We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Specifically, female sexual arousal. Can Maggie's readers handle a brief post on this topic?
Women have a much wider range of variation in sexual responsiveness than men. Men are, just, you know, always ready for some fun. Thousands of articles have been written about female sexuality, but, simply, people are different. I have spoken to women who feel hot and who lubricate when husband or boyfriend just say "Let's get together tonight." On the other end of the spectrum, women who take forever to get warmed up in bed whether with a hot new lover or with somebody they love and are used to.
I'll leave out the relationship (or no relationship) aspect because, although that is a factor (see Marital Sex), women vary a great deal in their erotic responsiveness. Some combination of physiological and psychological.
Years ago I spoke with a 40 year-old with three kids who had felt alienated from her husband for a few years, "but the sex is still great." This lady would have her first orgasm within 20 seconds of penetration, and go on to have 6 more in a 30-60 minute sex session. She told me she had been like that with pre-marriage boyfriends too. Told me she got noisy too, which could be awkward. I think I told her she had been blessed. As I recall, she said she was capable of having an orgasm just fantasizing about a guy she saw on the street - no hands.
There's a lot of space between her and women with "arousal disorders" (a real term, but I use it sarcastically). Probably a Bell Curve in female animal nature. Men, obviously, get a kick out of women who get tingles when they see them and are multi-orgasmic. Makes the guy feel good and inclined to come back for more.
It's a bit late in the year up here for this post, but beach wear is basically underwear. It exposes a person's condition.
We've pointed out that it would take about 2-3 hours moving speedily on a treadmill, elliptical, or stair machine to burn the calories in your breakfast bagel. But it doesn't work like that.
Our bodies preferentially burn glycogen (stored sugar, from carbs) for exertion. It takes over 40 minutes of higher intensity (eg running and the like) exertion to begin meaningful fat-burning.
It's true than a daily hour of some exercise (other than walking or slow pool laps) ups your metabolism for a while, but it's not really significant.
It's a downer for people, but the truth is that exercise is about fitness, while fat loss is nutritional unless you have 3 hrs.day to work out hard (probably not a good idea for people over age 35).
The reason doctors and everybody else talks about nutrition and exercise for fat loss is sort-of to fool people into getting moving and less sedentary because sedentary, regardless of body fat, isn't healthy. In fact, it correlates highly with early cardiac morbidity regardless of body fat %.
Sedentary can be defined, roughly, as less than an hour/day of sweat-producing exertion. Let's face reality: other than walks, most Western people prefer a sedentary, no-heavy-lifting comfortable life, and most do not wish to feel deprived of their appetites in these places where delicious things are in abundance. I get that, to each his/her own. We all have people we care about, though, who we'd like to stick around for a while.
With proper nutrition, anybody can lose 8-12 lbs/month easily, with or without exercise. In fact, with difficult exercise (ie heavy weights) it can be a bit harder to lose weight due to the nutritional requirements for muscle repair.
The youth have it easy. It can be difficult for the young (under 30 or 35) to gain weight even if they want to. To gain good athletic weight, the youth have to eat big and work out hard with weights.
Writers enjoy writing, but there are far more constructive ways to spend time. What famous author said "If you don't write for money, you are crazy"? Or something like that.
The only form of exercise which has been convincingly demonstrated to be helpful for depression and/or anxiety problems is resistance exercise, ie weights. The reasons are not known.
What about cardio exercises? There is "suggestive evidence" that it could be useful, but it has not been convincingly demonstrated.
My advice to everybody, regardless of personal emotional issues: Do weights, do cardio, do calisthenics. You will thank yourself.
EDS, "Excessive Daytime Sleepiness", has become a thing, a real symptom.
I've been reading up on the topic. Supposedly EDS is a contributory cause for 20% of auto accidents. The list of causes of EDS is lengthy. It includes, of course, Obstructive Sleep Apnea which can reduce sleep efficiency.
In my view, EDS can often be easily dealt with with a brief power nap. I suspect many hard-working people do it but it's difficult to do in a public work space.
