Saathi haath badhana, saathi, haath badhana;
ek akela thak jaayega, mil kar bojh uthana,
saathi haath badhana, saathi, haath badhana....
mehnat apni lekh ki diksha,
mehnat se kya darna,
kal gairon ki khatir ki aaj apni khatir karna,
fauladi hain seene apne, fauladi hain bahein,
HAM CHAHE TO PAIDA KARDE CHATANO MAIN RAAHEIN,
saathi haath badhana...
jai ho!ganesh.
P.S. : see you, soon, after some real achievements!
Friday, August 29, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Quo Vadis? Whither goest thou?
Yahaan kaun hain tera, musafir jaayega kahan, dam le le ghadi bhar, ke saiyan, payega kahan, yahan kaun hain, tera, a, aa, aaa!
great S.D. burman! what a soulful rendering.
similarly, the inimitable mukesh!
jeena yahan, marna yahan, iske sivai jaana kahan...!
Life is miserably blissful for the incorrigbly good!
what to do?!
the sitting ducks have to endure it, as long as they won't budge, and continue to be the sitting ducks/good samaritans!
meri duniya hain maa, tere anchal main, sheetal chaya...
again lovely song by burmanda!
jai ho!
ganesh.
great S.D. burman! what a soulful rendering.
similarly, the inimitable mukesh!
jeena yahan, marna yahan, iske sivai jaana kahan...!
Life is miserably blissful for the incorrigbly good!
what to do?!
the sitting ducks have to endure it, as long as they won't budge, and continue to be the sitting ducks/good samaritans!
meri duniya hain maa, tere anchal main, sheetal chaya...
again lovely song by burmanda!
jai ho!
ganesh.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The bitter halves?!
Is marriage still an institution, really preferred by the majority?
Today, it is more a case of bitter halves!
neither wants to be the better half!
or is it only something superficially evident in the metros?
A cause for concern, or natural evolution!
In any case, future shock/modernity has cast its ominous shadow over the future of mankind's great social invention : the marriage, the bedrock of family/the unit of society!
is there hope?
are things changing for the better?
should we be concerned?! of just go with the flow?
as in JUST DO IT! and think about repenting later!! if at all!
yahaan main ajnabi hoon, main jo bhi bas wahi hoon.....!
jai hind!
jai ho!
ganesh.
Today, it is more a case of bitter halves!
neither wants to be the better half!
or is it only something superficially evident in the metros?
A cause for concern, or natural evolution!
In any case, future shock/modernity has cast its ominous shadow over the future of mankind's great social invention : the marriage, the bedrock of family/the unit of society!
is there hope?
are things changing for the better?
should we be concerned?! of just go with the flow?
as in JUST DO IT! and think about repenting later!! if at all!
yahaan main ajnabi hoon, main jo bhi bas wahi hoon.....!
jai hind!
jai ho!
ganesh.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Friday, August 15, 2008
What is true freedom?! When are really independent?!
The inner freedom is not so easily obtained.
Apparently, one is living in a free country, having access to all things bright and beautiful, good and bad and can do as we please, as long as we don't overtly break law!
Is that true freedom? are we really independent?
Some of us are chained to the idea of TOTAL FREEDOM and would not accept any good idea, just for the sake of opposing/their right to dissent/the freedom of expression!
so, some of us maybe be well and truly bonded to freedom! chained by the need to be/look/feel free all the time!
on the other hand, if the inner self is in control, deliberates all options, with a sense of responsibility to oneself and the world around us, then one can truly be free.
The farmer who sits contented at the end of a long, hard day, and looks forward to a good meal, with his wife and kids, and a very unglamorous existence, may be free in the best sense of the term, both physically and mentally. He has no benchmarks to follow/no set path to aspire to!
he is so one with nature!
of course, he loses this independence in these modern times, with GE crops, et. al!
he is truly free, he has a wonderful interdependent relationship with nature and his fellow human beings.
He serves nature well and nature serves him well!
of course, all of us are thankful to the farmers for our daily annam!
Isiliye to Lal Bahadur Shashtri ji ne kahan tha :
JAI JAWAN, JAI KISAN!
jai ho!
Jai hind!
as we wrestle with the dilemma of apparent and true freedom!
one of the remarkable achievements of bharatvarsha has been that even though we were an occupied nation for centuries, through our intellectual brilliance, emotionally and spiritual resilience, we remained free inside! Nobody could invade our minds!
can the same be said in this 62nd year of independence, in the increasingly connected but not-so-free world?!
time will tell!
I am quietly confident that our resilient inner self will reassert itself, sooner rather than later!
thathastu!
tat tvam asi!
jai ho!
ganesh.
chennai.
7.27 p.m./15th August, 2008
Apparently, one is living in a free country, having access to all things bright and beautiful, good and bad and can do as we please, as long as we don't overtly break law!
Is that true freedom? are we really independent?
Some of us are chained to the idea of TOTAL FREEDOM and would not accept any good idea, just for the sake of opposing/their right to dissent/the freedom of expression!
so, some of us maybe be well and truly bonded to freedom! chained by the need to be/look/feel free all the time!
on the other hand, if the inner self is in control, deliberates all options, with a sense of responsibility to oneself and the world around us, then one can truly be free.
The farmer who sits contented at the end of a long, hard day, and looks forward to a good meal, with his wife and kids, and a very unglamorous existence, may be free in the best sense of the term, both physically and mentally. He has no benchmarks to follow/no set path to aspire to!
he is so one with nature!
of course, he loses this independence in these modern times, with GE crops, et. al!
he is truly free, he has a wonderful interdependent relationship with nature and his fellow human beings.
He serves nature well and nature serves him well!
of course, all of us are thankful to the farmers for our daily annam!
Isiliye to Lal Bahadur Shashtri ji ne kahan tha :
JAI JAWAN, JAI KISAN!
jai ho!
Jai hind!
as we wrestle with the dilemma of apparent and true freedom!
one of the remarkable achievements of bharatvarsha has been that even though we were an occupied nation for centuries, through our intellectual brilliance, emotionally and spiritual resilience, we remained free inside! Nobody could invade our minds!
can the same be said in this 62nd year of independence, in the increasingly connected but not-so-free world?!
time will tell!
I am quietly confident that our resilient inner self will reassert itself, sooner rather than later!
thathastu!
tat tvam asi!
jai ho!
ganesh.
chennai.
7.27 p.m./15th August, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
WOS # 26 : 7 Ways to Tell If You Are Addicted to Porn, By Yvonne K. Fulbright
Superb analysis of the 'disconnected inside' syndrome, plaguing all ultra-educated people in most places around the world!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357323,00.html
------
FOXSexpert: 7 Ways to Tell If You Are Addicted to Porn
Friday, May 23, 2008
By Yvonne K. Fulbright
E-Mail Print Share:
FNC
Author’s note: This is not an article on whether or not erotica is morally wrong. It is not an article on whether porn use is an addiction (I'll get to those great debates at another time).
I pounced on it the moment it arrived. For months, I had been awaiting the publication of “The Porn Trap: The Essential Guide to Overcoming Problems Caused by Pornography,” eager to hear its take on what has become a national dilemma.
Like it or not, porn has become a problem in this country. Forty million Americans visit an Internet porn site at least once a month – and it’s hitting many where it hurts.
Not so coincidentally, therapists are reporting an increased number of clients presenting porn-related problems. For example, 50 percent of divorce cases in 2002 involved porn, according to “The Porn Trap” authors Wendy and Larry Maltz.
So how does a person know that they’ve fallen into “the porn trap”?
When does a fun escape for an individual or couple become a nightmare?
Your father’s Playboy is just that – so yesterday. Porn is coming at us from all angles, and we’re no longer talking suggestive pin-up girls.
Between unsolicited emails, deceptive Internet links, pop-up windows, chat rooms, videos, games and the more than 400 million internet pages of porn for your viewing pleasure, erotica is hard to escape, whether it’s soft- or hard-core.
Even if you thought you’d never be caught in the web of porn, the wrong click at the opportune time could have you hooked. Spicing up sex is just one of many reasons people explore all sorts of erotica.
Click here to discuss this story.
Maltz and Maltz outline the following reasons you may decide to innocently get in on the action – ones that may ultimately be a disaster waiting to happen:
— Your relationship, although committed, is sexless.
— Your understanding of sex is that porn equals pleasure.
— It’s easily accessible.
— You view porn as a stress reliever.
— You are having trouble being intimate with another human being.
It may seem harmless at first. Everything may seem under control. You’re just in it for kicks, right? But, as too many people can tell you, porn use is a slippery slope if you don’t keep yourself in check.
Here are some major red flags that you may have a problem with pornography:
1. You’ve become anti-social.
You are spending more time with pornography than you are with the outside world. If you are single (and even if you are putting yourself out there) your preoccupation with porn may be hindering your ability to establish long-term, monogamous relationships. If you are involved with someone, you may find yourself bowing out of couple and familial obligations to steal moments with your laptop or DVD player. Bottom line: You only have eyes for porn stars and no one else.
2. You’re lying to your partner.
Your once honest relationship is now plagued by secrecy and dishonesty as you try to hide your porn habit. About 70 percent of people keep their porn use a secret. And many will go to all sorts of extremes in making sure that they are not found out. Even when busted, many will do or say anything to hide the truth.
3. Your partner is no longer attractive.
Unbeknownst to your partner, s/he has competition – and it’s your favorite porn star. Obsessed with fantasy characters, you find it hard to get turned on to the real thing, including yourself. That’s right; you’re not even letting yourself off the hook. Casting yourself against fiction, you’re sizing yourself up as unattractive. Either way, you are likely avoiding or completely uninterested in sex with your lover.
4. Your sex life with your partner is suffering.
Both your sexual desire and functioning, including arousal, have taken a nose dive. You and your lover are feeling robbed of romance, passion and emotional closeness. This is because you are not truly present with your partner. Emotionally distant, you are too busy having sex with porn. Ultimately, you are dissatisfied with your actual sex life, and this is affecting your relationship.
5. Your concept of “real intimacy” has become warped.
When you re-emerge from the fantasy world, you’re finding that your expectations about sex, sexual partners and intimacy have become unrealistic. You’re only interested in those who look and act like porn stars (which severely limit your dating pool if single). Sadly, you start to think there must be something “wrong” with your lover for not putting out like a porn star. Furthermore, you’re objectifying others, wondering what he or she would look like unclothed or how they would act during sex.
6. The habit is causing you distress.
Torn between desire and shame, your use of porn is causing you physiological and emotional distress. You may feel like a “sex pervert,” or suffer from isolation, shame, anger, unrest, depression and irritability. You may be distressed over the fact that using porn conflicts with your value system. Overall, your porn kink is starting to cause family, work, legal and/or spiritual problems.
7. You are engaging in risky behaviors.
You might be OK with ideas that usually make you think twice, for instance, having unprotected sex, but now you are engaging in behavior that is out of control. Soliciting a prostitute, looking at child pornography or anything involving animals or violence warrants a need for help.
If your porn habit is causing you to neglect important life matters, you should seek professional help, especially if it is causing you and your partner distress. A sex counselor or therapist may be able to help.
It also wouldn’t hurt to read “The Porn Trap,” which I thought was well-written and thoughtful.
— National Strategy to Fight HIV/AIDS Needed. Advocates attending a congressional briefing Tuesday called on the U.S. to implement a plan targeting high-risk populations in reducing the stigma against HIV and AIDS. A plan mirroring the framework of the President George W. Bush’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief is being suggested by some.
— Aussies Prefer a Comprehensive Approach. A study out of the University of Sydney has found that most parents in Australia support comprehensive sex education programs starting in primary school. The vast majority want realistic programs that offer information on birth control and safer sex rather than abstinence alone. In fact, 15 percent of parents surveyed felt the topic of abstinence should be banned from sex education classes entirely.
— Up to 1 in Ten Women Suffer From Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD). A recent American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists meeting suggested that only one-third of those with HSDD seek advice or help. However, the condition can have a serious impact on one's quality of life, causing psychological distress and impacting intimate relationships negatively.
Dr. Yvonne Kristín Fulbright is a sex educator, relationship expert, columnist and founder of Sexuality Source Inc. She is the author of several books including, "Touch Me There! A Hands-On Guide to Your Orgasmic Hot Spots."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357323,00.html
------
FOXSexpert: 7 Ways to Tell If You Are Addicted to Porn
Friday, May 23, 2008
By Yvonne K. Fulbright
E-Mail Print Share:
FNC
Author’s note: This is not an article on whether or not erotica is morally wrong. It is not an article on whether porn use is an addiction (I'll get to those great debates at another time).
I pounced on it the moment it arrived. For months, I had been awaiting the publication of “The Porn Trap: The Essential Guide to Overcoming Problems Caused by Pornography,” eager to hear its take on what has become a national dilemma.
Like it or not, porn has become a problem in this country. Forty million Americans visit an Internet porn site at least once a month – and it’s hitting many where it hurts.
Not so coincidentally, therapists are reporting an increased number of clients presenting porn-related problems. For example, 50 percent of divorce cases in 2002 involved porn, according to “The Porn Trap” authors Wendy and Larry Maltz.
So how does a person know that they’ve fallen into “the porn trap”?
When does a fun escape for an individual or couple become a nightmare?
Your father’s Playboy is just that – so yesterday. Porn is coming at us from all angles, and we’re no longer talking suggestive pin-up girls.
Between unsolicited emails, deceptive Internet links, pop-up windows, chat rooms, videos, games and the more than 400 million internet pages of porn for your viewing pleasure, erotica is hard to escape, whether it’s soft- or hard-core.
Even if you thought you’d never be caught in the web of porn, the wrong click at the opportune time could have you hooked. Spicing up sex is just one of many reasons people explore all sorts of erotica.
Click here to discuss this story.
Maltz and Maltz outline the following reasons you may decide to innocently get in on the action – ones that may ultimately be a disaster waiting to happen:
— Your relationship, although committed, is sexless.
— Your understanding of sex is that porn equals pleasure.
— It’s easily accessible.
— You view porn as a stress reliever.
— You are having trouble being intimate with another human being.
It may seem harmless at first. Everything may seem under control. You’re just in it for kicks, right? But, as too many people can tell you, porn use is a slippery slope if you don’t keep yourself in check.
Here are some major red flags that you may have a problem with pornography:
1. You’ve become anti-social.
You are spending more time with pornography than you are with the outside world. If you are single (and even if you are putting yourself out there) your preoccupation with porn may be hindering your ability to establish long-term, monogamous relationships. If you are involved with someone, you may find yourself bowing out of couple and familial obligations to steal moments with your laptop or DVD player. Bottom line: You only have eyes for porn stars and no one else.
2. You’re lying to your partner.
Your once honest relationship is now plagued by secrecy and dishonesty as you try to hide your porn habit. About 70 percent of people keep their porn use a secret. And many will go to all sorts of extremes in making sure that they are not found out. Even when busted, many will do or say anything to hide the truth.
3. Your partner is no longer attractive.
Unbeknownst to your partner, s/he has competition – and it’s your favorite porn star. Obsessed with fantasy characters, you find it hard to get turned on to the real thing, including yourself. That’s right; you’re not even letting yourself off the hook. Casting yourself against fiction, you’re sizing yourself up as unattractive. Either way, you are likely avoiding or completely uninterested in sex with your lover.
4. Your sex life with your partner is suffering.
Both your sexual desire and functioning, including arousal, have taken a nose dive. You and your lover are feeling robbed of romance, passion and emotional closeness. This is because you are not truly present with your partner. Emotionally distant, you are too busy having sex with porn. Ultimately, you are dissatisfied with your actual sex life, and this is affecting your relationship.
5. Your concept of “real intimacy” has become warped.
When you re-emerge from the fantasy world, you’re finding that your expectations about sex, sexual partners and intimacy have become unrealistic. You’re only interested in those who look and act like porn stars (which severely limit your dating pool if single). Sadly, you start to think there must be something “wrong” with your lover for not putting out like a porn star. Furthermore, you’re objectifying others, wondering what he or she would look like unclothed or how they would act during sex.
6. The habit is causing you distress.
Torn between desire and shame, your use of porn is causing you physiological and emotional distress. You may feel like a “sex pervert,” or suffer from isolation, shame, anger, unrest, depression and irritability. You may be distressed over the fact that using porn conflicts with your value system. Overall, your porn kink is starting to cause family, work, legal and/or spiritual problems.
7. You are engaging in risky behaviors.
You might be OK with ideas that usually make you think twice, for instance, having unprotected sex, but now you are engaging in behavior that is out of control. Soliciting a prostitute, looking at child pornography or anything involving animals or violence warrants a need for help.
If your porn habit is causing you to neglect important life matters, you should seek professional help, especially if it is causing you and your partner distress. A sex counselor or therapist may be able to help.
It also wouldn’t hurt to read “The Porn Trap,” which I thought was well-written and thoughtful.
— National Strategy to Fight HIV/AIDS Needed. Advocates attending a congressional briefing Tuesday called on the U.S. to implement a plan targeting high-risk populations in reducing the stigma against HIV and AIDS. A plan mirroring the framework of the President George W. Bush’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief is being suggested by some.
— Aussies Prefer a Comprehensive Approach. A study out of the University of Sydney has found that most parents in Australia support comprehensive sex education programs starting in primary school. The vast majority want realistic programs that offer information on birth control and safer sex rather than abstinence alone. In fact, 15 percent of parents surveyed felt the topic of abstinence should be banned from sex education classes entirely.
— Up to 1 in Ten Women Suffer From Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD). A recent American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists meeting suggested that only one-third of those with HSDD seek advice or help. However, the condition can have a serious impact on one's quality of life, causing psychological distress and impacting intimate relationships negatively.
Dr. Yvonne Kristín Fulbright is a sex educator, relationship expert, columnist and founder of Sexuality Source Inc. She is the author of several books including, "Touch Me There! A Hands-On Guide to Your Orgasmic Hot Spots."
Koti-koti pranam to all the matas of the world.
Have you seen God?
Yes?
No?
Maybe?!
surely, yes! all the mothers (okay, the true mothers!) of the world are definitely divya shakti.
usko nahin dekha hamne sabhi, par uski zaroorat kya hogi, hey maa, hey maa teri surat se alag bhagwan ki surat kya hogi!
sachi muchi!
a happy pattanathu kuti payal!
(that's in tamil!).
Yes?
No?
Maybe?!
surely, yes! all the mothers (okay, the true mothers!) of the world are definitely divya shakti.
usko nahin dekha hamne sabhi, par uski zaroorat kya hogi, hey maa, hey maa teri surat se alag bhagwan ki surat kya hogi!
sachi muchi!
a happy pattanathu kuti payal!
(that's in tamil!).
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Wonder if there a wonder-pill for anything?! pill=positively ill!!
thought-provoking research on depressive effect of pills.
http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/news/hormones_depression.shtml
give me amma/pattiamma, old-school home-management anytime!
old-fashioned women were not necessarily shackled, they definitely did lead more happy, all-round lives, instead of just the hedonistic chasing of 'sensual pleasures'.
They might have suffered in silence or sacrificed a lot for their families/children, especially, but i would like to think that most did it willingly/naturally, rather than out of compulsion. matrutva is like that. all encompassing, unconditional love.
and here are the modern-day women, wanting to keep away from the godliness opportunity of child-rearing, and thus going against nature, they lower their naturally sublime/exalted selves.
hope to see the return of shakti to her rightful place as the queen of the home.
nuclear families/single, desolate souls would certainly be missing the loving touch of that sometimes-suffering, but always enduring and shining maa, who takes true pride and joy in her family doing well.
