Tenken at Heart

So tired. . . .

2010-09-03T16:28:00.000-06:00

If I just keep screaming, maybe everything in the world will get better. Ironically, this works for me.

It's not screaming at people. It's just screaming. Usually, it's in my car with the music turned up really loud. If you scream enough, it wakes you up. But screaming itself gets tiring.

Right now, I'm just getting sick of screaming. I'm getting sick of proving my existence. I'm getting sick of the rules and obligations. The effort. The strain.

Everything feels like it's toppling out of control. Ironically, I grab onto things that bring more chaos just to get that sense of "This is something I know."

I'm just so tired. The caffeine isn't helping. I slept enough. I'm just exhausted. I'm so exhausted recently. Why can't it just be easy right now?

But then, I don't want easy, do I? I want something better than that. So, I guess . . . it's time for more screaming.

Blessed Offensive Shadows

2010-08-26T02:34:00.000-06:00

Life throws nothing but curve balls. The good thing is, for every really terrible miss that it topples you into, it gives you one clear and golden opportunity.

This week has been adventures and breakthroughs and happiness and wealth. It has been learning how to follow my desires, even the ones I can't have. It has been learning how to be honest with myself, how to be myself, how to respect myself, and how to love the journey. It has been excruciatingly amazing. I'm not exaggerating when I say "I feel like I've found my soul."

And last week—last week was hell. I couldn't finish work. I was so worried about my grandpa. I was so tangled in internal chaos. I didn't know which way was up, let alone which way I was going.

It's always good to know that these "reversals" can happen. I'm incredibly grateful for the week I've been having. I'm so glad that things are looking up, that I've had so much time to spend with people I love, and that my life has been filled with such a sense of meaning and purpose.

Thank you to all of those who have contributed to this. However, that stated, here's my moment of arrogance: This beauty is no one's fault, but it's being done for someone. In case you didn't guess, the person is me. I'm not finding meaning or losing weight or working on my novel or earning money for anyone else. Not for world peace or to end injustice. I'm doing all the things I do because I want to. Because they feel right. Because, at the core, I know this meaning like I know breath—as natural, as essential, and as beautiful.

P.S. I'm trying to make crappy pictures of my "favorite events" from the last year. This is harder than it sounds! I will keep working on it.

P.P.S. You should call me sometime. And we should hang out. It would be rad. We'll have an adventure.

P.P.P.S. Yes, I know that the previous P.S. was addressed to a collective you, and that it implies you specifically only as a literary gimmick. This does not make it not true! You should seriously call me, and we should seriously have an adventure.

Scott Pilgrim & Avatar: Prejudice or Plot Mechanic?

2010-08-24T16:01:00.002-06:00

SPOILERS AHEAD.

I loved the movie Scott Pilgrim vs. The World. I thought it was unique, creative, and engaging. While it lagged briefly at points, it maintained a mostly well paced rhythm. The characters were fun, the action was among the better produced by American cinema, and the humor was simply superb.

Of course, this movie failed at the box office. I blame the fact that no one seems to have heard of it. The reviews have come back mostly positive. One of the negative reviews frequently given, however, is that this movie is misogynistic.

Interesting. I want to take a look at that, as well as another movie which I thought was quite good and which received criticisms for being racist. Of course, that movie is Avatar. As a storyteller, let me explain my perspective on how these movies use certain plot mechanics, and to what degree the movies themselves should be considered prejudiced.

So, let's talk about Avatar. "We've heard this story before." I agree. Not particularly unique; simply filled with more spectacle. "Why is it that people keep making movies where white people become the leader of non-white tribes? Why is it that we feel white people are needed to save them?" Ah. Now, there's a question.

Yes, Jake Sully is white. For sure. Kinda pale, actually. See that picture to the right? He's pasty. It's interesting, though, that people zoom in on the fact that he's white. What they seem to be implying is that the fact that he is white is symbolic of our own need to dominate, or in a more liberal mentally, redeem and save. He's not actually just white, however. He's in a wheelchair. He's got tattoos. He's from the military. He's a twin. Yet all of these things are overlooked, and I didn't hear anyone saying that the movie represented how handicapped people are required to save foreign tribes.

Sully, an outsider, comes to win the trust of the natives. He's a twin—not the originally designated scientists; it's why he's military, and reckless. Thus, his being a twin is a plot mechanic used to push the story forward.

The group Sully comes with is primarily American, at least by appearance. It's safe to say that this is more commentary on the way America treats natural resources, how businesses exploit others, and how we use military force. Thus, Sully being white is a part of this mechanic to comment on our current lifestyle.

Sully is from the military. This allows us to see the military and the scientific aspects of the situation on Pandora. It gives some dramatic interplay, including internal conflict, for Sully himself. This makes the movie more interesting.

Sully is handicapped. This makes his exploration of a new body more interesting, makes his desire to have his legs fixed an incentive that can be used to manipulate him (and which ultimately becomes a symbolic part of what he gives up in order to do what he feels is right).

And finally, Sully is the white guy who saves the Pandoran tribes. True? Yep. But is it racist? Here's what I propose. To provide the sort of plot that this movie was aiming for, the main character has to have involvement in both factions. For the climax to be engaging, he has to be the hero. To be the hero, he has to stop the "white people" from being total douche bags (by killing them—with arrows, and birds). Sully's whiteness is simply a natural result of the other aims of the plot. It is not intentional. But, is it still there?

Well, people can still claim that, intentional or not, it's symbolic. Certainly, symbols don't rely on being placed by the authors; some things shine through anyway. Still, the primary purpose of this film's details is to drive its own plot forward. If we're going to say that Sully's whiteness is symbolic of our prejudices due to his role in the film, we may also say that it's symbolic that Hispanic people are more nobly rebellious against authority (as with the pilot), smokers are going to make the best top-level scientists, and so forth. These are character details used to move the plot. They are not intentionally, or very solidly, symbolic.

Now, let's move on to Scott Pilgrim. The love interest is Ramona. Much of the criticism for the movie being misogynistic is that Romona's character is . . . well . . . lacking. She rollerblades, she's sexually aggressive, a bit moody, and has seven evil exes. Oh, and she's pretty. This is enough to make Scott Pilgrim want to date her, facing life-threatening situations for what the movie terms "love."

Well, obviously, she's not a particularly well developed character. Also, this view on love isn't precisely the best to idealize. Two notes thus far. 1) In the comic books, it explains that Scott gets obsessed with Romona because she is using the subspace highway in his brain. It "rewires his circuitry," or some such. I think this can also be seen as a statement of "we can't always choose who we fall for." 2) This isn't exactly designed to be a realistic romance movie. There are video game bars scattered through the film, random doors leading to other locations, bizarre fight sequences; you get the idea. Ramona is more of an excuse for these strange things to be happening—once more, a plot mechanic more than a fully rounded character.

People may take that as an indicator that the movie degrades the role of female characters, but it's really all characters (even, to a lesser degree, Scott himself). People have also pointed out that Ramona's character isn't really "self-sufficient." She just stands on the sidelines as Scott battles all of her exes for her.

Okay, two additional things. First, the movie already got a bit lost in sluggish pacing. In-depth, dramatic discussions about love and purpose aren't what the film's about. As a parallel to video games, it's a simplified version of life: you have a goal, you know what you have to do to get there, it's hard, and you do it. I think that works for this movie.

Second, I feel that if Ramona's standing on the sidelines plays a symbolic role, it's in the commentary on the internal struggles of relationships. This movie is really an externalization of those internal problems, and in this case, the feeling of "having to defeat your partner's exes" makes sense. People struggle with their own insecurities, feeling that they're not as good as the last romantic partner, or that they are being compared to whatever. So, in this way, I feel it has very little to do with Ramona. Again—a plot mechanic used to say something about an internal struggle, not a universal or idealized truth about the behavior of women.

Now, let's get on to Roxy. This is Ramona's evil ex-girlfriend, and the one person that Ramona faces. She has to control Scott's hands in order to have him do any of the fighting, and Roxy is defeated by touching the back of her knee. After this point, she bursts into sexual noises before dying.

This is probably the most misogynistic thing about the movie, but let me provide an explanation. I think this choice was made very consciously. We can have Scott beating the hell out of a girl, or we can avoid it. We can have Scott pummel her to death, or we can find something else. I think that the movie creators likely predicted a poor audience reaction should there be a violent depiction of a fist fight wherein the male character beat the female character to death.

While some action movies do tread this ground comfortably, you can also see a strong trend of "When a girl dies, it's usually because another girl kills her." Perhaps this is some strange attempt at continuing the nobility of "you don't hit a girl." At the very least, this may be an attempt to say that Scott doesn't feel he should he a girl.

As for Roxy making sex noises until she explodes—well, I take some issue with that. There are implications of how "women are defeated" here that I dislike. While the men go out in a blaze of glory, the female ex essentially orgasms to death.

Then, we have the fact that Scott is kind of a douche. He is dating a young girl at the beginning of the film, but almost immediately abandons her for the punked out Ramona. He kisses Ramona before breaking up with Knives. There is an implication that he has dropped other women in similarly crappy ways. If the movie had him as the hero and left it at that, this might be a tad problematic, but it really doesn't. In the end, it's Scott's dumb and douchey decisions that lead to him getting killed.

How Scott eventually wins is by being responsible for his bad decisions and gaining self-respect. It was not love that pulled him through this (he gets defeated when he uses the "power of love").

My conclusion is that, while there may be some misogynistic moments, the film itself isn't about any sort of chauvinist message. Rather, most of the things taken as "symbolic" (and subsequently blown out of proportion) are plot mechanics used to make way for an interesting, action-based film. The message of the film is not, "If a girl is pretty enough, even if she's kind of a bitch, you should fight for her." Rather, it states that a person must fight through life battles for themselves, learn to be responsible, gain self-respect, and figure out how to like themselves if they are to "win."

Like the messages or not, Scott Pilgrim is an excellent movie. While its action sequences aren't perfect, they are well constructed, and the general energy in this balanced action-comedy is a rare find indeed.

A Year Killing Everyone Inside

2010-08-22T22:52:00.000-06:00

I'm glad to say that my Grandpa is looking better today. He was so exhausted the last time I saw him that I didn't know how to respond. Now it feels as if there may be some warning, some chance to say farewells before things are over. I love him very much, and seeing him struggle is hard for me. I hope he lives, healthy and happy, for several more years. I would like it very much if he lived to see me married and with children.