Or do we live in our own worlds, constructed from various presuppositions, superstitions, traditions, and preferred fantasies about ourselves, about others, and the world?
I have come to believe that everybody including me lives in some degree of a fantasy world, ranging from a little crazy (a few fantasies about self and others) to totally nuts (with minimal reality-testing especially with emotional issues). The further one is from consensual reality, the less effective in life one becomes. And to make it all more complex, consensual "real" is cultural and sub-cultural.
Not asserting that there is no "real," but that that experience is highly subjective and frequently distant from regular "real," in ordinary people. 35% of Americans believe the earth is flat, and God knows how many believe in UFOs. Yes, people are crazy.
TS Eliot: "Humankind can not bear very much reality."
This topic came up over dinner last night. I became the devil's advocate, of course, because everybody tends to think that their reality is the real one. People will defend their own reality to the point of war because so much of what they think about themselves depends on it.
When that is challenged or threatened, people can go berserk. Happens with sports teams, and politics, too. With religion, it's just too much.
People tend to write about grief in the context of a death, but there are many sources of grief. We see grief reactions in all sorts of losses: loss of physical or mental capacities, losses of a relationship, disappointments and failures in dreams or careers, financial losses, loss of a home, and so forth.
It is inevitable in life that we accumulate scars. Most griefs scar over in time. New adaptations are achieved. Sometimes, grief does not relent.
A cup of seawater contains 100 million cells, which are preyed upon by billions of viruses. Fifty million tons of fungal spores are released into the atmosphere every year. And the human gut is home to somewhere between 500 and 1,000 species of bacteria. The more we learn about microbial biodiversity, the clearer it becomes that the vast majority of life has long gone unseen, and unobserved. The flowering of microbial science is revolutionizing biology and medicine in ways unimagined only a few years ago, and is inspiring a new view of what it means to be alive...
Why do people with any fat stores ever feel hungry, or eat anything at all, considering they may have 1-5 month's worth of energy stored as fat? (We term the hunger experienced by overweight people "False Hunger," because it is.) Except in the truly malnourished or extremely fit, low body-fat athletes, hunger is rarely a signal of an energy deficit or of any nutritional need.
Think about it. Even normal-weight (neither overweight nor underweight) people carry 8-10 weeks of energy stored in fat if they can only access it.
You can consider appetite in the pudgy or overweight, not to mention the obese, to be a design flaw based on the hunting and gathering, and, earlier, just plain gathering condition of human existence, same as the other great apes who only become overweight in captivity. Agriculture and food abundance, along with sedentary life, exposed the design flaw for people who overnourish themselves. Of course, physical inadequacy is another side effect.
Americans do not exercise enough according to government CDC recommendations, and they need more help.
"More help"? Does anybody want or need government for elementary life advice? This is the sort of thing that annoys the heck out of me. Hey, let's start a government program to determine your nutrition plan (how did that work out?), your exercise regimen, your heart health (is it now recommending 1-2 glasses of red wine/day? Technically, it should). Anyway, overweight and sedentary is the new normal.
Everybody in America knows what they "should" do for physical fitness. Most do not want to bother. I think fitness is mainly a class/subcultural-related thing. It's a free country. Government should just leave them alone. For anybody who wants to be in good shape regardless of age, Maggie's has written volumes on the topics of nutrition and fitness for anyone to read, for free, and it is smarter and better-informed than any government advice.
As with government nagging, many of our readers are just annoyed by those topics. We post them for the few who find them of interest.
The word "myth" seems to have two meanings in English: first, ancient and enduring tales containing deep meanings about human nature and existence itself, and, second, common but mistaken out-dated beliefs. For examples, "myths about nutrition" vs "so-and-so is mythic in depth, scale and scope." Moby Dick is mythic.
Freud's one-time colleague in depth psychology had many interests but among them was a study of myths and the representations of archetypes embedded in them. In a way, Jung viewed myths as related to humanity as dreams are related to an individual. I suppose that seems obvious now.