Today, there is no sanctity to family/marriage/relationships, well, in most cases, but certainly there must be exceptions and one can stem the rot/turn the tide by social awakening/interaction.
why can't we talk about these things with assertiveness, sincerity and an understanding, not with witch-hunting. the younger generation needs caring, affectionate understanding. their are witnessing living, private hells, and not able to voice it. VIRTUAL REALITY IS REALLY STINGING and the pity is nobody can see it/watch it and protect himself/herself.
the invidual vivekam is the only hope, and that is nowadays very feeble.
asman pe hai khuda aur zameen pe ham, aaj kal woh iss taraf dekhta hain kam!
phir bhi umeedon ko pal bhar ke liye jeene do.
for the sake of the children, young and old, and the sublime, human spirit, which must be maintained, otherwise the world will turn into a sophisticated zombieland/hell, in other words!
hell is bewitching, looks wonderful but feels awful!
give me a stark heaven anytime, devoid of all 'entertainment' of the mayajaal-kind but full of hope and possibilities!
hey, mahadev, ham sab ki aur aapki bhi laaj rahe.
jai hi ho.
ganesh.
http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/news/hormones_depression.shtml
give me amma/pattiamma, old-school home-management anytime!
old-fashioned women were not necessarily shackled, they definitely did lead more happy, all-round lives, instead of just the hedonistic chasing of 'sensual pleasures'.
They might have suffered in silence or sacrificed a lot for their families/children, especially, but i would like to think that most did it willingly/naturally, rather than out of compulsion. matrutva is like that. all encompassing, unconditional love.
and here are the modern-day women, wanting to keep away from the godliness opportunity of child-rearing, and thus going against nature, they lower their naturally sublime/exalted selves.
hope to see the return of shakti to her rightful place as the queen of the home.
nuclear families/single, desolate souls would certainly be missing the loving touch of that sometimes-suffering, but always enduring and shining maa, who takes true pride and joy in her family doing well.
Today, there is no sanctity to family/marriage/relationships, well, in most cases, but certainly there must be exceptions and one can stem the rot/turn the tide by social awakening/interaction.
why can't we talk about these things with assertiveness, sincerity and an understanding, not with witch-hunting. the younger generation needs caring, affectionate understanding. their are witnessing living, private hells, and not able to voice it. VIRTUAL REALITY IS REALLY STINGING and the pity is nobody can see it/watch it and protect himself/herself.
the invidual vivekam is the only hope, and that is nowadays very feeble.
asman pe hai khuda aur zameen pe ham, aaj kal woh iss taraf dekhta hain kam!
phir bhi umeedon ko pal bhar ke liye jeene do.
for the sake of the children, young and old, and the sublime, human spirit, which must be maintained, otherwise the world will turn into a sophisticated zombieland/hell, in other words!
hell is bewitching, looks wonderful but feels awful!
give me a stark heaven anytime, devoid of all 'entertainment' of the mayajaal-kind but full of hope and possibilities!
hey, mahadev, ham sab ki aur aapki bhi laaj rahe.
jai hi ho.
ganesh.
Monday, July 14, 2008
WOS # 24 : What happened to marriage? Mariapaula Karadimas, Simon Fraser University
speak out: What happened to marriage?
To me, marriage has always been grounded in the concept of true love. As a little girl I thought I would grow up, fall deeply in love with someone, get married and never look back. But today's generation, spawned from hippie, or at least post-'60s parents, grew up sneaking boyfriends and girlfriends into their bedrooms. Heck, some parents even took in their child's partner with open arms and parented both children.
The consequences of practising free love in our teens and early 20s do not compare with the consequences that our grandparents faced. We sure as hell don't need to get married to share a bed openly with someone. Perhaps this is the downfall of marriage. Even true love won't always prompt a ceremony, so long as the couple has the freedom to be free with one another. The 20th century has led us into temptation and we haven't looked back.
During my teenage years, pre-marital sex among my friends started between the ages of 14 and 17. Depending on with whom and how many, the most you would suffer was a little gossip and possibly a grounding. Marriage, a concept that helped build civilisations for time immemorial, is no longer necessary. Living in sin is hardly a threat to the social order of things.
However, for centuries, marriage was considered more important as a social construct than a true union between soulmates. Take the story of Romeo and Juliet; the pair committed suicide trying to re-write the laws of marriage - fighting for true love over social responsibility. Today, if we do marry, we are expected to marry because of true love, and not for the mere sake of a union between families or the security of future generations.
Soon marriage may be non-existent given the freedom we have to live in sin with our partners. Men and women do not even have the pressure to produce future generations. I have three sisters and numerous female cousins. We all agree that some of us may not want children, possibly wouldn't make good mothers, or are just too selfish to think about having full-fledged families. The pressure to find a home, a job, and a partner is hard enough; why add kids into the mix?
Will we be regretting our single or common law status sans children when we're 40 and are nearing the end of our childbearing days? Will there be a generation of singles who wish they had conformed to tradition when they had the chance? And if not this generation, then perhaps these will be, among others, the shortcomings of the generation that will lead us into the 22nd century - only a mere 95 years away.
Marriage has been reduced to the necessary pretenses of true love. But who are the romantics out there who believe true love can survive in the face of the new social construct of independence?
We look to television, where women have been accepted as single mothers since the days of Murphy Brown, and true love is a crap shoot. Take the shows The Bachelor and The Bachelorette, where a man or woman is faced with an onslaught of naughty, hard-bodied independent people, and the task of finding true love. Some are there for the sport of sexual competition, some for the idea of true love. And what a perfect setting, 20 singles vying for the attention of one individual - no holds barred.
Love, in the end, is a promise to marry, should the two survivors' love affair continue to heat up off-screen. Sometimes, their love is even tested with the option to choose money over the partner they have fought long and hard to be with. If true love exists, it will shine through the nasty, back-stabbing game-playing that is the marketing strategy of these shows. True love is truly put to the test. So far, no more than one couple resulting from these shows has lasted longer than a year. Isn't love supposed to be a whirlwind of emotion, something that you would put up a fight for to protect from the intrusion of back-stabbing and game-playing?
If true love is all we have to lead us to the altar, then marriage is surely a dying tradition. Is it not safe to say that marriage may not be around at all in the next century given the fact that it is no longer backed by the traditional order of society? Hasn't true love become a joke that is fed to us as we watch Nick and Jessica's reality show, Newlyweds, shot months before and is now simultaneously airing during their separation?
"Another one bites the dust," is the headline of so many entertainment weeklies displayed at the cashiers' stands as I stand in line at the supermarket with my common law boyfriend, who, at 25, I've been living with for the past six years.
To me, marriage has always been grounded in the concept of true love. As a little girl I thought I would grow up, fall deeply in love with someone, get married and never look back. But today's generation, spawned from hippie, or at least post-'60s parents, grew up sneaking boyfriends and girlfriends into their bedrooms. Heck, some parents even took in their child's partner with open arms and parented both children.
The consequences of practising free love in our teens and early 20s do not compare with the consequences that our grandparents faced. We sure as hell don't need to get married to share a bed openly with someone. Perhaps this is the downfall of marriage. Even true love won't always prompt a ceremony, so long as the couple has the freedom to be free with one another. The 20th century has led us into temptation and we haven't looked back.
During my teenage years, pre-marital sex among my friends started between the ages of 14 and 17. Depending on with whom and how many, the most you would suffer was a little gossip and possibly a grounding. Marriage, a concept that helped build civilisations for time immemorial, is no longer necessary. Living in sin is hardly a threat to the social order of things.
However, for centuries, marriage was considered more important as a social construct than a true union between soulmates. Take the story of Romeo and Juliet; the pair committed suicide trying to re-write the laws of marriage - fighting for true love over social responsibility. Today, if we do marry, we are expected to marry because of true love, and not for the mere sake of a union between families or the security of future generations.
Soon marriage may be non-existent given the freedom we have to live in sin with our partners. Men and women do not even have the pressure to produce future generations. I have three sisters and numerous female cousins. We all agree that some of us may not want children, possibly wouldn't make good mothers, or are just too selfish to think about having full-fledged families. The pressure to find a home, a job, and a partner is hard enough; why add kids into the mix?
Will we be regretting our single or common law status sans children when we're 40 and are nearing the end of our childbearing days? Will there be a generation of singles who wish they had conformed to tradition when they had the chance? And if not this generation, then perhaps these will be, among others, the shortcomings of the generation that will lead us into the 22nd century - only a mere 95 years away.
Marriage has been reduced to the necessary pretenses of true love. But who are the romantics out there who believe true love can survive in the face of the new social construct of independence?
We look to television, where women have been accepted as single mothers since the days of Murphy Brown, and true love is a crap shoot. Take the shows The Bachelor and The Bachelorette, where a man or woman is faced with an onslaught of naughty, hard-bodied independent people, and the task of finding true love. Some are there for the sport of sexual competition, some for the idea of true love. And what a perfect setting, 20 singles vying for the attention of one individual - no holds barred.
Love, in the end, is a promise to marry, should the two survivors' love affair continue to heat up off-screen. Sometimes, their love is even tested with the option to choose money over the partner they have fought long and hard to be with. If true love exists, it will shine through the nasty, back-stabbing game-playing that is the marketing strategy of these shows. True love is truly put to the test. So far, no more than one couple resulting from these shows has lasted longer than a year. Isn't love supposed to be a whirlwind of emotion, something that you would put up a fight for to protect from the intrusion of back-stabbing and game-playing?
If true love is all we have to lead us to the altar, then marriage is surely a dying tradition. Is it not safe to say that marriage may not be around at all in the next century given the fact that it is no longer backed by the traditional order of society? Hasn't true love become a joke that is fed to us as we watch Nick and Jessica's reality show, Newlyweds, shot months before and is now simultaneously airing during their separation?
"Another one bites the dust," is the headline of so many entertainment weeklies displayed at the cashiers' stands as I stand in line at the supermarket with my common law boyfriend, who, at 25, I've been living with for the past six years.
WOS # 23
Great, inspiring article from the link :
http://www.aol.com.au/lifestyle/story/At-67-hippie-midwife-crusades-on-for-natural-childbirth/182711/index.html
----------
shows that true mettle/worth always shows up! the impersonal PC culture can't keep good, simple people down for long! goodness and natural justice prevails, later rather than sooner, these days, but prevail it does!
jai ho!
gi.
----------
At 67, hippie-midwife crusades on for natural childbirth
Despite living on a commune in rural Tennessee, Ina May Gaskin has had the kind of career success most people only dream about.
A midwife who never formally studied nursing, Gaskin has helped to bring home birth and lay midwifery back from the brink of extinction in the U.S. An obstetrical maneuver she learned from the indigenous Mayans of Guatemala has made it into scientific journals and medical textbooks, and her insistence on the rights of a birthing mother empowered a generation of women to demand changes from doctors and hospitals.
With a lifetime of accomplishment, the 67-year-old Gaskin has earned the right to slow down. But that is the farthest thing from her mind.
"At the time we began, I couldn't have dreamed that in 25 years' time women would be actively seeking Caesareans," she said.
Gaskin largely blames the nation's rising maternal death rate on the increase in Caesarean section births and the drugs sometimes used to induce labor.
The National Center for Health Statistics reported last month that the maternal death rate for 2005 has risen to about 15 women per 100,000 live births, more than double the 1998 rate of seven.
At least part of that increase is due to better reporting, but researchers say Caesareans also may be a factor.
Gaskin passionately believes natural childbirth is the answer. The number of women giving birth with a midwife has doubled over the last decade and accounts for about 8 percent of births today - the vast majority in hospitals. Still, she says it's a challenge to promote natural birth to a generation that favors comfort and convenience.
Promoting home births is an even tougher sell. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has continuously warned against home births as too risky.
In 1975, Gaskin published "Spiritual Midwifery," which included birth stories and a primer on delivering babies. Her book has sold around 750,000 copies, has been translated into four languages and has inspired a generation of women to become midwives.
Part of Gaskin's success has been that she combines an analytical mind with an instinctual understanding of birth.
She promoted the idea that a woman's state of mind will influence how easy her birth is and encouraged unorthodox ways to improve the woman's experience, like encouraging her to make out with her husband during labor.
At the same time, she kept detailed records of each birth, providing her commune, The Farm, with statistics that would prove important in the debate over the safety of out-of-hospital births.
She has tried to widen the reach of her message by airing natural birth videos from The Farm on television. "The women are so beautiful giving birth," she said.
TV stations rarely have run them, calling them too graphic.
"I started to think I should put them on YouTube," Gaskin said.
But the high rate of Caesarean sections in the U.S. may help Gaskin's message gain some traction. Former talk show host Ricki Lake produced and starred in a recent documentary that features Gaskin and is critical of hospital births and their high rate of C-sections.
The U.S. now has a Caesarean section rate of 31 percent, a figure the College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists agrees is troubling.
At the same time, this group of doctors who perform the C-sections also reiterates its "long-standing opposition to home births." In a recent statement, the organization said childbirth decisions "should not be dictated by what's fashionable, trendy, or the latest cause celebre."
Home births are not safe, their statement warns, because "a seemingly normal labor and delivery can quickly become life-threatening."
Over the years, studies on the safety of home births have conflicted. The doctors' group says research comparing the safety of home and hospital births has been limited and is not scientifically rigorous.
Their organization approves of the assistance of hospital midwives certified by the American College of Nurse Midwives. These midwives have nursing degrees or comparable training. The college of obstetricians warns against lay midwives like Gaskin, who have no formal medical training and who aid in home births.
Even so, the College of Nurse Midwives says home births can be safe and they are fans of Gaskin's. "She's quite a remarkable woman and an icon of midwifery," said Mairi Breen Rothman, a nurse midwife and consultant to the midwives college. Rothman herself was inspired by Gaskin's book.
Gaskin began her practice as one of about 250 hippies who pooled their money in 1971 to buy rural land south of Nashville to form a commune. Soon she and a few other women on The Farm were delivering 25 to 30 babies each month.
While training herself, Gaskin sought out doctors and other midwives and devoured medical texts. But she never sought a medical degree, instead helping to create an alternative certification so lay midwives could prove their competency.
Not all obstetricians think home births are inherently unsafe. New York obstetrician Heidi Rinehart spent a few weeks at The Farm while a medical student. Although her husband also is an obstetrician, when they were having a baby, they asked Gaskin to be their midwife.
But even doctors who've never heard of Gaskin have felt her influence because of patients who have read her books, seen her birth videos or heard her speak.
"They request or demand or vote with their feet to have the kind of birth they want," Rinehart said.
Now, Gaskin has a film in the works that is in keeping with her anti-establishment, freewheeling nature.
"We're doing a movie called 'The Orgasmic Birth,'" she said.
That's not a metaphor. Gaskin says that under the right circumstances women experience a sort of birth ecstasy.
"I mean, it's not a guarantee," she said, shrugging her shoulders and smiling, "but it's a possibility.
"It's the only way I can think to market it to (this) generation."
___
On the Net:
http://inamay.com
http://www.thefarmmidwives.org/
http://www.midwife.org/
http://www.acog.org/
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.aol.com.au/lifestyle/story/At-67-hippie-midwife-crusades-on-for-natural-childbirth/182711/index.html
----------
shows that true mettle/worth always shows up! the impersonal PC culture can't keep good, simple people down for long! goodness and natural justice prevails, later rather than sooner, these days, but prevail it does!
jai ho!
gi.
----------
At 67, hippie-midwife crusades on for natural childbirth
Despite living on a commune in rural Tennessee, Ina May Gaskin has had the kind of career success most people only dream about.
A midwife who never formally studied nursing, Gaskin has helped to bring home birth and lay midwifery back from the brink of extinction in the U.S. An obstetrical maneuver she learned from the indigenous Mayans of Guatemala has made it into scientific journals and medical textbooks, and her insistence on the rights of a birthing mother empowered a generation of women to demand changes from doctors and hospitals.
With a lifetime of accomplishment, the 67-year-old Gaskin has earned the right to slow down. But that is the farthest thing from her mind.
"At the time we began, I couldn't have dreamed that in 25 years' time women would be actively seeking Caesareans," she said.
Gaskin largely blames the nation's rising maternal death rate on the increase in Caesarean section births and the drugs sometimes used to induce labor.
The National Center for Health Statistics reported last month that the maternal death rate for 2005 has risen to about 15 women per 100,000 live births, more than double the 1998 rate of seven.
At least part of that increase is due to better reporting, but researchers say Caesareans also may be a factor.
Gaskin passionately believes natural childbirth is the answer. The number of women giving birth with a midwife has doubled over the last decade and accounts for about 8 percent of births today - the vast majority in hospitals. Still, she says it's a challenge to promote natural birth to a generation that favors comfort and convenience.
Promoting home births is an even tougher sell. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has continuously warned against home births as too risky.
In 1975, Gaskin published "Spiritual Midwifery," which included birth stories and a primer on delivering babies. Her book has sold around 750,000 copies, has been translated into four languages and has inspired a generation of women to become midwives.
Part of Gaskin's success has been that she combines an analytical mind with an instinctual understanding of birth.
She promoted the idea that a woman's state of mind will influence how easy her birth is and encouraged unorthodox ways to improve the woman's experience, like encouraging her to make out with her husband during labor.
At the same time, she kept detailed records of each birth, providing her commune, The Farm, with statistics that would prove important in the debate over the safety of out-of-hospital births.
She has tried to widen the reach of her message by airing natural birth videos from The Farm on television. "The women are so beautiful giving birth," she said.
TV stations rarely have run them, calling them too graphic.
"I started to think I should put them on YouTube," Gaskin said.
But the high rate of Caesarean sections in the U.S. may help Gaskin's message gain some traction. Former talk show host Ricki Lake produced and starred in a recent documentary that features Gaskin and is critical of hospital births and their high rate of C-sections.
The U.S. now has a Caesarean section rate of 31 percent, a figure the College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists agrees is troubling.
At the same time, this group of doctors who perform the C-sections also reiterates its "long-standing opposition to home births." In a recent statement, the organization said childbirth decisions "should not be dictated by what's fashionable, trendy, or the latest cause celebre."
Home births are not safe, their statement warns, because "a seemingly normal labor and delivery can quickly become life-threatening."
Over the years, studies on the safety of home births have conflicted. The doctors' group says research comparing the safety of home and hospital births has been limited and is not scientifically rigorous.
Their organization approves of the assistance of hospital midwives certified by the American College of Nurse Midwives. These midwives have nursing degrees or comparable training. The college of obstetricians warns against lay midwives like Gaskin, who have no formal medical training and who aid in home births.
Even so, the College of Nurse Midwives says home births can be safe and they are fans of Gaskin's. "She's quite a remarkable woman and an icon of midwifery," said Mairi Breen Rothman, a nurse midwife and consultant to the midwives college. Rothman herself was inspired by Gaskin's book.
Gaskin began her practice as one of about 250 hippies who pooled their money in 1971 to buy rural land south of Nashville to form a commune. Soon she and a few other women on The Farm were delivering 25 to 30 babies each month.
While training herself, Gaskin sought out doctors and other midwives and devoured medical texts. But she never sought a medical degree, instead helping to create an alternative certification so lay midwives could prove their competency.