Regardless, the point is, I'm somewhat relieved about that situation. My negative roommate situation is basically wrapped up now too, although I have taken responsibility for finding a new home for her cat. The cat deserves a good family, and I won't choose to take care of her. I also have to find a new roommate. If I can't by the first of the month, I'm not certain how I will pay rent. This could have been prevented if I were more on top of things with work last month, but alas, I wasn't.

Recently, I've been giving a lot of thought to concepts of responsibility, fear, self-respect, and attachment. The point of this blog is not to get into all of these thoughts, but I do want to point out a couple of my conclusions.

First is that responsibility isn't about doing particular things. I strongly feel being responsible is more about communicating than anything; making yourself a known entity so that others can make accurate decisions around you. If you want to let yourself crumble, it's fine, but you need to let people know so that they don't rely on you standing, and damage themselves in the process.

Second is that fear is sometimes the appropriate emotion, and shame isn't wrong. However, while certain things rightly have this fear (the possibility of physical harm, and so forth), fears of defying social normality shouldn't be categorized similarly. Fear that people will think less of you, for example, makes evident a deeper problem: your fears about judgement are determining your actions. Facing unknown possibilities is more rewarding, largely because it cultivates deeper self-respect.

Self-respect is crucial. If you don't respect yourself for who you are, what you want, and what your ambitions are, you wind up as a puppet serving the passions of others. This chaotic place is neither kind nor rewarding. There is nothing wrong with respecting your own desire to uphold positive things, but it should be your own desires, not the potential judgment of others, that determines this. On a related note, I feel anger is sometimes a very valid and healthy emotion that should be expressed (wisely) in order to solidify our own self-respect.

Attachment is an interesting thing as well. I may or may not move to France within the next year or so. There are some things I'm okay with leaving behind. There are other things that would be challenging for me. It has never been the objects in life that have made me happy; it has been the sense of momentum and meaning. There are certain people I'm attached to, and some familiar places or feelings that serve as a shelter to me. The more I'm willing to face these attachments, the less they seem to dictate my emotions. Admitting you want something that you can't have is freeing.

And today, I've been going through some old files. I found a lot of cool things that made my outlook on life seem a little kinder. It's reassuring, seeing that my actions don't vanish. Pictures that made me smile included: snapshots of myself when I was much heavier; ads from the Seraph Swords site, which I built to profitability prior to shutting down; ocean shots from my trip to California with several close friends; and a picture of an album cover labeled "A year, killing everyone inside."

There are many things I have learned over the last year or so. One of the items I want to revisit right now is a question that I haven't been able to answer. "Who am I?" I have never felt able to describe myself accurately. Today, I want to try again.

I'm Rob. I'm an adventurer, and I love having new experiences and traveling to new sights. I am passionate about life, stories, and people. I care deeply about finding meaning and being a positive thing in the lives of those who are close to me. I'm very independent, I'm ambitious, and I'm always eager to learn.

I think that's the gravitational center. I'm more than okay with that.

Anyway, I wanted to include some pretty pictures in this entry, but I don't have the time. I also want to go over some of the coolest things that have happened to me in the last year, but that will have to wait as well. For now, even though it's not my passion, I'm returning to writing and editing articles. It pays the bills, and allows me to pursue the things I really want.

Sick of being nice.

2010-08-21T15:56:00.000-06:00

I am a "nice guy."

Even when I try not to be nice, I end up being nice on accident. I intentionally work on being not nice with some people, and even vocally say "I know I'm not nice, but—" only to have them interrupt me and let me know I am, in fact, a nice-face.

I'm sick of it. It has not done right by me in my life. No, I don't like causing other people harm, and yes, I like to keep peace when possible. What this has often meant is people trying to walk all over me. Friends owing me money and never repaying (the total amount, if I tallied everything, ranging into multiple thousands). Employers underpaying me or overworking me. Girls relying on me emotionally even when I make it clear that I have my own shit to work on.

People break their appointments with me, they forget about arrangements, and otherwise leave me hanging. I don't take it lightly. I let them know I'm pissed off. But I don't get aggressive.

No, because aggressive is bad. Because I had a temper when I was a kid. Because being angry is bad, and you shouldn't be mean, or blunt, or claim the things that you want. You should let other people pull that shit on you, walk all over you, and "make peace." Be meek.

Well, fuck that. I'm so sick of it. I've been so concerned with being "peaceful," or "meek," or "nice" that I've let my own needs go untended. I'll let people take more of my time, energy, and emotions than I can spare. They have no right to any of my resources. They have no right to any of my time or feelings. My sympathy, communication, and reasonable nature are things that I give to those I feel deserve them.

I don't need to make more friends. I have enough friends. What I need now is respect. Being appropriately angry at the people who do wrong by me is a part of that. I'm a person; not just that, I'm a really fucking cool guy. I'm talented, I'm ambitious, I'm smart, I'm funny, I'm insightful, I'm mature—I'm a hell of a lot of things that most people just aren't.

I don't work a fucking dead end job. I'm a self made man who earned as much in an hour as most people around me do in a day. I've completed novels. I've lost 120lbs. I've published. I've traveled the world. What I am deserves respect. If people aren't willing to see it, I'm willing to demand it.

Maybe this is just some temper flare that I'll calm down from, but when it comes to "fight or flight," I'm sick of choosing flight. I'm ready to get into some brawls, I'm ready to smash in some heads, and I'm ready to wind up with more scars.

When people look at tattoos, a lot of time they ask "what does that mean?" Kanji or tribal symbols or whatever else emblazon the arms of many. Well, maybe I can get some scars, and they can ask the same question. And the answer is "I deserve respect." The scars mean that I demanded it, I fought for it, and I won.

Ramblings (Subjects: Depression, Romance, Firefly, Work, School, Grandpa)

2010-08-17T12:22:00.000-06:00

I've been doing quite well at work recently. The anxiety is more manageable, thanks to reducing the amount of emotional stress on my plate, taking cold showers, and staying generally on top of things. I've also been trying to do yoga and meditation twice per day. This was my habit in the happiest time of my life (Summer of 2005). I'd like to get back to that, and while I sometimes miss a session, I'm getting in at least one per day.

I still struggle with depression, and it's interesting to see the triggers. Many of them are emotionally based, specifically having to do with romance. This has led to the conclusion that I'm not interested in a romantic relationship at this point in my life. There are just too many demons to face down there. Sadly, this doesn't seem to eliminate the backlash of romantic emotion.

It seems there are things I have to avoid thinking about, people I have to avoid thinking about, because my emotions are too scrambled with them. Obviously, this is less than healthy. Avoidance is an option, but it's not an option I'd like to resort to categorically. I usually just don't know what to do with feelings like those. This can be actually feeling romantic emotions for someone, feeling angry at or wronged by someone who I have romantic feelings towards, feeling abandoned, and so forth. Honestly, it feels like I'm damaged in that way, and recently I've wondered if I will ever learn how to handle those feelings. Part of my life's ambitions involve having a healthy, happy family. I am aware that this must be put on hold until I can figure out some of my issues, and fix some of the ways in which I am broken. It can be small things or big things, but passing thoughts often trigger feelings of anger, fear, and depression.

Of course, that's not the only thing that triggers depression in me. Being tired and not treating my body right can put me in a very awkward emotional state where I feel excessively vulnerable. For example, last night I finished watching the series Firefly and the movie Serenity again. Eager for more, I scoured the web for any news of a Serenity sequel (there won't be one any time soon), and was lucky enough to find a number of online forum or text based Firefly games. Further research showed most of these have also been abandoned.

I kept thinking that I was so sad that there was no more Firefly. Then this turned into a feeling of desperation: I need more Firefly. Then I got angry. It would have taken so little for studios to make this show work right, and so little for them to pick it up, instead of having a movie where . . . well, I bemoan the fate of my favorite character. And by the end of it, I felt furious and about ready to cry that there wasn't a season two and three of Firefly, at the very least!

Maybe this is me throwing other issues onto a television series, but the truth is, Firefly feels like home to me. There's something very earthy about it. Unlike Star Trek, which has this vaguely "I'm at work" feel of properness and being shiny, Firefly has a rust and tear look and a humans getting by sort of feel. To quote one of the episodes: "It's good. People making a life for each other." And plus, Kaylee is SO pretty! (By the way, if you want to check out Firefly, it's on Netflix and Hulu).

My sleep schedule has been awkward recently, and I don't know when to wake myself up. Yesterday, I got up at 7:00 because I felt ready to start the day. I quickly felt exhausted, however, and took a three hour nap. Then I went to bed at about 2am, and woke up at six, ready to get going. I decided to force myself to sleep, and slept until 11am, when I finally did get started.

Today, I've got writing and editing to do, including a rush project and some written pieces about free radio movements. I also have a rush project to get into. I'm actually kind of excited for some portions of it.

I have a lot on my mind currently. I'm trying to get a new roommate, but my former roommate has been non-communicative on basically every level, and her things still keep my closets full. I'm literally "holding onto her dirty laundry," and I don't know whether or not she's going to be by to pick up her furnishings and resolve her past due rent. I'm very frustrated with the entire situation. Meanwhile, I have another potential roommate who has yet to see the place but wants to secure something. She doesn't have any previous landlord contacts. I've made it clear that I need money up front, and without previous contacts, I need the last month's rent as well. I just don't trust people with this. One of the recurring lessons I'm learning in life is, you really can't trust people. You need to protect yourself.

I hit the gym on Sunday, and I want to hit it again soon. Today, I feel . . . depressed, honestly, and I don't want to do anything. I want to lie around and overeat. I know this isn't good. How will I cope? Take an ice cold shower, do yoga, and go to a local coffee shop to do my work.

I have a lot I need to get done over the course of the next week. I want to get everything ready so I can go to school. I was originally intending to go starting now, but I've decided to wait a semester. My student loan payback won't kick in until then (if I'm lucky), it works better for student aid and scholarship possibilities, and I won't feel rushed. Plus, it will give me time to get on top of finances.

I also have to try to kill four people with the use of thirty or so goblins. Long story. I don't think I'll succeed, thankfully, but you can never be sure.

Also, it's really important to me that I go and see my grandpa. I've been told his energy levels are getting lower and lower. I want to be sure I get the chance to see him and talk to him more. It's actually really hard for me to picture a world where he's not around. He's one of my heroes. I don't want him to die, not ever, but I suppose science is still limited in that respect.

My Grandpa Blair is a man of amazing accomplishment who has traveled the world doing good things, and breaking academic ground in linguistics on various levels. He is truly phenomenal. I would be lucky to be half the man he is.

Anyway . . . I have things to get to. Thanks for listening to my rambling!

Things You Can Buy Me

2010-08-14T02:57:00.000-06:00

So, my birthday has already passed, but for those of you who want to buy me a late present, want to buy me a random present, or want ideas for the future, here are some things I want.

The current Writer's Market
The poster of this page: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling
The poster of this page: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe
The poster of this page: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon
The poster of this page: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/ie
The 16th edition (web or print version) of the Chicago Manual of Style
An affordable electronic piano/keyboard
A water cooler/dispenser that heats the water to tea ready temperatures
Tickets to any live show that features a band I enjoy

If you're trying to buy me something for Christmas, keep in mind that I may have already bought most of this stuff for myself by then. So maybe check with me before then.

So, I've Survived

2010-08-09T04:09:00.000-06:00

I'm 24. The age seems appropriate for me, somehow.

It's intense to me, thinking of all the things I've been through over the last year.

Notable things that happened this included:

Losing 38lbs.
Moving to SLC.
Getting into poetry readings.
Adopting a socialized syndicalist political outlook.
Meeting some amazing people, including several breathtaking women. ^_^
Doing the show Pirates of Penzance (yet again) in Park City.
Starting on my dream job as a writer.
Taking several amazingly fun road trips.
Being a groomsman in Jon and Tasha's wedding.
Getting obsessed with Iago from Shakespeare's Othello.
Quitting a job that I had fundamental moral disagreements with.
Made great strides in overcoming significant psychological barriers, including issues with self-worth, anxiety, and depression.
Playing various fun video games (including Dragon Age: Origins, Tales of Vesperia, and League of Legends), watching a large number of enjoyable movies (including Kick Ass, Inception, Ink, and Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs), getting into new television shows (including Firefly! Go Firefly.).
Listening to a large number of audio books, reading several real life books, and educating myself on a large number of interesting topics.
Otherwise enjoying myself, having fun new experiences, going awesome new places, learning wicked cool things, and living.

Cheers!

Rob

Focus, Focus, Focus

2010-08-06T11:19:00.001-06:00

Today, I shut down the website Seraph Swords. This has been a project since 2008, and has taught me a lot about web marketing, design, coding, and more. It was a lot of fun in many ways. However, every time I got an order, it just annoyed me. The average $7 profit was simply not worth all the customer questions I had to answer to get there, the juggle with my bank account, the annual business fees, and working with the warehouse to get the items shipped.

I want to focus. That's why I closed it down. And there are several things I want to focus on.

These are my current priorities in life. All else is secondary:

Work.

Figuring out how to make work fun.
Finding appropriate coping mechanisms for anxiety and stress.

Financial stability.

Getting a solid savings account.
Paying off debt.

Fitness

Getting to a 15% body fat
Increasing overall cardio, strength, and flexibility

Writing

Get my short story published
Get my novel ready for publication

I may do other things in my life, but things which interfere, rather than contributing, to these objectives are going to be cut off from my life. Just like Seraph Swords. :)

Focus, focus, focus. I can do this. Come on . . . I can do this.

Sex: Some Honest Answers + "Sexual Purity"

2010-07-26T17:04:00.000-06:00

Before I move on to discussing societal views on sex and sexuality, morality as it applies to sex in my world right now, the ideas of commitment and monogamy, and the variety of alternative views I see on sex and sexuality, I would like to start answering some questions. I have posed many questions. The ones I seek to answer here are simply the ones that I have already found some form of answer to.

If I could choose, from the beginning, how many sexual partners would I have had in my lifetime?

This is an interesting one, and one that I've given a lot of thought to. The answer is actually pretty clear in mind. If I could choose? One.

What's more difficult is understanding why. With my first actual sexual partner, there was a beauty and innocence to the sexuality that I don't feel I can legitimately hope to achieve again. It was damaging as well. Insecurities due to a lack of experience caused many other and far more prominent issues. But if I could go back and twist the Universe how I wanted it, I would want one. And I wouldn't have the insecurities, either. But it was the very loss of that innocence that forced me to face those insecurities, and acknowledge that this "purity" had, in many ways, created a splinter in the relationship.

The Short Answer: One. But I acknowledge that sexual experiences have also been part of what have helped me overcome jealous and possessive tendencies.

Do I believe emotionless sex and sexuality are damaging or degrading to a person's "sexual purity?"

This one's complex. There's this amazingly potent passage that was given in an advice column I read, with a woman asking advice on how to get her boyfriend to forgive her for sexual exploration she had previous to meeting him. She was shamed, frustrated, and guilt-ridden by the pain it caused her boyfriend. Here is a slightly trimmed down version of the response she received:

You are not a product. You do not have an expiration date. You are not sold used or new. Your value does not go down with every sexual experience. You do not have a finite capacity, like a phone card, after which you are used up.

Neither are you a substance that can be pure or impure. You are no less pure now than when you were born. You will never be less pure than you are right now.

Nor are you an object upon which men have left marks that your boyfriend may discover and interpret. You are not a public place were things are written for others to read. You are not an exotic land that men have visited and reminisce about in comfortable chairs.

You are not a collection of experiences like snapshots in an album, subject to perusal and approval by your boyfriend.

Your past is not a term paper for him to grade. Your past is not something that needs to be repaired. You are not a product, or a substance, or an object. You are not any of these things. For want of a better term, you are a creature, a spiritual being.

We are creatures of flesh and light and movement. We go through life. Things happen. We do things. We remember things. Things hurt us, things delight us, things frighten us. We go on.

The idea that sex and sexuality receive "degraded value" with experience seems to adopt a logical fallacy. I think. The idea that people, due to a number, decrease or increase in sexual value or purity, is connected to Judeo-Christian concepts which also view people, especially wives, as property. Not people.

I have days in which I feel no emotion (thank you depression). This does not make the days with emotion less valuable. If anything, they make me appreciate them more, because I know the difference and I experience the value more deeply thanks to the contrast. Similarly, a man who knows what terrible wine tastes like but understands fine wine will not have his palette ruined for the fine wine by drink poor wine. If anything, he will simply avoid the cheap wines because they do not satisfy, and cannot match the image in his mind's eye of what could be. What wine should be. But drinking cheap wine does not take fine wine taste less deep and rich and good.

I don't think people can be devalued. However, I think there is a risk to seeking emotionless sex, and I think there is a benefit to reserving sexual space (mentally) as emotional space. I think that there is a risk that people will start to believe - if they indulge frequently in meaningless sex - that they can't find, understand, or engage in emotionally connected sexuality. That they will give up. That they will train themselves, for emotional issues or other reasons, to evade emotionally meaningful sexual experiences. And thus, that sexual desire will be released or addressed, and will not have the opportunity to motivate meaningful connection - something that I feel humans crave far more, but receive satisfaction on far less, than sexuality. This risk of people viewing sex as "just sex" deprives sexuality of its potential greater connection, but it is also not mandatory that people adopt a "just sex" world view in order to engage in sex for the sake of sexuality.

By preserving sex and sexuality as something to be emotionally connected, an individual can ensure that they do not fall into this pattern, and can also create a safe space for partners, wherein the partner will know that they are emotionally meaningful, not just an object for sexual use. I don't objective to sexual use between willing partners, but if that is the extent of the relationship or connection, then I would certainly call it superficial.

The Short Answer: No, sexual experiences cannot devalue a person or sexuality. They can provide emotional learning opportunities, create positive or negative habits, and alter a person's world view on sexuality. These habits, lessons, and views, can have a significant influence, for better or worse, on sexuality.

The real question that we're leading to is What do I want my view on sex and sexuality to be in life? I will give some of the thoughts I have had on this subject so far.

I do like that sex is an emotionally connected thing for me in my life. I like that I understand and enjoy the "higher level" of sexuality, and what it can forge between two people. However, I am uncertain if drawing this alleged "line of purity" around it is the wisest idea. After all, so long as connected sex isn't abandoned, emotionless sex can serve its purpose - even if that purpose is, in my view, far inferior to sex that involves love.

We are not pure. We are not good. We are none of us angels.

We go through life, and we react to it as much as we act on it. I cannot judge anyone, because I am not them. I have felt attraction flow through me like lava, so powerful that everything in my world has seemed to change in order to make that attraction more likely to find fulfillment. This is one experience for me that, if I did not have it, I could never have understood. I cannot judge anyone, because I do not know the feelings, the pains, the joys, the lessons, the insecurities, and the adventures that led them to their sexual outlook and experiences.

Many of us who remain sexually "pure" do so by luck. If we had the experiences others did, we would likely have behaved the same. At the very least, we will never know that we would have acted differently. We are doomed to inhabit our own skin, and never know what it feels like to breathe with someone else's lungs.

Conclusions so far?

Ideally, sexual partners that I have will have a similar outlook on sex and sexuality to mine. They will at least be compatible. There will be nothing threatening in their view. I will be more than an object for sexual satisfaction for them. I will be a human, with needs, desires, and fears. They will respect and understand that.

However, there may be times or opportunities wherein sexuality without romantic emotional connection seem appropriate for me in my life. There is nothing fundamentally immoral about this, but it does run the risk of developing negative habits, and dependent on the approach, can be a way of showing a lack of respect for oneself. If I am making myself nothing more than an object, and making others nothing more than an object, it damages my outlook on myself - making, not sex, but my life, more dim and less worthy of me. Not because I am worthless - but because I surrendered to something within myself, or others, which tried to convince me that I was not worthy of being respected on every level. I am not okay with being a thing with a use. But perhaps it is possible to be a person with a use. The distinction between allowing oneself to be used as an object and allowing oneself to be used as a person is sometimes difficult to see - but to me, it's real, and it's significant.

I think this ideal can be generalized beyond sexuality. I will not tolerate people trying to use me without first respecting me as a human with needs and desires of my own. I will not use other people without first respecting and attempting to understand them. There are times when this moral view can lead to sex for the sake of sex, and that's okay - so long as it feels right, it's what I really want, it's what the other person wants, and it doesn't become the crutch my which I avoid meaningful romantic or sexual interaction.

