This is turning into one of those blogs...

As much as I try not to, I keep getting drawn into deeply philosophical topics on this blog. I recently met someone who differs from me on almost every important aspect in life. So, naturally, I am drawn to him and intrigued by his presence in my life. I routinely wonder what this experience might teach me.

He recently recommended a catholic book to me. I was open to the idea of reading what it said. Mostly, I just wanted to read it so I’d be able to better understand him. I’ve never turned down an opportunity to learn more about something that I was previously ignorant about…so that’s where my journey began.

This is going to be a blog about religion, in the way that makes sense to me. This is not meant to offend or degrade anyone or anything, and I hope I’ve captured that essence for the most part.

The book, “Men, Women and the Mystery of Love” was full of theories that made me truly ponder the basis for religion in modern life. It was another lesson for me in terms of how people’s unique biases, backgrounds, and preferences can color the lenses through which they interpret the world around them. I came away with a familiar echo in my mind: all people generally want the same things, but they go about achieving these things in vastly different ways and for hugely different reasons.

The Good
I thought I would have to search desperately for the good in this book. However, I rather easily found many things in this book that made me appreciate how I was raised (because of the open-mindedness it allowed me to have), and that made me step back and intelligently analyze the reasons why things appear to us the way they are.

More specifically, I tended to agree with the reasons for implementing social order prescribed by the book (and this actually shocked me), but I could not immediately identify with some of the underlying logic. Through the whole book, the only statement I totally identified with with was: “A great marriage is not one that simply stays together, but one in which spouses experience a deep personal communion with each other.”

In a broad sense, I can definitely appreciate and see the benefit in certain aspects of the book such as: seeing beyond someone’s physical presence and into their being, practicing some version of modesty as it makes sense to do so, refraining from immediate gratification when to do otherwise would negate a solid relationship, and wanting to believe there is something called altruism which allows us to act in a totally selfless manner. Interestingly, much of the book discussed the merits of waiting until marriage to have sex. Without doubt, I can see the value in allowing a love relationship to form before engaging in sex.

The thing I cannot firmly grasp is something deeper than the espoused ideals though; it is the way in which they are rigidly set forth in order to meet the standards of living a “correct” lifestyle. In other words, not having sex before falling in love would be fine for me, but defining true love only under the guise of the cultural mores of “marriage” is a bit disconcerting. See, unfortunately, marriages can be loveless in the same way dating partnerships can be rich with love; so to say sex within marriage is the only valid instance is overly simplistic.

The Bad
I found that a good deal of the book contradicted itself, and provided (what I consider) weak arguments to some very multifaceted and dynamic human choices. I fundamentally disagreed with at least some element of almost every point made in the book. How’s that for ‘not the target audience’?

My first gripe is with the lack of any evidence to the contrary of what was being presented in this analysis. For example, the chapter on chastity was especially interesting. To summarize it, people who do not live a chaste life are full of resentment toward those who do. Really? I mean, what might be some other explanations for the wildly different perspectives of people who are sexually promiscuous compared to those who are sexually abstinent (or “pure”)? This author implied that the person who engages in sex before marriage is somehow unhappy with that choice and that unhappiness spawns an automatic devaluation of others who do not engage in sex before marriage.

This is an easy argument to make and to proliferate, but is it really ever that black and white? What makes us think there’s some great disparity between virgins and non-virgins? Perhaps there is no resentment. Perhaps we all need to take a closer look at why we decided to pursue our individual paths.…as opposed to finding ways to turn (what may be) benign lifestyles into more sinister ones. Plus, where’s the case showing that some people who are unmarried are also completely happy – and better off – living together for decades as domestic partners? I also disagreed with the characterization that sex before marriage occurs primarily when one partner fears punishment or loss of attention from the other.

Similarly, the correlation this author makes between people engaging in sex before marriage and prostitution was clearly alarming. I see that as a stretch. I mean, again, I see the value and merit in marriage and how important it is in both a sacrificial and enduring way, BUT are we really selling out our bodies if we engage in an act that physically imitates a “holy realm” before the marriage license is signed at the courthouse? All I can say is wow.

My last HUGE point is regarding the opposition to using contraception in marriage. I believe that the use of contraception in a marriage does NOT in any way devoid the union of love. The author’s perspective here was vexing to say the least. I’m all about kids and even I wonder about people who are childless to some extent, but c’mon let’s get real here. Is this practical to expect couples to only have sex when a woman isn’t ovulating? How many people have “accidents” while practicing this method?

The noblest thing to do in the modern age is to practice 20th century family planning. If you don’t want kids, then you have an obligation to ensure you don’t have them. Thanks to science, we have that choice.

And that thing about marriages requiring offspring? Yikes, sounds like a recipe for disaster. I wholeheartedly disagree with that opinion and think that people should have kids only if both partners really want them! If someone can intelligently argue how controlling when pregnancy can occur is an impediment to love, I’m all ears. But in this day and age, that’s the single dumbest and most careless thing I’ve read in a while. I don't mean to be rude or disrespectful here, but I'd like to say in the most direct terms possible that I entirely disagree.

To put it another way, natural family planning might work for some people but I lean toward believing that unplanned pregnancies are NOT cool. I fully realize that I have an idealistic vision about what pregnancy, childrearing, and parenthood is supposed to be about, so pardon this unusually tyrannical and somewhat biased response. My personal conviction: the undeniably most important thing you’ll ever do in your life is have a baby, so why not allow a little more caution and control over such a choice?

The Ugly
The perspective offered by this book was oftentimes shallow and one-sided. That being said, I see the virtue in writing a piece like this, and the virtue in reading it. Clearly, I won’t be rushing to convert to catholicism any time soon, because there are just too many ‘what ifs’ that religions necessarily leave out in order to bolster their appeal. With rule sets as crude and binding as these, there’s really no way to truly accept people into your life who stray from these so-called ideals. That leaves a lot of people and perspectives automatically discounted in life. And how do you operationally define “selfless acts of love” or “pursuit of a common good” and how do you explain “sensuality is more powerful in a man than it is in a woman” to your daughter? The word-plays used in this book to distort the topics were laughable at best. This author doesn't distinguish between a plausible story and a scientifically testable hypothesis. And some of his arguments seem covertly circular, or self-serving.