Not all obstetricians think home births are inherently unsafe. New York obstetrician Heidi Rinehart spent a few weeks at The Farm while a medical student. Although her husband also is an obstetrician, when they were having a baby, they asked Gaskin to be their midwife.
But even doctors who've never heard of Gaskin have felt her influence because of patients who have read her books, seen her birth videos or heard her speak.
"They request or demand or vote with their feet to have the kind of birth they want," Rinehart said.
Now, Gaskin has a film in the works that is in keeping with her anti-establishment, freewheeling nature.
"We're doing a movie called 'The Orgasmic Birth,'" she said.
That's not a metaphor. Gaskin says that under the right circumstances women experience a sort of birth ecstasy.
"I mean, it's not a guarantee," she said, shrugging her shoulders and smiling, "but it's a possibility.
"It's the only way I can think to market it to (this) generation."
___
On the Net:
http://inamay.com
http://www.thefarmmidwives.org/
http://www.midwife.org/
http://www.acog.org/
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
44 years of immaterial brilliance-a short his-story in the making!
1). 1964-6th July : Birth in Karpakaunda vidhi, Coimbatore.
2). 1965-67 : The anjaan years : as an infant, in Chennai-mint street.
3). 1967-1969 : Chetpet, McNichols Road, Chennai. that bridge was there even at that time! studied L.K.G. in AVON English School, without knowing the origins of the name : stratford-upon-avon, the bard! learnt that after visiting the bard's home / hometown in 1990, during my first trip abroad! i think i went there with raghupathy!
4). 1969-1987 Jan. - those glorious, memorable years in apdo Vadodara/Baroda! Jai ho!
5). 1987 : ISMT, Ahmednagar + BSP, Bhilai.
6). 1988-1989 : BSP, Bhilai.
7). Dec. 1989 : Delhi tab door nahin tha! CII, DELHI.
8). Till May 7th, 1990 : CII, Delhi.
9). May 8th! 1990 till 1.9.1992 : CII, Chennai.
10). 1992-2000 : Out in the wilderness, THE ASK IT NETWORK, et. al.! wonderful experiments in life!
11). Oct. 2000-aaj tak! : Seahorse/MQCS, the dr. faustus saga, which hopefully will come to an end on 21st of July, 2008!
Jai ho!
and yes, definitely, for family's sake, if not for your own, MAKE THE NEXT FORTY-FOUR REALLY COUNT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jai hi ho!
ganesh.
2). 1965-67 : The anjaan years : as an infant, in Chennai-mint street.
3). 1967-1969 : Chetpet, McNichols Road, Chennai. that bridge was there even at that time! studied L.K.G. in AVON English School, without knowing the origins of the name : stratford-upon-avon, the bard! learnt that after visiting the bard's home / hometown in 1990, during my first trip abroad! i think i went there with raghupathy!
4). 1969-1987 Jan. - those glorious, memorable years in apdo Vadodara/Baroda! Jai ho!
5). 1987 : ISMT, Ahmednagar + BSP, Bhilai.
6). 1988-1989 : BSP, Bhilai.
7). Dec. 1989 : Delhi tab door nahin tha! CII, DELHI.
8). Till May 7th, 1990 : CII, Delhi.
9). May 8th! 1990 till 1.9.1992 : CII, Chennai.
10). 1992-2000 : Out in the wilderness, THE ASK IT NETWORK, et. al.! wonderful experiments in life!
11). Oct. 2000-aaj tak! : Seahorse/MQCS, the dr. faustus saga, which hopefully will come to an end on 21st of July, 2008!
Jai ho!
and yes, definitely, for family's sake, if not for your own, MAKE THE NEXT FORTY-FOUR REALLY COUNT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jai hi ho!
ganesh.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
WOS # 22 : Liberated Women? Think Again, by Joan Z. Shore
great short and sweet article, from :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-z-shore/liberated-women-think-ag_b_32289.html
--------------
Call it liberation, emancipation, sexual equality -- we are living under a grand delusion.
Women (and some men) believe we have made tremendous strides in the past 60 years. Rosie the Riveter returned home at war's end, raised a family, went on the Pill, joined a Women's Lib group, returned to school, got a divorce, got a job, took a lover, retired to Boca, and is now a happy grandma.
Email
Print
Buzz up!on Yahoo!Not quite.
Her grown daughter has been the victim of domestic violence, and her 20-something granddaughter is getting breast implants. Welcome to the Brave New World of post-feminism.
Because we have broken through a few glass ceilings, because men are helping a bit with the housework, because in a few places we can get an abortion, we tend to think everything is improving. But take a hard look at what is happening around us: in films, on television, in magazines, on the internet, and in real life. Have we ever been immersed in so much nudity, so much violence, so much mysogyny? Have we ever been swilled so much pornography? Have females ever been so extensively used for sheer titillation and commercial gain?
We look in revulsion at Muslim women wrapped in scarves and veils. We pity them, and we despise the male chauvinism that imposes that on them. But here's the catch: they are not caught up in our Western cult of exhibitionism and vanity. They are not openly competing with each other for men and men's favors. They are even, to a large degree, protected from assault and rape because they are virtually invisible. Home is their domain, husbands are their guardians.
Somewhere, between that repressive culture and our own permissive one, there must be a middle way. We must understand that an internet hooker, a porn star, a naked fashion model, is not a liberated woman but a subjugated one. She is being exploited, or knowingly exploiting herself, for the sleaziest motives, and whatever she earns for that is shameful money. Prostitutes have more integrity.
Let's be honest -- we have taken women out of the factory, out of the kitchen, out of the maternity ward only to turn them, again, into sex objects. Sixty years ago, they were pin-ups or calendar girls; today, they're advertising gismos and media bimbos. This isn't progress -- it's promiscuity parading as freedom. And the biggest danger is that this shallow, cynical view of women ends up making them thoroughly interchangeable, dispensable and, ultimately, vulnerable.
This is not simply a feminist issue; this is a question of where we place our values. As long as we encourage and reward women solely for their entertainment value, we are turning them into dolls and puppets. We are denying their human-ness, and our own. We are creating a seraglio society.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-z-shore/liberated-women-think-ag_b_32289.html
--------------
Call it liberation, emancipation, sexual equality -- we are living under a grand delusion.
Women (and some men) believe we have made tremendous strides in the past 60 years. Rosie the Riveter returned home at war's end, raised a family, went on the Pill, joined a Women's Lib group, returned to school, got a divorce, got a job, took a lover, retired to Boca, and is now a happy grandma.
Buzz up!on Yahoo!Not quite.
Her grown daughter has been the victim of domestic violence, and her 20-something granddaughter is getting breast implants. Welcome to the Brave New World of post-feminism.
Because we have broken through a few glass ceilings, because men are helping a bit with the housework, because in a few places we can get an abortion, we tend to think everything is improving. But take a hard look at what is happening around us: in films, on television, in magazines, on the internet, and in real life. Have we ever been immersed in so much nudity, so much violence, so much mysogyny? Have we ever been swilled so much pornography? Have females ever been so extensively used for sheer titillation and commercial gain?
We look in revulsion at Muslim women wrapped in scarves and veils. We pity them, and we despise the male chauvinism that imposes that on them. But here's the catch: they are not caught up in our Western cult of exhibitionism and vanity. They are not openly competing with each other for men and men's favors. They are even, to a large degree, protected from assault and rape because they are virtually invisible. Home is their domain, husbands are their guardians.
Somewhere, between that repressive culture and our own permissive one, there must be a middle way. We must understand that an internet hooker, a porn star, a naked fashion model, is not a liberated woman but a subjugated one. She is being exploited, or knowingly exploiting herself, for the sleaziest motives, and whatever she earns for that is shameful money. Prostitutes have more integrity.
Let's be honest -- we have taken women out of the factory, out of the kitchen, out of the maternity ward only to turn them, again, into sex objects. Sixty years ago, they were pin-ups or calendar girls; today, they're advertising gismos and media bimbos. This isn't progress -- it's promiscuity parading as freedom. And the biggest danger is that this shallow, cynical view of women ends up making them thoroughly interchangeable, dispensable and, ultimately, vulnerable.
This is not simply a feminist issue; this is a question of where we place our values. As long as we encourage and reward women solely for their entertainment value, we are turning them into dolls and puppets. We are denying their human-ness, and our own. We are creating a seraglio society.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
WOS # 21 : The most important things in life
Pithy write-up from the link :
http://pages.prodigy.net/jmiller.cb/a398.html
------------
The most important things in life
What are the most important things in life? What do the
proverbs, the wise sayings of man through the ages, have to say
on this point? Let us search them. If we did so we would come
up with the following list:
- sufficient food to eat
- a good wife (or mate)
- good health
- a good conscience
- a good name
- wisdom, good sense, spiritual truth, understanding of
life
Now let us ask another question. What things are most commonly
pursued by man? What does the common, ordinary man pursue in
life? We can list them:
- temporary pleasure (gratification of appetites)
- material possessions, wealth
- social position, being "important"
- friendship, friends, acceptance by a group
When we ask the question "What are the important things in
life?" what we really mean is: "What things in life bring the
best happiness?" Both are just different ways of phrasing the
same question.
What a person pursues in life depends on what he values. His
values, basic tastes and preferences, determine his priorities
and the way he occupies himself and spends his time. The most
basic, underlying values of the wise man are Wisdom, Justice,
Goodness, and Virtue. These are his first loves. They are
what drive him, determining his tastes and preferences. The
ordinary man, however, has as his first love pleasure and the
other things we have listed. He occupies himself with the
pursuit of Thrill and Temporary Pleasure. He focuses on the
temporary pleasures available to him through catering to his
base appetites. He spends his time in front of a TV set
watching programs that excite his fantasies and provide him
temporary thrills and erotic pleasure; he finds his pleasure in
eating, sex, gambling, coarse humor, alcohol and drugs. The
wise man, on the other hand, is driven by a different set of
tastes and preferences, likes and dislikes. He is attracted to
that which gives spiritual understanding. He is interested in
the serious questions of life and society. He is interested in
the problems of his fellow man. He is interested in the
dilemmas of life --- spiritual, moral, economic, etc.. He is
interested in spiritual and moral truth. And he tends to
prefer activities that aid him in these interests -- that
provide insight, knowledge, perspective, etc.. He is likely to
be a lover of reflection and also of books.
What are the pitfalls of the pursuits of the common man? The
problem with these pursuits is that that most of them are both
illusory and, at least when taken to excess, self-destructive.
And that they tend to sidetrack his energies and attention from
the thing that is really important in life: the pursuit of
wisdom and spiritual truth.
The truth of the matter is that the path of temporary pleasure
is often filled with snares and traps. Very often it is a very
different one from the one dictated by wisdom and prudence and
one is forced to choose. And the way one chooses shows what
kind of person he is.
http://pages.prodigy.net/jmiller.cb/a398.html
------------
The most important things in life
What are the most important things in life? What do the
proverbs, the wise sayings of man through the ages, have to say
on this point? Let us search them. If we did so we would come
up with the following list:
- sufficient food to eat
- a good wife (or mate)
- good health
- a good conscience
- a good name
- wisdom, good sense, spiritual truth, understanding of
life
Now let us ask another question. What things are most commonly
pursued by man? What does the common, ordinary man pursue in
life? We can list them:
- temporary pleasure (gratification of appetites)
- material possessions, wealth
- social position, being "important"
- friendship, friends, acceptance by a group
When we ask the question "What are the important things in
life?" what we really mean is: "What things in life bring the
best happiness?" Both are just different ways of phrasing the
same question.
What a person pursues in life depends on what he values. His
values, basic tastes and preferences, determine his priorities
and the way he occupies himself and spends his time. The most
basic, underlying values of the wise man are Wisdom, Justice,
Goodness, and Virtue. These are his first loves. They are
what drive him, determining his tastes and preferences. The
ordinary man, however, has as his first love pleasure and the
other things we have listed. He occupies himself with the
pursuit of Thrill and Temporary Pleasure. He focuses on the
temporary pleasures available to him through catering to his
base appetites. He spends his time in front of a TV set
watching programs that excite his fantasies and provide him
temporary thrills and erotic pleasure; he finds his pleasure in
eating, sex, gambling, coarse humor, alcohol and drugs. The
wise man, on the other hand, is driven by a different set of
tastes and preferences, likes and dislikes. He is attracted to
that which gives spiritual understanding. He is interested in
the serious questions of life and society. He is interested in
the problems of his fellow man. He is interested in the
dilemmas of life --- spiritual, moral, economic, etc.. He is
interested in spiritual and moral truth. And he tends to
prefer activities that aid him in these interests -- that
provide insight, knowledge, perspective, etc.. He is likely to
be a lover of reflection and also of books.
What are the pitfalls of the pursuits of the common man? The
problem with these pursuits is that that most of them are both
illusory and, at least when taken to excess, self-destructive.
And that they tend to sidetrack his energies and attention from
the thing that is really important in life: the pursuit of
wisdom and spiritual truth.
The truth of the matter is that the path of temporary pleasure
is often filled with snares and traps. Very often it is a very
different one from the one dictated by wisdom and prudence and
one is forced to choose. And the way one chooses shows what
kind of person he is.
WOS # 20 : The most important thing in life
Great write-up from the link :
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Orbin2.html
--------------------
The most important thing in life.
Probably the most significant question we can ask ourselves is what is the most important thing in life. The question has far reaching implications in that the answers (or lack of them) that we arrive at can determine the course of the rest of our lives.
Many would consider money or financial success as the most important factor in life.The high rate of suicide amongst lottery winners would contradict this. Others would search for fame, yet the list of famous people who have committed suicide or died from an overdose of drugs continues to grow.
Good health would be high on anyones priorities, and the presence of love in ones life is also of major importance.
I would propose that wisdom is the most important thing in life.The best definition of wisdom that I have read is “ the best means to achieve the best ends”.Wisdom is needed to achieve the best results in the myriad decisions we all need to make daily in our personal,financial,family,work,community lives.
Each one of us has a unique mindset or set of beliefs which is continuously changing and which we use to make decisions, each of which has significant roll on effect on how the rest of our lives turn out.These mindsets are determined by the unique environments we have grown up in, our age, our education and the cumulative impact that each life experience has had on us.
Our unique mindset is either working in our favour or working against us in each and every situation that we face.One way that we can test how online our thinking is in a particular situation is to look at the results we achieve as a result of the actions we took. Good results means our governing beliefs were online, bad results means that we need to re-evaluate our beliefs to determine what caused the negative outcome.
I would propose that life is very much like a game and that a comparison between the two is very enlightening.In any game, you need to be fit, possess certain skills and have a good knowledge of the rules in order to participate.In life, we need to have a good knowledge of the rules that apply and to use this knowledge continuously in order to assess and make decisions in every situation that we face.The more intensely we play the game of life,the better our knowledge and application of the rules, the better the results we will achieve, much like a football player who is skilled, trains hard and knows the rules.
During the course of our lives we progress from being dependent on our parents for food and shelter and emotional support, to being independent as we become young adults.We learn to make decisions for ourselves, and as we see the results of our decisions we get feedback and the resultant experience adds wisdom to subsequent decisions.
The next stage is to develop relationships with others,or interdependence, and it is through these relationships that significant personal growth can occur.Many of us however have a low sense of self esteem which holds us back in relating to others.
How then do we make significant progress in our lives, as evidenced by personal growth or an increase in wisdom? We look at the results we have and are achieving in our lives.If our results are unsatisfactory, we reassess our beliefs and make adjustments to our actions.Additional important feedback is our emotions (fear, anger,unhappiness,disappointment etc) which acts as warning signs and which leads us to evaluate either our rules or beliefs, or our actions. Our target is to lead a joy-filled, intense yet balanced life, leading to good life results and continually increasing wisdom.
Author's Bio
Tony Orbin is a chemical engineer with a passion for the field of self improvement. He is in the process of starting to give courses in this field. Tony can be contacted on aorbin@iafrica.com.
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Orbin2.html
--------------------
The most important thing in life.
Probably the most significant question we can ask ourselves is what is the most important thing in life. The question has far reaching implications in that the answers (or lack of them) that we arrive at can determine the course of the rest of our lives.
Many would consider money or financial success as the most important factor in life.The high rate of suicide amongst lottery winners would contradict this. Others would search for fame, yet the list of famous people who have committed suicide or died from an overdose of drugs continues to grow.
Good health would be high on anyones priorities, and the presence of love in ones life is also of major importance.
I would propose that wisdom is the most important thing in life.The best definition of wisdom that I have read is “ the best means to achieve the best ends”.Wisdom is needed to achieve the best results in the myriad decisions we all need to make daily in our personal,financial,family,work,community lives.
Each one of us has a unique mindset or set of beliefs which is continuously changing and which we use to make decisions, each of which has significant roll on effect on how the rest of our lives turn out.These mindsets are determined by the unique environments we have grown up in, our age, our education and the cumulative impact that each life experience has had on us.
Our unique mindset is either working in our favour or working against us in each and every situation that we face.One way that we can test how online our thinking is in a particular situation is to look at the results we achieve as a result of the actions we took. Good results means our governing beliefs were online, bad results means that we need to re-evaluate our beliefs to determine what caused the negative outcome.
I would propose that life is very much like a game and that a comparison between the two is very enlightening.In any game, you need to be fit, possess certain skills and have a good knowledge of the rules in order to participate.In life, we need to have a good knowledge of the rules that apply and to use this knowledge continuously in order to assess and make decisions in every situation that we face.The more intensely we play the game of life,the better our knowledge and application of the rules, the better the results we will achieve, much like a football player who is skilled, trains hard and knows the rules.
During the course of our lives we progress from being dependent on our parents for food and shelter and emotional support, to being independent as we become young adults.We learn to make decisions for ourselves, and as we see the results of our decisions we get feedback and the resultant experience adds wisdom to subsequent decisions.
The next stage is to develop relationships with others,or interdependence, and it is through these relationships that significant personal growth can occur.Many of us however have a low sense of self esteem which holds us back in relating to others.
How then do we make significant progress in our lives, as evidenced by personal growth or an increase in wisdom? We look at the results we have and are achieving in our lives.If our results are unsatisfactory, we reassess our beliefs and make adjustments to our actions.Additional important feedback is our emotions (fear, anger,unhappiness,disappointment etc) which acts as warning signs and which leads us to evaluate either our rules or beliefs, or our actions. Our target is to lead a joy-filled, intense yet balanced life, leading to good life results and continually increasing wisdom.
Author's Bio
Tony Orbin is a chemical engineer with a passion for the field of self improvement. He is in the process of starting to give courses in this field. Tony can be contacted on aorbin@iafrica.com.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
WOS # 19 : Let's talk about Sex.
Great article downloaded from :
https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/9497/1/dreed.doc
https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/9497/1/dreed.doc
What others say! : How to reclaim your self-esteem, by Michelle Casto.
What others say! : How to reclaim your self-esteem, by Michelle Casto
From the link :
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/8854/self_improvement_and_motivation/10_ways_to_reclaim_your_self_esteem.html
-------------
The way you feel about yourself impacts how and why you do everything in life. If you feel good about who you are, then what you do will be an outside reflection of your innermost thoughts and feelings. Contrary to popular belief, self-esteem is not something anyone or any accomplishment can give you. Just because people like you or you receive an award, does not mean that you will love and take care of yourself. Positive self-esteem comes from within and does not change because the scenery or circumstances change. To have esteem for something or someone is to regard highly or favorably. High self-esteem is relatively stable even when the forecast looks foreboding.
