Have you ever noticed how, when American couples get together, the women gravitate toward the other women, and the men to the other men? Even in family settings, this seems to be true. I'm more likely to end up chatting with my brother's wife and my elderly great Aunt at a family reunion, while my husband will likely spend much more time with my father and brother than I myself at the event.
It's called homosociality, and once you take a step back from societal norms on the whole thing ('of course all the women are together in the kitchen on Thanksgiving') it's a bit of an odd paradigm. Maybe the argument could be made that if unrelated women and men spoke to each other at length, they might not be able to keep their hands off each other, but what about T-day? The brothers and sisters who are separated when they head toward their gender group at holiday get-togethers surely aren't concerned about sexual feelings coming up between them.
Long ago I realized that within my friendships with women, I value having different friends with different personalities and skills. I've had writer friends whom I call with writing woes, neighbor friends for swapping vacation-help, friends who nurture, friendships centered around political views, dinner party friends for good eats, friends from whom I learn, and others to teach. I love that not every friendship has to be everything to me, and that each friendship is a great fit for some facet of my being. But all this has been within the realm of homosociality, friendships with other women. I'd open myself up to a lot more variety of perspectives and skills if I had friendships with men as well. I could have--I don't know--car-trouble friends!
In her fun little book, What French Women Know, Debra Ollivier describes how women and men are always seated away from their spouses at French dinner parties, sandwiched between two members of the opposite sex. Enjoying one-on-one conversations with a member of the opposite sex is par for the course, and flirting "is a civic duty." A French man is not threatened by his wife's interactions with other men, nor vice versa, according to Ollivier, because there is no culture of homosociality. So to the French (and surely to prehistoric humans), it seems imminently reasonable to expect a human being will have interactions and friendships with other humans of both the male and female variety...as wildly liberal as that may sound to our American sensibilities.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Carpe Diem: Meditations on Living in the Moment
From one risk-averse, internal-locus-of-control over-planner to the others of you that may be out there:
Carpe Diem, quam minimum credula postero
(Horace, First Century Roman Poet)
Don't ask (it's forbidden to know) what final fate the gods have
given to me and you, Leuconoe, and don't consult Babylonian
horoscopes. How much better it is to accept whatever shall be,
whether Jupiter has given many more winters or whether this is the
last one, which now breaks the force of the Tuscan sea against the
facing cliffs. Be wise, strain the wine, and trim distant hope within
short limits. While we're talking, grudging time will already
have fled: seize the day, trusting as little as possible in tomorrow.
given to me and you, Leuconoe, and don't consult Babylonian
horoscopes. How much better it is to accept whatever shall be,
whether Jupiter has given many more winters or whether this is the
last one, which now breaks the force of the Tuscan sea against the
facing cliffs. Be wise, strain the wine, and trim distant hope within
short limits. While we're talking, grudging time will already
have fled: seize the day, trusting as little as possible in tomorrow.
Jesus, in Matthew 6 (emphasis added):
“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life,
what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is
not life more than food, and the body more than clothes?
Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in
barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more
valuable than they? Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?
“And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these.
If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today
and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe
you—you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, in his essay, Self-Reliance (emphasis added):
Man is timid and apologetic; he is no longer upright; he dares
not say 'I think,' 'I am,' but quotes some saint or sage. He is
ashamed before the blade of grass or the blowing rose. These roses
under my window make no reference to former roses or to better ones;
they are for what they are; they exist with God today. There is no
time to them. There is simply the rose; it is perfect in every
moment of its existence. Before a leaf-bud has burst, its whole life
acts; in the full-blown flower there is no more; in the leafless root
there is no less. Its nature is satisfied, and it satisfies nature,
in all moments alike. But man postpones or remembers; he does not
live in the present, but with reverted eye laments the past, or,
heedless of the riches that surround him, stands on tiptoe to foresee
the future. He cannot be happy and strong until he too lives with
nature in the present, above time.
Mother Theresa:
"I believe in person to person. Every
person is Christ to me, and since there is only one Jesus, that person is
the one person in the world at that moment."
(Robert Herrick)
Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old time is still a-flying:
And this same flower that smiles to-day
To-morrow will be dying.
The glorious lamp of heaven, the sun,
The higher he's a-getting,
The sooner will his race be run,
And nearer he's to setting.
That age is best which is the first,
When youth and blood are warmer;
But being spent, the worse, and worst
Times still succeed the former.
Then be not coy, but use your time,
And while ye may go marry:
For having lost but once your prime
You may for ever tarry.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Masculine and Feminine
Within each man and each woman, there are masculine qualities, and there are feminine qualities. In my (dare I say, well-informed?) opinion, these two aspects must be in balance within an individual for maximum health, happiness, and actualization to be possible. This idea may sound most like the concept of Yin and Yang to you, but I have actually come to this perspective through study of work by Carl Jung and his 'mythopoetic' followers, including Marion Woodman, Robert Bly and Clarissa Pinkola Estés.
Here is my, fully inexpert, list of masculine qualities and feminine qualities:
Masculine
Feminine
Yes, these lists are both incomplete and inevitably biased, but I hope the exercise illustrates how many important traits are on each list. A man lacking any feminine traits will be isolated and lonely without the skills to relate to others, though possibly successful in his career. A woman deficient in masculine traits lacks grounding, is illogical and over-emotional, and lacks appropriate boundaries between herself and the outside world. And we all know a woman can lose her intuition, softness, and likability if she upholds the masculine at the expense of the feminine.
Each of us should be aware of our own masculine and feminine traits and work to strengthen them. I believe that American culture overvalues masculine traits while devaluing feminine traits, so many of us, both men and women, are skewed toward the masculine. But how can democracy, community, and high art survive if this is what we pass on to our children? Are not corruption, narrow hierarchies, dog-eat-dog perspectives, and lonely, depressed, anxious citizens the natural outcome if we scorn all that is feminine? Ancient peoples understood the value of both the masculine and the feminine, and reaped the rewards abundantly.
Here is my, fully inexpert, list of masculine qualities and feminine qualities:
Masculine
- Active Energy
- Control/Order, Domination
- Rationality & Linear Thinking
- Hierarchal Relating
- Self-orientation
- Protective
- Calm, clear-headed
- Direct, concrete
- Mathematical/Scientific
- Innovative, particularly with tools/technology
Feminine
- Receptive Energy
- Cooperation, Acquiescence
- Intuitive (subconscious) & Cyclical Awareness
- Egalitarian Relating
- Other-orientation
- Nurturing
- Emotional
- Abstract
- Social
- Artistic/Creative Expression
Yes, these lists are both incomplete and inevitably biased, but I hope the exercise illustrates how many important traits are on each list. A man lacking any feminine traits will be isolated and lonely without the skills to relate to others, though possibly successful in his career. A woman deficient in masculine traits lacks grounding, is illogical and over-emotional, and lacks appropriate boundaries between herself and the outside world. And we all know a woman can lose her intuition, softness, and likability if she upholds the masculine at the expense of the feminine.
Each of us should be aware of our own masculine and feminine traits and work to strengthen them. I believe that American culture overvalues masculine traits while devaluing feminine traits, so many of us, both men and women, are skewed toward the masculine. But how can democracy, community, and high art survive if this is what we pass on to our children? Are not corruption, narrow hierarchies, dog-eat-dog perspectives, and lonely, depressed, anxious citizens the natural outcome if we scorn all that is feminine? Ancient peoples understood the value of both the masculine and the feminine, and reaped the rewards abundantly.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
On Modern Motherhood
At the risk of sounding whiny, it's tough being a modern mother. Whether she works outside the home or not, the modern mother is overworked, underpaid, and under-appreciated (too whiny!? sorry!). She is judged by the cleanliness of her home, the quality of the food she feeds her family, the politeness and achievements of her children, the amount of volunteer work she manages or her success as a career woman, and her ability to look attractive while accomplishing these miracles. But even if she wasn't held to such ridiculous standards, a big problem for the modern mother* is the amount of responsibility she bears for raising happy, successful human beings. Even if a child has an exemplary mother and father, I feel certain the more loving, safe relationships they have with adults, the better. That is, the more the responsibility for rearing a specific child is spread among many good people, the happier, the healthier, the more generous in future, the child will be.