The Funny
I actually read this book while flying out of state for work and I didn’t have any paper to write my notes on – so I ended up using the complimentary barf bag to jot down my notes. Hahaha. Kinda puts everything in a new light.

My Conclusion
The main issue I take with this book is that even with the best laid plans and the purest of intentions, shitty things still happen to good people. I realize my view of organized religion is unpopular and I sound (even to myself, at times) like a heathen. But that’s not to say I am not spiritual. I hope that everyone continues to do whatever it is they feel passionately about. I still keep an open mind and try to live the notion that everyone should practice whatever religion works for them, in any form it works. As other great philosophers have put it, you should be at peace with god, whatever you conceive god to be.

Strategic swearing

A recent article in the Harvard Business Review discussed the topic of swearing as a strategic leadership technique to get one's point across. I've always been a fan of using strong language in situations where it is tactically advantageous (i.e. working with military guys to name one example)....but I further realize there are some inherent pros and cons with using profanity, especially at work! I felt a little mixed on the topic. I see how expletives can be offensive if used incorrectly, excessively, or amongst the "wrong crowd" but at the same time, I vehemently disagree with censoring or sugar coating emotions, reactions, and thoughts. While doing some more research on the topic, I found one view point that explained the idea of swearing at work this way:

I disagree strongly. Any manager who cannot show passion without profanity is sadly lacking in ideas, vocabulary and purpose, and is unable to convey a clear message. Take the profanity out of any typical rant, and there is not real message left. Profanity is an expression of emotion, but never of ideas. Profanity is never uplifting or empowering, but rather the opposite. The next time you hear someone swearing, ask yourself if they are showing that they are positive, in control and happy, or rather angry, frustrated and stuck in a situation. Profanity is for complaints, rants and losers.

The so-called “strategic use of profanity” is wrong as well. A person who doesn’t use profanity normally and suddenly uses it causes the listeners to focus on the profanity rather than the message. The so-called “shock value” is just shock – the speaker is angry or emotional, and therefore not rational; the person has no ideas or actions to convey, only emotion; and the leader is not in control, so the followers should fear both the situation and the speaker. Profanity is threatening, not engaging.

It is always easier to “step down” to a lower level than to “pull up” another to a higher level of interaction and communication. Managers should focus on clear communications, honest assessment and positive action rather than emotional dumping. Leave profanity to the ignorant, the fearful and the indecisive.

Frankly, this perspective sounds elitist and too moralistic. I have to wonder if this writer is someone who doesn't have a very diverse background or circle of friends. Why does using colorful language have to be considered a "step down"? That's a very "holier than thou" response to this topic. I can respect the argument itself but I disagree with much of this writer's opinion. As well, there is merit in using language that doesn't offend people or make them tune you out.

All I want to say is, don't forget what swear words can accomplish that other words cannot. Some of the most effective people I've ever met have used swearing selectively in professional situations. The truth is, it is impossible to speak in such a way that you will always be well-understood, so with any word or gesture there's the possibility of it being taken the wrong way, blown out of proportion, or used against you. I think cussing in professional situations can be mighty effective, especially when there is some rationale behind it. In other words, there's a time and a place for profanity, vulgarity, and obscenity.... and that place is right next to me. LOL. :)

My bank-owned beauty

I guess the price of homeownership is a costly one. Sometimes I really wonder if I am biting off more than I can chew. I know more about this process than I ever wanted to know in my life. I swear, if I had to list all the things that I've had to work-around, figure out, pay for, and give up since this started, I might be sick. Seriously, I had NO idea that the hardest parts came AFTER the offer was accepted. Tough wake up call for me. Guess that's the joy - and the misery - of going solo on a mission like this. Here are a few pictures:

Everything works out given time.

Training is a four-letter word

In an effort to temporarily refrain from blogging about existential theories and political musings, I have decided to make this blog about my job. Not very many people truly understand or even care what I do for a living, so this may be a somewhat boring blog; consider yourself forewarned.

I am sitting here amidst piles of articles, newsletters, and electronic reports wondering why I got myself into this mess. All is not lost. My initial thought is that I will map training methodologies to particular mission operations as a start. That doesn't sound so bad. Or maybe I can develop a tool for evaluating training methods currently offered - Retest - Retain. And based on those results I can make recommendations for a cultural taxonomy of translating intercultural competencies into learning objectives...yeah yeah that's what I'll do.... Relate - Communicate - Negotiate. Or perhaps I should focus on training transfer and the effect of social media on training effectiveness....

Oh dear.

Maybe I will start looking into Organizational Change. I remember that was somewhat easier to digest.

I'm gonna need more aspirin.

All We Are

My last post was a revelation in forgiveness. Today is a revelation in love. Perhaps you can't have one without the other?

People say I am boy crazy and it's at least a little bit true. I am very "relationshipy" and I've had many boyfriends. But as many times as I've said those three words, I have only truly been in love twice in my twenty-seven years. To me, and maybe this is where I am a realist, love is not a quixotic, unexplainable, mystical phenomenon that creeps up on you. Love is simple. I define it as the "pull" toward someone or something. It isn't the feeling you get when you are with that person but rather, the feeling you get when you are not. It is the ever-present desire to surround yourself with your object of affection, which ranges from mundane to complex manifestations of that desire. That might sound neurotic or obsessive, but it seems to have happened to everyone who has ever been in love.

When was the last time you went to the grocery store and realized that you never buy plain cheerios anymore because he doesn't really like them as much as the honey cheerios....and only mid-way through that fleeting thought it dawns on you that he has been gone six years? It doesn't go away. It never will. This is not a trivial matter, the cheerios. Think about it, something in you changed because you loved that person. Your freedom to act on every whim was forever altered. No longer will you ever look at the cereal aisle the same, even when you think you do. And whether you've realized it yet or not, your mind is not as powerful in these matters as your heart.

Obviously, sometimes the signals are not as dramatic or telling... maybe there are things that have changed you on a deeper level. Maybe he or she changed your whole philosophy....and continues to do so. But the crux of love is this: it changes you. My favorite way to describe being in love is that all your craziness suddenly has a purpose.