Your self-esteem is like a star at night that shines brightest when it is the darkest. It is your inner light that burns brightly and freely no matter what is happening around you. A zen saying reminds us: “What was your original face before you were born?” Self-esteem is perfectly intact when we are born, in fact, it is inherent to us; however, it often diminishes over the course of our childhood. We lose a little of it whenever we fail, make mistakes, misbehave, feel guilty, refuse to forgive, neglect ourselves, and/or do things we are ashamed of. As an adult, we sometimes feel as if our “self” is in pieces--- that we are somehow not whole and complete.
This is not true. We are whole and complete even with our missing pieces and broken parts. We just need to decide to gather up ourselves up and become whole again. I am willing to bet that when you look back over your life, the first thing that comes to mind are the regrets, the sad times in your past. Do you see the pieces of yourself lying along the path of your life? The ones where you didn’t feel good enough, or where you were criticized or blamed by someone else? But have you ever stopped to look at the memories of when you won the prize, felt really great, on top of the world----those moments that prove what a wonderfully amazing human being you are? Try it right now, write down 10 things you are most proud of.
It is your birthright to love and honor yourself. The good news is that you can reclaim that which is yours.
What follows are 10 Ways to Reclaim Your Self-Esteem:
1. Define life success
One of the most empowering things you can do for yourself is to define your criteria for life success. This requires reflecting on what the key elements are and the experiences you wish to have.
2. Choose to be happy
Happiness is a state of mind. The Dalai Lama says that the very purpose of life is to seek happiness. He believes that if you train the mind to be happy, you will be. Likewise, you can train yourself for higher self-esteem.
3. Set challenging goals
How much you like yourself is often reflected in the level of goals you will set for yourself. Generally, people who like themselves and feel valuable, set higher and more challenging life goals.
4. Honor your core values
When you live by a clear set of values, it is easier to align your life with what is most important to you. When you honor your core values, (those things you would fight for), you honor your true self.
5. Enhance your energy
People with high self-esteem seem to have a reservoire of energy, and seldom get sick or let life’s set backs keep them down. Their energy and enthusiasm for life encourages them to take care of their body, mind, and spirit.
6. Maintain a positive attitude
Attitude determines your altitude. The more positive your thinking, the more positive your feelings, the more positive the outcome. There is nothing more powerful and creative than your thoughts, so you may as well make them positive and uplifting.
7. Be passionate
Passion takes hold of you and feels like “fire in the belly.” It is a source of power that enables you to get fired about life and make a difference. The more passion and zest you feel, the more alive and brightly lit you are.
8. Live by vision and work with purpose
When you know your life vision and purpose, life has more meaning and direction. Vision and purpose provide a sense that you matter, that you have a part to play, and that you truly belong here.
9. Reward success
Set yourself up for success by breaking big goals into daily action steps and take time to acknowledge and celebrate the small successes. This will feed your need for recognition and provides the extra push to keep you moving forward.
10. Make smart life decisions
When you care about yourself, you make smarter decisions. You take care to choose the right mate, occupation, and lifestyle that support you.
Self-esteem is an inner state that can be nurtured and cultivated. The National Association for Self-Esteem (NASE) defines self-esteem as the experience of being capable of meeting life’s challenges and being worthy of happiness. That definition underlines two key things: going after goals and choosing happiness. Another definition is the level that you respect and value yourself as a loveable, worthwhile human being.
Your self-esteem contributes to your vitality, energy level, persistence, and personal magnetism. It is not to be confused with “self-image,” which is the comparison of those around you. Self-image is about what is on the outside and causes you to judge yourself and others. It changes whenever the wind blows. This fosters competition and fragmentation.
Self-esteem is about what is on the inside, a belief in yourself and your abilities. Positive esteem focuses on acceptance of self and others. It remains constant despite the storm. This fosters cooperation and wholeness.
It is common to have high self-esteem in one area of life, like career, but not in others. The highest form of self-esteem is when you can accept all of yourself---- strengths, weaknesses, best/worst parts, and overall, still feel good about who you are and what you do. Someone with a strong sense of worth will believe in herself, take more risks, say and do nice things for self and others, can let things go, not take everything so personal, forget the bad and focus on the good in life.
How do you feel about yourself right now?
10: perfectly happy with my whole self
to 5: moderately happy with my whole self
to 1: not at all happy with my whole self
If you are less than a 10, commit to using one of these tips today and feel your esteem rise, create a stronger sense of self, and reclaim your inner power. You deserve to feel great!
From the link :
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/8854/self_improvement_and_motivation/10_ways_to_reclaim_your_self_esteem.html
-------------
The way you feel about yourself impacts how and why you do everything in life. If you feel good about who you are, then what you do will be an outside reflection of your innermost thoughts and feelings. Contrary to popular belief, self-esteem is not something anyone or any accomplishment can give you. Just because people like you or you receive an award, does not mean that you will love and take care of yourself. Positive self-esteem comes from within and does not change because the scenery or circumstances change. To have esteem for something or someone is to regard highly or favorably. High self-esteem is relatively stable even when the forecast looks foreboding.
Your self-esteem is like a star at night that shines brightest when it is the darkest. It is your inner light that burns brightly and freely no matter what is happening around you. A zen saying reminds us: “What was your original face before you were born?” Self-esteem is perfectly intact when we are born, in fact, it is inherent to us; however, it often diminishes over the course of our childhood. We lose a little of it whenever we fail, make mistakes, misbehave, feel guilty, refuse to forgive, neglect ourselves, and/or do things we are ashamed of. As an adult, we sometimes feel as if our “self” is in pieces--- that we are somehow not whole and complete.
This is not true. We are whole and complete even with our missing pieces and broken parts. We just need to decide to gather up ourselves up and become whole again. I am willing to bet that when you look back over your life, the first thing that comes to mind are the regrets, the sad times in your past. Do you see the pieces of yourself lying along the path of your life? The ones where you didn’t feel good enough, or where you were criticized or blamed by someone else? But have you ever stopped to look at the memories of when you won the prize, felt really great, on top of the world----those moments that prove what a wonderfully amazing human being you are? Try it right now, write down 10 things you are most proud of.
It is your birthright to love and honor yourself. The good news is that you can reclaim that which is yours.
What follows are 10 Ways to Reclaim Your Self-Esteem:
1. Define life success
One of the most empowering things you can do for yourself is to define your criteria for life success. This requires reflecting on what the key elements are and the experiences you wish to have.
2. Choose to be happy
Happiness is a state of mind. The Dalai Lama says that the very purpose of life is to seek happiness. He believes that if you train the mind to be happy, you will be. Likewise, you can train yourself for higher self-esteem.
3. Set challenging goals
How much you like yourself is often reflected in the level of goals you will set for yourself. Generally, people who like themselves and feel valuable, set higher and more challenging life goals.
4. Honor your core values
When you live by a clear set of values, it is easier to align your life with what is most important to you. When you honor your core values, (those things you would fight for), you honor your true self.
5. Enhance your energy
People with high self-esteem seem to have a reservoire of energy, and seldom get sick or let life’s set backs keep them down. Their energy and enthusiasm for life encourages them to take care of their body, mind, and spirit.
6. Maintain a positive attitude
Attitude determines your altitude. The more positive your thinking, the more positive your feelings, the more positive the outcome. There is nothing more powerful and creative than your thoughts, so you may as well make them positive and uplifting.
7. Be passionate
Passion takes hold of you and feels like “fire in the belly.” It is a source of power that enables you to get fired about life and make a difference. The more passion and zest you feel, the more alive and brightly lit you are.
8. Live by vision and work with purpose
When you know your life vision and purpose, life has more meaning and direction. Vision and purpose provide a sense that you matter, that you have a part to play, and that you truly belong here.
9. Reward success
Set yourself up for success by breaking big goals into daily action steps and take time to acknowledge and celebrate the small successes. This will feed your need for recognition and provides the extra push to keep you moving forward.
10. Make smart life decisions
When you care about yourself, you make smarter decisions. You take care to choose the right mate, occupation, and lifestyle that support you.
Self-esteem is an inner state that can be nurtured and cultivated. The National Association for Self-Esteem (NASE) defines self-esteem as the experience of being capable of meeting life’s challenges and being worthy of happiness. That definition underlines two key things: going after goals and choosing happiness. Another definition is the level that you respect and value yourself as a loveable, worthwhile human being.
Your self-esteem contributes to your vitality, energy level, persistence, and personal magnetism. It is not to be confused with “self-image,” which is the comparison of those around you. Self-image is about what is on the outside and causes you to judge yourself and others. It changes whenever the wind blows. This fosters competition and fragmentation.
Self-esteem is about what is on the inside, a belief in yourself and your abilities. Positive esteem focuses on acceptance of self and others. It remains constant despite the storm. This fosters cooperation and wholeness.
It is common to have high self-esteem in one area of life, like career, but not in others. The highest form of self-esteem is when you can accept all of yourself---- strengths, weaknesses, best/worst parts, and overall, still feel good about who you are and what you do. Someone with a strong sense of worth will believe in herself, take more risks, say and do nice things for self and others, can let things go, not take everything so personal, forget the bad and focus on the good in life.
How do you feel about yourself right now?
10: perfectly happy with my whole self
to 5: moderately happy with my whole self
to 1: not at all happy with my whole self
If you are less than a 10, commit to using one of these tips today and feel your esteem rise, create a stronger sense of self, and reclaim your inner power. You deserve to feel great!
Doing good is also an eternal JOY!
A thing of beauty may or not be a joy for ever! especially when it is not inanimate!
however, doing good/being good; practising the nobler aspects of being a human being, can always be an ETERNAL JOY!
My utmost for the highest!
Try it out. you will certainly get greater joy in reaching out and touching people's hearts and souls, rather than just fulfil your heart's bidding or just crave for the 'ever-changing' apparently wondrous objects!
Fulfil the higher desire, and you will be rarely be unhappy! the baser desires will also be fulfilled, and beyond too!
jai hi ho!
nanha munha rahi hoon, des ka sipahi hoon, bolo mere sang, jai hind, jai hind, jai hind, jai hind!
gi.
however, doing good/being good; practising the nobler aspects of being a human being, can always be an ETERNAL JOY!
My utmost for the highest!
Try it out. you will certainly get greater joy in reaching out and touching people's hearts and souls, rather than just fulfil your heart's bidding or just crave for the 'ever-changing' apparently wondrous objects!
Fulfil the higher desire, and you will be rarely be unhappy! the baser desires will also be fulfilled, and beyond too!
jai hi ho!
nanha munha rahi hoon, des ka sipahi hoon, bolo mere sang, jai hind, jai hind, jai hind, jai hind!
gi.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Opium of the classes?!
If cricket was the opium of the masses, in bygone days; then can one safely say, these days, that the following are the virtual opium of the classes/the ever increasing elitist-masses?!! :
a). The Net! (the name says it all! it is a trap! bachke rehna re baba! can't say we weren't warned! it was there in the name itself, right from day-1! the internet exterminates the inner consciousness, if one is not satark, or lets oneself go down the virtual spiral staircase!).
b). Social networking! (which is full on anti-social fellows!).
c). Parties!
d). Fashion events, which are silly at the best and downright obscene, at the worst.
e). Twenty20 cricket matches!
f). Following the debauched life of so-called stars/celebrities! the uninhibited icons, who have it all, flaunt it all, and go to dust, early, burying their intellectual powers, sans any sense of proportion or discretion!!
g). The media flash news!! just get trapped in this chain, and waste a lot of time?! think, think, prani..
h). Advertisements who have stopped going for the jugular, instead head straight for the temporary homes of distressed brains, these days, the crotch!
i). Entertainment! euphemism for anything goes!
j). Gadget ownership/frequent updation!
k). Mobile connectivity / inner disconnectivity and discord!
m). The increasingly seriously silly concept of being a global citizen, and losing one's sense of identity/astitva; and slowly stop being patriotic or true to one's own roots, out of a mistaken sense of getting ahead/modernising/keeping up with the roses and bushes!
n). Debunking parents and all elders; they are always wrong!
o). Mental cruelty to those who are powerless.
p). Hating those who don't belong/dare to be different/dismissing every sensible criticism with the strident cry of moral-policing! (btw, what does that make them? immoral thieves?!!).
q). Objectification of the genders! the mind, soul and the spirit are no longer important?!
r). HEDONISM, complete and full-blown in this increasingly materialistic world!
--------------
phir bhi umeedon ko pal bhar ke liye jeene do!
alak niranjan!
jai ho!
ganesh.
a). The Net! (the name says it all! it is a trap! bachke rehna re baba! can't say we weren't warned! it was there in the name itself, right from day-1! the internet exterminates the inner consciousness, if one is not satark, or lets oneself go down the virtual spiral staircase!).
b). Social networking! (which is full on anti-social fellows!).
c). Parties!
d). Fashion events, which are silly at the best and downright obscene, at the worst.
e). Twenty20 cricket matches!
f). Following the debauched life of so-called stars/celebrities! the uninhibited icons, who have it all, flaunt it all, and go to dust, early, burying their intellectual powers, sans any sense of proportion or discretion!!
g). The media flash news!! just get trapped in this chain, and waste a lot of time?! think, think, prani..
h). Advertisements who have stopped going for the jugular, instead head straight for the temporary homes of distressed brains, these days, the crotch!
i). Entertainment! euphemism for anything goes!
j). Gadget ownership/frequent updation!
k). Mobile connectivity / inner disconnectivity and discord!
m). The increasingly seriously silly concept of being a global citizen, and losing one's sense of identity/astitva; and slowly stop being patriotic or true to one's own roots, out of a mistaken sense of getting ahead/modernising/keeping up with the roses and bushes!
n). Debunking parents and all elders; they are always wrong!
o). Mental cruelty to those who are powerless.
p). Hating those who don't belong/dare to be different/dismissing every sensible criticism with the strident cry of moral-policing! (btw, what does that make them? immoral thieves?!!).
q). Objectification of the genders! the mind, soul and the spirit are no longer important?!
r). HEDONISM, complete and full-blown in this increasingly materialistic world!
--------------
phir bhi umeedon ko pal bhar ke liye jeene do!
alak niranjan!
jai ho!
ganesh.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
What is the point of it all?!
Kabhi sochta hoon, ki main kuch kahun; kabhi sochta hoon, ki main chupp rahun!
Aadmi jo kehta hain, aadmi jo sunta hain, zindagi bhar woh, sadayein picha karti hain!
to main faisla kar hi diya, ki aaj zyada nahin bolunga!
kyonki ham bolenga to bolega ki bolta hain..! wish there was a memsaab around as in that great pran/kishore song! of course, without the other saab, as kabab main haddi!
kabhi sochta hoon : Yeh jeevan : What is the point of it all?!
maybe it is pointless! but full of figures! figure that out! good night.
ganesh.
Aadmi jo kehta hain, aadmi jo sunta hain, zindagi bhar woh, sadayein picha karti hain!
to main faisla kar hi diya, ki aaj zyada nahin bolunga!
kyonki ham bolenga to bolega ki bolta hain..! wish there was a memsaab around as in that great pran/kishore song! of course, without the other saab, as kabab main haddi!
kabhi sochta hoon : Yeh jeevan : What is the point of it all?!
maybe it is pointless! but full of figures! figure that out! good night.
ganesh.
Friday, May 30, 2008
WOS # 17 : Shameless and loveless, by Roger Scruton.
Simply brilliant analysis of the modern problem of getting more than what one wanted, wanting more still, but in the end, not feeling happy/satisfied! the key human ingredient is missing in these mechanical pursuits! (to call them animal pursuits would be an insult to the innocent, natural animals! who do not know any better!).
hope you like reading this.
me just loved it!
for it celebrates love and not just the act of so-called 'love-making'!
jai ho!
ganesh.
Shameless and loveless
ROGER SCRUTON
The condition in which we now find ourselves is novel in many ways. Perhaps the most interesting is the enormous effort that is now devoted to overcoming or abolishing shame.
Venus with a Mirror
Titian (c.1555)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sexual intercourse began, according to Philip Larkin's famous poem, in 1963. Four decades have elapsed since then, and these decades have seen a growing recognition that sexual liberation is not the answer to the problems of sex but a new addition to them. Traditional sexual morality reinforced the society-wide commitment to marriage as the sole legitimate avenue to sexual release. It is easy to understand such a morality. It has a clear social function — ensuring stable families and guaranteeing the transfer of social capital from one generation to the next. And it has an intrinsic rational appeal in making sense of love, commitment, jealousy, courtship and the drama of the sexes. The problem is that, by impeding our pleasures, it creates a strong motive to escape from it. And escape from it we did, with a great burst of jubilation that very quickly dwindled to an apprehensive gulp.
The condition in which we now find ourselves is novel in many ways. Perhaps the most interesting is the enormous effort that is now devoted to overcoming or abolishing shame. The Book of Genesis tells the story of man's fall, caused by eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Until eating the forbidden fruit, the Bible tells us, 'they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed'. No sooner had they eaten, however, than 'the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons'.
When you do something wrong and are discovered you feel ashamed of yourself. This kind of shame is a moral emotion, founded on the thought that someone else is judging you. But it is not what is referred to in the verses quoted, which are about sexual shame. Sexual shame differs from moral shame in two ways. First, it is not a confession of wrongdoing: on the contrary, it testifies to the reluctance to do or suffer wrong. Secondly, it is not troubled, as moral shame is troubled, by the thought that you are being judged as a self, a free being, a moral subject. On the contrary, it arises from the thought that you are being judged as a body, a mechanism, an object. Hence the German philosopher Max Scheler described sexual shame as a Schutzgefühl — a shield-emotion that protects you from abuse, whether by another or yourself. If we lose the capacity for shame we do not regain the innocence of the animals; we become shameless, and that means that we are no longer protected from the sexual predator.
Shame still existed in 1963. Couples hid their desire from the world, and sometimes from each other — at least until the moment when it could be clearly expressed. Obscenity was frowned upon, and by nobody more than the prophets of liberation, such as Herbert Marcuse and Norman O. Brown. Sex, for them, was something beautiful, sacred even, which must not be sullied by dirty language, lavatorial humour or exhibitionist displays. Shame has since been banished from the culture. This we witness in Reality TV — which ought to be called Fantasy TV since that is its function. All fig leaves, whether of language, thought or behaviour, have now been removed, and the feral children are right there before our eyes, playing their dirty games on the screen. It is not a pretty sight, but nor is it meant to be.
This shamelessness is encouraged by sex education in our schools, which tries both to discount the differences between us and the other animals, and to remove every hint of the forbidden, the dangerous or the sacred. Shame, according to the standard literature now endorsed by the DES, is a lingering disability. Sexual initiation means learning to overcome such 'negative' emotions, to put aside our hesitations, and to enjoy 'good sex'. Questions as to 'who', 'whom' or 'which gender' are matters of personal choice — sex education is not there to make the choice, merely to facilitate it. In this way we encourage children to a premature and depersonalised interest in their own sexuality, and at the same time we become hysterical at the thought of all those paedophiles out there, who are really the paedophiles in here. I see in this the clear proof that shame is not a luxury, still less an inhibition to be discarded, but an integral part of the human condition. It is the emotion without which true sexual desire cannot develop, and if there is such a thing as genuine sex education, it consists in teaching children not to discard shame but to acquire it.
Equally novel is the loss of the concept of normal sexual desire. In 1963 we still saw homosexuality as a perversion, even if an enviably glamorous one. We still believed that sexual desire had a normal course, in which man and woman come together by mutual consent and to their mutual pleasure. We regarded sex with children as abhorrent and sex with animals as unthinkable, except for literary purposes. Thanks in part to massive propaganda from the gay lobby, in part to the mendacious pseudo-science put out by the Kinsey Institute (whose charlatan founder has now been admitted to the ranks of saints and heroes), we have abandoned the concept of perversion, and accepted the official view of 'sexual orientation' as a natural and inescapable fact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Scheler described sexual shame as a Schutzgefühl — a shield-emotion that protects you from abuse, whether by another or yourself. If we lose the capacity for shame we do not regain the innocence of the animals; we become shameless, and that means that we are no longer protected from the sexual predator.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, things have gone further. Around 1963 the philosopher Michael Polanyi presented his theory of 'moral inversion', according to which disapproval once directed at an activity may become directed instead at the people who still disapprove of it. By moral inversion we protect ourselves from our previous beliefs and from the guilt of discarding them. Moral inversion has infected the debate about sexual inversion to the point of silencing it. To suggest that it would be better if children were not exposed to homosexuality or encouraged to think of it as normal, that the gay scene is not the innocent thing that it claims to be but a form of sexual predation — to make those suggestions now, however hesitantly, is to lay yourself open to the charge of 'homophobia'. And this will spell the end of your career in any place, such as a university, which has freedom of opinion as its guiding purpose. In this area, as in so many others, the ruling principle of liberalism applies; namely, all opinions are permitted, so long as they are liberal.
Novel too is the way in which sex and the sexual act are now described. In 1963 it was possible — just — to believe that the language of Lady Chatterley's Lover safeguarded the moral core of sexual emotion, and showed it to be the beautiful and personal thing that it is. Sex, for Lawrence and his liberated followers, was still something holy, which could therefore be defiled. Forty years on we have acquired a habit of describing sex in demeaning and depersonalised terms. Having lost all sense of the human being as 'made in God's image', we take revenge on the body by describing it in what the Lawrentians would regard as sacrilegious language.
A significant contribution has been made, in this respect, by pornography. You can study a picture and see only lines, colours and shapes, while failing to notice the face that shines in and through them. So you can look at a person and see only the body, and not the self that lives in it. It is precisely our sexual interest that presents us with this choice: whether to see the other as subject or as object. And this explains both the charm and the danger of pornography, which represents people as objects, so that the body becomes peculiarly opaque, a prison door behind which the self shifts invisibly, inaudibly and inaccessibly. People are repelled by pornography and also fascinated by it, and now that it is available to everyone on the internet, it seems that just about everyone is logging on.
The growing toleration of pornography, which will soon be regarded as an industry like any other, protected against criticism by the same moral inversion that now protects homosexuality, is rapidly changing the way in which the human body is perceived. One way of understanding this change is by invoking Kenneth Clark's distinction between the naked and the nude. In Titian's nudes you will often find a lapdog, whose eyes and posture express an eager interest in the woman who reclines on the couch. Dogs have no conception of what it is to be naked, and their calm unembarrassability before the sight of human flesh reminds us of how very different the human form is in their eyes and in ours. In this way Titian returns us to the Garden of Eden, instructing us that we are not to see this body as naked, as though the woman were exposing herself to us in the manner of the girl on Page Three. The nude's sexuality is not offered to us, but remains latent and expectant within her — awaiting the lover to whom it can be offered not shamelessly, but nevertheless without shame. The dog reminds us that she, unlike he, is capable of shame, while being neither ashamed nor shameless. This stupendous fact is presented to us not as a thought or a theory, but as a revelation — the kind of revelation that is contained in every human form, but which is of necessity hidden by our daily commerce and retrieved and clarified by art.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This shamelessness is encouraged by sex education in our schools, which tries both to discount the differences between us and the other animals, and to remove every hint of the forbidden, the dangerous or the sacred. Shame, according to the standard literature now endorsed by the DES, is a lingering disability.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The people in the pornographic image are not nude like Titian's Venus but naked — even if they are also partly clothed. The focus is on the sexual act and the sexual organs, which are exposed, framed by the camera and detached from any personal emotion. In this way pornography effects a shift in focus — a shift downwards from the human person, the object of love and desire, to the human animal, the object of transferable fantasies. This shift in focus is also a profanation. By focusing on the wrong things we pollute and diminish the right things. In pornography, desire is detached from love, and attached to the mute machinery of sex. This is damaging to adults in just the same way that modern sex education is damaging to children. For it undermines the possibility of real erotic love, which comes only when the sexual act is hedged round with prohibitions, and offered as a gift and an existential commitment.
The growth of internet porn is easily explained, however. Pornography has a function, which is precisely to relieve us of commitments. Life in the actual world is difficult and embarrassing. Most of all is it difficult and embarrassing in our confrontation with other people who, by their very existence, make demands that we may be unwilling to meet. It requires a great force, a desire that fixes upon an individual, and sees that individual as unique and irreplaceable, if people are to make the sacrifices upon which the community depends for its longevity. It is far easier to take refuge in surrogates, which neither embarrass us nor resist our cravings. The habit grows of creating a compliant world of desire, in which the erotic force is dissipated and the needs of love denied.
The effect of pornographic fantasy is therefore to 'commodify' the object of desire, and to replace love and its vestigial sacraments with the law of exchange. When sex becomes a commodity, the most important sanctuary of human ideals becomes a market, and value is reduced to price. That is what has happened in the last few decades, and it is the root fact of post-modern culture, the ultimate explanation of what is observed and commented upon on every side — namely, that our culture has become not just shameless, but loveless. For the human body has been downgraded in our perception from subject to object, from self to tool.
The distinction between body and self is not to be explained as a distinction between the physical body and the ethereal soul. It is a distinction between two ways of seeing our embodiment. Nor is it a distinction that we can really apply to the rest of creation. But it belongs to the truth of our condition. And it is only when we look on people as we should, so that their physical embodiment becomes transparent to the self-conscious viewpoint that is uniquely theirs, that we see the moral reality. That moral reality is what is meant when it is written that we are made in the image of God. Take that phrase as a metaphor if you like; but it still refers to something real, namely the embodiment in the human form of a free being, capable of desire, love and commitment and capable also, therefore, of shame. This reality was vivid to us four decades ago; today it is still perceived, but through a glass darkly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this way pornography effects a shift in focus — a shift downwards from the human person, the object of love and desire, to the human animal, the object of transferable fantasies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These radical changes have consequences that nobody would have foreseen in 1963. It was still assumed in that year that men made advances, and that women gave in to them only when consent was complete. What happened thereafter was the responsibility of man and woman alike. This assumption can no longer be made. In the world of 'safe sex' those old habits of courtship seem tedious and redundant. If sex is simply the pleasurable transaction that is on sale over the internet and advertised in schools, then consent is easily obtained and easily signified.
But it seems as though consent, offered so freely and without regard for the preliminaries once assumed to be indispensable, is not really consent and can be withdrawn at any time, even retrospectively. The charges of harassment or even 'date rape' lie always in reserve. The slap in the face which used to curtail importunate advances is now offered after the event, and in a far more deadly form — a form which is no longer private, intimate and remediable, but public, militarised and, in America at least, possessing the absolute objectivity of law. 'Date rape' is now a serious and increasing crime on the American campus. It doesn't matter that the girl said 'yes', since yes means no. In the absence of feminine modesty, ardent courtship and masculine address — behaviour still common in 1963 — you cannot assume that a woman knows what she is doing when she does it with you. You might take this as showing that 'safe sex' is really sex at its most dangerous. Maybe marriage is the only safe sex that we know.
With the crime of 'date rape' has come the lesser crime of sexual harassment, which means (to put it honestly) advances made by an unattractive man. The choreography of seduction was inherited in 1963 from the institution of marriage. But it has since decayed to the point where men are forced to be blunt about what they want, while being no longer trained to disguise their desires behind an offer of protection. In consequence unattractive men, reduced to blurting out their sexual need to its reluctant object, expose themselves to humiliation. And because women, however much they are schooled in feminist ideology, despise men who fail to be men and who appear to treat them as mere commodities, 'sexual harassment' has become a serious and wildly proliferating charge, a way in which women can release their generalised anger against men — an anger which is itself the long-term product of sexual liberation, and among the most distressing of the many legacies of 1963.
For four decades we have been defying human nature, making purely theoretical assumptions which fly in the face of customs and instincts that have existed, in one form or another, from the beginning of recorded history. Sexual liberation is here to stay; but we should try to temper it, to rescue the natural order that it threatens, and to safeguard the two great projects which, since 1963, have been in such serious decline: the project of love and the project of raising children.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Roger Scruton. "Shameless and loveless." The Spectator (April 16, 2005).
This article reprinted with permission from Roger Scruton. See his web site here.
THE AUTHOR
Roger Scruton is a writer, philosopher, publisher, journalist, composer, editor, businessman and broadcaster. He has held visiting posts at Princeton, Stanford, Louvain, Guelph (Ontario), Witwatersrand (S. Africa), Waterloo (Ontario), Oslo, Bordeaux, and Cambridge, England and is currently visiting professor in the Department of Philosophy, Birkbeck College, London. Mr. Scruton has published more than 20 books including, An Intelligent Person's Guide to Modern Culture, An Intelligent Person's Guide to Philosophy, Sexual Desire, The Aesthetics of Music, The West and the Rest: Globalization and the Terrorist Threat, Death-Devoted Heart: Sex and the Sacred in Wagner's Tristan and Isolde, A Political Philosphy, and most recently Gentle Regrets: Thoughts from a Life.
See Roger Scruton's web site here.
Copyright © 2005 Roger Scruton
hope you like reading this.
me just loved it!
for it celebrates love and not just the act of so-called 'love-making'!
jai ho!
ganesh.
Shameless and loveless
ROGER SCRUTON
The condition in which we now find ourselves is novel in many ways. Perhaps the most interesting is the enormous effort that is now devoted to overcoming or abolishing shame.
Venus with a Mirror
Titian (c.1555)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sexual intercourse began, according to Philip Larkin's famous poem, in 1963. Four decades have elapsed since then, and these decades have seen a growing recognition that sexual liberation is not the answer to the problems of sex but a new addition to them. Traditional sexual morality reinforced the society-wide commitment to marriage as the sole legitimate avenue to sexual release. It is easy to understand such a morality. It has a clear social function — ensuring stable families and guaranteeing the transfer of social capital from one generation to the next. And it has an intrinsic rational appeal in making sense of love, commitment, jealousy, courtship and the drama of the sexes. The problem is that, by impeding our pleasures, it creates a strong motive to escape from it. And escape from it we did, with a great burst of jubilation that very quickly dwindled to an apprehensive gulp.
The condition in which we now find ourselves is novel in many ways. Perhaps the most interesting is the enormous effort that is now devoted to overcoming or abolishing shame. The Book of Genesis tells the story of man's fall, caused by eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Until eating the forbidden fruit, the Bible tells us, 'they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed'. No sooner had they eaten, however, than 'the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons'.
When you do something wrong and are discovered you feel ashamed of yourself. This kind of shame is a moral emotion, founded on the thought that someone else is judging you. But it is not what is referred to in the verses quoted, which are about sexual shame. Sexual shame differs from moral shame in two ways. First, it is not a confession of wrongdoing: on the contrary, it testifies to the reluctance to do or suffer wrong. Secondly, it is not troubled, as moral shame is troubled, by the thought that you are being judged as a self, a free being, a moral subject. On the contrary, it arises from the thought that you are being judged as a body, a mechanism, an object. Hence the German philosopher Max Scheler described sexual shame as a Schutzgefühl — a shield-emotion that protects you from abuse, whether by another or yourself. If we lose the capacity for shame we do not regain the innocence of the animals; we become shameless, and that means that we are no longer protected from the sexual predator.
Shame still existed in 1963. Couples hid their desire from the world, and sometimes from each other — at least until the moment when it could be clearly expressed. Obscenity was frowned upon, and by nobody more than the prophets of liberation, such as Herbert Marcuse and Norman O. Brown. Sex, for them, was something beautiful, sacred even, which must not be sullied by dirty language, lavatorial humour or exhibitionist displays. Shame has since been banished from the culture. This we witness in Reality TV — which ought to be called Fantasy TV since that is its function. All fig leaves, whether of language, thought or behaviour, have now been removed, and the feral children are right there before our eyes, playing their dirty games on the screen. It is not a pretty sight, but nor is it meant to be.
This shamelessness is encouraged by sex education in our schools, which tries both to discount the differences between us and the other animals, and to remove every hint of the forbidden, the dangerous or the sacred. Shame, according to the standard literature now endorsed by the DES, is a lingering disability. Sexual initiation means learning to overcome such 'negative' emotions, to put aside our hesitations, and to enjoy 'good sex'. Questions as to 'who', 'whom' or 'which gender' are matters of personal choice — sex education is not there to make the choice, merely to facilitate it. In this way we encourage children to a premature and depersonalised interest in their own sexuality, and at the same time we become hysterical at the thought of all those paedophiles out there, who are really the paedophiles in here. I see in this the clear proof that shame is not a luxury, still less an inhibition to be discarded, but an integral part of the human condition. It is the emotion without which true sexual desire cannot develop, and if there is such a thing as genuine sex education, it consists in teaching children not to discard shame but to acquire it.
Equally novel is the loss of the concept of normal sexual desire. In 1963 we still saw homosexuality as a perversion, even if an enviably glamorous one. We still believed that sexual desire had a normal course, in which man and woman come together by mutual consent and to their mutual pleasure. We regarded sex with children as abhorrent and sex with animals as unthinkable, except for literary purposes. Thanks in part to massive propaganda from the gay lobby, in part to the mendacious pseudo-science put out by the Kinsey Institute (whose charlatan founder has now been admitted to the ranks of saints and heroes), we have abandoned the concept of perversion, and accepted the official view of 'sexual orientation' as a natural and inescapable fact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Scheler described sexual shame as a Schutzgefühl — a shield-emotion that protects you from abuse, whether by another or yourself. If we lose the capacity for shame we do not regain the innocence of the animals; we become shameless, and that means that we are no longer protected from the sexual predator.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, things have gone further. Around 1963 the philosopher Michael Polanyi presented his theory of 'moral inversion', according to which disapproval once directed at an activity may become directed instead at the people who still disapprove of it. By moral inversion we protect ourselves from our previous beliefs and from the guilt of discarding them. Moral inversion has infected the debate about sexual inversion to the point of silencing it. To suggest that it would be better if children were not exposed to homosexuality or encouraged to think of it as normal, that the gay scene is not the innocent thing that it claims to be but a form of sexual predation — to make those suggestions now, however hesitantly, is to lay yourself open to the charge of 'homophobia'. And this will spell the end of your career in any place, such as a university, which has freedom of opinion as its guiding purpose. In this area, as in so many others, the ruling principle of liberalism applies; namely, all opinions are permitted, so long as they are liberal.
Novel too is the way in which sex and the sexual act are now described. In 1963 it was possible — just — to believe that the language of Lady Chatterley's Lover safeguarded the moral core of sexual emotion, and showed it to be the beautiful and personal thing that it is. Sex, for Lawrence and his liberated followers, was still something holy, which could therefore be defiled. Forty years on we have acquired a habit of describing sex in demeaning and depersonalised terms. Having lost all sense of the human being as 'made in God's image', we take revenge on the body by describing it in what the Lawrentians would regard as sacrilegious language.
A significant contribution has been made, in this respect, by pornography. You can study a picture and see only lines, colours and shapes, while failing to notice the face that shines in and through them. So you can look at a person and see only the body, and not the self that lives in it. It is precisely our sexual interest that presents us with this choice: whether to see the other as subject or as object. And this explains both the charm and the danger of pornography, which represents people as objects, so that the body becomes peculiarly opaque, a prison door behind which the self shifts invisibly, inaudibly and inaccessibly. People are repelled by pornography and also fascinated by it, and now that it is available to everyone on the internet, it seems that just about everyone is logging on.
The growing toleration of pornography, which will soon be regarded as an industry like any other, protected against criticism by the same moral inversion that now protects homosexuality, is rapidly changing the way in which the human body is perceived. One way of understanding this change is by invoking Kenneth Clark's distinction between the naked and the nude. In Titian's nudes you will often find a lapdog, whose eyes and posture express an eager interest in the woman who reclines on the couch. Dogs have no conception of what it is to be naked, and their calm unembarrassability before the sight of human flesh reminds us of how very different the human form is in their eyes and in ours. In this way Titian returns us to the Garden of Eden, instructing us that we are not to see this body as naked, as though the woman were exposing herself to us in the manner of the girl on Page Three. The nude's sexuality is not offered to us, but remains latent and expectant within her — awaiting the lover to whom it can be offered not shamelessly, but nevertheless without shame. The dog reminds us that she, unlike he, is capable of shame, while being neither ashamed nor shameless. This stupendous fact is presented to us not as a thought or a theory, but as a revelation — the kind of revelation that is contained in every human form, but which is of necessity hidden by our daily commerce and retrieved and clarified by art.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This shamelessness is encouraged by sex education in our schools, which tries both to discount the differences between us and the other animals, and to remove every hint of the forbidden, the dangerous or the sacred. Shame, according to the standard literature now endorsed by the DES, is a lingering disability.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The people in the pornographic image are not nude like Titian's Venus but naked — even if they are also partly clothed. The focus is on the sexual act and the sexual organs, which are exposed, framed by the camera and detached from any personal emotion. In this way pornography effects a shift in focus — a shift downwards from the human person, the object of love and desire, to the human animal, the object of transferable fantasies. This shift in focus is also a profanation. By focusing on the wrong things we pollute and diminish the right things. In pornography, desire is detached from love, and attached to the mute machinery of sex. This is damaging to adults in just the same way that modern sex education is damaging to children. For it undermines the possibility of real erotic love, which comes only when the sexual act is hedged round with prohibitions, and offered as a gift and an existential commitment.
The growth of internet porn is easily explained, however. Pornography has a function, which is precisely to relieve us of commitments. Life in the actual world is difficult and embarrassing. Most of all is it difficult and embarrassing in our confrontation with other people who, by their very existence, make demands that we may be unwilling to meet. It requires a great force, a desire that fixes upon an individual, and sees that individual as unique and irreplaceable, if people are to make the sacrifices upon which the community depends for its longevity. It is far easier to take refuge in surrogates, which neither embarrass us nor resist our cravings. The habit grows of creating a compliant world of desire, in which the erotic force is dissipated and the needs of love denied.
The effect of pornographic fantasy is therefore to 'commodify' the object of desire, and to replace love and its vestigial sacraments with the law of exchange. When sex becomes a commodity, the most important sanctuary of human ideals becomes a market, and value is reduced to price. That is what has happened in the last few decades, and it is the root fact of post-modern culture, the ultimate explanation of what is observed and commented upon on every side — namely, that our culture has become not just shameless, but loveless. For the human body has been downgraded in our perception from subject to object, from self to tool.
The distinction between body and self is not to be explained as a distinction between the physical body and the ethereal soul. It is a distinction between two ways of seeing our embodiment. Nor is it a distinction that we can really apply to the rest of creation. But it belongs to the truth of our condition. And it is only when we look on people as we should, so that their physical embodiment becomes transparent to the self-conscious viewpoint that is uniquely theirs, that we see the moral reality. That moral reality is what is meant when it is written that we are made in the image of God. Take that phrase as a metaphor if you like; but it still refers to something real, namely the embodiment in the human form of a free being, capable of desire, love and commitment and capable also, therefore, of shame. This reality was vivid to us four decades ago; today it is still perceived, but through a glass darkly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this way pornography effects a shift in focus — a shift downwards from the human person, the object of love and desire, to the human animal, the object of transferable fantasies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These radical changes have consequences that nobody would have foreseen in 1963. It was still assumed in that year that men made advances, and that women gave in to them only when consent was complete. What happened thereafter was the responsibility of man and woman alike. This assumption can no longer be made. In the world of 'safe sex' those old habits of courtship seem tedious and redundant. If sex is simply the pleasurable transaction that is on sale over the internet and advertised in schools, then consent is easily obtained and easily signified.
But it seems as though consent, offered so freely and without regard for the preliminaries once assumed to be indispensable, is not really consent and can be withdrawn at any time, even retrospectively. The charges of harassment or even 'date rape' lie always in reserve. The slap in the face which used to curtail importunate advances is now offered after the event, and in a far more deadly form — a form which is no longer private, intimate and remediable, but public, militarised and, in America at least, possessing the absolute objectivity of law. 'Date rape' is now a serious and increasing crime on the American campus. It doesn't matter that the girl said 'yes', since yes means no. In the absence of feminine modesty, ardent courtship and masculine address — behaviour still common in 1963 — you cannot assume that a woman knows what she is doing when she does it with you. You might take this as showing that 'safe sex' is really sex at its most dangerous. Maybe marriage is the only safe sex that we know.
With the crime of 'date rape' has come the lesser crime of sexual harassment, which means (to put it honestly) advances made by an unattractive man. The choreography of seduction was inherited in 1963 from the institution of marriage. But it has since decayed to the point where men are forced to be blunt about what they want, while being no longer trained to disguise their desires behind an offer of protection. In consequence unattractive men, reduced to blurting out their sexual need to its reluctant object, expose themselves to humiliation. And because women, however much they are schooled in feminist ideology, despise men who fail to be men and who appear to treat them as mere commodities, 'sexual harassment' has become a serious and wildly proliferating charge, a way in which women can release their generalised anger against men — an anger which is itself the long-term product of sexual liberation, and among the most distressing of the many legacies of 1963.
For four decades we have been defying human nature, making purely theoretical assumptions which fly in the face of customs and instincts that have existed, in one form or another, from the beginning of recorded history. Sexual liberation is here to stay; but we should try to temper it, to rescue the natural order that it threatens, and to safeguard the two great projects which, since 1963, have been in such serious decline: the project of love and the project of raising children.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Roger Scruton. "Shameless and loveless." The Spectator (April 16, 2005).
This article reprinted with permission from Roger Scruton. See his web site here.
THE AUTHOR
Roger Scruton is a writer, philosopher, publisher, journalist, composer, editor, businessman and broadcaster. He has held visiting posts at Princeton, Stanford, Louvain, Guelph (Ontario), Witwatersrand (S. Africa), Waterloo (Ontario), Oslo, Bordeaux, and Cambridge, England and is currently visiting professor in the Department of Philosophy, Birkbeck College, London. Mr. Scruton has published more than 20 books including, An Intelligent Person's Guide to Modern Culture, An Intelligent Person's Guide to Philosophy, Sexual Desire, The Aesthetics of Music, The West and the Rest: Globalization and the Terrorist Threat, Death-Devoted Heart: Sex and the Sacred in Wagner's Tristan and Isolde, A Political Philosphy, and most recently Gentle Regrets: Thoughts from a Life.
See Roger Scruton's web site here.
Copyright © 2005 Roger Scruton
Saturday, May 17, 2008
The devil is tired of Dr. Faustus!
Here's an interesting real-life twist to Goethe's famous Dr. Faustus story!
In real life, if one just keeps doing the good work, the DEVIL FINALLY STARTS STUMBLING!
he enjoys in making us miserable!
but if one proactively works towards elevating oneself above the supposed-misery, one gets the strength from the divine power of continuing to do the right thing even under tremendous pressure/unbearable duress!
the oppressor/devil gets tired and blinks! or loosens his nasty grip!
alak niranjan!
LET JUST GOODNESS PREVAIL!
ganesh.
In real life, if one just keeps doing the good work, the DEVIL FINALLY STARTS STUMBLING!
he enjoys in making us miserable!
but if one proactively works towards elevating oneself above the supposed-misery, one gets the strength from the divine power of continuing to do the right thing even under tremendous pressure/unbearable duress!
the oppressor/devil gets tired and blinks! or loosens his nasty grip!
alak niranjan!
LET JUST GOODNESS PREVAIL!
ganesh.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
GI's back! Hoshiyaar bhai sab hoshiyaar!
2230 hrs. - IST. / 14th May, 2008.
Something deeply primeval yet good, ancient yet pure, ignored but yet invaluable, STIRRED IN ME, DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY!
and yes, me not only listening to that INNER VOICE, but doing its bidding!
The gold-medallist shall return!
WATCH THIS SPACE!
the real-life adventure begins now.
and of course, jai hi ho! sab ka bhala mere aur apke ramji karen!
ganesh.
Something deeply primeval yet good, ancient yet pure, ignored but yet invaluable, STIRRED IN ME, DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY!
and yes, me not only listening to that INNER VOICE, but doing its bidding!
The gold-medallist shall return!
WATCH THIS SPACE!
the real-life adventure begins now.
and of course, jai hi ho! sab ka bhala mere aur apke ramji karen!
ganesh.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
WOS # 16 : Divorce hurts the children : By PANKAJ ADHIKARI
From the link :
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2007-06/01/content_884955.htm
------
GI's comment : Globalised misery, too?!! ponder over that, as the world goes about at break-neck speed after the fruits of globalisation/material wealth!
As the saying goes : OPERATION SUCCESSFUL, PATIENT DEAD! similarly : Individually prosperous but there is nobody home waiting for one/to be made happy or to make us happy! as an old tamil ditty would say : tulla de, tulla de, aatu kutti, enn kayil irrukaradu surakatthi! (rough translation : oh, little goat, don't jump too much, for your joy may be short-lived! the butcher is waiting with his big, sharp knife!).
So, what's the solution : Nidanam! Change is inevitable, no doubt, but you master it rather than being its puppet! decide when and what to change, just don't change your world or yourself, just because others are doing it!
Jai ho!
ganesh.
----
Divorce hurts the children
(China Daily)
Updated: 2007-06-01 07:06
Divorce may have been traditionally discouraged in China, but over the past 20 years the rate has increased considerably.
According to a recent report by the Ministry of Civil Affairs, more than 1.9 million couples got divorced in China in 2006, an increase of 128,000 couples or 7 percent over the previous year. Between 1985 and 1995, the separation rate more than doubled; it had tripled by 2006.
Another statistic from the Shanghai Civil Affairs Bureau published in March this year indicated that the number of intercultural marriages in China had been rising steadily and 2,960 marriages involving Chinese nationals and foreigners had been registered in Shanghai in 2006, up 22.97 percent. The number of intercultural couples getting divorced also increased.
Why are divorce cases rising?
Women in today's China are becoming financially more independent and this perhaps is one of the causes for the increased divorce rate. Besides, as divorce procedures have been simplified and employers do not have to be notified or asked to provide recommendations on the suitability of an employee's marriage plans, Chinese can divorce more easily.
One study found that divorce makes the majority of adults involved happier than they were before and it makes women happier than men. Although distressing, a break-up can be a positive life change, with women better able to cope with all its stages than men, the study found. Another finding: While women are more likely to feel relieved, liberated and happy, men are more likely to feel devastated, and confused.
Whether a divorce can make a woman happier and bring much-needed relief to her is debatable. The end of a marriage is brutally painful to all involved. But for the children, it is not only traumatic but may contribute to a negative outcome in their lives.
Children often get caught up in conflicts between parents. The children are forced to constantly witness angry and abusive fights.
Daughters often follow the example set by their mothers when it comes to relations with men. Young women whose mothers were in a live-in relationship are more likely to opt for cohabitation themselves. Also, these daughters tend to enter into live-in relationships earlier than others. Each relationship transition for the mothers - including divorce, widowhood or new cohabitation - increases the likelihood of cohabitation for their daughters.
Divorce makes parenting more difficult. In the absence of another parent, concerns like going to parent-teacher meetings and school programs and playing with the child are neglected. These issues are serious because they can lead to psychological problems.
Most children of single parents feel lonely. They shy away from extracurricular activities and often do not get required medical attention as the parent is busy.
Parents have responsibilities for their children's psychological and emotional development. A child's development gets seriously affected when one or both parents abandon their responsibilities. By deciding to separate, the parents fail to keep their commitment to marital and family roles.
Following their parents' divorce, children show more anxiety, depression, anger and apathy in their play and in their interactions with both children and adults. At the same time, they may resist adult suggestions and commands. Some children become much more aggressive.
Spare a thought for your children before you decide to break up.
E-mail: pankaj@chinadaily.com.hk
(China Daily 06/01/2007 page10)
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2007-06/01/content_884955.htm
------
GI's comment : Globalised misery, too?!! ponder over that, as the world goes about at break-neck speed after the fruits of globalisation/material wealth!
As the saying goes : OPERATION SUCCESSFUL, PATIENT DEAD! similarly : Individually prosperous but there is nobody home waiting for one/to be made happy or to make us happy! as an old tamil ditty would say : tulla de, tulla de, aatu kutti, enn kayil irrukaradu surakatthi! (rough translation : oh, little goat, don't jump too much, for your joy may be short-lived! the butcher is waiting with his big, sharp knife!).
So, what's the solution : Nidanam! Change is inevitable, no doubt, but you master it rather than being its puppet! decide when and what to change, just don't change your world or yourself, just because others are doing it!
Jai ho!
ganesh.
----
Divorce hurts the children
(China Daily)
Updated: 2007-06-01 07:06
Divorce may have been traditionally discouraged in China, but over the past 20 years the rate has increased considerably.
According to a recent report by the Ministry of Civil Affairs, more than 1.9 million couples got divorced in China in 2006, an increase of 128,000 couples or 7 percent over the previous year. Between 1985 and 1995, the separation rate more than doubled; it had tripled by 2006.
Another statistic from the Shanghai Civil Affairs Bureau published in March this year indicated that the number of intercultural marriages in China had been rising steadily and 2,960 marriages involving Chinese nationals and foreigners had been registered in Shanghai in 2006, up 22.97 percent. The number of intercultural couples getting divorced also increased.
Why are divorce cases rising?
Women in today's China are becoming financially more independent and this perhaps is one of the causes for the increased divorce rate. Besides, as divorce procedures have been simplified and employers do not have to be notified or asked to provide recommendations on the suitability of an employee's marriage plans, Chinese can divorce more easily.
One study found that divorce makes the majority of adults involved happier than they were before and it makes women happier than men. Although distressing, a break-up can be a positive life change, with women better able to cope with all its stages than men, the study found. Another finding: While women are more likely to feel relieved, liberated and happy, men are more likely to feel devastated, and confused.
Whether a divorce can make a woman happier and bring much-needed relief to her is debatable. The end of a marriage is brutally painful to all involved. But for the children, it is not only traumatic but may contribute to a negative outcome in their lives.
Children often get caught up in conflicts between parents. The children are forced to constantly witness angry and abusive fights.
Daughters often follow the example set by their mothers when it comes to relations with men. Young women whose mothers were in a live-in relationship are more likely to opt for cohabitation themselves. Also, these daughters tend to enter into live-in relationships earlier than others. Each relationship transition for the mothers - including divorce, widowhood or new cohabitation - increases the likelihood of cohabitation for their daughters.
Divorce makes parenting more difficult. In the absence of another parent, concerns like going to parent-teacher meetings and school programs and playing with the child are neglected. These issues are serious because they can lead to psychological problems.
Most children of single parents feel lonely. They shy away from extracurricular activities and often do not get required medical attention as the parent is busy.
Parents have responsibilities for their children's psychological and emotional development. A child's development gets seriously affected when one or both parents abandon their responsibilities. By deciding to separate, the parents fail to keep their commitment to marital and family roles.
Following their parents' divorce, children show more anxiety, depression, anger and apathy in their play and in their interactions with both children and adults. At the same time, they may resist adult suggestions and commands. Some children become much more aggressive.
Spare a thought for your children before you decide to break up.
E-mail: pankaj@chinadaily.com.hk
(China Daily 06/01/2007 page10)
What others say # 15 :The War of the Women : By Yahiya Emerick & Reshma Baig
Interesting counter-point article, from the link :
http://www.jannah.org/sisters/warwomen.html
very well written/argued article.
gi.
-------------------
The War of the Women
By Yahiya Emerick & Reshma Baig
A popular English saying says that "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." The meaning being that if a woman feels like something unfair happened to her, her anger will be limitless. I'm not going to say that that is necessarily true or not, but I have seen shades of it in the world-wide war between women who wear the Hijab (head-scarf) and those who want to oppose it.
Why do I describe it as a war? If you have to ask then you haven't been paying much attention to what women talk about in public meetings, articles, lectures, and even among themselves. The battle consists, quite interestingly, of four distinct war-fronts. There are 1) the women who wear Hijab out of conviction that it is the Islamic thing to do. Then there are 2) the women who wear it only because their mothers and grandmothers wore it; unaware of its true Islamic significance. The third group, 3) the non-Muslim feminists, rally against anything that covers up even one inch of the female form, but we already expected this from them. And finally, 4) there are the secular "Muslim" women, who almost never practice Islam anyway, but who have Muslim names and roots, who make it a point to appear at all Muslim gatherings with hair fashionably styled in full public glory.
For the sake of this article, one issue must be clear from the outset (so as not to ruffle the feathers of too many readers): An operative definition of the Hijab-wearing woman must be constructed. Albeit, as described above, not all Hijab wearers are alike. Women wear the Hijab for varying reasons. In reality, there also exists those noble and true Muslim sisters who wear Hijab because it is Islamically correct. They perceive it as intrinsically empowering. In addition, the Hijab is not a facade (the "I'll wear Hijab then do whatever I like" attitude). The operative definition of a true Hijab wearing Muslim woman is one who correctly follows the guidelines of Qur'an and Sunnah and whose only motivation is to please Allah. (Qur'an 33:59) This type of Hijab wearing woman is intelligent, Allah-fearing, overcoming the temporal trappings of the life of this world, and ultimately very happy with her decision. She is not out to please anyone except her Creator.
Now as stated previously, there are the four groups in this Battle of the Scarf. But it's not a fair war. Although it would seem that there are two factions on each side, in fact, the culturally-based Hijab wearing women are no help to their Islamically-oriented sisters. The cultural Hijab-wearers don't look at their Hijab as an Islamic duty, but rather as an affiliation with some old-country culture. And in fact, they wear it only out of habit.
Obviously, then, the daughters of such women, feeling more "American" than Arab, Indian, Nigerian (or any culture transmitted by family origin), never wear the Hijab themselves because it's just "culture" and thus the cultural women are no help in the Islamic struggle. Their own offspring become some other "culture" just as they are only motivated by what they grew up with themselves.
Have you ever seen the women, walking in "full" Hijab, but then their two or three daughters, even if they're teenagers, are dressed completely like non- Muslims? It's incredibly common. I feel like asking those mothers. Why are you even wearing Hijab if it wasn't important enough for you to pass on to your daughters?
So the Islamically-oriented Hijab-wearers are quite alone in the face of the assault by the feminists/secular "Muslimahs". The relationship between those two erstwhile allies is strange. The agenda of the Western feminists has always been puzzling. They cry about equality and respect but then push for things that dehumanize women and put them at the mercy of merciless men. They'll say women should be respected for their minds rather than for their bodies, but then they'll say that women should go around in mini-skirts and g- strings. It's funny how some ultra-Feminists argue with pride that the only professions in which women earn more money than men are prostitution and fashion modeling--then, while complaining against violence towards women, they try to encourage more women to be "empowered" by disrobing (utilizing work- place fashions that place more emphasis on the female figure rather than intelligence and qualifications).
Men are an aggressive lot. If you take away clothes from a woman, the man is not suddenly going to start respecting her. Rather he's going to take it as a green light to chase after her. It's interesting how so many male fashion designers are worshipped by Western, European, and now even "Muslim" women. (Armani, De La Renta, Gucci, Mizrahi, Lauren, etc...)
It doesn't take an analyst from Fashion Avenue to figure out that a man will design clothes for women that fits one main criteria: That the outfit be pleasing and attractive to the eyes of a man. From this arises the catch- phrase: "powerful and sexy". Some cultural "Muslims" with more of an interest in fashion (rather than their love for Allah) heed the call of Vogue, Glamour, and Cosmopolitan rather than the guidelines for dress in the Qur'an and Sunnah.
Unfortunately, both "Muslim" men and women have fallen prey to the paradigms of worldly dressing. (Is it really dress for success or dress for sex?). Some brothers are ashamed of their wives and daughters wearing the Hijab in public (the "you look too dowdy with that thing on your head" syndrome.) Some women discourage their own Muslim sisters from wearing the Hijab saying that they'll "never succeed" or "just look old-fashioned and oppressed", or as I've overheard time and time again, "you only need to wear Hijab on Eid or at Jumu'ah prayer".
It must be added here that Muslim women are not being encouraged to dress dowdy, sloppy, or out of the "mode". It is merely being asserted that what is touted as fashionable is not necessarily empowering--or flattering-- in the real sense of the word. Islam arrived on the scene more than 1400 years ago to fortify a woman's dignity; introducing the concept of "covering the parts that elicit desire". Time and time again it is implored that "Allah is beautiful and loves beauty." Our Creator made us beautiful and the dictates of "modern" fashion morph that beauty into something exploitative and ugly.
The feminists say that women should be free and independent, never relying on any man. So the message men extract from this is that now they can have as many lovers as they want and never have to be tied down to one woman ever again. Consequently, a woman who dates can expect to go from man to man for twenty years or more before she can succeed in tying one down in marriage. And now women have to dress even more alluring to attract men, and have to work harder to keep them around lest the "roving eye" spots another, younger, prettier catch. Women, as polls have shown, are more harried, stressed and suffering from acute eating and other disorders than ever before.
Feminists say that all spiritual traditions are male-oriented and have worked to keep women down. While this may be true in the case of Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism, these feminists have no knowledge of Islam. All they see is the stupid, chauvinistic cultural traditions of backward X,Y or Z Muslim country and they equate that with the teachings of Islam. Then pseudo- scholars from the West quote ayat and Hadith out of context and paint a picture of a barbaric religion which seeks death for all.
On the same level, there are also ethnic "Muslim" women out there who do more to disparage Islam and present apologetic misinformation than their non-Muslim associates. Case in point: In a recent New York Times article about the growing number of Hijab wearing women in America, a "Muslimah" doctor from Chicago is quoted as saying that "Hijab has nothing to do with Islam." Her justification was that she was from Pakistan and it's not important over there. This makes one wonder: Which version of Islam is that? Oh, the abridged version. (Qur'an 33:64-68)
At the same time there is the wave of Muslimahs in America who assert their identities as Muslims and are cognizant that the Hijab is a requirement. These are the sisters on the frontlines who you see in various workplace settings with their Hijabs. The Hijab, as many sisters have commented, changes everything. Peoples are compelled to see you as a Muslim and therefore must assess their own feelings about Islam and Muslims. Ill feelings and sincere understanding of the faith are put through the sieve that is the Hijab.