My libertarian self is in favor, but my medical self is opposed. However, it remains a fact that more Americans die from overeating than from drug abuse, and food can not be illegalized. I tend to feel that government has little role in peoples' doing self-destructive things as long as we others do not have to pay their bills. Let reality rule. AA and NA cost nothing.
In my experience, males are just as emotionally-vulnerable as any other gender. Without male emotional vulnerability there would be no country music.
What the people promoting this notion miss is that most males spend years trying to be, or trying to at least act or appear, emotionally strong, brave, and tough. There are many good reasons for that, not the least being because these are things that appeal to women.
It's not just cultural, though. There's a biological substrate to it, obvious to anyone who has raised kids. Guys work to be emotionally strong in the same way they work to be physically strong, and to be tough in their effectiveness in the world. It's their job. Might be womens' job too, but that's another subject.
So enough of this baby-talk, Princeton, unless you wish to become a high-end kindergarten..
"Vita brevis, ars longa, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum, iudicium difficile."
That is the Latin translation of Hippocrate's first sentence in his medical text, "ars" - art - meaning the craft of medicine, is slow to learn given the brevity of life. I think the quote has been often misunderstood and misapplied.
It has always been interesting to me that the etymology of our use of "art" refers to "craft."
English: "Life is short, and (mastering a) craft slow, opportunity fleeting, experimentation perilous, and judgment difficult."
Those test levels are quite modest for active people. Everybody can aspire to better, but the doctors have learned to be modest in their expectations of us.
My only objection is to their including BMI on the list, which is a bad index for excess body fat. Is your waist size an ok measure of your body fat? Yes it is. Your waist size is not your belt size or jeans size, especially if you wear them on your hips which most people do these days. Your waist is above your belly button, the narrow space below your rib cage and above your hips (if you have a narrow space there).
How to Measure Your Waist
How do you measure your waist? Sounds simple enough, but it’s not always obvious where your waist is. Posture and other variables can affect the reading, so here are some basic guidelines to follow:
Position a tape measure at the narrowest point between your lower rib and the top of your hip bone, or at the midpoint in between. It should be snug but not compress the skin. If you can’t find the narrowest point (it may be difficult if you’re very overweight), measure just above your belly button.
Stand straight and breathe out normally; don’t suck in your belly.
Measure your waist first thing in the morning, before breakfast.
Though there’s no magic cutoff point, values over 37 inches for men and 32 inches for women indicate increased health risks, according to the World Health Organization; values over 40 for men and 35 for women represent substantially increased risk.
The referring person tells me "She is a 22 year-old cum laude college grad with no goals and no direction. She was just a diligent student. No stem classes. She is living at home, and terrified by the big world. She is shy and not overly-attractive. Self-involved, alternating between self-loathing and mild grandiosity. Very supportive family. Despite her college grades, she seems to lack some basic life skills so her low self-esteem seems justified to me. I think you would be a good fit for her if you can engage her. Self-pitying but not depressed, not psychotic."
OK. I'll do a consultation. This sad story is in my wheelhouse, and I have seen it many times.
IQ was less important in pre-post industrial societies. In personal experience, many people with below-average IQ have excellent common sense, work ethic, wit, and practical knowledge in abundance. Often, less interest in abstractions.
I'll admit that IQ below 80 is a handicap, but I see far more life difficulties produced by character flaws, maladaptive traits, and annoying or unsettling eccentricities than by IQ shortages.
Why Peterson's talks are controversial escapes me. The useful thing he does is to talk about Human Nature 101 and Adult Life 101. Maybe some people do not want to learn about human nature or adult life.
The only thing remarkable to me is that these things need to be said. Basics. A life worth living has to be constructed thoughtfully, in my view. I find it sometimes needs revisions, if not tweaking, because the things that mattered to me at 25 are no longer the most important things to me now. I like to think I have gained a little bit of wisdom.
How to Measure Your Waist