TODAY'S QUOTE!
"You are unique, and if that is not fulfilled, then something has been lost."
Martha Graham (submitted by Laura)
Martha Graham (submitted by Laura)
TODAY'S QUOTE!
"If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you."
Unknown
Unknown
TODAY'S REAL REPUBLICAN QUOTE!
“What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?”
Abraham Lincoln
Abraham Lincoln
THE MOVEMENTS OF LIFE: EXPANSION-CONTRACTION-REST!
Lincoln's words in "TODAY'S QUOTE" go well beyond politics or social movement.
Rigidly holding onto the familiar, and dogged resistance to the unknown is not only the source of stagnation in a society, but it is the main cause for difficulties personally in love and work - in other words, for life in general.
Expansiveness in the areas of love, Eros and sex, as well as in creative expression, physical health and material abundance can only be experienced and sustained by venturing into the new. On the other hand, if one primarily seeks familiarity and control over one's direction in life, then said life must be narrow and constricted.
Opening up to an expansive life means opening one's heart, body and soul to what may come from that very opening up, what Lincoln called the "new and untried." "Adhering to the old," as Lincoln described conservatism, can mean hunkering down emotionally, mentally and physically against the movement of life's processes if the grip to the past is too tight.
Does this mean that we should attempt to abolish conservatism? Not exactly.
Unfortunately, the current remains of the conservative movement politically have made it seem as if "conservative" equals racist, hate-mongering, gun-toting, sex-abstaining lunatic fringe - with ridiculous costumes to boot!
In reality, however, there are three necessary movements to life, what Wilhelm Reich called the "Three Cosmic Pulsatory Movements: expansion, contraction, rest."
And as we will see in the definitions below, elucidated by a former teacher of mine, there are positive and negative sides (distortions) to each type of natural movement.
Expansion in its harmonious form, is movement as creativity, growth and building, forward movement, outgoingness, unselfishness, searching for union with anything outside of the self, for the other, the other you. In the negative, expansion manifests as aggression, hostility, quarreling, destructiveness, cruelty, impatience, ultimately in some cases, war.
Contraction in its positive form, is assimilation, balance, introspection, inward movement, caution, patience, thoughtfulness, self search. In the negative it manifests as regressive, backward movement, resisting progress, selfishness, egocentricity, avarice, separateness.
Rest in its positive aspect is healthy passivity, preservation, a state of beingness, timelessness, gathering momentum for a new growth cycle. It is needed for fruition to take place. In the negative, it is stagnation, lifelessness, inertia.
Each human being is predominantly motivated by one of these pulsatory movements, but all three are present in everyone and ideally blend harmoniously. If you just kept expanding, for example, if expansion didn’t work together with contraction, it would become destructive and you would lose your grounding. People with tremendous will who force themselves to stay in expansion mode are blocking nature, just as much as those who refuse to move forward at all costs are blocking nature.
Rigidly holding onto the familiar, and dogged resistance to the unknown is not only the source of stagnation in a society, but it is the main cause for difficulties personally in love and work - in other words, for life in general.
Expansiveness in the areas of love, Eros and sex, as well as in creative expression, physical health and material abundance can only be experienced and sustained by venturing into the new. On the other hand, if one primarily seeks familiarity and control over one's direction in life, then said life must be narrow and constricted.
Opening up to an expansive life means opening one's heart, body and soul to what may come from that very opening up, what Lincoln called the "new and untried." "Adhering to the old," as Lincoln described conservatism, can mean hunkering down emotionally, mentally and physically against the movement of life's processes if the grip to the past is too tight.
Does this mean that we should attempt to abolish conservatism? Not exactly.
Unfortunately, the current remains of the conservative movement politically have made it seem as if "conservative" equals racist, hate-mongering, gun-toting, sex-abstaining lunatic fringe - with ridiculous costumes to boot!
In reality, however, there are three necessary movements to life, what Wilhelm Reich called the "Three Cosmic Pulsatory Movements: expansion, contraction, rest."
And as we will see in the definitions below, elucidated by a former teacher of mine, there are positive and negative sides (distortions) to each type of natural movement.
Expansion in its harmonious form, is movement as creativity, growth and building, forward movement, outgoingness, unselfishness, searching for union with anything outside of the self, for the other, the other you. In the negative, expansion manifests as aggression, hostility, quarreling, destructiveness, cruelty, impatience, ultimately in some cases, war.
Contraction in its positive form, is assimilation, balance, introspection, inward movement, caution, patience, thoughtfulness, self search. In the negative it manifests as regressive, backward movement, resisting progress, selfishness, egocentricity, avarice, separateness.
Rest in its positive aspect is healthy passivity, preservation, a state of beingness, timelessness, gathering momentum for a new growth cycle. It is needed for fruition to take place. In the negative, it is stagnation, lifelessness, inertia.
Each human being is predominantly motivated by one of these pulsatory movements, but all three are present in everyone and ideally blend harmoniously. If you just kept expanding, for example, if expansion didn’t work together with contraction, it would become destructive and you would lose your grounding. People with tremendous will who force themselves to stay in expansion mode are blocking nature, just as much as those who refuse to move forward at all costs are blocking nature.
REPOST: "The Second Half"
For a while now, I have been telling people in their 40's and 50's who worry that they're still trying to get some aspect of their lives together at such a "late age" that it's really only half-time. The fastest growing segment of the population today are centagenarians (people living to 100), and as Carl Jung once said, I think, we don't even reach true adulthood until 40. So, if a person is actually doing what it takes in their 40's or 50's to get ready for the second half, they're right on time.
Following is a related excerpt from a post by Sherry Lansing on the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sherry-lansing/#blogger_bio). Sherry served as Chairman of the Motion Picture Group of Paramount Pictures from November 1992 until March 2005. Under her chairmanship, three of Paramount's pictures won the Academy Award" for Best Picture during a four-year period - "Forrest Gump" (1994), "Braveheart" (1995) and the highest grossing motion picture of all time, "Titanic" (1997)
Here's Sherry:
"If we are, as the saying goes, defined by our work, then I want my work to really mean something. To me, the second half of life is the time to plow experience, skills, time, and compassion into work that gives back. We're young and we're healthy. The question is, how will we spend our time? As chair of the judges panel for a unique and inspiring awards program -- the Purpose Prize -- I have the honor of reading hundreds of stories about people spending what used to be called the "golden years" doing their most creative and meaningful work yet."