Sex: Issues and Influences

2010-07-26T16:18:00.001-06:00

Issues with Sex - General:

I am a 23 (almost 24) year old, straight male, and I have issues with sex. Issues, plural. I mentioned my "low number" of sexual partners and the half dozen sexual partners that I declined. While the shield of "morality" has provided an excellent excuse for inaction or avoidance on my part, I have recently realized that it is not my primary reason - and perhaps not even a significant reason. While moral confusion on the subject may be part of why I behave how I do, my emotional issues are a far more substantial part of the picture.

This makes the moral aspect of it confusing. I am in no way opposed to believing that sex is a special and sacred thing that should be preserved for emotionally intimate and committed relationships between two mature individuals - if that's actually what I feel. But I honestly don't know what I feel, because I have so many walls and barrier about sex and sexuality, which I have yet to work through. (For those of you who missed it, these entries are partially an attempt to understand and progress with these issues).

I will go into those issues now, and try to explain my perspective on where each issue comes from.

Emotional Intimacy

I have difficulty being close to people, and this is largely because the more I feel people know me, the more I feel they have power to hurt me. There are internal and external factors that make this a vulnerability. Externally, I have had many historic experiences where people have shown me, repeatedly, that the information I give them on my weaknesses will lead to those weaknesses being attacked. This has been the case from early childhood interactions with my family and peer group, through romantic and social experiences in the recent past.

Internally, the best way to state it is that these vulnerability matter far more than they should due to my own deeply rooted insecurities. I am not sure of myself enough to be able to feel that my feelings, wants, and perspective deserve to be respected by others. As a result, I become hyper-defensive, or in this case, emotionally distant.

Emotional intimacy and physical intimacy are not always connected, but for me they always have been, and certainly physical intimacy can be a way of opening doors to emotional intimacy, and vice-verca.

Guilt

Masturbation was wrong and evil and I was a sinner for doing it. As a result, climax become deeply associated with guilt for me throughout adolescence. If I could "stop before then," I was good. I had avoided temptation. I had self control. If not, I needed to repent. And the first step in that is guilt.

The pattern of orgasm being equated to sin was magnified during early sexual experiences. At the time, I was still LDS, and when achieving orgasm with a partner (even if avoiding intercourse), I was again a sinner. Worse, however, I was bringing sin and temptation down on them. The constant "yes, let's be bad" and "no, we musn't" vacillation created a lot of confusion, pain, shame, and guilt.

Even after moving on and leaving the LDS Church, I set up a framework for myself that adhered to a twisted rendition of Mormon morality. I had a partner who I saw as "my only lifelong partner." This served as a medium by which I could feel morally comfortable. This "grey zone" made the guilt and shame less prevalent. They didn't disappear, however, and guilt continued - and continues - to be a part of the sexual experience, especially post-orgasm, for me.

Sexual Framework

I am not seeking a lifelong sexual partner right now, but my previous sexual framework has always been selecting partners who I feel deeply committed to, have strong emotions for, and where sex remains an emotionally attached experience for me. What this has led to is a framework which is difficult to achieve, emotionally strenuous, and otherwise rare. While I don't call this negative, I'm also not certain it's ideal, and is a framework - I feel - designed to avoid guilt and risks with my other issues.

Trust

The simple way to put it is "I don't trust people." This has to do with my emotional intimacy issues, feelings of being betrayed in the past, and a desire to keep myself from being emotionally vulnerable in general. After all, because of the sexual framework and the guilt inherent in sex and sexuality for me, I am especially "open" during and after sex. If I can't trust my partner to respect that, I can't engage in the act.

Commitment

I am a person who naturally (either through hardwiring or soft wiring) finds himself looking for long term, serious, committed relationships, with deep emotional ties. However, I have come to recognize in my life that this is not always healthy or productive for my goals. I also have other issues with insecurity that lead me to become "hyper-committed" - emotionally reliant on the commitment and loyalty in the relationship. I feel that this is a reflexive emotional attempt to balance out a harmful view on what "relationships were" that I was exposed to when young.

I always felt that my parents had a marriage that would crumble at any second. I have noticed that people take on one of two tendencies when they are raised in this sort of environment. They either give up on serious relationships, avoiding them, or they go to the opposite extreme, seeking to create a Universe where relationships can exist and be healthy and committed. I belong to the second group. I would say "for better or worse," but I feel "for worse" is the only truly applicable thing here. The only "better" part is that I haven't given up on relationships. This hyper-loyal view has created a world where there is either no commitment or a loyalty that plunges people into relationships that are not healthy for them. The majority of my relationships have been toxic.

In recognizing this, I have been presented with two additional options. I can avoid relationships, or I can figure out how to make them healthy. I am attempting to do the second. However, this means a change to the framework of sexuality and romance, wherein not every relationship is necessarily one that will end at death. I fear both non-commitment, which is threatening to my desire to balance out the painful world view with which I was accidentally raised, and commitment, which life experiences have taught me lead to pain and toxicity.

In Summary

Due to my background and upbringing, sex and emotions walk hand in hand for me. Those intense emotions require emotionally vulnerability, which due to trust issues, I have challenges with. This is magnified by the fact that guilt is so deeply ingrained in the sexual experience for me. While I have made a protective and (hyper) rigorous framework for sexuality in my life, it has not always been healthy, especially in regards to commitment - which contains additional issues that are present from my childhood.

The influence this has had on my life is that I have had fewer sexually experiences and partners than I could have had. What concerns me here is not the fact, but the reason. It is substantially more difficult for me to enjoy romantic experiences than I feel it could be. Than, ideally, I feel I would want it to be. If I am going to avoid sexual experiences, I want it to be because of a moral or personal decision, not because of a fear or the need to avoid pain.

The Important Questions

At what point are these issues healthy for my current life? At what point are they healthy and productive for my long term view of how I want my life to be? What issues should be "protected" and "respected," and which ones should be disregarded for the sake of changing them?

What framework is healthy for sex for me? Is emotionally connected and vulnerable sex the only form of sex which can or should be a positive thing in life? In my world view, is "sex without emotion" something that damages "sex with emotion," degrades it, or otherwise causes emotional confusion or damage? What are the advantages of precluding emotionally disconnected sexuality?

What do I like about my own moral view on sex right now? What do I dislike? What do I still need to decide on? What is my view of what sexuality's role would be in my "ideal world?" What about society's view? What do I like about it? What do I dislike?

I will begin to discuss some of these questions in subsequent entries.

Veganism: Transcending Conventional Morality

2010-07-26T15:39:00.002-06:00

Please vote for me here: http://wildfireapp.com/website/6/contests/49517/voteable_entries/6749520
I might get free Amy's food. Which is awesome and delicious.

Transcending Conventional Morality

I was introduced to vegetarianism by a beautiful, intelligent, and wonderful girl, who I just happened to be in love with. I listened and teased when she first told me about the ethical dilemmas presented in factory farming. Then I did some research. I got my facts straight. I could hear her voice in my head when I ate meat, and it made me feel uneasy, so I avoided it - but I wasn't a vegetarian.

I wasn't willing to make a shift in my lifestyle to "impress someone." I had to determine that vegetarianism was right for me. After about a month of contemplating the issue, I decided that vegetarianism was completely compatible - possibly mandatory - with the remainder of my moral outlook and world view.

While I enjoyed many health benefits, including losing a hefty amount of weight, and enjoyed knowing that my environmental impact was more positive, the primary reason was simple. It was not enough for me to adhere to conventional morality and accept what was "right" and "wrong" based only on the views of others. This hearsay ethics extended back to the Old Testament, when a guy named God supposedly told people that they were allowed to eat other living, sentient creatures. This same guy named God also told people to kill homosexuals, that interracial marriages were immoral, and to stone people to death for disrespecting their parents.

Without objecting to God or religion, I took a stance on early Judeo-Christian morality, which dictated societal order as paramount - and all respect for human or other life was subservient to it. In the New Testament, Christ pushed to transcend this initial form of ethics. His message was not about maintaining a lawful society. He came "not to bring peace, but a sword."

Conventional morality, fighting for a status quo, is a simpler form of ethics that is easier to grasp and maintain. The constant validation of your peer group made the views seem right, and required no additional thought. Veganism stretched these boundaries, pushing into the territory of original thought and Universal ethics. Ethics that upheld the dignity of all - not just one race, one nation, or one perspective. This ethics seeks to find unity with all people, creatures, and things, and never serve the interest of one group at the expense of another. It is not enough to value and protect myself, in my privileged position. It is that very privileged position which makes the protection of others my ethical responsibility.

This post-conventional morality requires a lot. You become part of the 1%, instead of the 99%. While everyone else is moving one way, you move the other. You lack societal support, you are sometimes the subject of varying degrees of ridicule, and you are fighting for a cause that few have taken the time to understand. This path is harder. It's more stressful. It requires more dedication, passion, and perseverance. And it's much, much better.

I have been vegetarian for eight years, vegan for two, and have been happy with the impact in my life on every level. Health and personal appearance have improved, and while it is excellent to look good and feel good, it is far more important to me to do good - even and especially when it means fighting against the strong currents of status quo morality.

Sex: My History and Background

2010-07-19T05:30:00.000-06:00

Sex: My History and Background
(Part 2 of Many)

If you are very young (as in, one of my young cousins who has access to my blog entries through Facebook), or if you are sensitive on this subject (for religious or any other reasons), then I encourage you to LEAVE NOW, and ignore my blog for a little while. I will also be sharing excessively private information in these entries. You have been warned. . . .

My Previous and Current Views

I was raised Mormon, with a father and mother who taught me what they thought was right. The LDS Church surrounded me with views on sex and sexuality. There are many things that go into sexuality for the church, and I will summarize my view in the aftermath:

Sexual fantasies are wrong.
Masturbation and pornography use is wrong.
Heavy sexual contact with someone you're not married to is wrong.
Sex with someone you're not married to is definitely wrong.
You should feel guilty for engaging in any of the aforementioned activities.
Sex with someone you are married is an enjoyable, sacred, positive experience.

Morality and immorality here was simple. God ordained sex during marriage. Anything outside of that isn't ordained by God, and thus is immoral and sinful. However, I stepped away from the church completely at age 19 (and had been stepping away gradually since I was 11 years old). My view changed.

At this point, I felt that sex was immoral if:

You were not in love the person.
You weren't in a committed relationship with the person.
You were not emotionally connected to the person in a deep and significant way.

