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.
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.
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..
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.
... gender dysphoria—the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder. Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction. The treatment should strive to correct the false, problematic nature of the assumption and to resolve the psychosocial conflicts provoking it. With youngsters, this is best done in family therapy.
I believe that gender surgery is, or is close to, medical malpractice. Psychotherapy is not likely to change these people either. Same with effeminate gays. Like it or not, we must all just accept that there is a lot of variety, strangeness, and discontent in the human species. Blame our hypertrophied cortex.
Since a study came out a few years ago, based on BMI, that heavy people live longer and healthier than thinner people, many heavy people applauded the news.
In fact, it turns out that higher muscle mass correlates with reduced risk of illness and death. (Well, risk of death is 100% but they mean sooner rather than later.)
A meaningful gauge of being overweight for your build and fitness is your Body Fat percentage. The simplest way to do this is to have somebody use the body fat caliper method on you. That does not measure intra-abdominal fat deposits, but it assumes a correlation. Your doctor's nurse knows how to do that. There are other ways too. (An easier way is to study yourself naked in a mirror.)
This site has two charts, one depicting "ideal" fat percentages based on fitness, and the second based on age. As an athletic female, I like to be around 25-30%. Seems disgusting for your body to be 30% lard, doesn't it? It can be fine for a slender lady, though.
Just for fun, no ab exercises will give you 6-pack abs. Killer abs are all about fat. "Good abs" are visible in men at around 8% body fat, and in women around 12%. Those are either highly-athletic (ie well-beyond "fit" percentages) or otherwise verging on anorectic. I will not recommend any %s lower than those, even for models and ballet dancers, and, generally, feel that those %s are too low for regular fit people. 20% is fine for a regular fit male who plays sports and works out.
Below the fold, photos for comparison of men and women with varying body fat percentages.
There is nothing healthier than taking on things to dispel our self-esteem despite the ego-protective temptation to hide and avoid them. Into life, outside the comfort zone. Here are some of the things that work well:
- Socializing with high-achieving, highly life-competent witty people - Taking a calisthenics/fitness class at the gym - Taking the Great Courses Intro to Calculus or Intro to Immunology Class and discover your IQ limits - Joining a Bible, or classical music/opera study group and discover your ignorance and lack of insight - Accepting the duty of running a small volunteer organization - Inspecting your naked body carefully in a mirror - Reflecting on one's mortality and what good one will have left behind - Taking an advanced yoga class - Try to get your book published - Go to a new city or woods without a GPS and make yourself get lost - Reach out to befriend somebody you feel is smart, fun and interesting, and get the brush-off - Learn a new sport or skill from scratch - Go on a job search - Get into weight-lifting
I welcome your suggestions for deeper humility in the comments -
Damasio does not view consciousness and culture as resulting from some additive ingredient unique to human beings: reason, logic, or language. In this story, a form of awareness appears in all animals equipped with nervous systems. Differences in animal mental life emerge with increasing anatomical complexity. Human beings are sophisticated, feeling, affective, social body-subjects who may speak, write, make art, and build technologies, but we share the homeostatic impulse with all other living things.
A funny-sounding word, almost as if it were the opposite of paranoia (which entails projecting one's bad stuff into the outside world.) Metanoia is usually used for spiritually-based internal changes based on a deep and ruthless personal review, followed by penitence and/or confession. In fact, tenets of AA are based on the concept of metanoia.
In a more secular context (despite just coming off of Lent), it is never a bad idea, however unpleasant, to fearlessly do an honest review of one's character flaws and weaknesses, covert malevolences, selfishness, evil thoughts, unhelpful impulses, life errors, failures, ignorances, etc. etc. It's assumed that everybody is a mess or insufficient in some way, or in many ways. It takes great courage to review one's terrible shortcomings, and not one of us is all we can be.
I generally advise people to appraise their strengths, competencies, potentials, and virtues at the same time. Still, it's the flaws that need attention.
I learned the term from this wonderful and wide-ranging (including God and Jesus, free speech, and lots of history) conversation between Prof. Peterson and the thoughtful Australian politician John Anderson. An intellectual treat:
Most of the world cares about objective reality, not subjective. One aspect of my day job is to help peoples' subjective experiences align more closely with objective reality.
The primacy of subjectivity is by no means limited to politics. It now permeates the framework through which we have traditionally mediated our competing narratives. Journalism, academia, science, and law are all affected. In short, any institution that exists to accommodate competing perspectives is being undermined by a new paradigm that privileges the subjective ‘lived experience.’ And, in the process, the meta-values which have traditionally enabled us to transcend our differing subjective experiences suffer. Foundational principles such as audi alteram partem (listen to the other side), the presumption of innocence, proportionality, empiricism, and even the rule of law now must bow before the sovereignty of the subjective...
Since a study came out a few years ago, based on BMI, that heavy people live longer and healthier than thinner people, many heavy people applauded the news.