Following is a related excerpt from a post by Sherry Lansing on the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sherry-lansing/#blogger_bio). Sherry served as Chairman of the Motion Picture Group of Paramount Pictures from November 1992 until March 2005. Under her chairmanship, three of Paramount's pictures won the Academy Award" for Best Picture during a four-year period - "Forrest Gump" (1994), "Braveheart" (1995) and the highest grossing motion picture of all time, "Titanic" (1997)
Here's Sherry:
"If we are, as the saying goes, defined by our work, then I want my work to really mean something. To me, the second half of life is the time to plow experience, skills, time, and compassion into work that gives back. We're young and we're healthy. The question is, how will we spend our time? As chair of the judges panel for a unique and inspiring awards program -- the Purpose Prize -- I have the honor of reading hundreds of stories about people spending what used to be called the "golden years" doing their most creative and meaningful work yet."
SURVIVING PSYCHOPATHY!
I discovered an interesting website this past week called "AFTERMATH: SURVIVING PSYCHOPATHY." As my readers know, I've made studying and treating people with a psychopathic character structure a kind of sub-specialty professionally. Most therapists consider doing therapy with someone who is predominantly psychopathic as a lost cause... and for good reason.
The ego in a person with this character structure is a fierce tyrant, at once extremely overblown and simultaneously very fragile. They rarely seek out therapy, and when they do, it becomes a cat and mouse game in which the patient is forever manipulating, lying, hiding or trying to undermine the therapist. As a result, the sense of self in this person becomes gutted over time, and the feelings of inner emptiness seem unbearable to face. When you combine these inner dynamics with the unfortunate outer reality that so many in our culture are amused and entertained by psychopaths, or taken in by their endless stream of promises, it's easy enough to see why few would want to take this person on in a healing process.
The "AFTERMATH" website listed above is devoted to people who've tried to be in relationships with this character and have lived to tell the tale. Interesting. Worth Checking out.
And check out my Psychopathic Character Structure chart HERE.
The ego in a person with this character structure is a fierce tyrant, at once extremely overblown and simultaneously very fragile. They rarely seek out therapy, and when they do, it becomes a cat and mouse game in which the patient is forever manipulating, lying, hiding or trying to undermine the therapist. As a result, the sense of self in this person becomes gutted over time, and the feelings of inner emptiness seem unbearable to face. When you combine these inner dynamics with the unfortunate outer reality that so many in our culture are amused and entertained by psychopaths, or taken in by their endless stream of promises, it's easy enough to see why few would want to take this person on in a healing process.
The "AFTERMATH" website listed above is devoted to people who've tried to be in relationships with this character and have lived to tell the tale. Interesting. Worth Checking out.
And check out my Psychopathic Character Structure chart HERE.
PETER BREGGIN - ONE OF MY HEROES! - ON THE PSYCHIATRIC ABUSE OF CHILDREN!!
Of all of the subjects that I've written about over the years, this is the one that most often causes my fury to rise and my heart to break - how our doctors, therapists and "helping professionals" abuse children under the guise of healing them.
Dr. Peter Breggin has long been a hero of mine in this regard. Called "the conscience of psychiatry," Dr. Breggin has been informing the professions, media and the public about the potential dangers of drugs, electroshock, psychosurgery, involuntary treatment, and the biological theories of psychiatry for over four decades.
He is a psychiatrist who has fought against the use of drugs to control not only our children, but adult human beings, as well. With his landmark books, "TOXIC PSYCHIATRY" and "TALKING BACK TO PROZAC," and testifying in congress against the use of drugs to treat emotional and mental disorders, Peter began as a lone voice decades ago.
This is a truly great man, and I am so glad that he is still out there.
I have been fighting against the use of drugs to "treat" children since the use of Ritalin became so prevalent in the 1970's for so-called "hyperactive" kids when I was a young social worker. I knew then, as I know now, that such an Orwellian method of mind and emotion control was destructive in its effect and evil in its intent.
And it's now at epidemic proportions, even so much more rampant today.
Only a couple of years ago, a "learning specialist" at a private elementary school that our son was attending recommended drugs for our son, then only 8 years old, to help him "perform better" at tasks in school. As an encouraging anecdote, said specialist told us about another child, a girl our son's age, who started taking one of the latest "ADHD" drugs for a similar "problem." Here was the specialist's exact quote to us... just before we fired him: "It's true that she did lose a little of her spark, but she got a lot done!"
Imagine someone claiming to be helping children blithely talking about "losing her spark" as part of a reasonable trade-off.
HERE'S DR. BREGGIN:
"Millions of our children are being labeled with false and stigmatizing psychiatric diagnoses. Then their brains are being blunted and disabled by psychiatric drugs. These drugs work by crushing spontaneous behavior. Frequently this leads to depression, as well as insomnia, anxiety and psychosis. The stimulants suppress the growth of children, cause abnormalities in their brains, induce sudden cardiac death, and predispose children to cocaine abuse in young adulthood. The antipsychotic drugs work by flattening the emotions and causing docility, so that the children no longer make trouble, at least for a while. With their frontal lobe function suppressed, the kids become more robotic in their behavior, and their mental and emotional growth is stunted. Often these drugs will turn them into lifelong mental patients whose enslaved brains will continue to deteriorate under toxic assault."
Dr. Peter Breggin has long been a hero of mine in this regard. Called "the conscience of psychiatry," Dr. Breggin has been informing the professions, media and the public about the potential dangers of drugs, electroshock, psychosurgery, involuntary treatment, and the biological theories of psychiatry for over four decades.
He is a psychiatrist who has fought against the use of drugs to control not only our children, but adult human beings, as well. With his landmark books, "TOXIC PSYCHIATRY" and "TALKING BACK TO PROZAC," and testifying in congress against the use of drugs to treat emotional and mental disorders, Peter began as a lone voice decades ago.
This is a truly great man, and I am so glad that he is still out there.
I have been fighting against the use of drugs to "treat" children since the use of Ritalin became so prevalent in the 1970's for so-called "hyperactive" kids when I was a young social worker. I knew then, as I know now, that such an Orwellian method of mind and emotion control was destructive in its effect and evil in its intent.
And it's now at epidemic proportions, even so much more rampant today.
Only a couple of years ago, a "learning specialist" at a private elementary school that our son was attending recommended drugs for our son, then only 8 years old, to help him "perform better" at tasks in school. As an encouraging anecdote, said specialist told us about another child, a girl our son's age, who started taking one of the latest "ADHD" drugs for a similar "problem." Here was the specialist's exact quote to us... just before we fired him: "It's true that she did lose a little of her spark, but she got a lot done!"
Imagine someone claiming to be helping children blithely talking about "losing her spark" as part of a reasonable trade-off.