Love is only the third highest need in Maslow's hierarchy... But don't dare try to convince someone who has lost a love that there is anything of greater importance in the world. A lost love is probably the one thing that sticks with you as long as, say, having a child or stepping foot on the moon. It's that monumental. If you don't think so, I would argue that you didn't truly love the thing that was lost. And sometimes, sadly, you can know that only once it's gone for good.

But all love is not lost. In the occasion that your love continues, grows, and evolves, then you are one of the lucky few. See, people do not stay the same for long, they change. Adapting to that change is without a doubt one of the 7 Wonders of the (Emotional) World. Love cannot thrive without renewal and that comes through change. I am by no means an expert, but I believe that the key to weathering the lowest lows and embracing the highest highs starts from a seed called Trust. Some people are really good at this. Others, like myself, tend to shy away from situations where I have to put my faith in someone or something. I always figured that the only person I could rely on was myself. This has been a virtue in school and work, but a severe detriment in love. I wasn't always this way either.

My first true love I was able to trust with all my being. And it was pure, unadulterated trust! I did not trust him because that I thought he walked on water, or that he would do everything right and make sure life was just the way I wanted (not too hot-not too cold, like Goldilocks) - rather, and more importantly, I trusted that he would do everything in his power NOT to hurt me. He was just that kinda guy. It was me and him against the world. That's what our trust was built on. I believed that when I was hurt, he was also feeling just as much pain. We were in it together. He hated seeing me cry. It would make him cry! He wasn't a wimp, but he had very very deep feelings for me and for the world. He was a dreamer like me, a true visionary. He saw the horrors in life and wanted to shield me from them...now, he was usually unsuccessful in protecting me, but that's not the point. He cared about me SO much that I honestly couldn't see how we would ever separate. Until one day we did.

My world was rocked so unbelievably hard. I awoke to see that everything was still intact - except my trust. Somehow I had gone from thinking that love could be a many splendored thing to thinking that fairy tales only exist in books. I learned from that and grew immeasurably. But I was still hurt, and any snippet of hurt that I experience nowadays is felt tenfold. But I keep trying. And I think being willing is more important than being right.

Willingness cannot be underestimated. When your little seed becomes a sappling, you've reached level two in the laws of love. The second lesson in weathering the ups and downs of love is to GIVE. If you don't have the capacity to sacrifice some of your needs and desires for another person, you should not pursue a love relationship. It's been said, one who dares not touch the thorn should never crave the rose. That's what this is all about. Being giving means not asking what that person can do for you in return. This kind of giving should come relatively easily ... and regularly. It need not be monetary or tangible. It could be a massage, time alone, or a shoulder to cry on. Lovers intuitively sense this about one another. I think. Call me idealistic, but how hard is it to see that someone needs something? I am pretty sure humans have been programmed to "see" when someone needs something. The only caveat here is that it is NOT always clear WHAT a person may need. Those who tend to like shoulder massages usually give pretty good shoulder massages. But those who tend to like shoulder massages are absolutely awful at giving a person time to be alone. What I have come to realize over the past year is that our needs surface in a relationship all the time. The thing that distinguishes a good relationship from a bad one is how those needs are met, ignored, or answered the "wrong" way. Granted, this takes time to learn a person's unique needs...but it should never be something you don't want to do for the person you love, mostly because you TRUST that this will be good for you both in the long run....and you see the light peeking through every dim day when you look forward to holding that person again. That's something you won't foresake for your own temporary gratification.

Your tree of love is fully realized when it holds up to the third law of love:TIME. This is the one I have a good bit of trouble with because it is closely correlated with patience. Love takes time, precious time. Love takes time apart, to realize how much you really want to be with that person. Time together, to ensure your time apart is justifiably unpleasant. Time to see, since certain things can only be revealed after you've grown to a certain level of ONENESS. Time to spare, because you always end up doing what seems like nothing for entire stretches of hours or days (but that's ok with you). And if you don't have the stomach to wait it out, then maybe it's not worth it to you. That's ok too. Sometimes things aren't worth it. The good part is when you realize that. Time is not something that can be rushed or taken back. Love will stand the test of time whether you want it to or not.

Those are my thoughts on LOVE.

Forgive and Forget

The old saying "forgive and forget" never quite resonated with me. What is forgiveness, exactly? Literature is rife with quotes and all-too-familiar definitions. Religion has a very specific way of describing it. But forgiveness for sins never made much sense to me. You have to believe someone has wronged you, or believe that you've wronged someone, in order to engage in the act of "forgiveness" and possibly even forgetting. The laws of the church don't apply this concept well. The self-condemnation that comes from following a socially-sanctioned moralistic conscience is a vicious circle and inhibits being whole.

The secular view of forgive and forget doesn't make sense to me either. Sure, we can go ahead and forgive, but what part of that transgression - the thing we are forgiving - must be relinquished before we have successfully and truly forgiven someone? Is it possible to forgive someone fully if you still hold on to little pieces of the hurt, the mistrust, or the fear? Or, by the very definition of forgiveness, must we forgive the act in every sense, all memories included?

To put it another way, why would humans have memories if the goal in life was to forget certain things? Granted, the human mind is a deep chasm of subjectivity when it comes to recalling supposed "memories" in the first place. But, the way we encode a memory and retrieve it does matter in terms of learning from our experiences. This could be a good thing then... this thing called remembering. We need those memories to remind us not to do certain things that caused pain, and to engage with more conviction the things that brought us joy. Learning from experience is only possible when we access, rely on, and apply our memories to future decisions.

Therefore, I decided a long time ago to "forgive but never forget" because I believe that you have to trust your own recollection of your experiences and use that to propel you forward and help you decide which turns to take on the road called life. The act of remembering your past is a powerful catalyst to making more informed decisions as life progresses. Who controls the past, controls the future.

But for the longest time I was still stuck trying to figure out what forgiveness is really all about. I figured it's dependent on the act that caused the rift, what made one feel the need to forgive, and assumptions about whether the forgiveness will change anything. But let me expand your mind for a moment. Maybe what forgiveness is about is actually pretty simple: telling the truth. Maybe the word forgiveness is not really forgiveness at all; rather, it is the act of leveling with oneself about the event(s) that transpired. Forgiveness, in this sense, is not about hearing "I'm sorry" or telling the person that he or she has been forgiven. Forgiveness isn't about letting go of anything at all. It's about understanding your version of "the truth" and putting that tidbit in a safe place in the back of your mind, where it can't haunt you anymore.

Maybe telling the truth about your anger is a way to get back to your experience of "being," where you love yourself and therefore have something left over with which to love someone else. Forgiveness is about taking responsibility for your mind and the things it does to you. Responsibility means that whatever you are doing, you are willing to experience yourself as the cause. A commitment to forgive, and by extension to free yourself of mental torment, must be based on the awareness of what is, and on the willingness to be responsible for ourselves the way we are now. When you are lying, when you are keeping a secret, you are withholding information and feelings in order to protect something meaningless, usually to preserve a constant state of being or equilibrium.

Today, it is my belief that forgiveness is necessary, but not on a social level. Forgiveness is an internal decision to be honest with yourself about your pain. Forgiveness feels good in this way because your mind is not burdened with the stigma, drama, or trauma that once characterized your thoughts. The primary cause of stress, depression, and anger is living in a story and lying to maintain it. Forgiveness, freeing your mind by telling the truth, is the only way out.

When you correct your mind, everything else falls into place. ~Lao Tzu

*Parts of this blog were adapted from the book Radical Honesty: How to Transform Your Life By Telling the Truth by Brad Blanton

Psychological Warfare

Seriously....Is it true that women never say what they mean or how they feel? Both men and women are guilty of the same psychological warfare. But men have different motives - ego preservation.

Just take a look at some common boy-speak, and see if you can tell where he's protecting his ego.
1. He Says: "We should hang out sometime."
He Means: "I'm afraid you'll say 'no' if I ask you out."

2. He Says: "I'll call you later."
He Means: "I may or may not call you at some point between now and three months from now."

3. He Says: "My ex is crazy."
He Means: "I messed her up, and she got upset."

4. He Says: "That guy seems like a good friend of yours."
He Means: "Was there ever a thing between you?"

5. He Says: "It's a long story."
He Means: "It's a story that makes me look bad."

6. He Says: "That's a new look."
He Means: "You look weird."

7. He Says: "Why are you being so emotional?"
He Means: "Why are you acting like a psycho?"

8. He Says: "That's not what I meant."
He Means: "That's totally what I meant, but now that I see you're mad, I wish I hadn't said it out loud."

9. He Says: "It's fine."
He Means: "It's not actually fine, but I'm in no mood to discuss it."

10. He Says: "Can we talk about this later?"
He Means: "I never want to talk about this again."

*Men's language decoded is courtesy of Cosmopolitan.com

The Great Debate

Obama has the right idea and the right attitude, but he doesn't understand how politics work well enough to change the system. It's sad, and it's going to leave a lot of people in a lot of misery for years to come. I love Barack, don't get me wrong. But he is human, and fallible, so things will never be as easy or beautiful as his speeches profess. Obama Drama has always been a multi-sided story, unfolding over the last several years...and in true Hollywood-esque fashion, Barack has been effectively revealing true American values, biases, stereotypes, ugliness, and intolerance for any amount of diversity. Many people choose to ignore these facts, and in so doing, they ignore any chance to make real, permanent change.

Everyone would love to blame "someone else" but what truly matters here isn't what party affiliations you have, or how much money you can throw at lobbyists who will do your dirty work. Any reasonably aware person should understand by now that "The Great Debate" is - and has been - about more than rich versus poor, healthy versus sick, or me versus you. It's about doing the right thing. It's about being humane. Some of the same people who preach about fetal "rights" are the also arguing that people who don't have jobs should not be provided medical care for cheap or free. Really? How the hell does that make any sense? You can't simultaneously argue for and against humanity. This is about people being laid off, underinsured, or just having a stroke of bad luck. We've all been there. It doesn't mean you deserved it. People need to quit blaming the victims, quit believing in the "Just World Theory" (Lerner) and quit being so god damned ignorant and selfish.

How can people be so rigid and say that unless an individual pays for insurance directly out of his/her own pocket then it isn't justified or deserved? What's the difference between someone who marries a person with health insurance and getting spousal benefits (thus "cheating" the system since it's not coming out of his or her own pocket)? What's the difference between someone having an employer that pays most or all of the costs of health insurance for the employees (thus again, the cost is not falling on the individual insured)? Did this person "work hard" and get a good job? Sure. But what has been revealed in earnest lately is the truth, sometimes shitty things happen to good people and there's no reason for it. Or sometimes a lazy ass person marries into the right family, then contributes nothing to society for the rest of his/her life. Ask yourself, did that person work hard for these coveted health benefits?
 
People are so ignorant, they think this is about "poor people" not working hard. This is about reforming a broken system and getting proper medical care to everyone. That is the humane thing to do. Everyone deserves to be healthy and have an equal shot at it. Look, even some people who can easily spend $$$$ on health insurance cannot get the insurance if they want it. That's what this is about. Say you're a student or self-employed and you've had previous medical condition like cancer - with today's healthcare system, you will be UNINSURABLE.
 
 Don't these people get it? They talk about poor people thinking they're entitled....it's those who have insurance and have never had to fight for it, those who've never struggled with being sick and your fellow humankind not giving two shits about you to help, even though you have put into the system just as much if not more than the "average" healthy person. People who need insurance the most don't WANT to need it. They aren't abusing the system. They'd much rather be healthy, you see. It's those people who say ME ME ME and MINE MINE MINE who make me go absolutely batshit bonkers. These people are the most entitled, ignorant, selfish assholes in the world. What they don't understand is a little bit of philanthropy can go a long way. The $10 per month you will likely end up paying into any public healthcare option won't kill you, but it just may save someone else's life!
 
Time and time again, we see examples of people doing the right thing by others. I hope humanity doesn't collectively let us all down.

The boredom, the freedom, and the time spent alone

Someday, if all goes according to plan, I will actually miss these days...my twenties....my single, fearless, shot-out-of-a-cannon, take-no-prisoners, throw-caution-to-the-wind, lonesome, single twenties. The boredom and the freedom and the time spent alone with yourself allows for a kind of deep reflection that is not often available. Even so, the time spent in utter silence doesn't seem to quiet the brain...not as much as I'd like anyway. My brain refuses to shut up.