However, since that time, I have faced the realities of the world. Certainly, society does not believe that you should be in love to have sex. Sex comes first, then being in love, if it ever does come. Sex and emotions, even, are two very separate things, that just happen to be able to happen in the same place/time.

But I don't know what I currently believe, or what I want to believe. I know that current behavior follows a very specific line of thinking, where sex and emotion and deeply tied together. However, I'm not even positive that this is practical or best. And all of that makes the topic confusing and frustrating.

My Sexual History

Hi everyone reading my blog, including friends and family! Don't want to know too much about me? Don't read this blog entry. :)

I have kissed five women. I have had four girlfriends. I have had two sexual partners, if we declare sexual partners as someone who I actually had sex with. If we start counting it at the point where I could have gotten an STD, then I have had four sexual partners. In my head, at least, I count the latter number, but to compare the appropriate numbers with the appropriate numbers, I will say that I have "two."

I have also had other opportunities for sex. Outside the two sexual partners I have had, I have had two additional girls offer/request sex with me. I have declined. I have also had four additional girls imply that they were interested in having sex with me (inviting me to their room, asking me extensive questions about STDs and sexual habits before/during a date, talking about their sexual fantasies relating to me, and so forth). I have not pursued these. Beyond all that, I feel that I have evaded many opportunities to move things forward physically. I have not ever gone out of my way to try to find sexual partners. As you can see by comparing numbers above with one another, when I kiss a girl, it generally leads to a relationship. In fact, every girl I have kissed has declared an interest in a relationship with me. I just declined one of them.

I have been on dates with something like one and a half dozen women. The vast majority of these women only got one date with me. I'd like to say that I'm very picky, and I think that's accurate. However, I am not picky just because I think I'm a super-duper catch. I also have issues regarding sex, romance, and dating. It takes a greater than standard desire for me to want to bother overcoming those. The girl has to be exceptional in my eyes. I also have to feel that I am exceptional to her. I am not willing to "fill a chair" for any girl. There are plenty of other men who care more about relationships and sex who can take care of that for them, and who would be getting more out of it.

I went on my first date when I was 17. My average relationship duration has been about 16 months, and I have spent the majority of my adult life in some sort of relationship or another. I can honestly say, I have never even kissed a girl who I didn't care about deeply. You know what . . . I can honestly say, I never kissed a girl who I didn't love. However, the love has generally come after the kiss, not before. All these same things apply to sex.

My sexual experiences have happened in various circumstances, including committed relationships that I thought were going to lead to marriage, less serious monogamous relationships, dating (which later led to a relationship), semi-committed, and open relationships.

All of my romantic relationships have been what I consider "sexually active," even though not all of them involve intercourse. In most of these relationships, I have felt that I am the less sexually voracious. If I'm being honest, at this phase in my life, with what I want, and with the time and emotional energy that sex can take, I would ideally have sex about twice a week - which would lead to about an average number of sexual occurrences throughout a year. I would be completely fine going for weeks or longer without sex. I am led to believe that I am abnormal in this way.

I will continue this line of thinking in my next entry, where I will discuss my "issues" with sex (complex emotions tied to sex and how they have impacted my sex and love life).

Sex: Intro + Social Lies About Sex

2010-07-19T04:39:00.002-06:00

Sex: Intro & Social Lies About Sex

(Part of a series - part 1 of many)

This will be my first in a series of posts on sex and sexuality. If you are very young (as in, one of my young cousins who has access to my blog entries through Facebook), or if you are sensitive on this subject (for religious or any other reasons), then I encourage you to LEAVE NOW, and ignore my blog for a little while. As for the rest of you . . . this is all very much about contemplation and exploration. I am not trying to make a point - merely observations, and to hear, learn, and understand the various different world views on this topic.

More warning about myself and my beliefs.

You all know me, at least to some degree. Some relatives or older friends may still function on the idea that I am Mormon - a thought that is now about five years outdated. Keep in mind, then, that this is not a "religiously sound" send of contemplations. In addition, I am sexually active, and will share some portion of my sexual history here. This is not in an attempt to brag. This is merely an attempt to compare, understand, and otherwise relate to the world as it stands. You have been warned. . . .

Why is this on my mind?

There are many influences in modern society that create a certain image of sex. Rather, I should say images. These vary greatly, dependent on your location, culture, religious background, age group, and far more. My general beliefs about life have changed dramatically, especially over the course of the last five or so years.

There are some beliefs that I still hold from the moral framework of my childhood. There are many things that have changed. However, as far as sexuality is concerned, I will state simply: I'm confused. The "sex as a sacred act" concept is certainly one possibility, and I see advantages to it. However, there is also social pressure to believe in something different.

As a result, I have a laundry list of questions to answer about sex and sexuality, as far as how I relate to the world.

What are my questions about sex?

How different are the media concepts of sex from the reality of sex? What are the major cultural views on sex? What is the major cultural behavior regarding sex? What were the views that were instilled in me? What views are symbolically ideal? What views are practical? What is the appropriate response for guilt as it applies to sex and sexuality? Is there such a thing as "immoral sex" that takes place between two consenting adults? What is "normal" behavior? What behavior and views do I think are best (normal or not) for myself? What behavior or views should I look for in romantic partners? What problems does the current societal perspective on sex create? What behavior do I think is best for society at large? Are there any real, fundamental potential concerns in differing sexual views with friends, romantic interests, or other I interact with?

I will attempt to answer these questions over the next few entries. Let us start with this, however. . . .

Glorified, Falsified Sexuality

The average duration of sex? 7.2 minutes - 23 minutes if you include foreplay. The average size of a man's penis? 5.8 inches length, in 4.9 inches in girth - unless it's self reported. Then the numbers are mystically higher. Women achieve orgasm is about 60% of standard sexual encounters. The average number of occurrences of sex per year is between 89 and 127, with multiple occurrences in a day each being counted as separate.

Another interesting statistic is that in heterosexual men, the average number of sexual partners reported ranges from 7 to 11. In women, it ranges from 4 to 7. Note here, the averages should hypothetically be the same, since for every new sexual partner a woman has, a man also has a new sexual partner, and vice verca. What this means - what this really means - is that someone is lying. My guess? Everyone. I believe that men tend to exaggerate this number upward and women tend to exaggerate it downward. This is due to social stigmas and perspectives - some of which infuriate me. We will discuss this later.

Interestingly, the numbers are never really consistent, and vary greatly depending on who is surveyed, where they're surveyed, if they're self-reporting or if it's part of a study, and other major factors. The variations are dramatic - up and down up to about 30% with many of the numbers.

The point I want to make here is this: sex doesn't last as long, happen as often, or involve as many partners over a lifetime as is often shown as "socially normal." But where does this socially normal come from? Certainly, there is a part the media plays a major role. Certain things are seen as better for dramatic effect, better for social presentation. But perhaps the writers and other participants are also trying to adapt to the "socially accepted." If the writers, actors, or other members of the creative effort have a different sex life, they don't present it - it is kept hushed and secret, if anything.

Similarly, people in normal society who have an "abnormal sexual view" or "abnormal sexual behavior" aren't nearly as likely to share it with their friends, while those who follow the glorified forms of sexuality (for duration, frequency, number of partners, and so forth) are more likely to share. In fact, those who exceed the social standards on sexual expectations (which vary greatly - again, I'll go into this later) are more likely to share (/brag), giving an even more exaggerated perspective that is reinforced regularly in our social interactions.

Let me go ahead and illustrate one thing briefly here, by way of an example. I recently watched the movie "TiMER." This movie has a female lead who admits to having had five sexual partners, in the context of this being a very low number of sexual partners. Yet, this number is actually average for lifetime sexual partners. So, "average" receives a media presentation of "low." Another example of sexuality as it is presented in the media would be the television show Friends. In this show, the character Joey verifiably has dozens, and likely hundreds, of sexual partners. This is what we have started to see as "high."

Pornography, which 70% of men view regularly, and 30% of women view with at least some frequency, also paints a very false picture. Obviously, what is seen in these videos is what is "exceptional," not normal. Size, endurance, flexibility, general physical fitness, the desire for rougher, wilder, and more experimental sex, are all seen here in magnified forms - and performance enhancers, such as numbing lube and cosmetic surgery, is often used. While viewers are aware that pornography is an "exaggerated version" of sexuality, but most people still aren't aware of actual norms. Pornography, which is seen by standard viewers around four times a week (no reliable studies have been done on this - estimates, based on a large number of self-reported individuals, seem to be around this figure), stays the main exposure to sex and sexuality. It is used twice as often as actual intercourse for an average viewer. It is also the basis for sexual fantasies for most viewers, and those sexual fantasies happen as much as once every three minutes. Between this, the media, and social reinforcement, we are inundated.

The simple summary? Sex as we hear about it doesn't match up with sex as it actually happens.

I will continue my next entry briefly, where I will discuss some of my own history, influences, past perspectives, and current insights.

Emotions and Thoughts in Mosaic Dialogue

2010-07-14T16:18:00.000-06:00

Why do I do this to myself? You know it's self inflicted. I don't go to the mountain. I bring the mountain down on top of myself.

The smell of chocolate cake, or some other intensely delicious goody, wafts down from upstairs. And I won't be able to eat it. But hummus. I'll get hummus.

I want vegan brownies. I binge on those too crazy-like.

I miss Leena. I saw her, like, yesterday. I'm surprised. Silly Leena.

I'm glad I'm so surrounded by people who I like. People who care about me and take care of me.

Meteora is a pretty good album from Linkin Park. I'm growing fond of Mike Shinoda, too. Thanks to B-ry. And I'll have to give whatsisface the white rapper another try.

My Mom was listening to that "ten million fireflies" song on YouTube a minute ago. It was funny. I feel less manly for liking that song. Luckily I don't like it very much.

Twilight I like. More than an educated man of my intellect should.

Intellect is a tricky thing. I think the identifier has made life and anxiety more harsh. I'd rather not feel like I have to live up to anything.

Slim Shady. That guy. What is that rapper's name? That's going to drive me crazy until I can figure it out.

I really like talking to Day about anxiety and identifiers and stuff like that. My thoughts organize better when I'm around her. She's an incredibly good sounding board. Also, when she sounds back, she's very smart. I'm worried about her.

I'm worried about a lot of people. The list of names runs pretty fast through my head. I miss Rheanna. I may or may not ever hang out with her again. She looked beautiful in the picture with her child.