HERE'S DR. BREGGIN:
"Millions of our children are being labeled with false and stigmatizing psychiatric diagnoses. Then their brains are being blunted and disabled by psychiatric drugs. These drugs work by crushing spontaneous behavior. Frequently this leads to depression, as well as insomnia, anxiety and psychosis. The stimulants suppress the growth of children, cause abnormalities in their brains, induce sudden cardiac death, and predispose children to cocaine abuse in young adulthood. The antipsychotic drugs work by flattening the emotions and causing docility, so that the children no longer make trouble, at least for a while. With their frontal lobe function suppressed, the kids become more robotic in their behavior, and their mental and emotional growth is stunted. Often these drugs will turn them into lifelong mental patients whose enslaved brains will continue to deteriorate under toxic assault."
ABSOLUTELY MUST SEE! "CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY!!"
MICHAEL MOORE'S LATEST - opening city-wide today - is a moving, heart-wrenching, funny and withering indictment indeed! Using the facts of the matter and people's own words to incriminate themselves, the great documentarian does it again, revealing the disorders in our society that are no less ravaging and virulent than cancer or heart disease is in our physical bodies.
But here's the thing - my regular clarion call on such disorders as racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc., etc. - We must call the problem what it is.
Using the word "greed" has become so hackneyed and commonplace that we tend to think that these guys - from Donald Regan, Henry Paulson and Dick Cheney to all of the other current corporate crooks and thieves - are just normal people whose greed has gone wild somehow. Or we think that intellectually stunted shills and puppets like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush are guys we'd like to have beer with who really have the best interest of the country at heart.
It's not so.
When your avarice is at such a level that you have no conscience about destroying the lives of thousands if not millions of people, you are talking about a serious psychological disturbance. It is called "sociopathy." When your ignorance is at such a level that you believe that trickle down economics will really benefit everyone or that God wants you to start wars based on fabricated information, you are effectively evil.
At our own great peril do we continue to pretend that these individuals are basically normal people acting badly. These are by any psychiatric standards the clinically and criminally insane, and we are actually letting them run our country into the ground, listening to them on the radio and television as entertainment, and of most concern, we are allowing them, the most disturbed in our society, to redefine reality.
I understand why Michael Moore ended his film by saying: "I can't do this anymore." But... I also know that he won't stop.
But here's the thing - my regular clarion call on such disorders as racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc., etc. - We must call the problem what it is.
Using the word "greed" has become so hackneyed and commonplace that we tend to think that these guys - from Donald Regan, Henry Paulson and Dick Cheney to all of the other current corporate crooks and thieves - are just normal people whose greed has gone wild somehow. Or we think that intellectually stunted shills and puppets like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush are guys we'd like to have beer with who really have the best interest of the country at heart.
It's not so.
When your avarice is at such a level that you have no conscience about destroying the lives of thousands if not millions of people, you are talking about a serious psychological disturbance. It is called "sociopathy." When your ignorance is at such a level that you believe that trickle down economics will really benefit everyone or that God wants you to start wars based on fabricated information, you are effectively evil.
At our own great peril do we continue to pretend that these individuals are basically normal people acting badly. These are by any psychiatric standards the clinically and criminally insane, and we are actually letting them run our country into the ground, listening to them on the radio and television as entertainment, and of most concern, we are allowing them, the most disturbed in our society, to redefine reality.
I understand why Michael Moore ended his film by saying: "I can't do this anymore." But... I also know that he won't stop.
LAURA RESPONDS TO "HOW DO I BECOME AN ADULT?" A GREAT DIALOGUE!"
Here's Laura:
On the cusp of 27, I must admit I strongly identify with this young man.
Somewhere between college and “true adulthood,” the road map is snatched away. The road map that plots out 21+ years of life to coast upon our parents’ and societies’ expectations, as if life could be laid out as neatly as the clothes our mother left folded on the bed. That is to say, how can the tiger sneak up on us when we’re coddled by our parents for ever-increasing periods of time? “Tiger? What tiger?”
The “helicopter parents” I’m always reading about may have the best intensions, but simulations of adulthood and self-dependence (ex. college) don’t necessarily equate to the real thing. Even our early entry into, “the real world,” rewards us with help from our parents. (30, as they say, is the new 20.) And, I’m not arguing that in our modern age this isn’t a necessity. With college tuition on the rise, post-college debt is significantly higher than it was for our parent’s generation. And, the job market is nowhere near as generous. Also, we’ve had twenty-some years to daydream, enjoy our parent’s hard work, wealth, and conveniences. Adulthood, then, is more than just a mental shift; it’s a very real physical change, a lifestyle change. Some embrace this freedom while others strive to maintain the lifestyle they’ve always had, and this requires assistance and perhaps, a well-crafted delusion of adulthood.
In my personal journey, I think I’ve only just woken up and, I tell you, it’s a hungry-looking tiger…
Here's PL:
Carry on, Laura! At 27, you are very early in your journey and yet, it is clear that you are a tiger-hunter, one who is not just being "stalked" by adulthood, but rather, one who is seeking out its rewards, rights and privileges, along with its responsibilities. You are on a great journey indeed! I do believe that you've got the "eye of the tiger!"
Thanks for writing!!
On the cusp of 27, I must admit I strongly identify with this young man.
Somewhere between college and “true adulthood,” the road map is snatched away. The road map that plots out 21+ years of life to coast upon our parents’ and societies’ expectations, as if life could be laid out as neatly as the clothes our mother left folded on the bed. That is to say, how can the tiger sneak up on us when we’re coddled by our parents for ever-increasing periods of time? “Tiger? What tiger?”
The “helicopter parents” I’m always reading about may have the best intensions, but simulations of adulthood and self-dependence (ex. college) don’t necessarily equate to the real thing. Even our early entry into, “the real world,” rewards us with help from our parents. (30, as they say, is the new 20.) And, I’m not arguing that in our modern age this isn’t a necessity. With college tuition on the rise, post-college debt is significantly higher than it was for our parent’s generation. And, the job market is nowhere near as generous. Also, we’ve had twenty-some years to daydream, enjoy our parent’s hard work, wealth, and conveniences. Adulthood, then, is more than just a mental shift; it’s a very real physical change, a lifestyle change. Some embrace this freedom while others strive to maintain the lifestyle they’ve always had, and this requires assistance and perhaps, a well-crafted delusion of adulthood.
In my personal journey, I think I’ve only just woken up and, I tell you, it’s a hungry-looking tiger…
Here's PL:
Carry on, Laura! At 27, you are very early in your journey and yet, it is clear that you are a tiger-hunter, one who is not just being "stalked" by adulthood, but rather, one who is seeking out its rewards, rights and privileges, along with its responsibilities. You are on a great journey indeed! I do believe that you've got the "eye of the tiger!"
Thanks for writing!!
