MORE THAN HALF OF YOUR THERAPY ON POLITICS? DOESN'T MATTER!

Heard a very interesting bit on National Public Radio yesterday. A panel of psychotherapists were reporting that in 4 out of every 7 therapy sessions in recent times, patients were talking about the 2016 election. Thought of another way, that's 57% of the precious 50 minutes someone in therapy has to discuss their relationships and emotional lives, their careers and finances, and all the vicissitudes of their inner lives. 29 therapeutic minutes being spent on the 3D spectacle known as politics.

There's an article on the subject in the Washington Times entitled: "Sick: Americans now suffering from ‘election-related stress."

"Is the election making you sick?” asks Dr. Robert Glatter, an emergency room physician at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, and contributor to Forbes magazine. He calls the combination of election and nonstop media attention a “life stressor” with serious physical effects. Dr. Glatter counsels voters to be alert for increased blood pressure, fluttering heartbeats, headaches, nausea and other telltale symptoms of “election-related stress” — and seek relief through less exposure to news coverage and social media. Yoga, meditation and even psychotherapy could help as well, he says.

Even psychotherapy?! Come one, Doc, those last few things are what will constitute real healing methods in 5D.

But that's not the point of this piece. The point is that while talking about the election or politics or anything else going on in mass consciousness is valid fodder for self-reflection ( the FPL post: "YOU SAY IT'S WORLD PEACE YOU WANT? LOOK INSIDE!"), in 5D, which is where we are inevitably going, it just doesn't matter.

Who won the last debate? Who will win tonight's? Who will win the election? In the words of Bill Murray in "Meatballs," the classic comedy from 1979: "It just doesn't matter!"

Why not? Because the run-up to 5D consciousness is irrevocably in progress. It's happening. Period. There is no turning back, no regressing. We have already crossed the threshold. 3D is no more. And with the advent of the last quarter of 2016, the uprush to 5D is accelerating and going to continue to accelerate.

The only thing that remains a variable is how we're going to experience the acceleration - kicking and screaming, struggling against the current, or peacefully, serenely going with the flow. And that will be an individual decision first, a collective decision second.

So, if we collectively need a Donald Trump presidency to increase the pace of our awakening, we will have it. If, on the other hand, we are, en mass, waking up gracefully, but with all due diligence to our self-work, the ride will be smoother, and we won't need a Trump in the White House. We may have a Clinton, or maybe someone yet to surprise us, but it doesn't matter.

Do your work and watch what happens!

REPOST: "REJECTIONS YOU GOTTA LOVE!"

Ahhh... rejection. So many live in fear of it, do almost anything to avoid facing it, often to a point where many prospective artists (or lovers for that matter) decide not to even put their creative work or their hearts out there. Yet, as the examples below demonstrate, rejection is at worst an illusion, at best a "sifting" process.

Sifting?

Yes, if you understand that the "rejection" of passion-inspired art or passion-inspired love can only be experienced as such if you define it that way. Rejections always include beliefs, "formulas for success," calculations about "what will sell," measurements of one's "worthiness," etc., instead of just a loving focus on the simple but powerful desire and joy of offering one's gifts to another or to the world. In that latter framework, "pitching" or "auditioning," then, becomes more like looking for the right home, the right chemistry with another for your work or love.

Here's a short list of rejections received by some names you might recognize:

To Dr. Seuss:
"too different from other juveniles on the market to warrant its selling."

Here's a rejection letter for THE DIARY OF ANNE FRANK:
"The girl doesn't, it seems to me, have a special perception or feeling which would lift that book above the 'curiosity' level."

"Jonathan Livingston Seagull will never make it as a paperback." From the publisher of a magazine refusing an offer to bid on the paperback rights to Richard Bach's best selling novel. Avon Books eventually bought those rights and sales totaled more than 7.25 million copies.

H.G. Wells had to endure the indignity of a rejection when he submitted his manuscript, "The War of the Worlds" that said, "An endless nightmare. I do not believe it would "take"...I think the verdict would be 'Oh don't read that horrid book'." And when he tried to market "The Time Machine," it was said, "It is not interesting enough for the general reader and not thorough enough for the scientific reader."

Jacqueline Susann's "Valley of the Dolls" received this response, "...she is a painfully dull, inept, clumsy, undisciplined, rambling and thoroughly amateurish writer whose every sentence, paragraph and scene cries for the hand of a pro. She wastes endless pages on utter trivia, writes wide-eyed romantic scenes ...hauls out every terrible show biz cliché in all the books, lets every good scene fall apart in endless talk and allows her book to ramble aimlessly ..."

"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" --David Sarnoff's Associates in rejecting a proposal for investment in the radio in the 1920s.

"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible." -- A YALE UNIVERSITY professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)

"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --H.M. Warner (Warner Brothers) before rejecting proposal for movies with sound in 1927.

"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary Cooper." --Gary Cooper on his decision to reject the leading role in "Gone With The Wind."