I wouldn't say that I'm unhappy, just bored. Bored with life. I need more excitement, more to look forward to, more to miss when it's gone. But then, the great tragedy of filling your life up with "events" or "things to do" always results in waking up one day 40 years from now asking yourself where the time went. I should embrace the boredom for boredom's sake. Maybe even buy a TV and entertain myself like most people my age. But entertainment is over-rated too. Boredom should be cherished.

I wouldn't say that I'm anxious, just waiting. Waiting for the freedom to pass. I feel the urge to relinquish my freedom with that thing called 'marriage' and 'kids' and, odd as it sounds, some days I desperately wish I had someone to answer to. Someone who would not only listen to my stories about my day and give me a new perspective, but someone who would also ask where I've been if I come home late from work or find myself mesmerized at the shopping mall for what seems like a few hours too many. Someone who would wonder about me... all the time.

I wouldn't say that I'm alone, just solitary. But I'm learning to be ok with that. Keeping to myself has never been easy. I've been surrounded by friends, family, animals and random people all through my life. The silence is deafening. When I come home, it is how I left it. Every time. Nothing out of place. Nothing unexpected. Nothing moved. This, to me, is still taking some time to get used to after 8 years of living "on my own." When I lived at home as a teen, nothing was ever in my control and nobody ever left me alone. This is very different. A Chinese Proverb states "solitude is only enjoyed when one is at peace with oneself" and I'm positive this is the undisputed truth.

Someday, if all goes according to plan, these days that I take for granted now will surely be moments to reflect on with great joy, pride, and a sense of nostalgia for what was. I might even miss this boredom, freedom, and time spent alone.

A Follow Up to Breaking Up

Courtesy of Yahoo.com

Lori Gottlieb’s new book, Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough—is an eye-opening story about dating. Gottlieb is a single mother who, at 37, wanted a biological child and had one on her own. She wrote a story in the Atlantic about being a single woman trying to date; based on that article, her new book takes a deeper look at modern relationships and dating.

“There’s a big difference between compromising and settling,” Gottlieb says. “I don’t want the takeaway to be, pick the next guy off of Match.com and marry him. I’m saying, you don’t have to do anything differently if you don’t want. But if you feel like it hasn’t been working and you’re wondering why you haven’t met Mr. Right yet, think about looking for the qualities that are important. You can find someone you’ll be really happy with and fall totally in love with. These guys are all around you but you’re not giving them a chance. You could be passing up tons of Mr. Rights. And you’re going out with all the Mr. Wrongs. It’s less about what you wear or do on a date than it is about having healthier standards. You can still have the fairy tale, but it will look different from what the media portrays as the fairy tale.…The same unrealistic expectations we have about dating, we have about marriage, too. Married people have said that this book makes them appreciate their husbands more.”

According to Gottlieb, Here’s what many single women do that we might want to reconsider:

1. We feel entitled.
Gottlieb: “Women try to be good friends to each other. We say, ‘You deserve this, you’re so great! You’re such a good catch! Any man would be lucky!’ [Men don’t say that to each other.] We are good catches, but we also are human and we’re not perfect and somebody’s going to have to put up with us for the rest of his life. And we forget. My dating coach said, write down all the reasons a guy would not want to date you. At first I didn’t think I had that many things, because you think you’re a pretty good catch. He said, what you think of as quirky, endearing, and cute, is really annoying to someone else. But he would love you so much that he would overlook that. And you need to overlook things in him. Everybody has to compromise.”

2. We think we have unlimited options.
Gottlieb: “You walk into a store and you know you want a sweater and it has to go with this outfit and it has to be this color, and you’d like to be on sale. You find something great, but you wonder if there’s something better out there, so you keep searching. In the end, after three more weeks of searching for the perfect sweater—was it so much better than the one you could have bought originally? Whether it’s with men or sweaters…if you just think you have unlimited options for the rest of your life, of course you’ll keep looking, who wouldn’t?”

3. We’re judgmental.
Gottlieb: “The guys I interviewed for the book said women judge them so much. Women gave me 300 reasons they wouldn’t go on a second date with a guy, and men gave 3. When guys are ready for that stage of life, they find someone who is good enough that they’re totally in love with—but that person may not seem to the outside world to be as appealing in superficial ways—maybe she’s not as accomplished or funny as the last girl. Whatever he sees in her, he does. Guys don’t sit and micro-analyze a woman the way a woman would with a man. He knows she’s not as hot as the last girl he dated, but that’s okay. She’s hot enough.”

4. We’re pickier than men.
Gottlieb: “With online dating, we judge based on objective criteria (height, sports nut), rather than subjective (attraction), which you can’t judge until you meet the person. When you read other people’s profiles, don’t make assumptions or rule them out because of one thing they wrote. You can fall in love with a guy who wrote that he likes Madonna, but you can’t fall in love with a guy who isn’t kind.”

5. We go for the alpha males.
Gottlieb: “In cities where you find a lot of really ambitious, Type A, driven people, like in NYC and L.A., with the entertainment business and Wall Street…you get a lot of ‘maximizers’ [people who keep looking over their shoulder for something better]. Maximizer women date maximizer men. They will be just as picky in a bad and unhealthy way. The men who are actually available and wanting commitment and who are smart and funny and cute—maybe one guy is a little bit shorter, so he’s not getting the women. Maybe he’s not smooth initially or in big groups, but he is one-on-one. These are the kind of people who when you’re 35, 45, 55, that you’ll be happy with when you’re married, and the guy who is super charming at the party and has the crowd of women around him, maybe he’s not going to make as good of a husband. Maybe he’s not going to call you back. That guy is going to be judgmental and picky, and who wants that?”

6. We think, “I love me more.”
Gottlieb: “We don’t need a man. We don’t. But if you want one and you go around with this attitude of ‘I love me more,’ [what Samantha said in the Sex and the City movie, after she dumps a hot guy who helped her through cancer (and female audiences cheered)] well, a relationship is about reciprocity, so you need to love yourself and you need to be able to have some selflessness and love somebody else. Women take Samantha’s message as really empowering. If you don’t want to be alone—maybe Samantha does—that’s a dangerous message.”

7. We think he needs to share every interest.
Gottlieb: “We say, ‘I’m a writer, but he doesn’t read! I’m creative.’ But people can be creative in different ways, and the fact that he doesn’t read the same books that you do, well, maybe he wants someone who he can talk about the baseball game with but you’re not that person. The guy doesn’t have to be one-stop shopping. You’re not going to share every single interest, and that’s okay. The shared interest should be, Do we want the same things out of life? Do we both want to be married right now?”