"HOW DO I BECOME AN ADULT?" A GREAT DIALOGUE!
In his "SINCE YOU ASKED" column at Salon.com, Cary Tennis responds to a young man who asks:
"HOW DO I BECOME AN ADULT?: I missed the memo on how to grow up."
Here's the young man:
"I feel ashamed of myself because I know I could contribute good things to the world, but right now I'm not, and in fact, I feel like I'm on the path to becoming a detractor. Instead of putting things out into the world I let myself succumb to the seduction of my imagination, where everything is better and easier and more comfortable and yet more thrilling at the same time. I know I need to work harder on the thing that I'm passionate about but I feel like all this BS is clouding my ability to."
Here's an excerpt from Cary's response:
"Your distress is the memo. Adulthood - or your fate, shall we say - is staring you in the face, like a tiger that has crept up on you in the night. It is looking at you, wondering, When should I devour this child? Is it time? You open your eyes in terror. The tiger looks at its watch. Being devoured by the tiger that is adulthood is not so bad. The tiger eats you, digests you and drops you on the forest floor, not as a turd but as a cocoon. When you awaken and find the strength to break your shell, you emerge, eventually, as an adult and an apprentice. You are transformed in the belly of the tiger. You are remade.
Quoting the author Bill Plotkin, Cary goes on:
"The process of becoming a true adult is the process of coming to know one's ultimate place as an individual."
And finally, Cary concludes:
"To sum up: You know what time it is. The tiger knows what time it is, too. It is time for you to become an adult. But you do not know how to do it. Of course you don't know how to do it! You are not really supposed to know how to do it. The way you learn how to do it is by wandering. But you also need to find a guide."
"HOW DO I BECOME AN ADULT?: I missed the memo on how to grow up."
Here's the young man:
"I feel ashamed of myself because I know I could contribute good things to the world, but right now I'm not, and in fact, I feel like I'm on the path to becoming a detractor. Instead of putting things out into the world I let myself succumb to the seduction of my imagination, where everything is better and easier and more comfortable and yet more thrilling at the same time. I know I need to work harder on the thing that I'm passionate about but I feel like all this BS is clouding my ability to."
Here's an excerpt from Cary's response:
"Your distress is the memo. Adulthood - or your fate, shall we say - is staring you in the face, like a tiger that has crept up on you in the night. It is looking at you, wondering, When should I devour this child? Is it time? You open your eyes in terror. The tiger looks at its watch. Being devoured by the tiger that is adulthood is not so bad. The tiger eats you, digests you and drops you on the forest floor, not as a turd but as a cocoon. When you awaken and find the strength to break your shell, you emerge, eventually, as an adult and an apprentice. You are transformed in the belly of the tiger. You are remade.
Quoting the author Bill Plotkin, Cary goes on:
"The process of becoming a true adult is the process of coming to know one's ultimate place as an individual."
And finally, Cary concludes:
"To sum up: You know what time it is. The tiger knows what time it is, too. It is time for you to become an adult. But you do not know how to do it. Of course you don't know how to do it! You are not really supposed to know how to do it. The way you learn how to do it is by wandering. But you also need to find a guide."
TODAY'S QUOTE!
"True adulthood, or psychological maturity, has become an uncommon achievement in Western and Westernized societies, and genuine elderhood nearly nonexistent. Interwoven with arrested personal development, and perhaps inseparable from it, our everyday lives have drifted vast distances from our species’ original intimacy with the natural world."
Bill Plotkin
Bill Plotkin
TODAY'S QUOTE!
"Whoever loves becomes humble. Those who love have, so to speak, pawned a part of their narcissism."
Sigmund Freud
Sigmund Freud
FOLLOW-UP BY LOFF56 ON THE WEB CRAZIES!
I can't definitively disagree with anything you're saying here, L56. Let's see how it evolves.
PL
Here's LOFF56:
I hear what you're saying about the Three Stooges, but I think it's comparing apples to oranges. If you were to "act out" on things you picked up from The Three Stooges, you would have to do it in real life. But television is not interactive like the internet and the blogosphere is. Putting a wrench to somebody's face in the real world would have obvious consequences. The problem is that putting a virtual wrench to the face of an anonymous person in a virtual reality as of yet doesn't have any obvious consequences. (Well, at least not obvious to a lot of people still.) I'm not suggesting that they're right for being a-holes in virtual reality, I'm just saying that since the medium is so new people have only grown up with a general idea of how to behave in real life, nobody has ever been taught how to behave in virtual reality. There is a mental disconnect between the virtual people that they're slinging mud at on the internet and the actual real life people who are on the other side of the computer screen.
Also, anonymity in large groups is well understood to have ill effects. Mob mentality is exactly that. Individuals do things in the midsts of a large crowd that they normally would never do at any other moment. In chaotic events such as huge blackouts where lots of uncontrolled people take to the streets almost always there's a rash of vandalism, looting etc. Anonymity is exactly what "allows" people to perform immoral acts while avoiding personal responsibility. The KKK is a perfect example, generally speaking it's a large group of men covering their faces with white hoods. Deep down in the bowels of their being they must have known that hanging black people was wrong, (and the laws even said it was so), but they were able to justify to themselves doing it for so long partially because they were avoiding individual personal responsibility through anonymity provided by mob mentality and white hoods.
I'm not defending the way these mean bloggers behave, I'm just suggesting that they are all unchecked children in a candy store for the first time who haven't yet recognized the problem with gorging themselves with as much candy as possible. But as you've correctly recognized after a while you get a really bad tummy ache and you'll eventually come to the realization that it's the candy that's making you sick. But as we know not everyone learns at the same speed, some people never do. But hopefully as time progresses, more people than not will learn.
It's an interesting idea that the virtual rage could be a sort of siphon for actual rage. At first it seems logical, and maybe that's really all it is, and it's everyone else taking it all so seriously that's giving unexpected and unwarranted stock to their in-human argumentative tactics. Although interestingly, these recent Town Halls that have been so problematic from a decorum standpoint also suggest that the virtual rage is actually starting to translate into real rage - a scary prospect that seems counterintuitive to this idea.
Well, it is an interesting discussion indeed, and probably way under-researched, poorly understood and definitely not talked about enough.
PL
Here's LOFF56:
I hear what you're saying about the Three Stooges, but I think it's comparing apples to oranges. If you were to "act out" on things you picked up from The Three Stooges, you would have to do it in real life. But television is not interactive like the internet and the blogosphere is. Putting a wrench to somebody's face in the real world would have obvious consequences. The problem is that putting a virtual wrench to the face of an anonymous person in a virtual reality as of yet doesn't have any obvious consequences. (Well, at least not obvious to a lot of people still.) I'm not suggesting that they're right for being a-holes in virtual reality, I'm just saying that since the medium is so new people have only grown up with a general idea of how to behave in real life, nobody has ever been taught how to behave in virtual reality. There is a mental disconnect between the virtual people that they're slinging mud at on the internet and the actual real life people who are on the other side of the computer screen.
Also, anonymity in large groups is well understood to have ill effects. Mob mentality is exactly that. Individuals do things in the midsts of a large crowd that they normally would never do at any other moment. In chaotic events such as huge blackouts where lots of uncontrolled people take to the streets almost always there's a rash of vandalism, looting etc. Anonymity is exactly what "allows" people to perform immoral acts while avoiding personal responsibility. The KKK is a perfect example, generally speaking it's a large group of men covering their faces with white hoods. Deep down in the bowels of their being they must have known that hanging black people was wrong, (and the laws even said it was so), but they were able to justify to themselves doing it for so long partially because they were avoiding individual personal responsibility through anonymity provided by mob mentality and white hoods.
I'm not defending the way these mean bloggers behave, I'm just suggesting that they are all unchecked children in a candy store for the first time who haven't yet recognized the problem with gorging themselves with as much candy as possible. But as you've correctly recognized after a while you get a really bad tummy ache and you'll eventually come to the realization that it's the candy that's making you sick. But as we know not everyone learns at the same speed, some people never do. But hopefully as time progresses, more people than not will learn.
It's an interesting idea that the virtual rage could be a sort of siphon for actual rage. At first it seems logical, and maybe that's really all it is, and it's everyone else taking it all so seriously that's giving unexpected and unwarranted stock to their in-human argumentative tactics. Although interestingly, these recent Town Halls that have been so problematic from a decorum standpoint also suggest that the virtual rage is actually starting to translate into real rage - a scary prospect that seems counterintuitive to this idea.
Well, it is an interesting discussion indeed, and probably way under-researched, poorly understood and definitely not talked about enough.
LONG RESPONSE FROM LOFF56 TO PL'S FORAY INTO THE CRAZY UNDERWORLD OF THE INTERNET!
It's long, but it is below in its entirety. I sort of disagree with only one premise put forth by L56 - that somehow the anonymity of the internet allows people to be more hostile and volatile than they would be if they had to deal face to face. I don't think media changes personalities or, ultimately, actions. For all those episodes of The Three Stooges I watched when I was a kid, I never felt inclined to take a pipe wrench to anybody's nose (although I did once stage a pie fight with a cousin of mine!). And who knows, maybe the ranting and raving on sites like craigslist actually siphons off some of the unsocialized rage that these fringers carry around, rage that they would otherwise act out physically. Interesting. Anyway... 
Here's LOFF56:
Oh man, I thought you knew...
This post got me thinking again about something that I've often thought about on and off over the last, oh, decade or so. That is: the other side of the double edged sword that is the internet.
I remember reading a while back when instant messaging first came on the scene, oh it must have been '98 or so, about the serious problems with instant message communications. Really it's pretty simple, it was about a lack of facial expression and tonal inflection that's obviously so important to good face to face communication. Obviously things are very easily taken the wrong way when you're just typing words without your eyes or your hands or your voice to give the subtleties and the subtext behind the words. Irony, sarcasm and emotion are totally lost if you're not completely specific with your words. (Emoticons were developed in an ad hoc manner to combat this, although their usefulness is still pretty limited.) :-)
As a matter of course, I did myself fall victim to that very problem. I attempted to get a problematic relationship off the ground through instant messaging, probably because I wasn't getting any where in real life and Instant Messaging was there, and it was the latest craze, so why not? Needless to say the attempted relationship ended in a stupid, disastrous mess. It was a pretty quick lesson in the limitations of the social aspects of the internet.
That's just Instant Messaging which is really about person to person communications. More recently with the advent of the Blog, MySpace, then Facebook and finally Twitter, that impersonality has extended not only to person to person but also to very large virtual rooms of sometimes thousands and thousands of people. Think about it, impersonal, practically anonymous communication combined with virtual mob mentality, how could the result be anything but what you're experiencing?
The virtual anonymous nature of blogging (well more to the point, the people that respond to the blogs) is particularly problematic. My sense is that if you were to round up all these people that say these unbelievably horrific things and put them in a world with no internet, no TV, no nothing for a year, they'd ultimately have to revert back to the morality and sensibility that most of them learned from living in the real world before the internet. I don't think these people would be that mean if the opposing point of view was presented by someone in real life - like their brother, their friend or even a random guy they met on the street. Take away the face, the identity and the responsibility and of course it's gonna' get ugly.
The word blogosphere was introduced around 2002, around the time that blogs really started to take off. That's only 7 years ago. These people that are saying these things are older than 7, in fact, most of them are probably between 25 and 45. A 40 year old for example would have been alive for 33 years before he'd even have an opportunity to read a blog. 33 years of living an un-anonymous life where the human filter that filters out all the unbelievably ridiculous things that we all think, but never say out loud because we're... human and appreciate human contact has been well honed. I doubt a 40 year old walked around for 33 years saying that kind of stuff and got away with it. They didn't get away with it, but the anonymous nature of the internet gives them a sudden unfettered medium to say the things that are in the most backward places of their minds without having to pay the consequences.
In a sense the blogosphere is a 7 year old child with some untold millions of parents that feed it, live through it, spoil it but never discipline it. As a psychologist you know exactly what that child would be like.
Anyway, what's interesting to think of is the political implications of all of this. Again, the internet is barely 15 years old, blogging - at the level it's at now - probably 5, I don't think that our political structure has really caught up. (I would add that the 24 hour news cycle is definitely part of this same problem). There's a lot of weird crap going on in relation to all this stuff. The anonymous nature of it is reverting us back to days where we didn't have that social filter that we've worked so hard to develop which is creating a feedback loop, where people are starting to act out in real life the primal urges that they're experiencing online which is fueling more anonymous primal urges online.
Politicians can't figure out how much of the blogosphere is legit. I mean, how many of these "mean bloggers" (for a lack of a better term) actually vote? Clearly they're living in a fantasy world, why would we think that they have the initiative to actually get out from behind their computer screens and get to a voting booth? But also, the 24 hour media is eating this blogosphere feedback loop up and are reporting a lot of this as if it were sort of ad hoc polling which in turn influences the people who do watch the news and who do actually vote. It's very probable that our politicians are making a lot of decisions based on information that's gleaned from unreliable sources. The actual messages from the blogosphere are probably no where near the REAL feelings of those same people that have been sucked into this ridiculous vapid void.