*(Or any individual, grandmother or single father, etc, who bears the majority of child rearing responsibilities.)
For instance, let's assume I'm a good mother, fortunate to have lots of tools available to me that have shaped me as such (like having had a good parenting role model as a child, so its easier to replicate; or having access to lots of good parenting information and advice). Still, I'm human, so I make mistakes. Well, let's imagine I'm a prehistoric mother, with the same ability to nurture, but the same flaws. My prehistoric children would be surrounded by 30-50 other maternal figures, all willing to listen to my child's stories, watch as he demonstrated a new skill, or share a hug after a tumble. It is likely that prehistoric women breastfed infants not their own, as necessary...these women were committed to mothering all the tribe's children! So whatever my flaws, my child's experience of them would be minimized by her constant exposure to so many other caring women (with their own, different, flaws, and their own, different, strengths).
Similarly, prehistoric children likely did not perceive one man as their father, but instead viewed all the men of the tribe as paternal figures. The best hunter would teach my son how to hunt, the best tracker, how to track, etc. All the men provided food, shelter and protection to all the children.
How can this not be a boon for a child? I am so grateful to have caring teachers in my children's lives, who have skills and perspectives that I do not. I moved 2,500 miles so my kids could live near their grandparents, and rejoice in their unique parenting styles--I don't want them to just be a replica of me! I cherish the relationships my children are cultivating with their friends' parents and with my own friends. Yes, these men and women do things differently than I do... that's the great part! The belief system behind the "how dare you tell me how to raise my kid" or "how dare you correct my child's behavior" thinking seems to me more about not wanting one's own child to be exposed to different perspectives or styles. (I know this makes me sound like I go around bossing other parents or children around, which couldn't be farther from the truth!) It's just that I can work to cultivate, for my own children, exposure to lots of caring adults, but I dream about every child having access to a tribe of loving elders, and that requires a large scale cultural change.
*(Or any individual, grandmother or single father, etc, who bears the majority of child rearing responsibilities.)
For instance, let's assume I'm a good mother, fortunate to have lots of tools available to me that have shaped me as such (like having had a good parenting role model as a child, so its easier to replicate; or having access to lots of good parenting information and advice). Still, I'm human, so I make mistakes. Well, let's imagine I'm a prehistoric mother, with the same ability to nurture, but the same flaws. My prehistoric children would be surrounded by 30-50 other maternal figures, all willing to listen to my child's stories, watch as he demonstrated a new skill, or share a hug after a tumble. It is likely that prehistoric women breastfed infants not their own, as necessary...these women were committed to mothering all the tribe's children! So whatever my flaws, my child's experience of them would be minimized by her constant exposure to so many other caring women (with their own, different, flaws, and their own, different, strengths).
Similarly, prehistoric children likely did not perceive one man as their father, but instead viewed all the men of the tribe as paternal figures. The best hunter would teach my son how to hunt, the best tracker, how to track, etc. All the men provided food, shelter and protection to all the children.