Facebook has a crazy draw. So distracting from work.

Stupid deadline. Eight hours of work to do by 9am tomorrow morning. And I have family stuff tonight.

It's so cool that we're celebrating Bastille day. Violent revolutionary holiday.

Zizek's Violence was pretty insightful. I don't agree with all of it. I'm not sure what parts I do agree with.

The world right now is so broken. It systematizes and accepts the violence. "Noble violence." "Virtuous violence." But it leads to so many deaths, and so many more broken lives.

The rapper is definitely not Chris Rock. That's the comedian who was in Rush Hour, right? That was a good movie. That was Jackie Chan, right? Yeah, he was pretty good. I like Jet Li better. Hero is such an awesome movie.

I'm really glad that I got Netflix for my Xbox. Especially because I saw Ink. That was a trippy, awesome movie.

Drugs are so interesting. Modern psychiatrics go crazy messing with chemicals and hormones. And yet our society doesn't accept marijuana. I'm not saying either is good, but marijuana has been tested for thousands of years, and has fewer side effects, especially over the long term.

I'm worried about therapy. I'm worried that I'll feel judged. I'm worried the therapist's life view will be too different from mine. I'm something of a radical.

My mom is listening to the firefly song again upstairs. That's funny.

It's not slim shady. I'm going to have to Google this one.

EMINEM! Of course. Okay. "Lift up the liquor racks because I'm raising the bar." Pffft. Funny guy. He loves his daughter. The subcultures are all so different, but some of the values are absolutely the same.

It constantly astounds me how much Christianity has been corrupted. I think that the philosophy of that Joshua dude were pretty good. And Buddhist.

Taoism is far less appealing now than it was four years ago when I first studied it.

I should meditate more. And I miss yoga. It's hard to do yoga when you're depressed. Ironic.

The charred feeling in my chest is still there, but it's starting to dissipate. I wish my mind didn't focus like crazy in on things. Circular. Painful. No good. But there you have it.

I want to go to the gym again. I'd like to have sexy arms. I don't think I can lose weight now, though. It's just not happening.

Putting my Weight on Hold

2010-07-05T11:28:00.001-06:00

I weigh about 185. Some days, I weigh in as high as 188. Some days as low as 182. But 185 is about what I weigh. That's 120lbs I've lost.

The problem is, I can't seem to lose much more. The weight loss slowed down a ton around September of last year. Then it essentially halted around the end of April. That means two months with basically no progress. Irksome.

Anyway, I talked to some friends about all this, and I gave it all some thought, and I figured I had two options.

1) Assume that my body should obey me, and kick everything up a notch, continuing to try these different diet options and such.

2) Assume that maybe my body has good reasons for not losing weight, and give it some time.

I decided to take option 2. Maybe my body wants time to tighten lose skin. Maybe it just wants some time to rest before losing more weight (hell, I already had it shed 40% of its mass). I don't actually know the reasons. But I do know, I'm tired of trying and trying to lose weight and having nothing happen.

So, I'm giving it a break. A full, six-month break - until the end of the year.

It's not that I'm giving up on fitness in that time. I'll still go to the gym, and I'll do yoga, and I'll go on hikes and take long walks. What I won't do, however, is obsess over what I'm eating and what I'm doing. I'm just going to eat what I'm hungry for, and try to stay healthy.

I might lose weight - as slowly as I am now, maybe faster, who knows. But until the end of the year, my only weight goal is to "not go back over 190." The rest is about fitness. Let's be honest: I'm already in the best shape of my life. I'm going to take this as a victory, and revisit the issue in the beginning of 2011. Until then, it's about health, not about weight.

Self-Awareness

2010-06-24T19:58:00.000-06:00

Sometimes I go a long time in a bad state, and I don't even realize it.

For example, after going for a half hour walk today, I realized that I'd been massively overheated and dehydrated the entire day. Probably for two days. I took a tall glass of water and immediately started sweating.

Similarly, after my walk - the sunlight, the water - and a dozen episodes of Glee, and some very loud singing for my neighbors here in Oregon to hear, I realized. Singing "Alone" by Heart, fifteen times at your kitchen table may seem like a melodramatic act, but it can help pull you from an emotional slur, that's for sure.

And suddenly the inaction of the last two days makes sense. I wasn't avoiding work because I was avoiding work. I was avoiding work because I was deeply, deeply depressed. It was like not wanting to run when you're dehydrated. The exhaustion has a cause. Fix that first.

It's interesting, realizing that I'm sometimes not even self-aware enough to realize that I'm incredibly depressed.

Weight Update and Pics

2010-06-23T18:46:00.001-06:00

Okay . . . a reminder:

One month into weight loss, I was at about 290-295.

Hands on my monumental waist, like a morbidly obese peter pan.

This is today.

I'm about 185. Not perfect. But progressing.

Let's do those again, but side-by-side.

~125 down. I'm looking at 15% as my next benchmark. 174lbs. 11lbs to go. Give or take.

Day 1: Single Serving Friends

2010-06-21T18:36:00.000-06:00

The bus ride was supposed to begin at five after midnight. They said to show up an hour early, so I did. I waited in line with everyone else.

Leena stood next to me, patiently waiting despite the fact that I said she could leave. The only entertainment is the child running around screaming "I'm going to get on that bus," one girl insistently repeating that she needs to get on the bus because she misses her boyfriend, and people complaining about the wait. As it becomes obvious that the "re-boarding line" itself will fill the bus, the complaining changes to "Yeah, the bus is going to be full," and people wondering in an irate fashion what Greyhound is going to do about it.

It's a half hour past when the bus was supposed to have left that a representative comes out and says that they will give us re-boarding passes for the noon bus to Portland. Forget the anxiety of waiting with two heavy packs in a line for an hour and a half. They'll catch me next time. They'll be sure of it.

Leena, waiting kindly with me.

Stealing my hat.

I go home and sleep. I don't want to be close to anyone. I don't want to think about the frustration.

I finally make it back for the bus, and rolls out fifteen minutes late.

On the bus, tempers run hot. A man boarding talks about how he's former military, and how Obama is a complete idiot, and how all our military is doing overseas is killing our troops for oil - but that we should just carpet bomb Iraq and Afghanistan and have it done with. A woman talks about how her ex-husband had been threatening to kill her, so she's moving her small family to Seatlle.

On the bus, the ex-con sitting next to me tries to make small talk, but he mumbles, so I mostly smile and nod. He's nice enough, and I like his humor, when I can understand him. He says that his sentence was served in three prisons, all across the states. His offence was drug related. He doesn't go much further into it than that. Anti-social as I often and surprisingly am, I retreat into my book (American Gods) and get a bit of work done on my laptop, who's battery life is at its least impressive

The air is filled with the smell of a child's dirty diaper on top of a general stench of sweat and urine. The background track consists of the rumbling noise of wheels over gravel, hushed conversations that crescendo in sudden bursts, and the reverb of ipod headphones up too loud.

The man on his way back from prison offers me a piece of gum, or of jerky, or a handful of corn nuts, about twice an hour.

In Idaho, first of the states we pass through, the landscape alternates between shrub-brush littered desert grass, rolling hills, and wide open plains. The Serpent River, big as any river I remember seeing, is moderately impressive at first glance - then breathtaking as you pass over it from three hundred feet above, once it's become the Serpent River Valley.

The bus stops are an hour, hour and a half apart. Two thirds of the bus's population leaves to smoke at every one. At the first stop I got a sandwich, put together by a pretty girl with bleached hair that has a violet streak running through it who works at this convenience store Quiznos. I stay on the bus for the other stops until Boise. Pulling into Boise, we're moving through rain, and a double rainbow spreads over the horizon, full and perfectly arched over the landscape.

A pretty rainbow.

It only got better from here, but

I didn't catch a picture of it.

Despite this Zen moment in nature, tempers flare again at the station. A passenger wants to get his bag without going through the baggage claim, and he starts yelling that he needs to leave, swearing up a storm. He's been on the bus for two days. I've been on it for eight hours.

A black man with gold teeth who speaks in the way you expect black people to talk in movies helps me hijack a power outlet for my computer by shoving an arcade game out of the way and taking its slot on the wall. He's worried because there doesn't even seem to be a Western Union here, and someone is supposed to be wiring him some money. He'll have to wait for his layover. He's on his way to Seattle. He speaks confidently, and uses the phrase "that's what's up" a lot. I like him. He's nice.

I get back on the bus, after the bus driver kindly explains to me that he shouldn't be letting me back on, because my ticket is for the night before. The man who gave me the re-boarding pass the night before should have had me print a new ticket.

I keep reading my book until the daylight fades away. I then make small talk with the people in the seat behind me -- three women who have mostly been talking about sex and drugs for the last two hours. I realize how stunningly bad I feel at small talk. I wonder if I use humor as a way to replace being interesting. I wonder if there's a difference.

A thunderstorm starts on the horizon. I'm deeply entranced by the lightning cracks. It's more intense over the rolling plain area here than it is when you're surrounded by mountains, but I always love lightening, regardless.

Two of these girls want to become journalists. The third, from the way she's talking about women and men and the lesbian music scene, seems to be a gay woman who wants to write erotica. She has no job, but draws in her free time. She shows me a picture on her phone that she drew. It's a morbid piece - a man and a woman, both hanged, holding hands. I like it a lot.

She then shows me a couple dark renditions of Alice, the one from Wonderland, and accompanying characters. She's thinking of getting a pink Cheshire cat tattoo. She also designed her own tattoo of a heart sewn back together with a music vibration, listening to headphones. I mention that we could try to have the guy sleeping next to me swap seats with her so that she can show me more of the art, while keeping me in line to see the lightening, but she says that's basically all she has. I wonder if this is a lie because she doesn't want to sit next to me, but don't mind either way. I turn back to watch the lightening.

At the next stop, I stay in the car and fall asleep across two seats. The man who's been sitting next to me doesn't wake me when he gets back on the bus. Instead, he finds another seat. I notice this with a smile as I toss and turn, trying to get comfortable. I drift off into an uneasy sleep.

On Desire, Coercion, and Anxiety

2010-06-14T23:25:00.000-06:00

I have just concluded a somewhat interesting conversation with a friend on Facebook, where the friend had responded to my statement that "I simply don't know what I want anymore. . . ." When they inquired as to what I meant, I indicated that I feel that most of my desired have been attempts to mirror what I feel society says a person is supposed to want.