In some sense I agree with Frank Schaeffer in that we need to sort of move around these poor people who've gotten sucked into this literal virtual reality. I mean in the least we certainly can't ask the people that have been rendered insane to help make decisions for the sane. At the same time I think it's also our responsibility to keep helping those who've been sucked in to get out. I mean I guess maybe it's like a drug addiction, in reality they're gonna' have to learn on their own; nothing we can do or say will stop them from doing what they're doing. But we should be there to support them and realize that most of them are legitimately decent people who just got caught in a stupid game.
It's definitely a weird time right now, but I have a bit of faith that once we as a society learn how to better tame this enormous beast which is the internet I think we'll eventually see a return to some decency and normalcy and we'll look back at this era as sort of a great battle we had with this technology. (It actually reminds me of a show that was on the History Channel recently that was talking about the invention of the x-ray. When it was invented we had no idea about the health problems associated with over exposure and were willy nilly using it on everything. Shoe salesmen had a device that provided a live x-ray picture of your feet so you can see how snugly your shoes fit.) Of course I just have no idea when we'll collectively realize the social health risks of anonymous internet postings. When Obama leaves office (I'm optimistically assuming he'll get re-elected) blogs will literately be more than twice as old as they are now, the Internet - roughly 50% older. Obviously with the development of anything, the early years are the most productive (and volatile). Think about the difference between a 7 year old and a 15 year old. Or a 15 year old and a 23 year old. I would hope that just as quickly this has gotten to where it's gotten, perhaps in just as much time, it will get to a place much better than where it is now.
Anyway, I'm glad that you've broken out of your "fugue", and I look forward to future postings with your new found perspective.
Here's LOFF56:
Oh man, I thought you knew...
This post got me thinking again about something that I've often thought about on and off over the last, oh, decade or so. That is: the other side of the double edged sword that is the internet.
I remember reading a while back when instant messaging first came on the scene, oh it must have been '98 or so, about the serious problems with instant message communications. Really it's pretty simple, it was about a lack of facial expression and tonal inflection that's obviously so important to good face to face communication. Obviously things are very easily taken the wrong way when you're just typing words without your eyes or your hands or your voice to give the subtleties and the subtext behind the words. Irony, sarcasm and emotion are totally lost if you're not completely specific with your words. (Emoticons were developed in an ad hoc manner to combat this, although their usefulness is still pretty limited.) :-)
As a matter of course, I did myself fall victim to that very problem. I attempted to get a problematic relationship off the ground through instant messaging, probably because I wasn't getting any where in real life and Instant Messaging was there, and it was the latest craze, so why not? Needless to say the attempted relationship ended in a stupid, disastrous mess. It was a pretty quick lesson in the limitations of the social aspects of the internet.
That's just Instant Messaging which is really about person to person communications. More recently with the advent of the Blog, MySpace, then Facebook and finally Twitter, that impersonality has extended not only to person to person but also to very large virtual rooms of sometimes thousands and thousands of people. Think about it, impersonal, practically anonymous communication combined with virtual mob mentality, how could the result be anything but what you're experiencing?
The virtual anonymous nature of blogging (well more to the point, the people that respond to the blogs) is particularly problematic. My sense is that if you were to round up all these people that say these unbelievably horrific things and put them in a world with no internet, no TV, no nothing for a year, they'd ultimately have to revert back to the morality and sensibility that most of them learned from living in the real world before the internet. I don't think these people would be that mean if the opposing point of view was presented by someone in real life - like their brother, their friend or even a random guy they met on the street. Take away the face, the identity and the responsibility and of course it's gonna' get ugly.
The word blogosphere was introduced around 2002, around the time that blogs really started to take off. That's only 7 years ago. These people that are saying these things are older than 7, in fact, most of them are probably between 25 and 45. A 40 year old for example would have been alive for 33 years before he'd even have an opportunity to read a blog. 33 years of living an un-anonymous life where the human filter that filters out all the unbelievably ridiculous things that we all think, but never say out loud because we're... human and appreciate human contact has been well honed. I doubt a 40 year old walked around for 33 years saying that kind of stuff and got away with it. They didn't get away with it, but the anonymous nature of the internet gives them a sudden unfettered medium to say the things that are in the most backward places of their minds without having to pay the consequences.
In a sense the blogosphere is a 7 year old child with some untold millions of parents that feed it, live through it, spoil it but never discipline it. As a psychologist you know exactly what that child would be like.
Anyway, what's interesting to think of is the political implications of all of this. Again, the internet is barely 15 years old, blogging - at the level it's at now - probably 5, I don't think that our political structure has really caught up. (I would add that the 24 hour news cycle is definitely part of this same problem). There's a lot of weird crap going on in relation to all this stuff. The anonymous nature of it is reverting us back to days where we didn't have that social filter that we've worked so hard to develop which is creating a feedback loop, where people are starting to act out in real life the primal urges that they're experiencing online which is fueling more anonymous primal urges online.
Politicians can't figure out how much of the blogosphere is legit. I mean, how many of these "mean bloggers" (for a lack of a better term) actually vote? Clearly they're living in a fantasy world, why would we think that they have the initiative to actually get out from behind their computer screens and get to a voting booth? But also, the 24 hour media is eating this blogosphere feedback loop up and are reporting a lot of this as if it were sort of ad hoc polling which in turn influences the people who do watch the news and who do actually vote. It's very probable that our politicians are making a lot of decisions based on information that's gleaned from unreliable sources. The actual messages from the blogosphere are probably no where near the REAL feelings of those same people that have been sucked into this ridiculous vapid void.
In some sense I agree with Frank Schaeffer in that we need to sort of move around these poor people who've gotten sucked into this literal virtual reality. I mean in the least we certainly can't ask the people that have been rendered insane to help make decisions for the sane. At the same time I think it's also our responsibility to keep helping those who've been sucked in to get out. I mean I guess maybe it's like a drug addiction, in reality they're gonna' have to learn on their own; nothing we can do or say will stop them from doing what they're doing. But we should be there to support them and realize that most of them are legitimately decent people who just got caught in a stupid game.
It's definitely a weird time right now, but I have a bit of faith that once we as a society learn how to better tame this enormous beast which is the internet I think we'll eventually see a return to some decency and normalcy and we'll look back at this era as sort of a great battle we had with this technology. (It actually reminds me of a show that was on the History Channel recently that was talking about the invention of the x-ray. When it was invented we had no idea about the health problems associated with over exposure and were willy nilly using it on everything. Shoe salesmen had a device that provided a live x-ray picture of your feet so you can see how snugly your shoes fit.) Of course I just have no idea when we'll collectively realize the social health risks of anonymous internet postings. When Obama leaves office (I'm optimistically assuming he'll get re-elected) blogs will literately be more than twice as old as they are now, the Internet - roughly 50% older. Obviously with the development of anything, the early years are the most productive (and volatile). Think about the difference between a 7 year old and a 15 year old. Or a 15 year old and a 23 year old. I would hope that just as quickly this has gotten to where it's gotten, perhaps in just as much time, it will get to a place much better than where it is now.
