"I wish that I were..."

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Free ad for Caravaggio (1571-1610)
How the 1% get a heart attack
Foie Gras Wars
Keen's Chophouse (Steakhouse) for mutton chops
"President Obama Stands Up to Big Oil"
Party decor
10,000 steps per day
"Coincidence Studies"
Is good old-fashioned lechery now re-named "Sex Addiction"?
Rent Control in NYC and DC
Is honesty an obsolete, bourgeois "value"?
The self-esteem fad is finally fading
Do Americans want freedom? Is it too much to ask of "ordinary people?"
Stark Assessment Of Afghanistan
Roger Williams and "Soul Libertie"
Retired Activities
Do too many people go to college in the US?
Let's address stereotyping! "Not all Irishmen drink too much, not all of them beat their wives..."
The overwhelmingly largest risk factor for cancer and heart disease
Poverty in America

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Friday, November 6. 2009

I have been thinking about the wishes we have about ourselves, and about how we deal with our disappointments in ourselves and our perceived shortcomings.

Here are some of the things I have heard from people:

I wish I were...

taller
shorter
more beautiful and sexy
stronger
more handsome
richer
blonde
blue-eyed
green-eyed
more outgoing
more inner-directed
more charismatic
a better athlete
smarter
better at math
more popular
more disciplined
less fearful
better at memorization
better at focusing
less neurotic
more confident
more courageous
more authoritative
skinnier
able to relax
more energetic
more knowledgeable
less naive
less cynical
less of a manipulator
more interesting
less of an asshole
less self-centered
more self-interested
more adventurous
less reckless and impulsive
less boring
darker-skinned
lighter-skinned
bigger
smaller
bigger-breasted
smaller-breasted
bigger-penised
quicker to orgasm (women)
slower to orgasm (men)
younger
bigger-assed
smaller-assed
better at (fill in the blank)

The list could go on and on. It is not human to be too pleased with oneself unless one is delusional on some level. God, and our Moms, and Mr. Rogers might like us just as we are, but we generally do not.

Why would we? Love would not be as special, as miraculous, otherwise.

What would the world be like if we could all design ourselves - besides being filled with rich 6'3" guys with 3-foot johnsons and rich 5'6" skinny blondes with perfect - but generously so - boobs? All with 160 IQs and charming personalities.

Posted by Dr. Joy Bliss in Our Essays, Psychology, and Dr. Bliss at 12:40 | Comments (19) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

maggie, you've just described "gattica".

#1 Jack the Jets fan on 2009-11-06 13:55 (Reply)

It would be boring.

Very boring.

#2 wolfwalker on 2009-11-06 14:06 (Reply)

wolfwalker,

You beat me by a nano-second. Fine thoughts you have there.

Cheers!

#2.1 Garry on 2009-11-06 15:45 (Reply)

What would the world be like?......very boring !!

#3 Garry on 2009-11-06 14:06 (Reply)

" It is not human to be too pleased with oneself unless one is delusional on some level."

and this is the most troublesome thing bc if someone doesn't think they have any faults, then they won't work on them!

i'm having a bad day. i'm glad maggie's is here to cheer me up though!

#4 kab on 2009-11-06 14:15 (Reply)

kab,

I used to work in the aviation field with a gentleman (who retired before I did and was a navigator on Lancaster bombers in WW2) and he had a favourite expression (TIC of course...he was a very humble man)...

"I'm not perfect....perfection is a fault !!...(I have no faults)"

He has passed on and I think of him often. He was a class act.

Thanks for listening.

#4.1 Garry on 2009-11-06 15:51 (Reply)

I didn't see my wish on that list. smaller penised

#5 sean on 2009-11-06 14:43 (Reply)

You are evil!