I went on to explain that my life is far too gravitationally centered around anxiety - that 70% or more of my waking hours are spent, one way or another, dealing with feeling of anxiety. This can mean dealing with tasks that make me anxious, dealing with long term anxiety solutions, or (most commonly) trying to engage myself fully in other tasks so I go numb to the anxiety. From stress eating to video gaming to occupying myself with television shows or other projects, my world revolves around my anxiety.

And I've been thinking that maybe this anxiety is due to disjointed desire - an attempt to pursue things that I believe I should want but do not know that I want. The anxiety may, in this sense, be seen as an attempt to call attention to an uncomfortable psychological leap that is out of alignment with my core, personal desires. This is not necessarily so because the things I am doing are opposed to my own desires, but because I have accepted the societal directions on "should dos" without question or personal contemplation.

May it be that anxiety is an act of unconscious rebellion? That the world has told me to behave in a certain way, I have grudgingly accepted without finding desire for the act, and that (in an attempt to declare its independence from the remainder of society) my unconscious flails, avoids the scenarios, and tries to avoid the "should do" behaviors simply because they are for others, not for myself.

There are multiple ways in which one can act for others, but the two most primary are coercive and selfish. Coercive acts for others involve a person acting unselfishly, for the benefit of another person or group, because something of theirs is implicitly held hostage. This is typically their sense of identity or belonging with the majority of society. "Yes, you can keep all those candies for yourself, but then we will reject you." So the person shares the candy, not because they want to, but because they want to avoid the rejection that will occur if they don't. Tension invariably remains if the person wanted to keep the candies for themselves. They feel something has been taken from them due to social coercion - a form of psychological brutality, even, that occurs in human interaction.

The second way to act for others is to selfishly be unselfish. "You can share the candies or not, and we will not punish or reject you." And so a person may choose to not share the candies, and have that reward, or they can choose to share the candies. Sharing will give them the reward of greater social connections, feelings of being generous, a sense of self-established identity and a declaration of priorities, and the mutual enjoyment of a group (yielding empathetic joy through proximity and the shared experience). There is no psychological brutality here, no sense of resentment, and no question as to why the activity was done, or if the one choosing the share really wanted to make that choice.

As long as the psychological punishments that robs us of actual choice, free of coercion, remains, there can be no real desire - or, at the least, real desire is far more difficult. "Yes, I am sharing because I want to, even though I would have had to anyway" is simply not a real choice or desire in most scenarios.

So, in a society that does use this coercion, what are the options for a person who wants to break from this disjointed desire? Let us assume that anxiety may truly be an act of rebellion, seeking to establish an independent self. If this is so, how can this act of rebellion be satisfied in a way that allows us to then pursue our desires without further fear of either coercion or anxiety?

As I see it, the desire must be found in an authentic way. For there to be authentic desire, the coercion must be entirely robbed of its power. This does not necessarily mean getting rid of the coercion (an altogether more difficult task). Rather, we must be willing to fully accept and then disregard the value of the negative consequences that attempt to coerce us. If society says, "do this or lose your sense of belonging to this majority group," we must be willing to say "I honestly do not care if I belong to that group - if the identifiers that are required do not accurately describe me, then it is best that I am separate." If society says, "you will be robbed of material comforts," we must be willing to say "I can do without material comforts, as they are less important to me than pursuing my own authentic desires."

This takes immense courage, self-sufficiency, and confidence. Once these coercive elements are disregarded, we can then decide what we truly do want. We may find we want precisely what was asked of us in the first place. But it must be done outside the coercion, or there will always be a disjointed disconnection of self and society, of desires for self and desires for others. All desires, to appropriately synthesize into the person we are, must be of the self - and may include "of the self for others," but must be "of the self" first and foremost.

Burned, Bruised, and Battered: It Was An Awesome Day

2010-06-07T15:22:00.000-06:00

Once upon a time, Rob and Leena went for a hike to Doughnut Falls. The path there was really lovely.

Surprisingly enough, upon reaching the waterfall, we found all the paths were covered with snow. Rob was feeling adventurous enough to climb it.

On the way, he got scraped up by several rocks, and got an egg sized welt on his ankle, along with some scratches. Leena, for some unknown reason, followed Rob up the snow and scratching rocks, despite her fear of heights. She got a lovely gash on the back of her own leg, and scrapes up and down her arms. Ironically, it was Leena that insisted that they climb up and around to get back, leading them to even further heights.

While looking down at the tops of extraordinarily tall trees was fun, they eventually headed back to the car. By this time, Rob was starting to get a sunburn, and applied sunscreen in preparation for the next hike, to a lovely little lake.

Rob had a good time, even if he was bleeding and did have a sunburn. Leena seemed to enjoy it, too.

By the next day, Rob's injuries had lost most of their swelling, and didn't look nearly so impressive in pictures, but he figured he'd share them anyway.

Rob enjoyed the thing so much that he decided to add a Moab trip to his "to do" list, though perhaps with a little more sunscreen. Still, it's his opinion that if you don't get at least a little injured, you're probably not having enough adventure.

You're a Target

2010-06-05T11:21:00.000-06:00

The Truth About Capitalism

Watch this for some context:

So . . . there's this series of commercials running on TV, radio, and on billboards, that states that "the tobacco industry sees you as a target. Are you?"

The clever tagline and slogan is one of the more effective arguments against the tobacco industry. Some of the previous arguments were either silly (saying that stress relief isn't a sufficient reason to smoke) or verifiably false (basically saying that everyone in the world who smokes will end up in the hospital because of it).

Nonetheless, every time I see one of the billboards or hear one of these commercials, I think the same thing:

They're not the only ones who see you as a target.

Modern age consumerism and marketing, the engine of the Capitalist system, rely on targeting people - the more the better. It has no concern for the people beyond the quarterly dividends and annual reports. Profit before people has always been the line in Capitalism, and the ultimate responsibility is never to the consumer, or to the employee, but to the shareholder.

The lines I'd like to focus on are from a radio spot from The Truth that state "It doesn't matter what you're into, the tobacco industry sees you as a target. They want you to buy, they want you to smoke, and if you die they'll just find someone else."

And let's be honest. This is all fully accurate. Of course they want you to buy, of course there are addictive properties to cigarettes, and of course they have the potential to cause cancer. With 250,000 deaths caused annually by smoking related cancer, that's hard to deny. (Statistic from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009). Even if there are other influencing factors to these forms of cancer, smoking is definitely a big portion of it.

But let's take a couple of examples that fit the same protocol. The most obvious one is the fast food industry.

Fast Food Kills More People Than Cigarettes

According to a 2006 research study from the Stroke Association, 831,000 deaths occur each year due to some form of cardiovascular disease (with the most prominent being coronary heart disease, the other related diseased including stroke, high blood pressure, and similar). Statistics here indicate that 70% of all of these diseases are related to being overweight. In other words, 581,000 deaths each year are directly related to people being overweight.

While it is difficult to say for certain that there is any single cause for the obesity, with influencing factors including the sedentary work lifestyle and the large amount of entertainment that is entirely sedentary, fast food does play a large role.

According to John Banzhaf, law professor at George Washington University, a "large part of [the obesity problem] is the restaurant industry and the fast food industry." Various studies, including a 15-year study from Mark Pereira (University of Minnesota) and David Ludwig (Children's Hospital) published in the 2004 Lancet Medical Journal, show a strong link between fast food and obesity. Other surprising negative impacts of fast food include a decrease in insulin uptake (104% decrease) in the consumer, increasing the likelihood of diabetes. These significant differences occur when comparing those who eat fast food two or less times per week as opposed to more than two times per week.

And does the fast food industry want you to eat their fatty food? They spend over 11 billion dollars a year in advertising, so I would certainly say so. With only ten million being spent by other companies to promote healthy eating, the amount is easily overwhelmed.

How much does the tobacco industry spend on advertising? More or less, 7 billion (with a smaller figure if you exclude amounts not spent but budgeted, and a larger figure if you include things like two for one deals or discounted rates - items we're not including in the fast food budget statistics). The higher amount sometimes quotes (about 13 billion) includes these discounted rates and special deals. How much is being spent to fight tobacco? Several million for each state in most states, about nine million from the federal government, and over ten million from independent campaigns (such as the nine million a year from The Truth). In other words, the total anti-smoking budget compared to the smoking advertising budget is far more against smoking than it is against fast food. And fast food, according to the statistics above, is responsible for more than twice as many deaths.

Does the fast food industry want you to buy? Yep. Do they care if you get fat? Not really. So long as you keep buying. And if you die? Yeah, they're going to find someone else. Guaranteed. Let's move on to a less obvious example.

Links:

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Smoking_and_Cancer_Mortality_Table.asp
http://strokeassociation.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4478
http://www.annecollins.com/obesity/statistics-obesity.htm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14415766/
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(04)17674-5/fulltext
http://www1.worldbank.org/tobacco/tcdc/215TO236.PDF
http://www.healthpolicyguide.org/doc.asp?id=5221
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/28063940/Facts-and-figures-about-anti-smoking-education-spending

Car Companies Don't Care if You Die

The automobile industry is pretty fantastic, don't you think? But they're a pretty high up cause of death, with about 38,000 deaths each year. That's not so many as cancer related smoking, but they also have far more injuries - with about 2.5 million people injured each year in a car wreck. The aim is not to say that one is worse than the other, but certainly vehicles have shown a dangerous side.

And yet, somehow, the minimums that car manufacturers provide - while maintaining hefty profit margins - aren't nearly as much as they could be. They increase the risk of your death and injury substantially in two separate ways: decreasing your ability to prevent accidents and increasing the likelihood that you will suffer an injury in those accidents. They don't do this directly, but it's something they could easily prevent, and don't - all for the sake of profit.

Backup assistance, tire pressure monitors, electronic stability control, rollover sensors, and more can all help you avoid an accident. Side airbags, onstar, intelligent head restraints, and stronger frames can help you survive that accident. These aren't included, however. The total price for the items mentioned above (excluding the frame, which is difficult to estimate) reach about seven thousand dollars ($7,000 US). Is that what it costs the car company? Absolutely not. It's just what they can sell it for to maximize profits.

You could also just avoid buying the car, walking or using public transportation, greatly diminishing your chances of dying or getting injured - not to mention reducing pollution and decreasing your chances of obesity (see above). But a car is part of the American dream, thanks to a yearly advertising budget of over a hundred billion each year.