Anyway, I'm glad that you've broken out of your "fugue", and I look forward to future postings with your new found perspective.
THE VILLAGE IDIOT: PART TWO!
I'm back from a foray into the wilds of unfiltered lunacy on the internet. It feels like I've been in a kind of fugue state, really.
Here's how it happened:
When I first started this blog, I used to post the title of my latest blog entries for free on one of three craigslist areas - "Rants and Raves," "Politics," and/or "Therapeutic Services," depending on what the subject matter was. Given the nature of my primary field of interest, I posted on the Therapeutic Services area most often. I rarely wrote on the cl posting beyond just the title and a link to my blog, and to be honest, I rarely read what other people were saying on craigslist. I was just trying to bring people to my blog.
Then, about two months ago, craigslist started charging a fee to post on the therapeutic site. Since I write and post so often, it didn't seem worthwhile to start paying for the privilege, so I just posted on the Rants site or the politics site when I had something to say that was relevant to the area. After a while, I started paying attention to what others were writing about on cl, especially on the politics site. It was an eye-opener!
For whatever reason, the cl politics site has become a gathering place for the most hateful, vile, racist and all around ignorant segments of our population. I mean, this place is the far right of the far right. Obama is the anti-Christ here for sure. They casually refer to the president as "boy," and frequently talk about his wife's "fat ass." Some of the regular posters regularly call him a socialist, a communist, a liar, a traitor, certainly not an American, and most definitely plotting to turn the United States into a dictatorship! On and on it goes. Oh, and liberals? Forget about it! They are just "Commie Fucks," "pussies," and cry-babies" because they don't want to settle their differences by having a fist fight! For real!
Anyway, those of you who regularly read my blog know that I frequently say that you can only preach to the choir, and that some people cannot change in this lifetime. And just the other day, I posted an excellent interview with one Frank Schaeffer, a conservative Christian and former Republican who said this about the religious far right: "You don‘t work to move them off this position. You move past them. Look, a village cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot. It‘s as simple as that. And we have to understand, we have a village idiot in this country, it‘s called 'Fundamentalist Christianity.”
Well, I lost my way for a bit. I started getting so angry at what I was hearing on the cl site that I let myself get drawn into the fray. Yep. I started bantering at first, then out-right mud-slinging with some of the worst of the haters there... until the other day. I stopped myself, shook my head and posted this on the cl politics site:
"AN OPEN APEAL TO ALL POSTERS HERE" -
"This is a very challenging and potentially exciting time for our country. It's a new century and we're all here participating in it. Throwing hate-filled verbal assaults at each other is not only out of synch with the opportunities that this moment in history is providing to us, it is an indication that we're letting our fears of change and our most base and primitive impulses rule us. We're all passionate about having our voices in the ongoing dialogue heard or else we wouldn't be posting here. It only discredits our contribution when we trash others as if they were traitorous losers because they see something differently than we do.
Let's stop.
This isn't a contest, my team against your team. We're all Americans, liberal-conservative, Republican-Democrat, and America is a democratic republic, founded on the principles that all are created equal with equal rights to pursue life, liberty and happiness. And our government and Constitution were established to protect the well-being and freedom of all citizens. You're no more of a patriot if you marched for or against health care, for or against the Iraq War, etc. If you honestly care about the general well-being of your fellow Americans, then you're a patriot. If you think a particular point of view is wrong, say so, go for it, make your case as articulately as you can, but if you make personal attacks, you're surrendering credibility and lowering the level of discourse for everyone. I am guilty. I have gotten very angry at those who I see as "wrong," and so, I have become part of the problem instead of part of the solution. I am stopping. Let's all stop and listen. There are no saints out here, and there are no devils.
Let's stop."
Well, I have said you can only preach to the choir, right? Here's the only response I got:
"The Constitution was designed to give us freedoms and to protect us from Government. It is our right to protest. Protesting is not unpatriotic, it is our Constitutional right. And so is speaking out. So go blow, you ignoramus!"
The Village Idiot lives!
Here's how it happened:
When I first started this blog, I used to post the title of my latest blog entries for free on one of three craigslist areas - "Rants and Raves," "Politics," and/or "Therapeutic Services," depending on what the subject matter was. Given the nature of my primary field of interest, I posted on the Therapeutic Services area most often. I rarely wrote on the cl posting beyond just the title and a link to my blog, and to be honest, I rarely read what other people were saying on craigslist. I was just trying to bring people to my blog.
Then, about two months ago, craigslist started charging a fee to post on the therapeutic site. Since I write and post so often, it didn't seem worthwhile to start paying for the privilege, so I just posted on the Rants site or the politics site when I had something to say that was relevant to the area. After a while, I started paying attention to what others were writing about on cl, especially on the politics site. It was an eye-opener!
For whatever reason, the cl politics site has become a gathering place for the most hateful, vile, racist and all around ignorant segments of our population. I mean, this place is the far right of the far right. Obama is the anti-Christ here for sure. They casually refer to the president as "boy," and frequently talk about his wife's "fat ass." Some of the regular posters regularly call him a socialist, a communist, a liar, a traitor, certainly not an American, and most definitely plotting to turn the United States into a dictatorship! On and on it goes. Oh, and liberals? Forget about it! They are just "Commie Fucks," "pussies," and cry-babies" because they don't want to settle their differences by having a fist fight! For real!
Anyway, those of you who regularly read my blog know that I frequently say that you can only preach to the choir, and that some people cannot change in this lifetime. And just the other day, I posted an excellent interview with one Frank Schaeffer, a conservative Christian and former Republican who said this about the religious far right: "You don‘t work to move them off this position. You move past them. Look, a village cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot. It‘s as simple as that. And we have to understand, we have a village idiot in this country, it‘s called 'Fundamentalist Christianity.”
Well, I lost my way for a bit. I started getting so angry at what I was hearing on the cl site that I let myself get drawn into the fray. Yep. I started bantering at first, then out-right mud-slinging with some of the worst of the haters there... until the other day. I stopped myself, shook my head and posted this on the cl politics site:
"AN OPEN APEAL TO ALL POSTERS HERE" -
"This is a very challenging and potentially exciting time for our country. It's a new century and we're all here participating in it. Throwing hate-filled verbal assaults at each other is not only out of synch with the opportunities that this moment in history is providing to us, it is an indication that we're letting our fears of change and our most base and primitive impulses rule us. We're all passionate about having our voices in the ongoing dialogue heard or else we wouldn't be posting here. It only discredits our contribution when we trash others as if they were traitorous losers because they see something differently than we do.
