine, but this gifted actor is interested in starring in and directing a feature film of mine, called "THE FILE." In fact, we just had a table reading of the screenplay last week, directed by Elias, and it was exhilarating.

It is so gratifying to see the harmonious rhythm and evolution of a bright light in a fellow human being. I speak often about "generativity" - the need in a developing adult to give back to the world through the expression of one's natural soul gifts. It's a beautiful thing to witness.

Congratulations, Elias!!

Below is the piece on Elias by Fernandez, and below that is a brief scene from my screenplay, THE FILE.

Here's Fernandez:

This is decidedly random, but I’ve seen two movies recently that featured typically strong appearances by the mostly unsung Elias Koteas. I don’t know what it is, but I find this guy exhilarating to watch and wholeheartedly believe that he needs to be on screen as much as humanly possible.
So I hereby call for casting directors to bring him in on everything — comic book villains, romantic leads, action roles, miserable dramas, pornos, whatever. Get him in the movie. Do it now.
At Sundance two weeks ago, I was suffering through “The Killer Inside Me” when Koteas popped up as one of the few relatable characters — a guy who sees through the charming bullshit of Casey Affleck’s disturbed killer. He’s the kind of actor that lives so close to the skin of the character that he gives off those blurry heatwaves you see above a hot blacktop.
And then yesterday morning I was in a screening of Martin Scorsese’s “Shutter Island” on the Paramount lot and — whoa — there’s Koteas again. It’s only one scene, and he’s in some gnarly makeup, but I was so psyched to see his probing eyes and malicious grin.
Anyway, we all know how versatile he is, how he sizzled as the seductive Vaughan in David Cronenberg’s “Crash” and as the terribly conflicted captain in Terrence Malick’s “The Thin Red Line” and his supporting roles in Fincher’s “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” and “Zodiac.”
He’s one of those rare actors — I’m thinking of Joe Morton, or David Strathairn — who classes up any movie he’s in, no matter how crappy it is or how little he’s in it.
So: Elias Koteas. Put him in your fucking movie. Please.

Here's a scene from THE FILE:


Drew is in his position on the couch. He is wearing an expensive-looking, blue 3-piece suit. Kimberly is looking a little uneasy in her chair. The little hand-held tape recorder is on. They are already into the session.

So, I don’t know. I don’t feel good about it, but I don’t feel totally bad about it either.
My work life is very stressful, even though I love what I do.
Well, I don’t know if I actually love what I do.

He hears Kimberly tapping her pen on the edge of the book.

DREW (cont’d)
You nervous or something today?

What? No. Continue.

It’s stressful, my work. I guess maybe yours is, too, huh? Well, I don’t know about you, but for me, sex is the tonic, the stress-reliever. Especially good sex for good sex’s sake. For fun, you know? No questions asked, no strings, no emotional baggage...

Why can’t you have that with a woman who isn’t a... professional?

Hey, I’d love to meet a woman naturally who feels that way about sex...


No. Lois is not the woman we’re talking about, and she’s not ever going to be. We’ve been over this.
Anyway, even if I ever did meet that woman, it’d be tricky, wouldn’t it? I’d have to know that she’d be able to maintain our confidentiality.

Kimberly fidgets nervously. He turns his head and looks at her. He notices the book and loose papers.

DREW (cont’d)
Hey, what'd'you lose my file or something?

He leans up on his elbows, sizing her up.

(trying to compose herself)
Of course not. I left it home last night. I was just reviewing your case.

I was your bedtime reading, huh?

She just smiles slightly, not taking the bait.

DREW (cont’d)
Well, I know you won’t tell me if you live with anyone, or whatever, but I hope it’s not where someone else can read it.

No. Definitely not. Don’t worry.

Don’t worry? That’s a first from you.

She just looks at him. He seems to be lost in thought for a moment.


There's a piece entitled Don't Be My Valentine, by Tracy Quan, on THE DAILY BEAST this weekend that starts out with this:

"Cheating on your spouse? Sleeping with the boss? Seeing a hooker? A Valentine's Day survival guide for people with complicated love lives."

What follows in Quan's article is a snappy, tongue-in-cheek, albeit shallow list of what to do for Valentine's Day in a number of precarious situations that so many people find themselves in today (see above). You can read the whole piece HERE.

But what is worth noting to me is that extramarital dalliances are so common that it's not only okay to make fun of the pervasive reality of the the lack of marital bliss, but it also fun to joke about the so-called "collateral damage" of "cheating," and to refer to the people who indulge in the activity as simply having "complicated love lives."