How can this not be a boon for a child? I am so grateful to have caring teachers in my children's lives, who have skills and perspectives that I do not. I moved 2,500 miles so my kids could live near their grandparents, and rejoice in their unique parenting styles--I don't want them to just be a replica of me! I cherish the relationships my children are cultivating with their friends' parents and with my own friends. Yes, these men and women do things differently than I do... that's the great part! The belief system behind the "how dare you tell me how to raise my kid" or "how dare you correct my child's behavior" thinking seems to me more about not wanting one's own child to be exposed to different perspectives or styles. (I know this makes me sound like I go around bossing other parents or children around, which couldn't be farther from the truth!) It's just that I can work to cultivate, for my own children, exposure to lots of caring adults, but I dream about every child having access to a tribe of loving elders, and that requires a large scale cultural change.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Interdependence
Four walls and a roof protect me from cold, wet, or the scorching sun. But single family homes also create a powerful illusion of separateness...from neighbors, passersby, or 'nature*.' The mortgage crisis illuminated our profound interdependence on those around us: our neighbor's and countrymen's choices impact our lives in big ways. If you have children, you know the decisions of the parents of your child's schoolmates absolutely influence your child. As a community, a nation, a species, we are connected through a web of interdependence. What empowers, educates, uplifts another benefits us all.
But interdependence is a wide, deep, rushing river. It not only inescapably ties our lives to those of our fellow humans, but to that of all other living creatures and to planet earth itself.
I lived three years in windward Oahu. 360 days of the year, the (copious) louvered windows were open, letting in the breezes, the sounds of the insects and children playing, the scents of the flowers and the rain-drenched soil. Geckos lived in every room in the house, and I'd watch the babies crawl along my ceiling as I drifted to sleep. There was also a thumb-sized frog perpetually living in the master bathroom. There were walls, but they seemed porous, and I learned my interrelatedness at a fundamental level in that house. How much more must our ancestors have grasped their dependence on 'nature' when the trees were their shelter, the flora and fauna their art, their companions, their sustenance?
If we all really understood our interdependence, we'd find the strength to make the behavior changes that 'nature' requires to continue to support us. Decisions about recycling, consuming less, eating locally, composting, safeguarding green spaces, lowering carbon footprints, banning toxic chemicals, or protecting endangered species, when re-framed with the understanding of how entirely we depend on 'nature' for our the survival, become easier. And don't forget, 'nature' will go on chugging away in new forms, even if we continue to choose to endanger our own species.
*This idea of human separateness from nature is challenged eloquently in the forward of Jane Jacobs' The Nature of Economies: "The theme running throughout this exposition--indeed the basic premise on which this book is constructed--is that human beings exist wholly within nature as a part of natural order in every respect. To accept this unity seems to be difficult for those ecologists who assume--as many do, in understandable anger and despair--that the human species is an interloper in the natural order of things. Neither is this unity easily accepted by economists, industrialists or politicians, and others who assume--as many do, taking understandable pride in human achievements--that reason, knowledge, and determination make it possible to circumvent and outdo the natural order. Readers unwilling or unable to breach a barrier that they imagine separates humankind and its works from the rest of nature will be unable to hear what this book is saying." As she points out later in the book, ant colonies live in huge, complex societies and build impressive, complicated housing and transportation structures yet we have no problem seeing ants as part of 'nature,' or understanding that changes in their ecosystem affect their chances of survival.
But interdependence is a wide, deep, rushing river. It not only inescapably ties our lives to those of our fellow humans, but to that of all other living creatures and to planet earth itself.
I lived three years in windward Oahu. 360 days of the year, the (copious) louvered windows were open, letting in the breezes, the sounds of the insects and children playing, the scents of the flowers and the rain-drenched soil. Geckos lived in every room in the house, and I'd watch the babies crawl along my ceiling as I drifted to sleep. There was also a thumb-sized frog perpetually living in the master bathroom. There were walls, but they seemed porous, and I learned my interrelatedness at a fundamental level in that house. How much more must our ancestors have grasped their dependence on 'nature' when the trees were their shelter, the flora and fauna their art, their companions, their sustenance?
If we all really understood our interdependence, we'd find the strength to make the behavior changes that 'nature' requires to continue to support us. Decisions about recycling, consuming less, eating locally, composting, safeguarding green spaces, lowering carbon footprints, banning toxic chemicals, or protecting endangered species, when re-framed with the understanding of how entirely we depend on 'nature' for our the survival, become easier. And don't forget, 'nature' will go on chugging away in new forms, even if we continue to choose to endanger our own species.