5 Breakup Warning Signs

Courtesy of Yahoo.com

Have you ever found yourself in a relationship where the frustration level and the number of times you butt heads with each other seems to increase by the second? You say blue, she says red, and the fights just seem to be going in circles.

If the answer is yes, then you may be at what I call "the breakup point." Here are five signs that your relationship may be past the point of fixing. Whether you are living together, married, or just dating, these breakup signs are usually loud and clear.

1. You stop relationship-building behaviors. In the honeymoon stage of a relationship, which we all know is the first 90 days of pure bliss, you are learning about each other and making efforts to create romantic moods and nice evenings. When you're in that stage, you are really working at building your relationship. Then, at some point, you start to butt heads with each other. Critical relationship elements deteriorate. Maybe you stop kissing each other goodbye or stop texting each other during the day. Instead of adding things to the relationship, you start to resent each other like two five-year-olds who stop sharing their crayons. This is a breakup point.

2. You don't understand each other anymore. The fighting escalates to a place where you no longer feel like you're understood by your partner. Physical intimacy stops, communication stops, and you are living like roommates. You're at the point in the relationship where you are trying to understand each other, but you get so frustrated because you feel like you just don't understand each other anymore. This is a breakup point.

3. You start punishing each other. When you get to the point of no longer understanding each other, what happens is that you end up just kind of coexisting in the new dynamic. Resentment builds and you get in your head too much. You are no longer about feelings, and you start punishing each other. "Well, he hasn't done this for me, so I'm not going to do this for him" are the kind of thoughts that take root. The longer you stay in that dynamic and the further away you get from the dynamic you had during the early part of the relationship, the less likely it is that you'll ever get it back (and, after a point, you won't). You have hit the breakup point.

4. You fight less. When you get to the breakup point, you actually fight less with your partner. You fight less because in your mind and heart you start detaching yourself from the other person, and you don't care as much anymore. You have already made a determination that they don't understand you, that they will never understand you, and that the relationship just won't work out. The minute you get into a fight, you just walk away from it. That is a sure sign that you are at the breakup point.

5. You've taken the time to think it through. When you think you might have hit that breakup point, you must tell the person that you're disconnecting from them. You need to be honest and raw. If you don't think the relationship is going to work, or you know you've already disconnected based on how things have been going, then you might want to consider walking away for a week. When you're in the thick of things, they never seem to be able to work out.

So take a break. Spend a week without your partner. Take the week to ask yourself some questions. Go visit some friends or family. Really think about what life would be like without that person. How would you feel? Then, go back and either take a stand for the relationship or break up.

Whichever decision you make, you need to be honest with yourself. Life is too short! There are a lot of wonderful, amazing people out there ready to meet you.

I'm still an all-or-nothing kinda girl

I've been thinking about relationships lately. Not that this is anything new. It's what consumes most of my free thought. Those who know me well know this.

I've come to realize that all my life, I've been an all-or-nothing type of girl. I like to have something in its entirety if I'm going to expend effort to have it at all. Emphasis: I like to have something in its entirety. That's the ideal state for me. But do I get this? No, not really.

My goal is simple. I want to know a person inside-out, anticipate his thoughts, fears and joys, and be able to feel like I really know what this person is all about. And that takes time.....Precious time.

There are different levels of spending time or energy on a person. Here are a few:

• I feel like he is accessible when I need him
• He wants to be accessible when I need him

(These first two desires are both pretty standard, in my opinion)

• He should continually make himself accessible at a moment's notice, in case I need him

(This last one is pushing it...and borders on nutty)

See, I can disambiguate non-crazy from crazy, passionate from psychotic, caring from obsession. I am not a control freak. I am not possessive. I am not dependent. I would argue that all the ingredients for a successful relationship are there, in my head. More than likely, the trouble is that I meet people who desire different quantities of these ingredients, or want them put in a different order. But on this issue, I know I have the right stuff. I just haven't found the ideal mixture yet.

Relationships are a layered onion and learning the idiosyncracies of a person is not a passive process. It's work. All I ask is that someone will mutually put in the work, over and over and over and over and over.....

I hope to meet someone soon who I can sit across from and feel that this connection will change my life forever. Someone who will put in the work and never give up on "me" or "us." This person will allow me to close my eyes, take a deep breath, and fall backward. And he will be there to catch me (almost) every time.

Tell Me Something Good

Ever have one of those days where you just need to hear something good? This has definitely been one. It started with a very minor, early morning earthquake (tiny, really, at 4.4) about 40 miles southwest of San Diego. It wasn't actually the earthquake that upset me, seeing as how I slept right through it. It was how everything else just didn't seem to fall into place throughout the day... as if a small earthquake had happened inside my life, or my head. It's one of those days where the people you least want to talk to call every 30 minutes, and the ones you do want to talk to are too busy or don't care enough to chat it up today. It was one of those days that if it lasted any longer than the mandatory 24 hours, it would have lasted entirely too long.

To use Alexander's words, it was a Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day. My eyes were itchy, my face is broken out, I'm tired even when I sleep 9 hours straight, my hair is frizzy, none of my clothes fit, people look at me funny, I have tons of work to finish and no energy to do it, I don't want  to see anyone tomorrow but have meetings scheduled aaaaalllll day, I missed my cooking class, I found out I owe the State of California Franchise Tax Board $73 [ugghhhhh], I worked 10 hours and still don't feel like I've accomplished anything, I didn't really like eating leftovers for dinner AGAIN, and I just want to be left alone (but not really alone... ). Go figure.

Here's to tomorrow not sucking so incredibly!!!

Education is the key to ending poverty

I listen to NPR a lot. And one of the things that struck me recently was a story about Africa and poverty. It was horribly sad, but inspiring ...shocking, but real ...sobering, but difficult to accept .... and everything in between.

The part of the story that most intrigued me was about the village girls and the education they lack because of their culture and "role" as women. The article said it better than I can....

The United Nations hopes to bring the number of girls being educated up to the level of boys by 2015. Malawi [in southern Africa] has seen some success since free primary education was introduced there about 12 years ago.