What gives?

Well, you can anticipate a lot what I'm going to say if you've been keeping up here on the FPL blog, right?

You know, I'm going to say that most people enter into marriage or relationships with dysfunctional and suspect motives and intentions, like to fulfill images and/or dependency needs left unmet from childhood. I'm going to say that contractual monogamy is a function of fear, not love. And of course, I'm emphatically going to say that a vibrant relationship must include love, Eros and sex, and in this case two outta three is bad! I'm going to say again that "staying together for the kids" is really bad for the kids. And so on.

Regarding the "cheating" issue, well it depends. I have found many times with patients that I work with in therapy that it is a good diagnostic sign when someone in a relationship without Eros or sex has an affair. Of course, feeling the need to sneak around isn't a measure of a healthy psyche, but at least the "cheater" in question hasn't given up on life's most necessary elements.

Love isn't complicated, folks. But it is powerful, and because our egos have taken over as captains of our emotional ships, we resist letting the tidal wave of Eros sweep us into the unknown land of blissful union with another.

So, there it is, another not-so-romantic Valentine's message from PL on FPL, but you know what? Real love, Eros and sex beats romance every time.



This is one of my favorite scenes from my series for television, "CITY ROCK." Marva is a pregnant teen in a group home in which the heroine of City Rock, Jennie Silverman, a high-energy, Janis Joplin throw-back type, is the social worker. Darryl is a street-tough teen who thinks Marva is pregnant with his child and wants her out of the group home so he can control her. Jennie dices Darryl up here quite nicely in Episode 3: "Ridin' That Train."


The front door bell rings. A heavy-set, middle-aged woman, ANNIE, goes to answer it. She is a house mother at the group home. She opens the door and there stands a very hostile-looking Darryl.

Can I help you?

I come to pick up Marva.

Oh? Pick her up for what?

Just get her, okay?

It’s okay, Annie.

Annie turns around to see Marva. Darryl slips inside.

Darryl, I can’t leave. You got to go. Don’t make trouble for yourself.

Trouble for my-self?! I don’t think so. But there’s gonna be trouble for you and this... this damn lesbo hotel if you don’t get your stuff.

Sounds like we have a closet case of severe homosexual anxiety here, ladies.

Everyone turns to look at Jennie, who moves into the fray with an easy authority.

What’d she say?

I said, it sounds like your having a problem with your sexuality, Cool.

Darryl’s nostrils flare as he glares at Jennie, still not totally sure what she’s saying. Before he can speak, she keeps going.

Dig. I’m just playing with you.
(sidling up close to him)
Listen, Darryl... can I call you “D?” D, Marva has to stay here until we say she can go. That’s the deal, and the law. But I hear that you’re really into claiming your parental rights - very righteous of you. That’s the kind of brother I like! So, I just put in a call to the Bureau of Child Welfare and they insisted on having you pay for part of Marva’s room and board and expenses while she’s here - and check it out, we could really use the bread! And of course, they’ll want to fingerprint you so they can keep track of you down the road, you know, make sure you keep up those child support payments and all. You’re a real man to step up like this, Darryl. You don’t have a criminal record, by the way, do you? I mean, nothing that would show up from the fingerprints?

Darryl’s jaw is flapping up and down without words as he looks back and forth incredulously from Jennie to Marva.

Cool! So, you want to come in for a cup of joe or something and we’ll talk about signing you up to take birthing classes with Marva? I could tell you’re the kind of dude that would definitely want to be there when that beautiful, bloody little mess of a child comes poppin’ out of your honey's honey pot! Dig. It’s a sight!

Darryl, still flapping, confused as hell, looks at Annie, who is containing a smile, once more at Jennie, like she’s the devil, and then, he points his finger at Marva.


He leaves in a hurry. The women wait, then laugh together.



There's a good comic send-up on CRACKED.COM, entitled "6 SHOCKINGLY EVIL THINGS BABIES ARE CAPABLE OF", that serves as a good follow-up to my piece about the horrors of what happens when baby souls are left to their own devices. The piece humorously makes the correct point that babies don't begin to develop a conscience until four years old or later, and so likewise, a baby soul, even in an adult physical body, can similarly be without conscience.

For safety purposes, folks, I strongly suggest reading the SOUL AGE material, and committing it to memory, so you know who you're dealing with in your day-to-day life!