*This idea of human separateness from nature is challenged eloquently in the forward of Jane Jacobs' The Nature of Economies: "The theme running throughout this exposition--indeed the basic premise on which this book is constructed--is that human beings exist wholly within nature as a part of natural order in every respect. To accept this unity seems to be difficult for those ecologists who assume--as many do, in understandable anger and despair--that the human species is an interloper in the natural order of things. Neither is this unity easily accepted by economists, industrialists or politicians, and others who assume--as many do, taking understandable pride in human achievements--that reason, knowledge, and determination make it possible to circumvent and outdo the natural order. Readers unwilling or unable to breach a barrier that they imagine separates humankind and its works from the rest of nature will be unable to hear what this book is saying." As she points out later in the book, ant colonies live in huge, complex societies and build impressive, complicated housing and transportation structures yet we have no problem seeing ants as part of 'nature,' or understanding that changes in their ecosystem affect their chances of survival.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Vitality and Weight Loss
As I've mentioned before, I am a Nutrition Therapist. I spend a lot of time with people who want to lose weight, and I've seen individuals do a lot of really drastic things toward that aim. When working with clients with eating disorders, the approach back to a healthy relationship with food and weight is complex, multifaceted, and careful. If I had to sum up my perspective on weight loss for the rest of us, though, and this is a paradigm built on years of experience, I'd say achieving and maintaining a healthy weight has a pretty simple formula. It has nothing to do with counting calories or avoiding sugar, but with prioritizing vitality, pleasure, and self-expression.
Here are the questions I'd recommend asking yourself if you're trying to lose weight:
1) What experiences make me feel vital? When do I feel alive, joyous, engaged, connected, passionate, understood, energized? Ok, now go do more of that. Seriously. Arrange your life so you get some of that, every day. You may have to give up some stuff that's not fulfilling to you, and you may have to put your needs ahead of others' sometimes, but it's worth it. You will do less boredom snacking and emotional eating if you are prioritizing your happiness. Wherever possible, minimize activities that are boring, stifling, or upsetting, and see a therapist if you're struggling with daily experiences causing anger or anxiety.
2) How do I feel during and after eating various foods? Notice which foods bring you the most pleasure to eat, and savor every bite of them. As much as possible, avoid foods that don't really please you. Each food affects your postprandial energy level, physical comfort, mood, and satisfaction differently. This is very specific to your body, so you're going to have to really tune in to begin to understand which foods increase your sense of vitality. If there are foods you believe you like, but you realize that even after a large quantity of it, you're still left wanting (store-bought cookies or potato chips do this to me) then why bother? If eating a burger and fries (or whatever) leaves you feeling like you have a rock in your stomach, don't do that to yourself! You deserve to feel good in your own skin...go out and eat based on what is pleasurable both during and after the eating experience.
3) How can I increase my activity level in a pleasurable way? I don't exercise. Who wants to waste their finite time in this life doing something that feels burdensome or painful? But I do move. I walk, a lot (in fact, I'm walking right now...I have a 'treaddesk', so all my computer time is spent walking). I dance. I enjoy kickboxing, because some days it feels so fucking good to kick the shit out of that bag. I run around the park after my kids. I make love. I move. I think it might be impossible to feel vital sitting all day. But I absolutely forbid you to go out and exercise... you must find some wonderful, delicious way to move and do not for one moment think about how many calories you are burning while doing so.
That's it. That's my advice. Don't go on a diet! Even if you lose weight, you'll gain it back (a heartbreaking 95% of dieters do). But do fill yourself up in so many other ways that food goes back to being simply...food.
Here are the questions I'd recommend asking yourself if you're trying to lose weight:
1) What experiences make me feel vital? When do I feel alive, joyous, engaged, connected, passionate, understood, energized? Ok, now go do more of that. Seriously. Arrange your life so you get some of that, every day. You may have to give up some stuff that's not fulfilling to you, and you may have to put your needs ahead of others' sometimes, but it's worth it. You will do less boredom snacking and emotional eating if you are prioritizing your happiness. Wherever possible, minimize activities that are boring, stifling, or upsetting, and see a therapist if you're struggling with daily experiences causing anger or anxiety.