You can imagine the outrage feminists feel when they hear that women are leaving "liberated" Western-secular culture and accepting Islam. I once overheard one feminist say, "Why are they entering a religion that will oppress them." It is so wired. If a woman walks down the street in a french- style head-wrap, nobody blinks an eye. If an old woman has a scarf or net wrapped around her head, nobody even looks. But the minute a woman walks in public with a scarf worn in typical Muslim style, people, women mostly, absolutely freak out. Otherwise nice women will start muttering insults or even yelling.
Of course, no one says anything bad when they see a statue of Mary wearing a veil- and she always has a veil on. And no one yells at nuns, many of whom dress more Islamically than most Muslim women. So why the anger at the Hijab? You know, there's an interesting experiment you can try, and it may also save you from committing sins. Whenever a pretty girl walks by, almost every man looks at her, right? In Islam this is discouraged, for obvious reasons. But the next time you see a pretty woman walking by a stationary group of people, don't look at the pretty woman, (save yourself from a sin,) instead, look at the faces of the other women as the pretty woman passes by them. You'll be amazed to see that it's the women who are most blatantly and closely watching the young debutante prance by. And the glances of the women will follow long after the men have lost interest.
It's amazing! Women judge each other by their looks and appearances more than you would imagine. Especially non-Muslim women, who see the new female as a potential rival for male attention. When a Muslim woman, dressed according to her conscience, walks by, you see these same women grimace and make ugly faces. Why are they so threatened by a covered woman even more so than a half-naked one?
Because the half-naked woman is only a rival for a man. The covered woman is a direct challenge to any woman's whole being, sense of self and way of life. A modestly dressed, covered woman is a walking, talking challenge to the women (and men) who are sacrificing their Akhira for success on the terms of Dunya. A woman in Hijab who is a functioning member of society is a clarion call to everyone around her. She symbolizes a woman who is empowered by Allah (swt) rather than by the shabby, eclectic, pop-cultural, spiritually bankrupt throngs who pass as the icons of contemporary society.
The average non-Muslim woman sees nothing wrong with unmarried sexual relations, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, dancing with men, walking around half-naked, maybe taking drugs, gossiping, lying, using foul language, etc... (Who are all those immigrant Muslim men who race to marry such women and ignore their noble Muslim sisters?)
While the Muslim woman, in Hijab, radiates the exact opposite! She doesn't engage in those things and rather tries to be humble, self-controlled, full of nobility and goodness and spiritually motivated. Non-Muslim women freak out because they feel so much shame deep down that they are so rotten and unclean! (Culturally-oriented Hijab-wearers don't threaten them much because they usually are rude, loud and without inner-purity, as well. There is a style of Hijab and a look of inner-purity which distinguishes the conscientious Muslimahs from all others. You can see Taqwa in a person's face!)
A Muslim woman, whose inner-purity is reflected in her behavior, is more beautiful than even the most sensually dressed non-Muslim. So many men I know have said this, both Muslim and non-Muslim! Men love to run after the easy women for "conquests" but they want to marry someone who is pure more than anything else in the world! Non-Muslim women are filled with their shame/rage and it makes them attack Islam and things Islamic with a venom more deadly than any Orientalist ever had.
So many Western women, despairing of the lifestyle in which women have been reduced to mere sex-objects for men, are leaving the immoral lifestyle for the Islamic one in huge numbers. It doesn't matter if they find good husbands or not. They're accepting Islam because it's real, because it speaks to them as women.
But still the non-Muslim women twist their hands in rage. Now, because there is a whole class of Muslim immigrants who grew up worshipping America and the West, associating its technological advancements with its values, the non- Muslim feminists have a useful new tool in their fight against the one thing that shows them how wrong they are. These allies are the women with Muslim names who don't practice Islam, or who at the very most consider Islam to be a praying and fasting "religion" and little else.
These "Muslim" women, who may be victims of backward cultural traditions, think that the "Muslim" culture they came from is what Islam is about. Well, if that was true, I wouldn't like Islam either. I'm sure you'll agree that Muslims are sometimes the worst examples of what Islam categorizes as bad. But most of us are intelligent enough to realize that just because I have to pay a bribe to the policeman or if a woman has to abort her daughter in favor of a male child in the future-- it doesn't mean that Islam teaches that.
But there are a whole class of "Muslims" who can't seem to make such distinctions. They can't seem to understand where culture ends and Islam begins; they can't seem to let go of cultural values and adhere to the teachings of the Qur'an; they can't seem to wash away the taint of culture to expose the illumination of Islam. That would require a sacrifice on their part. (Oh my god! If they followed true Islam they might have to allow their daughters to marry people of a different ethnic group. Can't have that now!)
Already the feminists have destroyed Christianity and Judaism. Read that sentence over one time. Those two religions are now in the dust-bin of history, despite a cough from them every now and then, because they're effectively marginalized. The feminists, without even understanding that Islam is best for them, have brought secular "Muslim" women into their ranks to show the world that Islam should become as quaint and marginalized in society as Christianity is now.
Just on a side note, you know how Christian missionaries are roving all over the world and making thousands of new converts every day? They brag about it and Muslims complain about it because countries like Indonesia and Nigeria are in danger of becoming "Christian" countries in a few decades. But wait a minute! Who are the Christians converting and who is becoming Muslim?
The Christians are converting ignorant villagers, uneducated natives and people with Muslim names who don't know anything about Islam. While those who are accepting Islam are Jews and Christians- Westerners who are highly educated and have lived the secular way of life all their lives! The dumb become Christian while the educated become Muslim! There's some food for thought!
Back to the war of the women: How have the feminists used these "secular Muslim" women? They have convinced some "Muslim" women that the path to money and power in this country is through bastardizing your own soul. By conforming to the heathen wishes of the majority, you can achieve loads of worldly success. That if you're a working professional (in any field), that success can only be attained by ripping off the "oppressive weight" of your Hijab and donning a "powerful and sexy" power suit.
As many Hijab wearing, practicing Muslim sisters have commented, the Western feminist ideology only hurts those who are ready to sacrifice their Next Life for the success of the world. Our practicing, Hijab wearing sisters have proved time and time again that they can wear their Hijab and become teachers, doctors, nurses, accountants, principals, economists, professors, etc... On the same level, without sacrificing their identity as Muslims; they are accepting the challenge of success while not simultaneously sacrificing their Islam.
But the feminists have their ready slaves: there are "Muslim" women who are brought by the feminists to their seminars and meetings to give the "Muslim" voice (read: token "Muslim" woman who will lash out against Islam and emerge as the Renaissance Woman Who Emerged From Behind The Veil.) Because these women had no real belief anyway, they almost always parrot, quite shamelessly, the views of the feminists. Then these "Muslim" women become filled with the idea of a crusade against "oppression" in their ethnic communities. An Arab secular "Muslimah" will work her agenda in the Arab community; an Indo-Pak in that community, etc...
It's easy for them to do this given that most of the Muslims who immigrated to this country are as of yet, unorganized and unaffiliated with any Masjid or organization. What's more, we shoot ourselves in the foot because some of our centers are run by people who are also secular in their outlook and just want to be important in the eyes of their associates. (Qur'an 9:107-108)
The feminist "Muslimahs" set up clinics with free counseling (toward non- Muslim values), abortion facilities, women's shelters and the like. (They get grants from universities, local governments and feminist organizations.) They say they're helping, but by promoting values in the minds of the women they serve which are unIslamic, they really cause harm in the long run.
They literally make it seem as if all you have to do is remove the Hijab, wear a mini-skirt and give up Islamic teachings then all your problems will be solved. When the root of the problem to begin with is almost always someone in their lives, maybe themselves or their husbands, were not following Islam to begin with! The cure can never be the poison.
The culturally-based Muslim Hijab wearers are the most vulnerable. They are usually, and you know this is true, uneducated village-style women who will listen to anything that sounds "sophisticated". Their Islam is usually a mixture of folklore, cultural traditions, superstitions and the like. They are the majority of women in the Muslim world. They're not bad or evil or anything, they're just completely unaware of real Islam. The feminists and the secular "Muslimahs" want to "liberate" them into the great world of today's used, worn-out, vulgar, "modern" Western woman.
The women who have either accepted Islam or who rediscovered it after living in a Muslim family are often quite alone. Those who love Allah by their own conviction and who seek to follow Islam truly are the enemies of the feminists, and by extension, of the Shaitan. The Shaitan calls people to forget Allah, to forget that they're responsible for their actions and to forget that this life is a short time of testing. He lures people with their animalistic desires and their cravings for the best in life. He whispers that there are no moral standards and that you can do as you please. Those who accept this call, whether with Muslim names or non-Muslim ones, descend to the level of intelligent beasts. (See Qur'an 7:16-17)
I have personally witnessed confrontations between those who wear Hijab by conviction and those secular "Muslimahs" who say it's not required. Every single time, the secular "Muslimahs" have utilized an insulting and nasty tone. Arguing with their worst faces. Of course, one of the signs of a hypocrite is that they'll get nasty in a disagreement, but then again, they don't accept the Hadith usually anyway, unless it seems to agree with their positions. (Qur'an 33:36)
The Muslim women who don't yet wear Hijab, but who desperately want to, sometimes may become afraid of the mean-spirit of the secular "Muslimahs." Nobody wants to be pointed out and nobody wants to be yelled at. I feel bad for these women. Their hearts and minds are tugging them towards true Islam but the nastiness of mean, shame/rage filled people make them afraid to wear Hijab. And sometimes the conscientious Hijab wearers don't always know when to be gentle and don't always encourage their sisters in a thoughtful, sisterly way. This as a result of always having to be on the defensive.
This war will go on for as long as there are women who believe in and love Allah. Many a Muslim man, whose own faith was weak, has fallen to it and pressured his wife or daughters not to wear Hijab. But in the end, the purity is the proof. A Muslimah in Hijab always looks purer than a woman in a mini- skirt. And a Muslimah in Hijab who practices Islam, will always be happier and free of shame, while a "liberated" woman has nothing but the empty standards of fashion magazines, western-style therapy, and empty and temporary "love" affairs to look forward to.
There is one incident that we'll never forget. We were once at a Muslim youth rally on the east coast. There were hundreds of Muslim college students in attendance. As we were moving through the crowd we came upon a group of Hijab wearing sisters. One of the sisters, a young woman of about 18 or 20 was stating, "One thing that scares the heck out of everyone is an articulate, well dressed, intelligent, and professional Muslim sister wearing Hijab". It's true. Because they present the alternative that every woman can attain. That is the real equality and the real standard of respect. (See Qur'an 33:35) The trouble is, so many people are so trapped in the sinful, immoral lifestyle of lies, substance abuse, irresponsibility and chaos, that their shame drives them merely further into rage.
We know of one mother, a Muslim woman, who sent her daughter to an Islamic school in Michigan. The daughter opened her eyes to Islam and wanted to wear her Hijab outside of school, in public, also. But her mother, who was a secular "Muslimah" forbade her to wear Hijab saying, "I won't have my daughter being better than me." May Allah help us and the Muslim women who strive to please their Maker and ultimate judge. Amin.
*** The authors would like to state that this article is not intended to disparage those Muslim sisters who do not take Hijab for whatever personal reason. It is understood that a sister will take Hijab when she is ready since there is no compulsion in Islam. At the same time, according to the Qur'an, Hijab is a fard and this fact cannot be overlooked. (Qur'an 33:59) Allah (swt) is the final judge. May he give us all courage.
Yahiya Emerick's articles are reproduced here electronically with permission from the author. - H.A.
Back to Path to Islam ...
http://www.jannah.org/sisters/warwomen.html
very well written/argued article.
gi.
-------------------
The War of the Women
By Yahiya Emerick & Reshma Baig
A popular English saying says that "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." The meaning being that if a woman feels like something unfair happened to her, her anger will be limitless. I'm not going to say that that is necessarily true or not, but I have seen shades of it in the world-wide war between women who wear the Hijab (head-scarf) and those who want to oppose it.
Why do I describe it as a war? If you have to ask then you haven't been paying much attention to what women talk about in public meetings, articles, lectures, and even among themselves. The battle consists, quite interestingly, of four distinct war-fronts. There are 1) the women who wear Hijab out of conviction that it is the Islamic thing to do. Then there are 2) the women who wear it only because their mothers and grandmothers wore it; unaware of its true Islamic significance. The third group, 3) the non-Muslim feminists, rally against anything that covers up even one inch of the female form, but we already expected this from them. And finally, 4) there are the secular "Muslim" women, who almost never practice Islam anyway, but who have Muslim names and roots, who make it a point to appear at all Muslim gatherings with hair fashionably styled in full public glory.
For the sake of this article, one issue must be clear from the outset (so as not to ruffle the feathers of too many readers): An operative definition of the Hijab-wearing woman must be constructed. Albeit, as described above, not all Hijab wearers are alike. Women wear the Hijab for varying reasons. In reality, there also exists those noble and true Muslim sisters who wear Hijab because it is Islamically correct. They perceive it as intrinsically empowering. In addition, the Hijab is not a facade (the "I'll wear Hijab then do whatever I like" attitude). The operative definition of a true Hijab wearing Muslim woman is one who correctly follows the guidelines of Qur'an and Sunnah and whose only motivation is to please Allah. (Qur'an 33:59) This type of Hijab wearing woman is intelligent, Allah-fearing, overcoming the temporal trappings of the life of this world, and ultimately very happy with her decision. She is not out to please anyone except her Creator.
Now as stated previously, there are the four groups in this Battle of the Scarf. But it's not a fair war. Although it would seem that there are two factions on each side, in fact, the culturally-based Hijab wearing women are no help to their Islamically-oriented sisters. The cultural Hijab-wearers don't look at their Hijab as an Islamic duty, but rather as an affiliation with some old-country culture. And in fact, they wear it only out of habit.
Obviously, then, the daughters of such women, feeling more "American" than Arab, Indian, Nigerian (or any culture transmitted by family origin), never wear the Hijab themselves because it's just "culture" and thus the cultural women are no help in the Islamic struggle. Their own offspring become some other "culture" just as they are only motivated by what they grew up with themselves.
Have you ever seen the women, walking in "full" Hijab, but then their two or three daughters, even if they're teenagers, are dressed completely like non- Muslims? It's incredibly common. I feel like asking those mothers. Why are you even wearing Hijab if it wasn't important enough for you to pass on to your daughters?
So the Islamically-oriented Hijab-wearers are quite alone in the face of the assault by the feminists/secular "Muslimahs". The relationship between those two erstwhile allies is strange. The agenda of the Western feminists has always been puzzling. They cry about equality and respect but then push for things that dehumanize women and put them at the mercy of merciless men. They'll say women should be respected for their minds rather than for their bodies, but then they'll say that women should go around in mini-skirts and g- strings. It's funny how some ultra-Feminists argue with pride that the only professions in which women earn more money than men are prostitution and fashion modeling--then, while complaining against violence towards women, they try to encourage more women to be "empowered" by disrobing (utilizing work- place fashions that place more emphasis on the female figure rather than intelligence and qualifications).
Men are an aggressive lot. If you take away clothes from a woman, the man is not suddenly going to start respecting her. Rather he's going to take it as a green light to chase after her. It's interesting how so many male fashion designers are worshipped by Western, European, and now even "Muslim" women. (Armani, De La Renta, Gucci, Mizrahi, Lauren, etc...)
It doesn't take an analyst from Fashion Avenue to figure out that a man will design clothes for women that fits one main criteria: That the outfit be pleasing and attractive to the eyes of a man. From this arises the catch- phrase: "powerful and sexy". Some cultural "Muslims" with more of an interest in fashion (rather than their love for Allah) heed the call of Vogue, Glamour, and Cosmopolitan rather than the guidelines for dress in the Qur'an and Sunnah.
Unfortunately, both "Muslim" men and women have fallen prey to the paradigms of worldly dressing. (Is it really dress for success or dress for sex?). Some brothers are ashamed of their wives and daughters wearing the Hijab in public (the "you look too dowdy with that thing on your head" syndrome.) Some women discourage their own Muslim sisters from wearing the Hijab saying that they'll "never succeed" or "just look old-fashioned and oppressed", or as I've overheard time and time again, "you only need to wear Hijab on Eid or at Jumu'ah prayer".
It must be added here that Muslim women are not being encouraged to dress dowdy, sloppy, or out of the "mode". It is merely being asserted that what is touted as fashionable is not necessarily empowering--or flattering-- in the real sense of the word. Islam arrived on the scene more than 1400 years ago to fortify a woman's dignity; introducing the concept of "covering the parts that elicit desire". Time and time again it is implored that "Allah is beautiful and loves beauty." Our Creator made us beautiful and the dictates of "modern" fashion morph that beauty into something exploitative and ugly.
The feminists say that women should be free and independent, never relying on any man. So the message men extract from this is that now they can have as many lovers as they want and never have to be tied down to one woman ever again. Consequently, a woman who dates can expect to go from man to man for twenty years or more before she can succeed in tying one down in marriage. And now women have to dress even more alluring to attract men, and have to work harder to keep them around lest the "roving eye" spots another, younger, prettier catch. Women, as polls have shown, are more harried, stressed and suffering from acute eating and other disorders than ever before.
Feminists say that all spiritual traditions are male-oriented and have worked to keep women down. While this may be true in the case of Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism, these feminists have no knowledge of Islam. All they see is the stupid, chauvinistic cultural traditions of backward X,Y or Z Muslim country and they equate that with the teachings of Islam. Then pseudo- scholars from the West quote ayat and Hadith out of context and paint a picture of a barbaric religion which seeks death for all.
On the same level, there are also ethnic "Muslim" women out there who do more to disparage Islam and present apologetic misinformation than their non-Muslim associates. Case in point: In a recent New York Times article about the growing number of Hijab wearing women in America, a "Muslimah" doctor from Chicago is quoted as saying that "Hijab has nothing to do with Islam." Her justification was that she was from Pakistan and it's not important over there. This makes one wonder: Which version of Islam is that? Oh, the abridged version. (Qur'an 33:64-68)
At the same time there is the wave of Muslimahs in America who assert their identities as Muslims and are cognizant that the Hijab is a requirement. These are the sisters on the frontlines who you see in various workplace settings with their Hijabs. The Hijab, as many sisters have commented, changes everything. Peoples are compelled to see you as a Muslim and therefore must assess their own feelings about Islam and Muslims. Ill feelings and sincere understanding of the faith are put through the sieve that is the Hijab.
You can imagine the outrage feminists feel when they hear that women are leaving "liberated" Western-secular culture and accepting Islam. I once overheard one feminist say, "Why are they entering a religion that will oppress them." It is so wired. If a woman walks down the street in a french- style head-wrap, nobody blinks an eye. If an old woman has a scarf or net wrapped around her head, nobody even looks. But the minute a woman walks in public with a scarf worn in typical Muslim style, people, women mostly, absolutely freak out. Otherwise nice women will start muttering insults or even yelling.
Of course, no one says anything bad when they see a statue of Mary wearing a veil- and she always has a veil on. And no one yells at nuns, many of whom dress more Islamically than most Muslim women. So why the anger at the Hijab? You know, there's an interesting experiment you can try, and it may also save you from committing sins. Whenever a pretty girl walks by, almost every man looks at her, right? In Islam this is discouraged, for obvious reasons. But the next time you see a pretty woman walking by a stationary group of people, don't look at the pretty woman, (save yourself from a sin,) instead, look at the faces of the other women as the pretty woman passes by them. You'll be amazed to see that it's the women who are most blatantly and closely watching the young debutante prance by. And the glances of the women will follow long after the men have lost interest.