But challenges remain. Many girls who complete elementary school can't afford high school, which isn't free. So they drop out because they see no hope of fulfilling their dreams -- of becoming doctors, teachers, school inspectors ... and even presidents.

During my walk through Malawi's tiny Mnjolo village, the little girls kept running up behind us, touching our clothing and giggling. I thought something was wrong, but when I asked, Kalichero, she told me that they were touching us with the hope of being like us. "They see us as powerful women, as role models," she told me with a smile. Then she pointed out that it was only girls and not the boys following us around.

All over the continent, the goal of gender parity in education is lagging, with severe consequences for eradicating poverty. Some blame a lack of political will; others cite resources or a combination of the two.

This is not a trivial issue. The horrific tragedies that young girls in Africa are subjected to everyday makes these education injustices all the more palpable. Poverty is directly correlated to high childbirth rates. High childbirth rates are moderated by education, access to contraceptives, and being free from human rights abuses (i.e. rape). These girls are never given a chance. They are subjected to a life of continuous poverty from day one, with no hope to ever transcend this sentence. That makes my blood boil. This vicious cycle is nothing if not abominable, disgusting, and heinous.

Another segment from the article really touched me...

In the end, however, there is widespread agreement that the most fundamental way out of poverty for women and girls is education. It's often said in Africa if you educate a man, you educate an individual, but when you educate a woman, you educate a nation.

The reason?

Because educated women see to it that their children are educated and when their children are educated, they become contributing members of the society. They're much more aware. They're much more likely to advocate for things, including their own human rights, which are still being abridged broadly throughout the continent when it comes to girls.

This was the part I found so fascinating and inspiring. Women are able to see past all these tragedies and press on. So it's women being empowered by education. Educated women just have much more to contribute to the country that they are in, as well as the continent. So that's why it's so important.

I am saddened by the fact that women have been suppressed for so long and seen as commodities to be traded to the highest bidder. I am saddened that 55% of women in sub-Saharan Africa are living with HIV or AIDS and that the rate is much higher for women than men because of involuntary transmission. I am saddened that the world outside of Africa turns a blind eye to this and the widespread belief seems to be "well, we can't help everyone."

At the same time, I am hopeful and empowered to act on the behalf of women in Africa. I am not going to forget about this and I will find ways to help, donate my time or money, and raise awareness wherever possible. Because, after all...

... hope lies in the women on the continent who are finding voices for their aspirations, especially through women's movements like the Foundation for African Women's Advancement. And they are bolstered by the emergence of women leaders -- still small in number...

The full article is available at:  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5634432

Finding your first home is a lot like finding yourself

The title of this blog is a quote from my favorite TV personality, Sandra Rinomato.


She is the host of HGTV's Property Virgins and she always has good advice for people who are trying to buy their first home. Recently, I realized that I will soon need to become VERY serious about saving money in order to buy my first place. It has been a dream of mine to become a homeowner for ... probably about 8 years.

Ever since I saw the light at the end of the tunnel with school, my next dream was to find out whether home ownership is really all it's cracked up to be. I almost got sidetracked a couple times with thinking it would be easier to wait until I find a suitable guy to marry and then buy a place together, but in the end, I want this to be my decision and my burden alone. This is a hugely important decision and I want to feel empowered enough to make it myself without the input or distraction of another person.

The romanticism of buying a home together is still very appealing, but there will be time for that one I figure this out for myself, for me, for my future. This is my goal, and as it should stay.


I know I won't be able to afford a huge house or anything fancy, but that's ok. I think. ;0)

Wish me luck!!!

Dashing through the snow...

A little bit of snow equals a very white lake tahoe christmas~

Being Choosy

Traditional wisdom states that men are less choosy than women when it comes to dating and selecting a potential mate for raising offspring. Historically, people assumed that this was based on an evolutionary perspective - women having far fewer chances of passing on their genes and it being a lot more risky to do so with the wrong partner choice. But is that really true?

I have met a lot of guys who are far more picky than a lot of the girls I know. In fact, sometimes girls seem to be less choosy simply because they have more options! This is sort of a catch-22 because since men were so indiscriminate with choosing partners, this has really opened the door for women to "taste test" many varieties before choosing one. It seems women are often at a real advantage when it comes to dating because they can have their cake and eat it too, so to speak.

Nowadays, the doors have been flung wide open for women to "experiment" with multiple partners before selecting one with which to procreate, often with very few serious consequences. The same cannot always be said for men, who still must compete against one another in a very difficult world of dating. In my opinion, sometimes this intense competition for guys to "get a girl" increases the odds that the guy will literally just stop caring and thus will eventually become a perpetual bachelor. Guys who don't have the looks, money, personality, etc. to attract many women will stop approaching women and asking them out for fear of getting shot down, as an act of preserving their own self-esteem. This process changes the game completely.


One recent study published in Psychological Science (by Finkel and Eastwick) tested an interesting theory about the relative choosiness of men and women. They argued that perhaps the act of merely approaching a woman to ask her out was enough to give a man the indication that this is an act worth pursuing...

They tested this in a series of 15 heterosexual speed dating events, involving 350 young men and women. Each participant went on about 12 dates, but the researchers changed the rules: In these events, the women and men approached each other about equally. Following each date, each participant rated the other for romantic desire and romantic chemistry. They also rated their own sense of self-confidence on the date. A bit later, they decided thumbs up or thumbs down.

The results were a score. As reported on-line in the journal Psychological Science, the well-known gender difference vanished when men and women assumed more egalitarian roles. The difference didn’t completely reverse when women were on the move. That is, their choosiness went away but they didn’t become more indiscriminate than men. This suggests that the ancient tendencies may still have some force, but they are also reinforced by arbitrary social norms. What’s more, it was increased self-confidence that appeared to make the difference: Simply standing and being on the move boosted confidence, which in turn boosted romantic attraction.

We don’t speed date through real life, of course, but there are all sorts of social conventions based on gender, and these presumably shape romantic feelings and actions. Having men behave more like women and women more like men appears at least to narrow this one gap between the sexes.

The women in this study were no more selective than men. How's that for defying social norms! When men and women approach each other equally - throwing the old conventions of dating out the window - the well-known gender difference in pickiness vanished! I love this type of research because it shows just how arbitrary our ideas of gender roles are. Men and women can both be picky and they can both be indiscriminate. What matters most is the context in which the behavior exists, and a little bit self-esteem for good measure.