Let's stop.
This isn't a contest, my team against your team. We're all Americans, liberal-conservative, Republican-Democrat, and America is a democratic republic, founded on the principles that all are created equal with equal rights to pursue life, liberty and happiness. And our government and Constitution were established to protect the well-being and freedom of all citizens. You're no more of a patriot if you marched for or against health care, for or against the Iraq War, etc. If you honestly care about the general well-being of your fellow Americans, then you're a patriot. If you think a particular point of view is wrong, say so, go for it, make your case as articulately as you can, but if you make personal attacks, you're surrendering credibility and lowering the level of discourse for everyone. I am guilty. I have gotten very angry at those who I see as "wrong," and so, I have become part of the problem instead of part of the solution. I am stopping. Let's all stop and listen. There are no saints out here, and there are no devils.
Let's stop."
Well, I have said you can only preach to the choir, right? Here's the only response I got:
"The Constitution was designed to give us freedoms and to protect us from Government. It is our right to protest. Protesting is not unpatriotic, it is our Constitutional right. And so is speaking out. So go blow, you ignoramus!"
The Village Idiot lives!
"WHY WE SHOULD WRITE" ON THE LOVE WE MAKE!
Very good piece on The Love We Make blog entitled: "WHY WE SHOULD WRITE."
For many years I have told many people that writing is a very important adjunct to therapy and to one's growth process. Mary Cavataio describes her own process in grappling with the writing experience in her piece beautifully. Definitely worth reading.
Here's an excerpt:
"We should write because humans are spiritual beings and writing is a powerful form of prayer and meditation, connecting us both to our own insights and to our higher and deeper level of inner guidance. We should write because writing brings clarity and passion to the act of living. Writing is sensual experiential, grounding. We should write because writing is good for the soul."
For many years I have told many people that writing is a very important adjunct to therapy and to one's growth process. Mary Cavataio describes her own process in grappling with the writing experience in her piece beautifully. Definitely worth reading.
Here's an excerpt:
"We should write because humans are spiritual beings and writing is a powerful form of prayer and meditation, connecting us both to our own insights and to our higher and deeper level of inner guidance. We should write because writing brings clarity and passion to the act of living. Writing is sensual experiential, grounding. We should write because writing is good for the soul."
OUCH! NEW RULE FROM BILL MAHER ON HEALTH CARE!!
Here's Bill:
"New Rule: You can't complain about health care reform if you're not willing to reform your own health. Unlike most liberals, I'm glad all those teabaggers marched on Washington last week, because judging from the photos, it's the first exercise they've gotten in years, not counting, of course, all the Rascal scooters there, most of which aren't even for the disabled. They're just Americans who turned 60 and said, 'Screw it, I'm done walking.' These people are furious at the high cost of health care, so they blame illegals, who don't even get health care. News flash, Glenn Beck fans: the reason health care is so expensive is because you're all so unhealthy. Yes, it was fun this week to watch the teabaggers complain how the media underestimated the size of their march, 'How can you say there were only 60,000 of us? We filled the entire mall!' Yes, because you're fat. One whale fills the tank at Sea World, that doesn't make it a crowd."
What?
"New Rule: You can't complain about health care reform if you're not willing to reform your own health. Unlike most liberals, I'm glad all those teabaggers marched on Washington last week, because judging from the photos, it's the first exercise they've gotten in years, not counting, of course, all the Rascal scooters there, most of which aren't even for the disabled. They're just Americans who turned 60 and said, 'Screw it, I'm done walking.' These people are furious at the high cost of health care, so they blame illegals, who don't even get health care. News flash, Glenn Beck fans: the reason health care is so expensive is because you're all so unhealthy. Yes, it was fun this week to watch the teabaggers complain how the media underestimated the size of their march, 'How can you say there were only 60,000 of us? We filled the entire mall!' Yes, because you're fat. One whale fills the tank at Sea World, that doesn't make it a crowd."
What?
TODAY'S DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSION HEADLINES!
BREAKING: 75 Percent of Oklahoma High School Students Can't Name the First President of the U.S. (Oklahoma consistently votes Republican in national elections.)
BREAKING: Teen birth rates highest in most religious states (Most religious states consistently vote Republican.)
BREAKING: Teen birth rates highest in most religious states (Most religious states consistently vote Republican.)
REPOST: GUIDE LECTURE ON SEXUALITY - SOME WORTHY READING!
HERE'S AN EXCERPT:
The Spiritual Symbolism And Significance Of Sexuality
By The Pathwork Guide
"Every human manifestation has a deep spiritual significance. It does not matter whether this manifestation is natural, instinctual, or whether it is man-made, as it were. No matter what the human experience, it is always symbolic of a wider, deeper, and fuller meaning. Sexuality manifests differently in every human being
according to the development of each human being. We shall discuss the
principle of sexuality in the totally self-realized individual, in the
average person, and, down the scale, in those who are perhaps still on a
very low level of spiritual development, and therefore severely blocked and
split. Even the most advanced psychology is oblivious of the fact that in the way sexuality manifests the whole character, all attitudes, all personality and ego trends, all problems and impurities, are revealed."
READ THE ENTIRE LECTURE HERE.
The Spiritual Symbolism And Significance Of Sexuality
By The Pathwork Guide
"Every human manifestation has a deep spiritual significance. It does not matter whether this manifestation is natural, instinctual, or whether it is man-made, as it were. No matter what the human experience, it is always symbolic of a wider, deeper, and fuller meaning. Sexuality manifests differently in every human being
according to the development of each human being. We shall discuss the
principle of sexuality in the totally self-realized individual, in the
average person, and, down the scale, in those who are perhaps still on a
very low level of spiritual development, and therefore severely blocked and
split. Even the most advanced psychology is oblivious of the fact that in the way sexuality manifests the whole character, all attitudes, all personality and ego trends, all problems and impurities, are revealed."
READ THE ENTIRE LECTURE HERE.
"OLD MAN LOFFREDO?!" HEY!
Well, this is pretty funny! Apparently my critique of the narcissistic stroller set in Park Slope ruining the dining experience of adults is garnering some attention. Here's a link to a piece in the GOTHAMIST, written by one Jen Carlson, entitled "Are Park Slope Parents Killing the Romance?" in which I am referred to as "Old Man Loffredo!"
Now, what's up with that, Jen?!
Now, what's up with that, Jen?!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