It's amazing! Women judge each other by their looks and appearances more than you would imagine. Especially non-Muslim women, who see the new female as a potential rival for male attention. When a Muslim woman, dressed according to her conscience, walks by, you see these same women grimace and make ugly faces. Why are they so threatened by a covered woman even more so than a half-naked one?
Because the half-naked woman is only a rival for a man. The covered woman is a direct challenge to any woman's whole being, sense of self and way of life. A modestly dressed, covered woman is a walking, talking challenge to the women (and men) who are sacrificing their Akhira for success on the terms of Dunya. A woman in Hijab who is a functioning member of society is a clarion call to everyone around her. She symbolizes a woman who is empowered by Allah (swt) rather than by the shabby, eclectic, pop-cultural, spiritually bankrupt throngs who pass as the icons of contemporary society.
The average non-Muslim woman sees nothing wrong with unmarried sexual relations, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, dancing with men, walking around half-naked, maybe taking drugs, gossiping, lying, using foul language, etc... (Who are all those immigrant Muslim men who race to marry such women and ignore their noble Muslim sisters?)
While the Muslim woman, in Hijab, radiates the exact opposite! She doesn't engage in those things and rather tries to be humble, self-controlled, full of nobility and goodness and spiritually motivated. Non-Muslim women freak out because they feel so much shame deep down that they are so rotten and unclean! (Culturally-oriented Hijab-wearers don't threaten them much because they usually are rude, loud and without inner-purity, as well. There is a style of Hijab and a look of inner-purity which distinguishes the conscientious Muslimahs from all others. You can see Taqwa in a person's face!)
A Muslim woman, whose inner-purity is reflected in her behavior, is more beautiful than even the most sensually dressed non-Muslim. So many men I know have said this, both Muslim and non-Muslim! Men love to run after the easy women for "conquests" but they want to marry someone who is pure more than anything else in the world! Non-Muslim women are filled with their shame/rage and it makes them attack Islam and things Islamic with a venom more deadly than any Orientalist ever had.
So many Western women, despairing of the lifestyle in which women have been reduced to mere sex-objects for men, are leaving the immoral lifestyle for the Islamic one in huge numbers. It doesn't matter if they find good husbands or not. They're accepting Islam because it's real, because it speaks to them as women.
But still the non-Muslim women twist their hands in rage. Now, because there is a whole class of Muslim immigrants who grew up worshipping America and the West, associating its technological advancements with its values, the non- Muslim feminists have a useful new tool in their fight against the one thing that shows them how wrong they are. These allies are the women with Muslim names who don't practice Islam, or who at the very most consider Islam to be a praying and fasting "religion" and little else.
These "Muslim" women, who may be victims of backward cultural traditions, think that the "Muslim" culture they came from is what Islam is about. Well, if that was true, I wouldn't like Islam either. I'm sure you'll agree that Muslims are sometimes the worst examples of what Islam categorizes as bad. But most of us are intelligent enough to realize that just because I have to pay a bribe to the policeman or if a woman has to abort her daughter in favor of a male child in the future-- it doesn't mean that Islam teaches that.
But there are a whole class of "Muslims" who can't seem to make such distinctions. They can't seem to understand where culture ends and Islam begins; they can't seem to let go of cultural values and adhere to the teachings of the Qur'an; they can't seem to wash away the taint of culture to expose the illumination of Islam. That would require a sacrifice on their part. (Oh my god! If they followed true Islam they might have to allow their daughters to marry people of a different ethnic group. Can't have that now!)
Already the feminists have destroyed Christianity and Judaism. Read that sentence over one time. Those two religions are now in the dust-bin of history, despite a cough from them every now and then, because they're effectively marginalized. The feminists, without even understanding that Islam is best for them, have brought secular "Muslim" women into their ranks to show the world that Islam should become as quaint and marginalized in society as Christianity is now.
Just on a side note, you know how Christian missionaries are roving all over the world and making thousands of new converts every day? They brag about it and Muslims complain about it because countries like Indonesia and Nigeria are in danger of becoming "Christian" countries in a few decades. But wait a minute! Who are the Christians converting and who is becoming Muslim?
The Christians are converting ignorant villagers, uneducated natives and people with Muslim names who don't know anything about Islam. While those who are accepting Islam are Jews and Christians- Westerners who are highly educated and have lived the secular way of life all their lives! The dumb become Christian while the educated become Muslim! There's some food for thought!
Back to the war of the women: How have the feminists used these "secular Muslim" women? They have convinced some "Muslim" women that the path to money and power in this country is through bastardizing your own soul. By conforming to the heathen wishes of the majority, you can achieve loads of worldly success. That if you're a working professional (in any field), that success can only be attained by ripping off the "oppressive weight" of your Hijab and donning a "powerful and sexy" power suit.
As many Hijab wearing, practicing Muslim sisters have commented, the Western feminist ideology only hurts those who are ready to sacrifice their Next Life for the success of the world. Our practicing, Hijab wearing sisters have proved time and time again that they can wear their Hijab and become teachers, doctors, nurses, accountants, principals, economists, professors, etc... On the same level, without sacrificing their identity as Muslims; they are accepting the challenge of success while not simultaneously sacrificing their Islam.
But the feminists have their ready slaves: there are "Muslim" women who are brought by the feminists to their seminars and meetings to give the "Muslim" voice (read: token "Muslim" woman who will lash out against Islam and emerge as the Renaissance Woman Who Emerged From Behind The Veil.) Because these women had no real belief anyway, they almost always parrot, quite shamelessly, the views of the feminists. Then these "Muslim" women become filled with the idea of a crusade against "oppression" in their ethnic communities. An Arab secular "Muslimah" will work her agenda in the Arab community; an Indo-Pak in that community, etc...
It's easy for them to do this given that most of the Muslims who immigrated to this country are as of yet, unorganized and unaffiliated with any Masjid or organization. What's more, we shoot ourselves in the foot because some of our centers are run by people who are also secular in their outlook and just want to be important in the eyes of their associates. (Qur'an 9:107-108)
The feminist "Muslimahs" set up clinics with free counseling (toward non- Muslim values), abortion facilities, women's shelters and the like. (They get grants from universities, local governments and feminist organizations.) They say they're helping, but by promoting values in the minds of the women they serve which are unIslamic, they really cause harm in the long run.
They literally make it seem as if all you have to do is remove the Hijab, wear a mini-skirt and give up Islamic teachings then all your problems will be solved. When the root of the problem to begin with is almost always someone in their lives, maybe themselves or their husbands, were not following Islam to begin with! The cure can never be the poison.
The culturally-based Muslim Hijab wearers are the most vulnerable. They are usually, and you know this is true, uneducated village-style women who will listen to anything that sounds "sophisticated". Their Islam is usually a mixture of folklore, cultural traditions, superstitions and the like. They are the majority of women in the Muslim world. They're not bad or evil or anything, they're just completely unaware of real Islam. The feminists and the secular "Muslimahs" want to "liberate" them into the great world of today's used, worn-out, vulgar, "modern" Western woman.
The women who have either accepted Islam or who rediscovered it after living in a Muslim family are often quite alone. Those who love Allah by their own conviction and who seek to follow Islam truly are the enemies of the feminists, and by extension, of the Shaitan. The Shaitan calls people to forget Allah, to forget that they're responsible for their actions and to forget that this life is a short time of testing. He lures people with their animalistic desires and their cravings for the best in life. He whispers that there are no moral standards and that you can do as you please. Those who accept this call, whether with Muslim names or non-Muslim ones, descend to the level of intelligent beasts. (See Qur'an 7:16-17)
I have personally witnessed confrontations between those who wear Hijab by conviction and those secular "Muslimahs" who say it's not required. Every single time, the secular "Muslimahs" have utilized an insulting and nasty tone. Arguing with their worst faces. Of course, one of the signs of a hypocrite is that they'll get nasty in a disagreement, but then again, they don't accept the Hadith usually anyway, unless it seems to agree with their positions. (Qur'an 33:36)
The Muslim women who don't yet wear Hijab, but who desperately want to, sometimes may become afraid of the mean-spirit of the secular "Muslimahs." Nobody wants to be pointed out and nobody wants to be yelled at. I feel bad for these women. Their hearts and minds are tugging them towards true Islam but the nastiness of mean, shame/rage filled people make them afraid to wear Hijab. And sometimes the conscientious Hijab wearers don't always know when to be gentle and don't always encourage their sisters in a thoughtful, sisterly way. This as a result of always having to be on the defensive.
This war will go on for as long as there are women who believe in and love Allah. Many a Muslim man, whose own faith was weak, has fallen to it and pressured his wife or daughters not to wear Hijab. But in the end, the purity is the proof. A Muslimah in Hijab always looks purer than a woman in a mini- skirt. And a Muslimah in Hijab who practices Islam, will always be happier and free of shame, while a "liberated" woman has nothing but the empty standards of fashion magazines, western-style therapy, and empty and temporary "love" affairs to look forward to.
There is one incident that we'll never forget. We were once at a Muslim youth rally on the east coast. There were hundreds of Muslim college students in attendance. As we were moving through the crowd we came upon a group of Hijab wearing sisters. One of the sisters, a young woman of about 18 or 20 was stating, "One thing that scares the heck out of everyone is an articulate, well dressed, intelligent, and professional Muslim sister wearing Hijab". It's true. Because they present the alternative that every woman can attain. That is the real equality and the real standard of respect. (See Qur'an 33:35) The trouble is, so many people are so trapped in the sinful, immoral lifestyle of lies, substance abuse, irresponsibility and chaos, that their shame drives them merely further into rage.
We know of one mother, a Muslim woman, who sent her daughter to an Islamic school in Michigan. The daughter opened her eyes to Islam and wanted to wear her Hijab outside of school, in public, also. But her mother, who was a secular "Muslimah" forbade her to wear Hijab saying, "I won't have my daughter being better than me." May Allah help us and the Muslim women who strive to please their Maker and ultimate judge. Amin.
*** The authors would like to state that this article is not intended to disparage those Muslim sisters who do not take Hijab for whatever personal reason. It is understood that a sister will take Hijab when she is ready since there is no compulsion in Islam. At the same time, according to the Qur'an, Hijab is a fard and this fact cannot be overlooked. (Qur'an 33:59) Allah (swt) is the final judge. May he give us all courage.
Yahiya Emerick's articles are reproduced here electronically with permission from the author. - H.A.
Back to Path to Islam ...
WOS # 14 : Eccentrics: they live longer, happier and are odd! : David Weeks
Eccentrics: they live longer, happier and are odd! (interview with author David Weeks)(Interview)
From: Nutrition Health Review | Date: 1/1/1996
Q: What prompted you to make a scientific study of eccentricity??
A: Psychologists have undertaken exhaustive studies of every personality type and mental disorder under the sun, yet somehow we have completely overlooked eccentrics. And psychiatry, on the other hand, tends only to take an interest in those who seek treatment, and since eccentrics rarely do so, they have been overlooked. Eccentrics were to psychology what black holes once were to astronomy. I thought it might contribute something important to our understanding of the mind if we had a better understanding of the thought processes of those who regard themselves and who are regarded by others as eccentric.
Q: Can you give us a thumbnail description of the eccentric?
A: The eccentric is very creative and curious and has vivid visual imagination in the daytime and vivid dreams at night. Eccentrics are intelligent, opinionated, and frequently have a mischievous sense of humor. Many of them are loners, and they often have unorthodox living arrangements.
Q: For example?
A: We have several men who lived in caves. Women eccentrics tend to he obsessive collectors and renovators. One woman in our study has 7,500 garden gnomes on her lawn. Sarah Winchester, the widow of the man who made the rifle, kept adding to her house in San Jose until it had eight stories, 158 rooms (not counting the secret chambers), 2,000 doors, 10,000 windows, and 48 fireplaces.
Q: You found in your study that eccentrics are happier and healthier than the rest of us. Why do you think that is so?
A: I believe that's true. We did meet a few gloomy eccentrics, but most of the subjects in our study had a refreshingly sunny outlook on life. There is also pretty solid proof that eccentrics are healthier than the norm. In Great Britain, where health care is free, the average person goes to the doctor twice a year, while eccentrics will typically go for eight or nine years without seeking medical help. It's not that they're avoiding doctors or don't believe in conventional medicine. They just don't need it much.
Q: How do you explain shot?
A: It's a combination of an optimistic outlook and low stress, due to the fact that eccentrics don't feel the need to conform. Eccentrics don't give a hoot what the rest of the world thinks of them; if someone makes-fun of them, instead of getting angry or embarrassed, they regard the other person as the one with a problem. In fact, eccentrics revel in the fact that they make people laugh. Another nice benefit is that they may have slightly higher levels of growth hormone, which can postpone some of the ailments associated with old age, such as osteoporosis and muscle atrophy.
Q: What makes a person an eccentric? After all, everyone has some unusual habits or traits.
A: Eccentricity is a choice. It's quite true that everyone has eccentric traits, but as we grow older, most of us learn to conform, to blend in -- the process we call socialization. But the eccentric says, "No, thank you," and chooses not to conform. Often it is triggered by an event in childhood, when the budding eccentric consciously makes -- the choice to be different from the other kids. It can even be something as simple as a name: a woman named Salome told us that when she was seven years old, "I made the decision that, having an unusual name, I was damn well going to be different."
Q: Under your definition, how many people qualify as true eccentrics?
A: Based upon our study, we found that approximately one person in 10,000 is a classic, full-time-eccentric. However, because this was the first scientific study of the subject, we put a 50 per cent margin of error on the figure. In ether words, it might be as common as one in 5,000, or as rare as one in 15,000.
Q: Are men or women more likely to be eccentric?
A: The incidence of eccentricity is about the same, but it manifests itself in different ways. Society has always been more tolerant of aberrant behavior in men than in women; if a man gets into a fight with a co-worker or goes off on a drinking spree, we might overlook it, but if a woman does the same thing it's considered scandalous. One female subject told us, "My moods were not permitted. First they were called premenstrual histrionics. Then they were called pre-menopausal histrionics." A woman sometimes becomes eccentric later in life, a phenomenon we call "flowering" or "blossoming." She conforms in her youth, marries and has children, but once the kids have left home, she leaves her husband and lets her eccentric, creative side take over. Today higher proportions of women, especially liberated women in the United States, are deciding to be eccentric -- and self-fulfilled.
Q: Dr. Weeks, are you eccentric?
A: I've been trying to get inside the minds and hearts of these extraordinary people for the past eleven years, to emphathize with them, to see the world from their unique perspective. If you do that seriously, some of their traits are bound to rub off on you. Emulating their unorthodox way of thinking can have terrific results. I have recently filed a patent application, a new one, which has actually been granted. Yet, I would say that I may have always been slightly eccentric, perhaps a little rebellious. However, I do admire the authentic, life-long eccentrics. I think we can all learn a lot from them about holding onto the dreams and curiosity we had as children.
From: Nutrition Health Review | Date: 1/1/1996
Q: What prompted you to make a scientific study of eccentricity??
A: Psychologists have undertaken exhaustive studies of every personality type and mental disorder under the sun, yet somehow we have completely overlooked eccentrics. And psychiatry, on the other hand, tends only to take an interest in those who seek treatment, and since eccentrics rarely do so, they have been overlooked. Eccentrics were to psychology what black holes once were to astronomy. I thought it might contribute something important to our understanding of the mind if we had a better understanding of the thought processes of those who regard themselves and who are regarded by others as eccentric.
Q: Can you give us a thumbnail description of the eccentric?
A: The eccentric is very creative and curious and has vivid visual imagination in the daytime and vivid dreams at night. Eccentrics are intelligent, opinionated, and frequently have a mischievous sense of humor. Many of them are loners, and they often have unorthodox living arrangements.
Q: For example?
A: We have several men who lived in caves. Women eccentrics tend to he obsessive collectors and renovators. One woman in our study has 7,500 garden gnomes on her lawn. Sarah Winchester, the widow of the man who made the rifle, kept adding to her house in San Jose until it had eight stories, 158 rooms (not counting the secret chambers), 2,000 doors, 10,000 windows, and 48 fireplaces.
Q: You found in your study that eccentrics are happier and healthier than the rest of us. Why do you think that is so?
A: I believe that's true. We did meet a few gloomy eccentrics, but most of the subjects in our study had a refreshingly sunny outlook on life. There is also pretty solid proof that eccentrics are healthier than the norm. In Great Britain, where health care is free, the average person goes to the doctor twice a year, while eccentrics will typically go for eight or nine years without seeking medical help. It's not that they're avoiding doctors or don't believe in conventional medicine. They just don't need it much.
Q: How do you explain shot?
A: It's a combination of an optimistic outlook and low stress, due to the fact that eccentrics don't feel the need to conform. Eccentrics don't give a hoot what the rest of the world thinks of them; if someone makes-fun of them, instead of getting angry or embarrassed, they regard the other person as the one with a problem. In fact, eccentrics revel in the fact that they make people laugh. Another nice benefit is that they may have slightly higher levels of growth hormone, which can postpone some of the ailments associated with old age, such as osteoporosis and muscle atrophy.
Q: What makes a person an eccentric? After all, everyone has some unusual habits or traits.
A: Eccentricity is a choice. It's quite true that everyone has eccentric traits, but as we grow older, most of us learn to conform, to blend in -- the process we call socialization. But the eccentric says, "No, thank you," and chooses not to conform. Often it is triggered by an event in childhood, when the budding eccentric consciously makes -- the choice to be different from the other kids. It can even be something as simple as a name: a woman named Salome told us that when she was seven years old, "I made the decision that, having an unusual name, I was damn well going to be different."
Q: Under your definition, how many people qualify as true eccentrics?
A: Based upon our study, we found that approximately one person in 10,000 is a classic, full-time-eccentric. However, because this was the first scientific study of the subject, we put a 50 per cent margin of error on the figure. In ether words, it might be as common as one in 5,000, or as rare as one in 15,000.
Q: Are men or women more likely to be eccentric?
A: The incidence of eccentricity is about the same, but it manifests itself in different ways. Society has always been more tolerant of aberrant behavior in men than in women; if a man gets into a fight with a co-worker or goes off on a drinking spree, we might overlook it, but if a woman does the same thing it's considered scandalous. One female subject told us, "My moods were not permitted. First they were called premenstrual histrionics. Then they were called pre-menopausal histrionics." A woman sometimes becomes eccentric later in life, a phenomenon we call "flowering" or "blossoming." She conforms in her youth, marries and has children, but once the kids have left home, she leaves her husband and lets her eccentric, creative side take over. Today higher proportions of women, especially liberated women in the United States, are deciding to be eccentric -- and self-fulfilled.
Q: Dr. Weeks, are you eccentric?
A: I've been trying to get inside the minds and hearts of these extraordinary people for the past eleven years, to emphathize with them, to see the world from their unique perspective. If you do that seriously, some of their traits are bound to rub off on you. Emulating their unorthodox way of thinking can have terrific results. I have recently filed a patent application, a new one, which has actually been granted. Yet, I would say that I may have always been slightly eccentric, perhaps a little rebellious. However, I do admire the authentic, life-long eccentrics. I think we can all learn a lot from them about holding onto the dreams and curiosity we had as children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)