Do they want you to buy? Absolutely. But they want you to buy in whatever pattern maximizes their company profits. Do they care if you die? Well, not so much. Otherwise they would include all these nifty extras at cost, or let them cut into their total profits. Don't pretend like the auto industry is in peril, either, because financially they're still doing well (with profits up 35% in 2009). It's just their employees who are getting laid off so that the companies can post bright and shiny quarterly dividends.

Links:

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
http://www.slideshare.net/AnciraCommunity/automotive-digital-advertising-facts-charts
http://www.lawyershop.com/practice-areas/personal-injury/motor-vehicle-accidents/car-accidents/statistics/
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/auto/car-guide-2004/top-safety1.asp
http://www.industryweek.com/articles/geely_auto_profit_up_35_in_2009_21558.aspx

Treat the Symptoms or the Disease?

There are some bloodthirsty liberals out there who want to see cigarettes off the market. Some want to have fast food post their nutrition information and a warning label about the statistics of fast food. In other words, a "buyer beware" assistance environment. While plausible as a way to improve matter, with billions being spent in the fast food industry, tens of billions from the auto industry, and yes, billions from the cancer stick industry, the cost of waging this war is truly phenomenal. We are essentially cutting ourselves with our right hand and trying to bandage ourselves up with the left - and bleeding severely.

What solutions are there? One disease based solution, rather than symptomatic, is to create greater levels of prohibition on these industry, mandating that they not kill people for the sake of profit. So, why hasn't this happened already? The answer is pretty simple. The people in power, with the ability to send lobbyists and contribute large amounts to campaign discretionary funds, are the very industries who would be stopped.

In a world where Capital runs the show, it doesn't just run the market. It runs everything that money touches, and that includes the media, the general public opinion, and yes, the Government. As long as a profit over people mindset is created by our system, there is no way to prevent this. As soon as the masses of people overpower the Capitalists, that's revolutionary change. There are various political models that aim to have the power of voice in society spread more evenly, rather than simply allowing the wealthy to run the show - thus guaranteeing their own persistent wealth and the growing divide between the upper and middle class. My own view, socialized syndicalism, is one. Other forms of socialism, anarchism, syndicalism, and communism all strive for similar ideals through different mediums. All these views aim to treat the disease that prevents the treatment of these problems.

The fact is, this profit over people mindset, as well as the "seeing people as a target" view, are not the disease. They are also symptoms - which create further painful symptoms for the people of the world. The real disease lies in the system that essentially mandates that this outlook exists by rewarding the people who are willing to systemically rape and murder people, just to make a buck.

The Limitations of Live and Let Live (An Argument For and Against Gay Marriage)

2010-06-02T19:17:00.000-06:00

I tend to be very laid back, and tend to side with the liberal mentality that says "live and let live" (for example, the issue of gay rights). Nonetheless, the conservative perspective isn't one that's altogether daft. The very terms "liberal" and "conservative" seem appropriate to this perspective. The liberal tends to want to "liberate the individual," while the conservative seeks to "conserve values."

Let's say that it was not gay marriage - not two people being happy together in a same sex relationship - but something else. Let's say it was running over stray cats.

Sure, why not? Running over stray cats. We need more pet population control, that's the truth. It saves the government money. And if the person doing it is happy doing it, why not just let him "live his life?" It's not as though we really protect stray cats, anyway. He's really just putting the cat out of his misery.

I'm hoping these extreme example will evoke the desired response, but in case it doesn't, let me clarify that the rationale is pretty straightforward: we don't want to live in a society where people just run down stray cats, no matter how happy it makes them.

Thus, the essential morality (from a societal perspective) of a thing is an important factor in determining legality. In a 75% Christian nation, it's unsurprising that there are such restrictions on gay marriage. After all, despite the Christian ideology of tolerance, same sex relationships have always been seen as immoral by the Christian faith (with some more progressive sects providing exceptions). The majority of society, thus, does not want to live in a society where same sex relationships are legitimized.

This is an entirely logical stance, but it requires a religious presupposition, so the real question that I have to pose to the conservative population boil down to this:

Is your issue religious or secular?

If religious, isn't it true that the declared values of the country are to protect the religious beliefs of the individual, rather than imposing them on the masses?

Assuming this is true, isn't this a clear violation of a combination of church and state (and dangerously close to the imposition of religious beliefs on the masses)?
Wouldn't we have to make any imposition of religious belief of the majority on the masses legitimate in order to make this morally consistent?
Don't you want to evade the restrictions of the religious beliefs of others (even the majority) if they would prevent your own "pursuit of happiness?"

If secular, where is your evidence?

Isn't it so that all major evidence has indicated no negative effects in the legitimization of same sex marriage, no increase in homosexuality on the whole, and a strong indication of biological factors being the most predominant in same sex attraction?
Is there some other negative aspect to the legitimization of same sex marriage that is not clear to me? Is there something fundamentally damaging about there being gay individuals visible in the public eye?

In brief, don't you want the protections afforded by separating the divisions of church and state?

Where is your Christian belief coming from?

Within the New Testament, Christ himself never speaks against homosexuality. Rather, he speaks of tolerance and open minded behavior. While there are passages written by Paul, these are never directly quoting Christ. Paul also never claims that it's against any Christian laws to do these things (though he does not speak fondly of "sodomites"). Christ's own perspective on sins of others seems most evident to me in the story of the adulterer, and the "let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone." In other words, a "neither do I condemn you" perspective that does not impose legal restrictions, but forgiveness and social support. Isn't it possible that Christ would not condone or promote a political agenda that opposed homosexuals?
The primary evidence against homosexuality comes from the Old Testament, which also restricts individuals of different nationalities from having sexual relationships. Do you also agree with this?

What about other restrictions on "immoral sex" from a Christian perspective?

If you truly believe that Christian perspectives (including old and new testament laws) should be enforced legally, do you believe that there should be legal restrictions on masturbation? Oral sex? Anal sex? Multi-racial relationships? Fornication? Adultery? Certainly, while we disagree with things like adultery as a society, we do not have legal penalties for those who engage in these acts. So, what is it about homosexuals that makes it so they get the brunt of the "Christian wrath," and the only area where legal enforcement is visible?

If you cannot respond to all of these questions, then how is it that moral consistency can be present in protecting the word "marriage" against homosexuals, but not inter-racial couples, non-Christian couples, those who commit adultery, those who marry for money, or those who otherwise violate the sacred nature of marriage as presented in the Bible?

Ah . . . stability, how I've missed you.

2010-06-01T17:25:00.000-06:00

My roommate got her portion of rent to me today (hoo-rah!), and while I trust her well enough, I had been holding back all my extra money in case I had to make the full rent payment myself. Now that I've got that, I was able to get the rent check ready and hand it to the on site manager, go grocery shopping (finally!), and make sure all my bills are up to date.

They ARE up to date (hoo-rah again!), including my power bill, insurance, internet, gas, and so on. I'm not past due on ANYTHING, and I have $1500 coming in within the next two weeks. In the first half of this month, I only have three bills to handle - my AMEX bill ($100) and my HSBC bill ($50) and my final Sprint MiFi bill ($60). Judging on my shopping trip today, I should be able to manage the two weeks with about $120 in groceries at the top end. In other words, I have plenty of extra! (Hoo-rah another time!)

It will feel extraordinarily nice, and I'm also going to be able to "pay myself" the rewards that I've been saving up (I've saved up something like $250 in reward money based on the work I've done toward my major goals). I'll probably do that by getting the Evo, which will cost just $200, plus I'll be able to get the same monthly rate - just with more texts, minutes, and unlimited data. A lot of the reason I want to get it is the organization tools it will provide. Huzzah for organization tools!

I'm also working on selling the car. Thanks to my Dad really helping me out on getting the title for the car (for easy sale), my budget is far more open in the first half of this month. Without the car (once it's fully gone and I'm no longer paying insurance), I will be able to get my "standard expenses" at about a thousand a month. What you have to realize to see how awesome that is is the fact that I'm aiming to make $120 a day (doing what is essentially part time work from home), and thus far I am making an average of $150 a day. That's 21.5 working days a month, on average. That's (if I maintain my average) $3225.

Go ahead, take out 10% that I'm withholding for tax (since most of what I spend on is tax deductible, being self employed). Go ahead, take out the 20% that is going to rewards for me. :D With about $2300 left, what this means is about $1300 of extra space in my budget. What that means is that I can build security quickly and easily. Once that's done, paying the extra toward debt is likely the next step. $1300 on top of the ~$100 that goes to principle already means $1400 a month.

And when I sell my car, that's the complete elimination of that debt (/crosses fingers). So my total debt, once that's said and done, will be about $22k. So let's say that I get enough extra money in accounts that I feel stable by the beginning of August (totally doable). Then, let's say that only $200 in stuff goes wrong each month, so $1200 can go toward debt. That's debt eliminated completely in 18 months. Everything but student loans will be said and done within a year, so when I get to really focusing on my student loans, I'll be able to toss even more at it. Even more! Bwa-ha-ha.

Obviously, this is a very long term plan, and probably not even good for my anxiety. It's too big a project to handle. Still, daydreaming is fun.

My goal is just to have $500 extra in my budget each month. That's it. And for that, I just need three hours of concentrated work, five days a week.

Yay for stability!

Why Soda Calms Me Down

2010-06-01T11:06:00.000-06:00

I always feel a little sketchy when I go and get a soda (or a candy bar) in order to calm down, but I think I can effectively evade that little guilt glitch. Here's why.

I stumbled across this article when, after an hour of intense work (right after breakfast) I felt hungry again:

http://caloriecount.about.com/thinking-burn-calories-q4079

The basic summary is that you don't burn many extra calories by thinking hard, but your brain goes through glucose a lot more rapidly. Glucose is the major fuel that your brain uses in order to keep functioning, especially in high intensity thought patterns.

I looked up which foods have lots of glucose, and it's basically sugary foods, especially sodas, candies, and fruits are the fastest way to get glucose into your blood stream. Then, it all clicked. The reason I calm down when I have a soda is that my mind, which has been freaking out about its glucose levels, now has the materials it needs

So there's multiple bits of good news. One is that I don't have to beat myself up about craving a Dr Pepper every so often. The other is that fruit may fix the issue as well (I really need to get more fruit for my apartment). Regardless, more understanding is always uber!