2) How do I feel during and after eating various foods? Notice which foods bring you the most pleasure to eat, and savor every bite of them. As much as possible, avoid foods that don't really please you. Each food affects your postprandial energy level, physical comfort, mood, and satisfaction differently. This is very specific to your body, so you're going to have to really tune in to begin to understand which foods increase your sense of vitality. If there are foods you believe you like, but you realize that even after a large quantity of it, you're still left wanting (store-bought cookies or potato chips do this to me) then why bother? If eating a burger and fries (or whatever) leaves you feeling like you have a rock in your stomach, don't do that to yourself! You deserve to feel good in your own skin...go out and eat based on what is pleasurable both during and after the eating experience.
3) How can I increase my activity level in a pleasurable way? I don't exercise. Who wants to waste their finite time in this life doing something that feels burdensome or painful? But I do move. I walk, a lot (in fact, I'm walking right now...I have a 'treaddesk', so all my computer time is spent walking). I dance. I enjoy kickboxing, because some days it feels so fucking good to kick the shit out of that bag. I run around the park after my kids. I make love. I move. I think it might be impossible to feel vital sitting all day. But I absolutely forbid you to go out and exercise... you must find some wonderful, delicious way to move and do not for one moment think about how many calories you are burning while doing so.
That's it. That's my advice. Don't go on a diet! Even if you lose weight, you'll gain it back (a heartbreaking 95% of dieters do). But do fill yourself up in so many other ways that food goes back to being simply...food.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Corruption & Happiness
A few years back, while listening to a researcher describe his
recent iteration of the "happiest countries on earth" list, I was
struck by the comment that government corruption has a very
strong negative impact on individual happiness. That statement came back to me on Friday as I listened to Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson talk about their new book, Winner-Take-All Politics on the new Moyers & Company. It's not just competing visions of utopia between the two parties standing in the way of good government policy, as I have told myself in the past. It's an intentional decision on the part of our nation's politicians, from both sides of the aisle, to knowingly promote public policies that are not in the best interest of the public, because those politicians can get paid to do so. In other words: corruption, big time.
The corruption doesn't only make us vulnerable to 'great recessions,' giant oil spills or contaminated food, though. Living in an environment in which it is unsafe to trust...that is a terrible burden for our psyche to carry. Given social trust, loyalty, cooperation and mutual protection were foundational to our success as a species for the first 190,000 years, we are wired to thrive under those auspices. It's a tricky balancing act to remain connected to the vital energy of socializing, trusting and aiding those around us--without which connection we can end up going through the motions of life without passion, joy, vitality--when barraged with news of the untrustworthy around us, particularly those with positional power. So while we work towards punishing the corrupt and rewarding the honorable within our political establishment, we must also work to build, in our own lives, the kind of social networks that our prehistoric brothers and sisters depended on: those founded on reciprocity, intimacy, loyalty, and the knowledge that the most fun and pleasure to be found in human life rests in our interactions with those around us.
The corruption doesn't only make us vulnerable to 'great recessions,' giant oil spills or contaminated food, though. Living in an environment in which it is unsafe to trust...that is a terrible burden for our psyche to carry. Given social trust, loyalty, cooperation and mutual protection were foundational to our success as a species for the first 190,000 years, we are wired to thrive under those auspices. It's a tricky balancing act to remain connected to the vital energy of socializing, trusting and aiding those around us--without which connection we can end up going through the motions of life without passion, joy, vitality--when barraged with news of the untrustworthy around us, particularly those with positional power. So while we work towards punishing the corrupt and rewarding the honorable within our political establishment, we must also work to build, in our own lives, the kind of social networks that our prehistoric brothers and sisters depended on: those founded on reciprocity, intimacy, loyalty, and the knowledge that the most fun and pleasure to be found in human life rests in our interactions with those around us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)