Just a few points. Choosing to harm yourself in order to be a "star" does seem a rather asinine choice. On the other hand, acting is an art form in which you have to attain the approval of others in order to participate in your chosen art. To choose to not meet the cultural standard of beauty is to choose to not "do" your art.

Second, please don't assume that I am painting Ms. Murphy as a helpless victim. You make your choices and you live or die with them. However, the cultural imperative to be and look a certain way is extremely powerful and to just brush this force aside lightly is too careless. Being an accepted part of the pack is a core force driving the human psyche, not just an outgrowth of excessive narcissism. It doesn't make it any easier to ignore that force if what the pack wants is bad for us.

Third I could not agree more with you on the intertwined nature of the masculine and the feminine which is WHY in a story such as this it leaves out half the tale to not look at the role that our accepted images of what IS masculine and what is feminine play in our ability to ultimately grow into our own skins, both as a culture and as individuals.

And on that note, perhaps I should go eat some chocolate.


Here's Hartkitt:

My instant take on this tragedy after looking at pictures of Brittany Murphy was that she was, like most TV and movie stars WHO ARE WOMEN all bones and stress. She has that look that so many actresses have of distended tendons and skeletal structure way too close to the surface. And yes, it may take a lot of drugs to get that look.

Women who start out looking "normal" slowly shrink up to dessicated wraiths to maintain the thinness required to be a star. Recent pictures of Sandra Bullock, for example, are painful to behold. It's almost a waste of time to even say it anymore, but our cultural standard for womens beauty is moving more and more towards a painfully thin look and actresses have to maintain it if they want to work. Maintaining a lifetime of partial starvation probably requires a lot of manipulation, drugs included.

Now, you can take as written here a general tirade on how keeping women thin and childlike is a way of depriving of them of perceived and actual power in life. If you spend a huge portion of your mental energy on being unnaturally thin then a) you don't have that energy for other things b) you're too wiped out from starvation to have energy for other things and c) you are, in effect saying that the body you live in is BADBADBAD and needs to be gotten rid of. How can this be empowering?

It seems almost impossible to fight against this cultural perception that a normal female body is not fat when all we see on TV, in movies and magazines is women who have every piece of fat removed from their bodies. The best I can do is point out over and over to my daughters that what they are seeing is NOT the norm and most likely not healthy as I did when we read of Brittany Murphy's death. Case in point.

Anyway, my point is that there was a reason she was taking all those drugs and had a weakened immune system and being bone thin could not have helped and may have been a causal factor. While feminism as such doesn't play a massive role in this blog it seems evident that for women, as part of accepting all of oneself, of giving oneself "full permission" to live giving permission to the parts of our bodies that aren't rock hard and bony plays a part.

Once again, don't get me started...

Here's PL:

Good to hear from you, Hartkitt. I understand your strong feelings about this, and at one level, I agree with all of what you are saying. I would add, however, that this is a collective and individual pathology at play here, and so in the truest sense, there are no simple or pure victims. You use a phrase like "required to be a star" as if there were no choice for said star but to decimate her body. "No" is one of the most empowering words in the English language, and if one puts one's "stardom" over one's physical, mental and emotional well-being, then somewhere there has been a choice made to say "Yes" to the narcissism rampant in our culture, especially in certain industries.

Full Permission Living is about self-love and self-acceptance, yes, and trusting in one's first nature. As such, feminism or any "ism" doesn't play a "massive role" on this blog, because in the Yin and Yang of it all, the masculine and feminine are equal and inextricably intertwined essential aspects of All That Is, the essence of which is love.

Thanks, HK!


This episode brings in an all too familiar dramatized headline from the early 1980's, a time when the crime rate in NYC was at an all-time high, as were the tensions between the white powers that were and people of color living in the city. The finale to this episode is explosive and heartbreaking, as so many of those days were back then.

Here's a short scene from "SHOOTING STARS":


OFFICER OTHA PRESCOTT, our proud rookie cop and center fielder, and 2 older WHITE COPS are hiding in the shadows, watching a middle-aged BLACK MAN about to enter a tenement building, looking around anxiously.

That’s him. That’s definitely him.

Yeah. Let’s take him.

I-I can’t see his face. You sure that’s him? How can you tell?

Experience, rookie. Stay with us and be ready.

They move on the man.


The man turns around, one hand fumbling in his pocket. He pulls something out.


Suddenly, the cops begin firing, including the frightened Otha. A hail of bullets topple the man over. The cops rush over, guns pointed.

Where’s the gun? Find the gun!

COP TWO opens the man’s hand to find a key case. He looks frantically around, searching the ground and then the man.

I can’t find it!

You said he had a gun!

He did. He did! I saw it.

COP ONE takes the key case and looks at his two partners.


(wide-eyed and shaking)
H-he’s...dead. W-we killed him.

We see the riddled body of the dead man, his blood spreading out on the stoop beneath him.

Hey. HEY! KID! Take it easy. Believe me, this guy’ll turn out to be a criminal, one way or another. It happens. We’ll make the report. We’ll tell you what to say. Be cool.

Otha is in shock.



Here's LOFF56:

I definitely agree with the principal of what you're both saying - that drug companies and doctors alike are nefariously putting us at undue risk for their own personal gain. But by definition I think the coroner was right that it was an accidental death. (Although I admit the possibility exists that all the facts weren't presented and there was more to it than what's been made public).

An accident is the societal justification of a statistically inevitable negative result of a risk. (In an absolute sense there should be no such thing as an "accident" - everything happens for a reason.) It's just that the degree of how "accidental" an event is is proportional to our judgment of the value of the positive benefits associated with that risk. It's staggering the number of people that die in automobile accidents each year. Yet most of us don't think twice about getting into a car - and, by the way, very rarely do we blame those accidents on the auto industry.

It's all about statistics. If .1% of drivers die in a car accident this year, when it does happen it's not a stretch to call it an accident. If 1% of people die of an adverse affect to a prescription drug, it's still statistically an accident when it does happen. Unless of course you don't believe at all in any benefit of prescription drugs, then in that case increasing your risk of death by 1% for no apparent benefit disqualifies a negative result from being considered an accident. But it would be the same for someone who say doesn't believe in the benefits of driving a car, to them adding a .1% risk of death is just foolish.

I realize that there may be some other factors in this particular case such as intentional overdose, which in my analogy I guess would be like driving 120 miles an hour at night in the rain - if you die, than yes, it's your own damn fault. Or maybe negligence on the doctors part, perhaps not noticing the conflicting circumstances, I guess that would be like a mechanic failing to fix your brakes correctly. In both cases there is someone to blame for the accident. But in both of those cases you can't blame the drug company or the car company for that specific result.

I'm not trying to absolve the drug companies in any way, personally I think there are aspects of what they do that reach into the realm of what the tobacco companies do. And the more we learn about the drugs they produce the more the risk to benefit ratio changes. But they're no where near 100% risk and 0% benefit that the tobacco companies have managed to accomplish. There are still tangible benefits they provide. Penicillin would be one, however a cure for Restless Leg Syndrome - not so much. When they start adding risk with no tangible benefit, that's when they become reckless and irresponsible. But I don't think we should tear down the whole industry, but for sure we need to beat the greed out of them like there's no tomorrow!!

Here's PL:

Well, I know we've had this discussion before on this blog, the one bad apple/don't throw the baby out with the bath water debate. But you know what, when there's enough bad apples in a particular bunch on a regular basis, you stop going to that orchard. I think that the pharmaceutical industry has reached the tobacco industry's low bar. I mean, hey, cigarettes help reduce anxiety for some people in the short run while helping them create cancer, right? And cars? Yes, actually, cars are pretty much an insane, archaic mode of transportation that at this point does more harm than good en masse.

Big Pharma has gone so far beyond a few potentially useful antibiotics or analgesics to a place where they make Frank Lucas, the heroin kingpin made famous in "American Gangster" look like not much more than a benign hipster. Sorry, L56, I can't let 'em off the hook that easily. At best, if it's not technically homicide, then Brittany's doctors and pharmacists were complicit in her suicide.


Here's Auntlori:

"The primary cause of the death was community acquired pneumonia, with contributing factors of iron deficiency anemia and 'multiple drug intoxication," according to the Los Angeles County coroner's office.

The death was ruled accidental.

This passage is from the coroner's report on Brittany Murphy's death. How does "multiple drug intoxication" get ruled "accidental"?! IF she was not abusing the "prescription" medications she took, then who is responsible for providing her with a toxic combination of prescription drugs? Any scenario here is anything but accidental.

Here's PL:

Couldn't agree with you more, Auntlori. One of the biggest scandals of our lifetime, after all of these nefarious financial shenanigans are dealt with, will be the deadly and deceitful practices of our mainstream medical-pharmaceutical industry.

Thanks for the post!

blogger templates 3 columns | Make Money Online