Ebb and Flow

These are my thoughts on change. The never static life that consumes us...


To be truly happy, I believe one thing you have to do is become very comfortable with perpetual ebb and flow. Constant change surrounds us and changes us. Becoming really comfortable with ups and downs, ins and outs, and ebbs and flows of who you think you are and what you think of everything around you is harder than it seems. Just take food as an example, in the last decade I have completely adopted entirely new eating habits (poorer eating habits, some would argue!) and just as I feel certain that almost nothing has changed about me in the last 10 years, I know with absolute clarity that nearly everything has! Take clothing as another example, or language for that matter. What words did you use as a 10 year old that you would never dare utter today? This may seem obvious to you, and not worth mentioning, but it is. All things change given time, and life. Take a journey with me...

How might a person harness change for good? What has society's role been in teaching us that we must change from this...


To this...


And who's to say which one is better? What if being "healthy" isn't your cup of tea? Where's this 'CHANGE NOW!' demand coming from? Is it within us? Is it innate?

Look around at those who you consider friends. Chances are that in the next 10 years, some may not be, and others who you do not yet know may take their places. Interpersonal relationships are one of the most dynamic forces in human lives. They are constantly changing, developing, deteriorating, or in some way becoming different than they were previously. One thing we don't do is stay the same. Think of your 3 closest girlfriends, chances are at least one of them (most likely 2 of them) will become a divorcee in her lifetime. You can't tell me that's because of the media and pop-culture discouraging everlasting marriage. Or can you? Why do people who were once in love change so dramatically? What are the precursors to this substantial change and how might we measure and predict it? Is that even possible? If we could bottle change, what would it look like?

How does a culture change from this...


To this....


And again, the million dollar question is WHY. What spurs this kind of cultural change and interpersonal change? What factors are involved in real change? Is any change permament? Better yet, is it ever possible for something to remain unchanged? Is there a thing on this planet that has never changed?

The exact degree to which we change each day, with each waking hour, cannot yet be measured, but I am without a doubt that it's a large amount. Over the course of your life, how many cars will you drive, residences will you live in, or friends will you make? Of those, how many will be with you from birth until death?

What is the nature of change and, more importantly, how is it that some people live their entire lives without asking themselves this question? Are we fundamentally unaware? Are we programmed to perceive real change as insignificant and minute? A popular psychologist believes it comes down to this: Each of us is trapped in a time, a place, and a circumstance and our attempts to use our minds to transcend these boundaries are more often than not ineffective. In essence, the human brain is not particularly sensitive to change, it seems.



And even with all these questions, I, sadly, have no answers with which to leave you. All I have is this quote from a great contemporary author:

With the exception of a few moments of time in my life, particularly those spent with the ones I love, I sometimes think I've passed through life with no more awareness than that of a small child on a long car ride, staring out the window as the scenery rolled past.

"Tender Years" Doctrine

In the 1990s the so-called Tender Years Doctrine was abolished in the courts. This doctrine essentially stated that mothers were the more "fit" parents to give care to their children under 7 years of age. This was an old-school mentality even for the time, and it was overturned legally - but not always figuratively - in order to rule on custody cases with an unbiased eye. In theory, both parents (male or female) should be able and willing to care for children after a divorce. What's surprising as of late is a complete reversal to this system; instead of mothers being seen as the more able-bodied parent, fathers are now being viewed as just as capable if not moreso. I see this as welcome news! Congratulations to us all for realizing that it takes two people to make a baby as well as to care for one! Wow.

In that same vein, however, some groups are advocating that this reversal is backlash for mothers working outside the home. The full story was covered on NPR recently and can be read on the website. The premise is that women who work will not be as involved in the children's lives and do not have as much reason to be granted full custody in situations where both parents are working. I agree that when both parents are working then both parents have less time for child-rearing (just as a matter of how many hours are in the day) but this shouldn't be construed to mean that one is any less EFFECTIVE at parenting than the other. I mean, shouldn't both parents be equally involved in the children's upbringing, hence a 50/50 custody arrangement? Call me naive or idealistic but that's my honest opinion. I know that sometimes with some careers, a parent can have more or less time and resources to provide for children following a divorce, but they still need to be equally involved. Period. I don't exactly see how a woman working outside the home should be viewed by divorce courts any differently than a man who works outside the home. The real issue, it seems, is that gender stereotypes are not completely dissolved. The problem we have today is that "when a mom is working long hours, she's held to a higher standard" and that needs to change. Our strict mindsets of 'who' is better at 'what' need to change.



When I was young, my mom worked outside the home AND inside the home because she didn't have any other option. She was a single parent with four kids and that was what she had to do. If given the option, I am sure she wouldn't have worked BUT without that luxury, she did what was necessary. I hope all parents want to do that for their kids. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to stay at home, certainly not in most families today! And that's not so bad. Seeing your parents work hard - at home and/or in the workplace - for things they really care about is one of the best lessons you can teach kids. But it doesn't have to be the way things used to be. It should be whatever works for you and your family at this moment, given the circumstances of your life. I think courts should take more time to evaluate each case rather than making life-altering and potentially WRONG decisions with little information. Or, barring any child endangerment or abuse, BOTH parents should automatically get a 50/50 split on custody. Give me one good reason it should be any other way.

Think twice before you 'Just Do It'

Oh, the perils of being Tiger Woods. My heart goes out to Elin and all spouses who endure the horrors of an unfaithful marriage. But how much of it is our business? I like to think that I don't easily get wrapped up in the drama of Hollywood and sports, but the fact of the matter is that when you are widely considered the world's best (and highest paid) athlete, you have an obligation to the public. I wish he would have refrained from Nike's trademark and NOT just done it. But where do Elin and Tiger go from here? Some who are close to Elin say that she should have used a tire iron or an oversized club instead of a wimpy 3-iron to smash his car windows. Others say that she is lucky because now she's sitting on a cool $3 Million just because her pre-nup states that if he cheats she gets an automatic paycheck. How weird is that? Can we put price tags on adultery? Damn. I don't know where this leaves the two of them, but I hope they don't start a divorce and custody battle over this because the kids deserve better parents than that.