"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make."-- Rejection letter to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." --Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." --Ken Olsen, pres., chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977 (I owe this quote to Yasemin Urkmez).

"You want to have consistent and uniform muscle development across all of your muscles? It can't be done. It's just a fact of life. You just have to accept inconsistent muscle development as an unalterable condition of weight training." --Rejection letter to Arthur Jones, who invented the Nautilus Fitness Machine.

"640K ought to be enough for anybody." -- Bill Gates, 1981, rejecting proposal for larger computer memory.

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons." --Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."-- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.

"Everything that can be invented has been invented." --Charles H. Duell,Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value." --Marshall Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre.

"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction". --Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872.

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." --The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall in rejecting a book on data processing, 1957.

"I do not believe the introduction of motor-cars will ever affect the riding of horses" -- Mr Scott-Montague, MP, in 1903 in the United Kingdom 

"I do not think it would be practicable to introduce pedestrian crossings in London" -- Colonel Ashley, MP, Roads Minister in Britain, in 1927 

"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." --Western Union internal memo, 1876 

"So we went o Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey we don't need you. You haven't got through college yet.'" --Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and H-P inetersted in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer.

"Who the hell wants to copy a document on plain paper???!!!" -- 1940 Rejection Letter to Chester Carlson, inventor of the XEROX machine (Note: In fact, over 20 companies rejected his "useless" idea between 1939 and 1944. Even the National Inventors Council dismissed it. Today, the Rank Xerox Corporation has an annual revenue in the range of one billion dollars.)

AND THE ALL-TIME WINNER REJECTION IS:

Decca Records rejecting The Beatles in 1962, an executive saying: "guitar groups are on the way out" and "the Beatles have no future in show business."

ARE YOU "GOODENOUGH?" WELL, YOU COULD BE!

Think you're old? Too old? Will be eventually?

Well, think again. 

And read THIS!

And THIS!

AND THIS!!! 

HEY, GET THE EGO OUT OF YOUR "I" TODAY!

"I am not ___ enough to ___."

Perhaps the most common sentences I hear in sessions with people are constructed like the above one. You can fill in the blanks with endlessly different words or phrases ("I am not good enough to be successful." "I am not attractive enough to find love." "I am not secure, strong, trusting, confident enough to leave my dysfunctional relationship or the job that I hate, or to love my body as it is.").

I have written often on this blog about character structures, and the injuries and defenses that lead to their creation by the immature ego of the little child. I have also written extensively about the essential self-work needed to dismantle the character structures in order to head towards a life of self-actualization. Well, today, for those who are ready, I'd like to offer an exercise that can assist greatly in the process of dismantling the ego's grip on our lives. It will sound simple and straightforward, but it will be a challenge.

Ready?

Okay. From now on, remove the pronoun "I" from any negative statement about yourself and your life, and replace it either with "my ego" or "the child in me."

So, "I am not attractive enough to find love" becomes... "My ego says I'm not attractive enough to find love." "I am not secure enough to love my body as it is" becomes... "The child in me is not secure enough to love my body as it is." And so on.

Try it. You will discover how powerful this simple exercise is in revealing how identified with your ego you are, how often when you say "I" you are actually speaking the words, statements and beliefs of the ego. And specifically what, you may wonder, is the problem with such an identification? Well, a great deal, actually.

You see, the ego did have an original purpose in the developing child's psychology. That purpose was to observe events and experiences and store them in memory, very useful if you don't want to keep getting burned over and over from touching a hot stove to discover once again that it's not a desirable action.

However, what went awry living in the environments we did as little children, chronically getting wounded emotionally and psychologically by our un-self-actualized parents, relatives, teachers, etc., is that we turned to our ego to protect us emotionally:

"Maybe if my ego helps prevent me from burning my hand over and over, it could help me figure out how to get mommy to not be angry at me, or how to get daddy to pay attention to me."

The above is a logical leap for that desperate little child, but an erroneous one. You see, the ego is designed to be the periscope on the submarine, but it is not the submarine itself, nor even the captain. Operating from a primary false assumption that all little children make - that the painful effects of the parents' lack of self-actualization could somehow be manipulated or avoided by the actions of child's ego - the child assigns the ego the impossible task of providing for its security and well-being.

The ego, in turn, does its best to take on the job, but its resources are inadequate to the task. What the ego comes up with as solutions are the very things that hinder our fulfillment as adults, because the ego's main efforts are directed at keeping the true self of the child hidden behind a false self (mask). In fact, for this defensive maneuver to have its effect fully, it becomes compulsory to believe that we in fact are our ego and its various masks. This false solution ultimately interferes with the real solution that nature and life provides for the child - growing up!

So, folks, try this exercise. It's much more than a word game or semantics. It's a way to aid the self-work you are hopefully doing to detach yourself from your ego and become your fullest, truest adult self, who is of course going about the business of becoming conscious of itself as your Higher Self, and ultimately, All That Is, your one true identity.