#5.1 Bird Dog on 2009-11-06 15:55 (Reply)

Capitalism would die.
`

#6 Meta on 2009-11-06 14:56 (Reply)

You,ve got me on that one, Dr Ruth, because I have no idea what that means. Hope you have a good weekend. I am off to do hand-to-hand combat with my father. He can still give me a tussle. :)

#6.1 jappy on 2009-11-06 17:43 (Reply)

Madison Avenue would fold in on itself as products are sold to people who want to be as beautiful as those who model the goods. There would be no incentive to keep up with the Joneses because you have what they have. The cosmetic industry, close to the largest industry in the world, would collapse. The clothing industry would wither as many use clothing to counter not being beautiful. People wouldn't work as hard because they wouldn't feel the need to augment the former items they purchased to feel good about themselves, and those who continued to work hard wouldn't after a while because of the constant jealousy and fighting that would consume the work place. Marriages would fall apart as women left to go find Sean.
`

#7 Meta on 2009-11-06 19:41 (Reply)

Wasn't that an episode of The Twilight Zone, where the mobster died and thought he was in heaven but soon realized it was hell?

#7.1 KRW on 2009-11-06 20:17 (Reply)

Beats me.
`

#7.1.1 Meta on 2009-11-06 22:40 (Reply)

Naomi Wolf, a militant feminist, wrote a book when she was just emerged from gaining her college degree back in the 1960s called The Beauty Myth. The book was uneven in execution but had some interesting ideas in it. She claimed, IIRC, that the males in our society were so adversely challenged by the aggressively feminist women who were achieving so much in the formerly male dominated society that the males got together,[ the fashion world CEOs and beauty industry CEOs anyway,] and raised the bar on beauty standards for wome., They required that the women be much thinner than the current standards allowed, or could even be achieved without anorexia, and that they should have much bigger breasts and thinner hips than was the current taste in beauty, making them look like young boys with bumps on top.

These evil menfolk figured that if they set the 'beauty bar' impossibly high, that the aggressive women would be distracted trying 'to achieve the unachievable' in standards of beauty and take their eyes off the ball in their male/female business competition, thus allowing the menfolk to re-assume their traditional position on top.. Business-wise, of course.

What's your opinion, guys?

Marianne

#8 Marianne Matthews on 2009-11-06 21:43 (Reply)

The fashion world/beauty industry? Of course! They're full of gay men. No heterosexual man would want to make women less attractive, nor would they plot something like that because they would have no idea that women would fall for it. It defies man-logic.

Just like men who like to write about women, women who like to write about men think men think like women. And that goes double for the kind of 'men' who write for women about men. Wifey's Oprah magazine a while back had a story staring up at me in "the reading room" titled "Men would rather be impotent than bald", written by a 'man'...OK, I'm starting to confuse myself and the leg's starting to ache again...time to refill the rheumatism medicine....Mr. Jameson!...

#8.1 KRW on 2009-11-06 22:16 (Reply)

I don't buy her thesis at all. It's too complicated. It's manipulating the physical body to achieve something incorporeal in society. How about just being smart and accepting women for their intellectual worth and integrity. Either that or someone needs to write a book about how men better lose their guts, shave their nether acres, get penis implants, and learn foreplay.

Turn about is fair play or something like that.
`

#8.2 Meta on 2009-11-06 23:04 (Reply)

Marianne,

I think the 'feminist' movement did a greater diservice to the "Womens' " movement than any MALE could ever accomplish...what think ye Meta ?? !

#8.3 Garry on 2009-11-07 01:54 (Reply)

Garry,

I don't recognize a difference in the 'feminist' movement and the 'womens' movement, but I agree men could never have succeeded in being so destructive to our society's balance. In the end, though, it ushered in political correctness, and for that we all suffer in equal measure. Or misery..
`

#8.3.1 Meta on 2009-11-07 09:59 (Reply)

You and me, KRW. When I do pour myself a tot, once in a very great while, it's always Jameson's. Sooo smooth. It's that third filtering, I think.

On top of that, I pretty much agree with you. The whole problem with the feminist movement is that at the very beginning the women decided that 'equal' meant 'the same.' Thus the feminists like Maureen Dowd, who is convinced that no man is as smart as she is, while actually a whole lot of men are much smarter. Silly woman.

Marianne

Marianne

#9 Marianne Matthews on 2009-11-06 23:09 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm