Growing up is painful. Thats a fact of life that i guess, nobody can deny. The pains of having more wants in life, the pains of the exploring the unexpectable,the pains of having to face our failures,  the pains of trying to make a yourself heard in this very vast globe. Taking that in mind, i am exceptionally motivated, inspired and encouraged by this lady, Alexandra Burke. She comes as one of the contestants in the All-English X-factor competition. Three years ago, she was sent off the stage despite being an ownage. Now, she comes back three years later, as someone charismatic, stronger and wiser. She gave me goosebumps from her very first auditions. That's something i really envy of people like Burke, the desire to pursue their passion and most importantly, the courage to face their failures and pick up right from where they fell off. She is going to be the next Leona Lewis, or maybe, even greater.

Most people who are close to me will know, i like singing! Whether i sing well or not is secondary , but i enjoy singing. But recently, i have an honest declaration to make. Recently, i started to dislike my own voice. I have seriously no idea why, i just don't like my own voice. I'm quite sick of hearing my own singing. Yes, i do doodle and murmur and sing a few sentences here and there in the day, but on the whole, i really hate my voice! Maybe its because the meaning of singing has changed so much for me.

Alright , despite so much of emo'ing, life isn't all a bleak as it may sound. I do enjoy my happy times of the week .We went out yesterday for Nonya restaurant buffet! It was kinda good but the variety was quite lacking at Bugis! The price was kinda hefty for such a buffet...personal opinion.But overall, still quite a nice place to makan ! Went to peninsula to shop for a pair of shoes but ended up with nothing. Nothing really really appealed and the only one that did ...the auntie refused to give us a discount. So NO-no.

I want this shoe.Christmas and my birthday is coming. HAHA.

***

In less happysoppygentle news: I'm tired of the pathetic University/freshman relationship problems surrounding me (note: this is said out of complete honesty, not the warped jealousy as it may seem - I'm about 8569% sure of it.) Mehhhh. "My boyfriend never says the right things" nehhh. "Why are boys so stupid?!" nehhh x2; "why does he never understand how much it hurts me?" nehhh x3. Just neehhh. Generally, I'd say I was an understanding and empathetic (or however you spell that word) person - and in the external world I respond with the usual (and sometimes outstanding, you could say - I impress even myself) words of support and fervent agreement, such as [insert obsessive head-nodding] "I know! All men are evil and give nothing to the world of women! DAMN them!" or, [insert seductive voice laced with wisdom and a finger-wagging] "You know what, men never know the right thing to say to a Woman with a capital W - trust me on this" although you really shouldn't trust me on that - I have absolutely no credibility or personal evidence.

I'm not a girly girly girl thing. Obviously I like sharing chocolates and having intimate girl talks and discussing the world with my female friends, but I cannot stand discussing petty relationship problems. Internally. It irritates me like a big lumpy fly irritates a window. I am a window in such situations. A glassy, frosted window with condensation on the outside but warmth on the inside. I appear warm, but really I am not going to let you in to the full extent of my understanding. Carry on clinging to the futility of the moment, little fly!

But I digress... so to make it even clearer: I am an understanding person, really. Really really! Really. But there comes a limit, which is the type of complaint that digs desperately for a response from the complaint-receiver, their eyes sawing violently into yours and making you feel sort of dumb and stupidly sarcastic inside. And it's the type of pathetic and immature (ouch) complaint that comes from a 19 year-old like myself, who has just discovered the magic of living alone and having a boyfriend simultaneously, and wants to be an adult before they have even grasped at a job. Like myself. Minus the 19 year-old excitement of living alone. You could say I was someone in my mid-20's living in a freshman's body. You could.

My neighbouring flatmate did this to me the other day. The Complaint lasted a good half hour, and I listened to all of it with my usual supportive and egging-on responses, and I even think she was rather impressed with my advice, but all the time I was just thinking - "so if this is how much he upsets and neglects you, then what did you get up to last night?"

NEHHHH. I know I know, love can do some funny things to you, but. NEHHH. Please. Don't. Share. It. With. Me. Now.

In an earlier blog I wrote about letting go, and how at least for me it takes a significant event or epiphany of sort to recognize "it" and do something about whatever "it" may be. I had a similar happening today, while browsing the book section of the student store at my local college. I forget the name of the book but it was something to the tune of "The twenty something monologue..." somewhat intrigued I flipped through the pages and stumbled upon the topic of "Toxic Relationships", due to a series of events over the past week or so I felt this is a chapter I must read. This is when the light bulb went off and it all made sense, as the chapter drew to a close all I could think was how did I not realize this before.

This is something Im sure most, if not all of us have dealt with... toxic friendships/relationships. The super duper educated definition of one according to webmd, "is a friendship that is unsupportive, draining, unrewarding, stifling, unsatisfying, and often unequal. Toxic friends stress you out, use you, are unreliable, are overly demanding, and don’t give anything back. While a toxic friend doesn’t have to lay claim to all of these charming characteristics, they do seem to bring on their nasty behavior on a consistent basis, as opposed to those of us who just have a bad day once in a while and take it out on some of the people we care about the most -- our friends."

Ill be honest in saying I had a friendship/relationship like this for almost 7-8 months which finally came to a rather messy end over a rather ridiculous subject and not surprisingly it exhibited all the symptoms as described above. Ill add to the list though, you realize this person constantly criticizes you, makes you second guess yourself when no one else does, makes empty promises, constantly tells you how they know best, holds you at an impossibly high standard, assumes you will forgive them for all their fuck ups but holds it against you for even slipping a little and above all brings out the worst in you.

In my reading they compared these types of relationships to that of abusive ones, you know your in one but you just shrug it off hoping its just a phase or its something you did, never the fact that maybe the other person just is not compatible at all. The resolution to all of this is blatantly clear just end it, but as I have found out its easier said than done... In hindsight though Im much better off, not having that constant pressure on my shoulders, not constantly wondering if their criticisms of me are actually true, not having to deal with drama that was never mine to begin with.

I guess I found comfort in knowing Im not the only person who had to deal with ridiculous shit like this, I keep forgetting there are billions of people in this world to meet why let one bad apple spoil the whole barrel... I  firmly believe karma will eventually find a way of getting even with this kind of person.

Any adventure that yields a good story is an adventure worth having.

One of the core philosophies I try to live my life by is to live with no regrets. It's actually very easy to do. One way is to just stop caring. I don't recommend that way. Instead I try to take something from every action, decision, mistake, etc, I make. Learn from the past, don't dwell on it.

Okay, enough philosophizing for this week. Here's another Charlie and Rose strip. They're fun to write for, so expect more of them in the future. I promise we're going somewhere with all this. Just stay tuned. Everyone just sit back and enjoy the art this week. Absolutely fantastic, Artista. I particularly love how nonchalantly Charlie chucks that red shell at the tailing car. Also the wind in his hair. Our artist kicks major booty.

Shout out and thank you to Sean and Mimi, who recently upgraded their site and added a links page, with us among their friends! Yay! If you haven't checked out their comic, which is equal levels hilarious and adorable, shame on you you should.

Hope everyone had a nice weekend. See you all next week.

Not even undomesticated equines could remove me,

Phoenix

PS Reiterating (probably just iterating to some of you) the fact that Craig Ferguson is my hero.

The movie started at a slow pace but picked up both on humor and content a few frames into it. Unlike in Bill Maher's TV show Real time with Bill Maher on HBO, Maher does not deliver his pointed opinion on religion in the film. Instead, he questions people of their faith and the basis of their faith. He does not denounce religion with certainty; instead, he promotes doubt. However, the authoritative tone that he was able to use in some scenes when he questions people about Christianity in America was missing when he questions Muslims or Jews in the Middle East. The parts that were shot with him interviewing Muslim leaders/priests and Jewish priests were shaky in comparison to those shot in America and the Vatican when questioning Christianity. Perhaps he didn't want to take any chances with misrepresenting Islam or Judaism: both religions that he might be less familiar with considering that he was raised in a Catholic household despite his mother being Jewish.

Overall, I enjoyed the film for its light hearted humor, the non-preaching approach that it takes, the questions it raises, the doubts that it intends to promote without being condescending or patronizing to anyone. It was good to see Bill Maher's personal opinion not fully overtaking the film considering that he is quite opinionated on the issue of religion. Instead, he allowed the answers to the questions he raised dictate the theme of the film and that, I felt, was its winning point. New York Times reviews the film here.

The two points that I took away from the film were:

1. The stories that we hear of Jesus Christ are also true of other prophets who existed around the same region prior to Jesus like Horus, the Egyptian God. For example, they were both born on December 25 midnight, born to a virgin mother, beheaded, and resurrected as well. There were many other 'prophets' who had similar stories as well. Conclusion being that these are all stories akin to fairy tales which alleviate these prophets, who might have been good leaders in their day if they existed, to 'God'-like status considering our perception of 'God' being a supernatural power which can perform miracles unimaginable to human beings. It is necessary for the prophets to be viewed as ever so powerful God-like beings for humans to have faith in them and believe in them ... but the film raises the point that if we don't believe in fairy tales like Cinderella to be true, then why do we believe that Christ was born to a Virgin mother?

That thought stayed with me as we drove home. I thought back to the stories I was taught about Sikh gurus when I was young. One of them was about Sikhs' first Guru, Guru Nanak, who was apparently shaded from the sun by a black Cobra once while he was sleeping in his fields during his childhood years. Strangely similar to that story is the story of Lord Krishna being shaded by the King of Serpents, Vasuki, from rain while being transported as a baby to safety by Vasudeva, Krishna's father. Both stories speak of snakes as a source of protection to the Prophets. Snakes were definitely a huge part of life (and mythology) of the agricultural societies that both of the prophets mentioned were born into. I am certain that there are many other similar stories that have originated from the same region but my lack of knowledge of exact details inhibits me from writing about more. It's interesting to notice the similarities though and more interesting to note that the fanatics in both religions will defend the authenticity of their own story despite the fact that they are both one and the same and could just be an inspiration from the local folk tales.

2. Although religion (theoretically) is not supposed to promote violence, it still is a reason for a lot of violence in the world and, yet, people swear by religion for it does provide solace and comfort to many. However, if we were part of a social club whose agenda was NOT to promote violence but was still hijacked by a few members and used to cause devastation in the world, would we still want our name associated with that social club despite its positivity? I don't know about anyone else but it sure had me thinking and the conclusion I reached is:

People being people will always need something to identify with others and hate on someone else as a group. The means of identification could be similar cultural values, race, skin color, religion, or it could be anything as trivial as hair length. We, as a species, need to hate on someone to feel better about ourselves. Even if religion was eliminated from this planet, we'd find something else to hate each other. Religion just provides an organized 'system of hatred' to the rogue elements which would be provided by something else if religion didn't exist.

The 'system of hate' makes it OK to hate and hurt because it is being done for 'religious' reasons which somehow are always justified. Example: Bombing of Air India Flight 182 by Babbar Khalsa in 1985 and many many other events as such like 9/11 et al. As long as we feel that we are justified in our actions, we will continue to do them no matter how detrimental our actions are ... and 'religion' provides that justification in a very systematic manner. It can be argued that those who justify violence with religion are not religious but they feel the same about those who don't do anything to defend their religion. It's an ongoing battle with no end in sight. This has been happening for centuries and will always go on like I mentioned in the Good ol' days et Humanity post.

To sum up, Religulous urges people to start questioning their faith, having doubts about their beliefs rather than just accept it as something they were taught in childhood. The film does not advocate certainity and I agree. If there is no certainity that there is no God, there should be no certainity that God exists too. Doubt should pervade every thinking mind atleast once in a lifetime. If despite months and years of questioning, the resultant still is certain faith, then more power to faith. If the result is opposite, then more power to lack of faith. Or just always be questioning while never disrespecting those who believe or do not believe. I choose the last option.

Peace... I feel complete peace, the chaos of life had all but vanished in these few precious moments. My eyes were fully opened to the true beauty of life, nature, and love, the beauty was always there I just often overlook it in my chaotic quest of daily activities. Frou Frou said it best there is beauty in the breakdown... breakdown the distractions and there is a whole new world for your eyes to see.

i believe in intelligent and informative campaigning.

i believe in educational prerequisites for suffrage, such as the completion of sixth grade primary school.

i believe government officials should not endorse any commercial product while in office or afterwards.

i believe projects and/or ads funded in whole or in part by the government should not carry any politician's name or image.

i believe in the abolition of the pork barrel.

i believe in "glasnost", the policy of maximal publicity, openness, and transparency in the activities of all government institutions.

i believe openness and transparency should apply to all government officials, including the president, and should include independent audits and administrative details.

i believe in the effective use of technology and the internet for the publishing of requested declassified government information, such as audits on officials, and regular statements or broadcasts from the head of state.

on industry and government:

i believe in making the tourism industry more filipino-friendly.

i believe in initiating and promoting local government-subsidized and government-owned businesses to increase national revenue.

i believe in the improvement of public transportation, and the eventual abolition of jeepneys as a mode of transport.

i believe in the development of the agricultural industry in order to be self-sustaining, especially with regards to rice.

i believe in the funding, training and close regulation of the police force with the goal of increasing public confidence and security.

i believe in the mandatory training and retraining of elementary and high school teachers.

i believe in increasing taxes on foreign-owned businesses, and partial capital sponsorship for local business to promote filipino entrepreneurship.

i believe that each foreign-owned company operating in the country should sponsor a company college scholarship program in an amount proportional to the revenue of the company.

i believe in a mandatory college subject on "current national and local society", intended to cover existing laws and ordinances, government institutions and processes, and the minimum social and legal expectations of citizens.

on crime and punishment:

i believe in heavy fines imposed for petty crimes such as littering and traffic violations.

i believe in abolishing the presidential authority to pardon criminals.

i believe that a malicious crimes, involving intentional physical or psychological harm that infringe upon human dignity, should be punished disproportionately to the crime.

i believe in "cruel and unusual punishment ", such as torture, for malicious crimes.

i believe that the most heinous crimes, such as murder in conjuction with rape or torture, should be punishable by death.

i believe the death penalty should only be applied to cases with irrefutable physical evidence.

i believe the minimum sentence for rape should be life imprisonment.

i believe that malicious crimes against minors, especial when involving rape, should be treated as heinous crimes.

i believe crimes committed against one's own children warrant punishments more severe than usual, and a mandatory loss of custody.

on national and foreign policies:

i believe in roe vs. wade.

i believe in the promotion of contraception and adoption.

i believe in gay marriage.

i believe that divorce, prostitution and the possession of firearms should remain illegal.

i believe that genetic research should be closely and strictly managed and regulated, and directed to practical usage such as for prevention and cure of diseases, but not stopped entirely.

i believe in the right to clean air, and the banning of smoking in public places including streets and parks.

i believe in the kyoto protocol.

i believe in the disarmament of all nuclear weapons in all governments as called for in the russell-einstein manifesto.

i believe in the repair and maintenance of the country's natural resources including forests and coral reefs, considered by many to be one of the world's most diverse.

i believe that any member country of the united nations that wages war without the u.n.'s authorization should be stricken from the list of member countries.

Divided by belief

By Stacey T Pollock

Life came first before belief.

We need to survive before we can reason why.

Belief is based on individual choice, and it can be reasoned that in life we can decide on how we wish to see our value and purpose. These values are based on choices and come from the mind, a place that has freedom to see without physical constraints. Everyone can decide their own philosophy for life and say what is to be seen as right or wrong, this shows that in the end we all have individuality and choice in our foundation for viewing life.

When looking at how beliefs work in life it is evident that they are the key factor that divides us on all levels. They place people into categories through the strength gathered by favored belief groups that have been given enough funding and control in order to make decisions based around our physical living environment. Strength in numbers is a definite way in order to push people in certain directions of seeing in order to assimilate people into set philosophies and goals. Goals are seen as the purpose for life and they fit right into the structure of belief walking hand in hand on the way to destruction of many who do not have the same point of perception.

Read more here

The rhythm of everyday love.

The loud ones - the ones who complain work stories down the phone, smashing at their keyboards with a sad urgency, or puff their face away with make-up - they hold no mystery. They aren't attractive at all. Only the ones that stumble around silently for their ticket, their eyes falling in strange places and catching awkward lights: head trying to find a soft place to lean on and call it a day. The ones who fiddle with their life soundtrack, trying to find the right song to match that right moment; making music videos in their head to match the cinematic scene in their head and the reality that rolls out the window, or the darkness. Hands always trying to find something new and seemingly normal to do. They dangle so delicately between their desired destinations, and I just fall in love with that uncertainty and freshness, that discomfort that I love to feel around me because ironically, it feels so familiar.

I don't like it when people know where they're going. It's easier to fall in love with the spontaneous journey.

- another blast in Mehrauli flower market of Delhi (on September 27th afternoon) where the death toll has reportedly reached 10 with more than 30 wounded

- more blasts today in Gujarat and Maharashtra killing atleast 5 and leaving over 80 injured

I was in two minds today to write about this again after having discussed the same topic only a few days ago; the sense of apathy that we begin to feel after being repeatedly exposed to violence and terror. Something that shook me out of my unfeeling state was news of a 5 year young girl, Sneha, being the youngest victim of the recentmost Delhi blast of Mehrauli. It really shakes you up to the core to think of the heartlessness of people who are hurting innocent little children. What harm did this little girl do to anyone to be suffering as she is now? She has to undergo surgery now but we may never find out what would happen to her. What of the young 13 year old boy who picked up the packet that exploded to return it to the packet's owners who drove away on a motorcycle? How did he wrong anyone?

These victims are real people. Why doesn't media talk more of them? Why doesn't it talk about their lives, their families and make them real to the audience? 100 dead, 20 dead, 30 dead ... it has just become an insensitive logistic game. Who were the 100 who died? What were their names? What made them laugh? What made them cry? Who did they love the most? What of those who loved them? These people are real and not just part of some morbid list! As real as me, you and everyone we see around ...  I am sorry, they were real. They no longer exist. For no fault of theirs. Their families and loved ones suffer for decisions made by those in political offices and positions of power. My silent prayers.

Whenever anything frightening like the aforementioned bomb blasts happens, most of us react with the overly cliched good ol' days. No one cares about anyone else anymore as they used to back in good ol' days, we think. Humanity is coming to an end as we see it. Just a few weeks ago, I was at that point too wondering whether it is a good idea to even bring children into this world or not. I sincerely believed that the world is spiralling downwards out of control anyway and it'd be ethically wrong on a parent's part to introduce their children to a world that's already a failed system and make them suffer the consequences. That's what I thought but, now, more I think about it, more I realize that humanity never really died. It is still very much alive. People still care about each other as much as they did a century ago. The 'good old days' syndrome is a part of  every generation: present and those begone. We cling on to positive memories from our past for our survival sake while consciously hushing the negatives and, hence, the good ol' days.

Humanity is still the same as it was in the good ol' days. It always has been. Decades and centuries ago too. There have always been bad elements in it and there has been plenty good in it too. While there were unfortunate events like wars, slavery, imperialism, racism etc., there were also developments in science, bonding of human relationships, pursuit and experiences of love et al. It's the positive in humanity that consistently works to outweigh the negative. It always has worked to do that and it is continuing to do the same.

Ironically, it's only in moments of great distress like the bomb blasts in Mehrauli when humanity comes forth full force to combat the negativity. While we shake our heads (in disbelief) at the ruthlessness of those who injured Sneha, we must also remember the stranger who took her to a nearby hospital.

Well, I am not trying to imply it is good or bad. What crops up my mind is that after all the evolution or developments mankind has been through, where we are finally heading to!!! We the human beings are blessed with the power of thinking, reasoning and host of other qualities which are only getting sharper in the process of evolution. Yet, from eternity most of us had been engaging ourselves to the same kind of activities, albeit in a more and more developed manner may be. In the age old days we were busy with small houses, wooden wheels, simple foods etc. and now we are into sky-scrappers, bullet trains or continental dishes and so on. We would probably be into much more different things in the times to come, but the basic things remain the same. Since the ancient times generations have been probably continuing to do mostly the same things, indeed in more and more developed ways, and then vanishing after handing over the process to successive generations. That was what probably most of our ancestors did, that is what probably most of us have been busy with and that is what probably most of our next generations would continue to do until the whole process comes to a halt someday, somehow!!!!!!!

I also realized that we as individuals are great at dishing out advice and terrible at receiving it... Ive always been captivated by this, friends ask how your doing you tell them your joys and sorrows in life, sometimes they half way listen, then reply with some short half witted response, and at times immediately start telling you about something similar in their life or how they had it worse, the catch is I do the same thing 98% of the time so Im probably more of an offender than most. Why do we do it though?  More importantly why do I do it? Maybe were all just eager to have another set of ears listen, maybe offer advice, or maybe we just like to hear the sound of our own voice, I dont know...

What Im getting at is I realize more and more there are things about me that Im far more guilty of than those I critisize. Ive been told in the past Im a great listener, and give solid advice but I dont see how, Im only 21 Ive really yet to experience life.  Im idealistic at heart and I simplify problems that probably are not as simple as I make them out to be,  I need to take my own advice, listen more and talk less...

Another reason why people are losing confidence in the democratic system is because they feel that the have been ignored and it seems no matter what the majority has to say the government does its own will. Take for example, in 1999 the Labour government announced that it intended to abolish Section 28, introduced under the Conservative administration of Margaret Thatcher to prevent local government providing funding for gay and lesbian groups and discussing homosexual relations in sex education classes in schools. A campaign to keep "Section 28", accompanied by much public debate, was funded by a rich businessman, a Free Church member, who formed an alliance with certain religious groups and conservatives. Allegedly four million ballot papers were distributed, and about forty percent returned. Not surprisingly, those against teaching about homosexuality were more likely to take part and 80% voted to keep the bill. A poll of this type has no legal effect and parliament had announced in advance that the result would be ignored.[1]

Every elections in Britain people are free and without victimisation to vote for a party of their choice. The reason we all vote is because we either believe the promises that the political party's make or we vote for the one with the philosophies we agree to. For we all want to make Britain a better place. However some governments abuse their position and become a "democratic dictator". They have been elected by the people and for the people yet in office they represent no one but the longevity of their party in power. Such examples are of Zimbabwe and the tyranny of Robert Mugabe who during election after election forces the masses to vote for him or face the consequences. Britain is not that extreme however they are as controlling, for example:

In Britain we have lost our privacy and we slowly coming into the days when we lose our freedom. Our Government has given itself unbelievable new powers to listen to, read and monitor all our communications and transactions. Personal privacy, the essence of true liberty, no longer exists. And the worst is yet to come. Our ruthless and abusive Government clearly intends to extend its powers still further and to continue to take away what few rights we have left and what little privacy remains. It seems that every new piece of legislation is now introduced in the name of terrorism.  Surveillance cameras are everywhere. The Government is bringing in ID cards. New legislation reducing our civil liberties is being introduced so quickly that civil liberties groups hardly have time to express outrage at one new piece of fascist legislation before another ism being prepared.
The Government keeps detailed records of every move we make. They have introduced new legislation, which has so damaged our personal security that identity theft is now one of the fastest growing types of crime. Personal privacy for law-abiding citizens is now just a memory. The law enforcement agencies have given up protecting the public (the task for which they are paid) and now spend most of their time persecuting motorists (an easy target and a ready source of income).

"The sovereignty of Parliament is, from a legal point of view, the dominant characteristic of our political institutions. Parliament consists of the King, the House of Lords, and the House of Commons acting together. The principle, therefore, of parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this, namely that "Parliament" has "the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament."[2]

[2] Chap. I. p. 3, post. Parliament may itself by Act of Parliament either expressly or impliedly give to some subordinate legislature or other body the power to modify or add to INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE LAW OF THE CONSTITUTION by A. V. Dicey, All Souls College, Oxford, 1885

An interesting interview with the author.

Looking at our culture through this set of glasses explains why we are so successful around the world selling the trappings of adolescence: Coca-cola, Nike shoes, fast food, blue jeans, and loud, violent movies. America has never produced a world-class classical composer, but has successfully exported rock, hip-hop, and R&B -- the music if adolescence -- to every corner of the globe. American basketball players who can hardly read make exponentially more money than American scientists do. We are endlessly fascinated with celebrities and all the adolescent mistakes they make.

** - My comments - Why Nike shoes? Adadis, Ascis, Puma... there are far better and more enduring brands out there. Does Nike have a "adolescent" brand image? "Music of adolescence" - Ouch (some of the greatest rock influences came from Britain, the country of "detachment")! Obsession with celebrities - it's not just about being "young at heart" (aka, "immature" as the author implied). Americans are obsessed, ESPECIALLY, with celebrities involved in scandals. The more scandals, the better. Why? Because seeing the rise and fall of the (in)famous enables them to sit back and enjoy the wild ride vicariously, while snickering and sighing inwardly "even though my life is dead boring, at least I am not as crazy as these people!" The same mentality applies to people's obsession with reality TV.

Love - FALSE EXPECTATIONS

A woman searches for Mr. Right because she believes the stories she reads in books or watches at the movies; she finds someone she believes she can "change" into her ideal man, and she disappointedly sees her efforts fail. A man searches for Ms. Perfect for many of the same reasons; he finds a woman who excites him, he believes it will stay this way forever, and he is disappointed when motherhood takes her interests elsewhere.

Our cultural unconscious compels us to have unrealistically high standards for love.

Seduction - MANIPULATION

When Americans think of seduction, they think of being forced to do things they don't want to do or that they believe they shouldn't do.

Americans invented the concept of the "battle between sexes." American books and talk shows endlessly exhort their audiences to rail against the way men and women manipulate each other during the act of seduction.

Sex - VIOLENCE

Repeatedly, the respondents spoke of winning and losing, of taking things and of having things taken from them, even of dominance and being dominated.

It's also clear that as a culture we are far more comfortable with violence than with sex... The FCC fines television stations for showing women breast-feeding (as though that were in any way sexual), but on any given night, those same stations can broadcast simulations of murder and mutilation without penalty.

Americans have unconsciously "replaced" sex with violence... Americans are fascinated with violence... Consider this snapshot: for the week ending October 9, 2005, the number 1 television show in the country was CSI, a drama filled with grisly crime images... In fact, each of the top five shows that week had strong viokence themes... Americans may abhor real violence, but we find simulated violence enthralling. This is another offshoot of our cultural adolescence: as adolescents, we feel immortal, indestructible, and we are drawn to violence to test our invincibility.

** Despite the abundant anecdotal observations that seem very plausible, I am still not completely convinced by the sex/violence connection. However, I think the comment that Americans are "enthralled" by "simulated violence" is dead on. Or in other words, Americans love simulated crime (think the staggering popularity of CSI, Law & Order, and similar legal/crime shows, as well as mysteries/crime novels). I think the American culture code for sex is actually CONTRADICTION (e.g., the media is chock full of titilating images that seduce and exaggerate, but people are squirmish and uneasy about the open discussion of this topic). Actually, this dicotomy exists in many other cultures too (e.g., the prim and proper Japan is a top player - or at least, manufacturer/exporter - in the pleasure/desire industry, the seemingly repressed Chinese have the largest population in the world - although that also has something to do with its unhealthy insistence on having male progeny.)

Beauty - MAN'S SALVATION

If a woman can impress her beauty upon a man permanently, if she can stay beautiful in his eyes, she can make him a better human being. She is doing more than keeping herself visually appealing to him: she is elevating him from a rutting animal to something more exalted.

** I completely disagree with this assessment. It should be the other way around. Beauty, as evidenced by the disclosure/reveries of the subjects he cited in the book, means THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING RESCUED BY MEN FROM THE DRUDGERY OF LIFE! If a woman doesn't have the "look", she has to depend on her "brain" to survive in the cruel cruel world. If she is beautiful, she doesn't need to have ANYTHING ELSE and will surely be snatched up by Knight in Shining Armor and live with the Prince happily ever after. If she has neither (the brain or the look), well, she needs to be "a good person." If you have both, God loves you, really really loves you.

Fat - CHECKING OUT

As Americans, we are masters at putting undue pressure upon ourselves... that's an awful lot to handle. In fact, for many of us, it's much too much. Therefore, we unconsciously check out. Better to blame the fat than to acknowledge our desire to eschew expectations... Being fat allows us to know who we are (fat), why this has happened (the overabundance of food "forced" on us), who is responsible (McDonald's or some other fast food restaurant that "makes us" eat their food), and what our identity is (a victim).

** He really hit the nail on the head on this one.

Health - MOVEMENT / Youth - MASK

For Americans, health and wellness means being able to complete your mission... their greatest fear about being sick is the inability to do things... movement makes us feel healthy, confirms that we are alive.

In the American culture... we not only want to survive, we want to remain at the peak of our powers... we want the illusion of invincibility that every teenager has... Americans are fascinated with youth and the fanciful notion of staying young forever.

Youth in America is as much a state of mind as it is an age... youth isn't a stage of life, but something you can hide behind, something you can wear instead of your actual age.

** Actually, America is rather tolerant of "old(er) age." Americans should feel lucky that at least employers are mostly PC (although it's required by law) and old(er) stars (Meryl Streep) still get attention, considering the rampant age discrimination in the current Chinese job market and the adoration of extreme youth in Japan (e.g., school-girl fixation, obsession with young and pretty actors/actresses).

Home - prefix Re- (return, reunite, reconnect, reconfirm, renew...) / Dinner - ESSENTIAL CIRCLE

Work - WHO YOU ARE

"[Upon meeting] Where do you come from?" is the first question, followed by "What do you do?" The answer enables us to size someone up, as well as providing an evening's worth of small talk.

Instead of "Bonjour Paresse" ("Hello Laziness"), our best-sellers include "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" and "Good to Great."

Americans very strongly believe that they are what they do in their jobs... we believe that if we work hard and improve our professional standing, we become better people... but the sense that they're moving toward something more glamorous is very much on Code.

Deep down, we believe that you never have to be stuck in what you do. Self-reinvention is definitely on Code. Americans champion entrepreneurs because they are our most aggressive identity-seekers. They don't wait for someone to tell them what to be, but rather take significant risks to become what they believe they should be.

** You can't put it any better. I complete agree with the author here.

Money - PROOF

[Money] shows us how we're doing, tells us how far we've come from improvished roots. Money reminds you that your "business is a good one," that you've worked hard to get something, that you can carry your burdens, that you are appreciated, and that you are moving up to the next level.

Money is our barometer of success... Money is a scorecard.

** Another reason for Americans' love for money is the collective "bigger/more is better" mentality: big houses, big cars, big pools, big meals, and of course, big money.

Quality - IT WORK / Perfection - DEATH

We want to discover things and learn how to do things our way... Trying, failing, learning from our mistakes, and coming back stronger than ever is an essential part of the American archetype... The path of American progress is filled with high peaks and low valleys, but the peaks always get higher.

Americans, on the other hand, find perfection boring. If something is perfect, you're stuck with it for life, and that doesn't sit well with most Americans... Planned obsolescence is on Code with the American culture. We want things to become obsolete, because when they do we have the excuse we need to buy something new.

None of our products needs to perform brilliantly... but they absolutely need to perform... We insist on something simpler: make sure the thing operates the way it was supposed to... Americans put a premium on functionality. We are not a bells-and-whistles culture.

The bottom line is that great service is more important to Americans than quality.

** That explains why American cellphones are at least three generations (in terms of aesthetics and functionalities) behind those in Japan and Korea. Americans really just don't care too much about the "cuteness" factor. However, why are people attracted to Apple products? They are fancy, chic, and in terms of their iPods, lacking in extensive and practical features that competitors offer (e.g., no radio, no recording). And yet, their mp3 players still occupy at least 70%, if not more, of the market share. Is the tide changing? Do Americans start to be attracted to aesthetics and product-user identity ("you are what you use")? As a Mac/iPod user, I am drawn to Apple products by the stability of their laptops and the streamlined management of music (the killer combo iTunes + iPods). But I also know that many people buy them for the "cool" factor. So it seems that Apple satisfies a wide gamut of consumers by being both reliable and cool. However, they have a very ostensible planned obsolescence - the battery dies in two years and replacement is time-consuming and expensive, new OSs make your computer incompatible with new apps, etc.

Food - FUEL

Americans strongly connect food with love. Obviously, this comes from our earliest memories of being fed by our mothers... In America, food is "safe sex." Whereas we unconsciously have negative feelings about sex, we find it universally acceptable to take food into our bodies for pleasure. Perhaps that it's why so many of us eat so often and to such extremes.

** Another OUCH! First of all, mother, feeding, food, sex? Freudian association here? Secondly, it reminds me of this amusing line from the sitcom Friends: "It's just food, not love." Therefore, I think it's more accurate to say that food should be associated with "FULFILLED LOVE", as opposed to "disappointment and disillusion" and the ensuing loneliness and frustration, all due to "FALSE EXPECTATIONS." Most emotional eaters binge not because of the lack of sex, but the lack of love (in the broadest sense, as in "attention, relationship, connection, communication, understanding, etc.")

American has a subculture of food aficionados, "foodies"... The foodie subculture, vibrant though it might be, is not representative of the way most Americans feel about food.

Americans regard their bodies as machines. Our machines have functions to perform and we need to keep them working. Some of us choose to keep our machines in top shape by attaching them to other machines - the workout equipment at our local health club.

Interestingly, we seem far less concerned with the quality of the fuel than one might expect.

Alcohol - GUN

Forbidden to drink alcohol as children, and learning little about it other than that is "bad" for you, Americans end up imprinting alcohol at a rebellious age. When they gain access to alcohol (usually underage, which enhances the sense that they are doing something taboo), they know nothing of its pleasures, subtleties, or role as an enhancer of food, but they quickly discover its intoxicating qualities. Taste is unimportant. What matters is that this substance can do a job for you: it can get your drunk.

** The more you forbid people from doing/trying/knowing something, the more curious they are, and once they get their hands on it, they are out of control. It's human nature. Even though I am inclined to agree with the author here regarding the attitude differences between the Americans and the French, I have say, Americans are not alone in seeking out drunkenness - there are peoples that have stronger attachment to drinks and inebriation: Russians and the Irish. But alcohol = gun? That's just preposterous. Alcohol should be associated with ESCAPE. It's the fastest and most acceptable way to get out of your shell and either be your true self or go crazy and be somebody else. The best thing is, you won't remember a thing the next day and can go back to your "normal" life/persona. Many things can be said and done without a guilty conscience when you claim that you are drunk (it's like the lighter version of "temporary insanity"). Alcohol relaxes you, emboldens you, exonerates you, and in extreme cases (if you become an alcoholic or drive while intoxicated and get in an accident), ruins you.

Shopping - RECONNECTING WITH LIFE / Luxury - MILITARY STRIPES

Most of our favorite luxury items are functional... The Italian culture defines luxury via an item's artistic value... Luxury in France represents the freedom to do nothing and to own useless things - things that provide beauty and harmony, but have no practical function... The British use luxury to underscore their sense of detachment. They'll join exclusive clubs where they can show one another how unimpressed they are with their own status.

** Amusing observations/connections. So far so good...

There are levels of luxury, just as there are levels in the military... Service is an important component of luxury... Luxury comes not only in different ranks, but also in different "branches," and the branch we choose says a good deal about how we want to perceive us.

** Hmmm... most of the luxury brands he mentioned are EUROPEAN brands, and I am sure the "ranks" come with them from their place of origin. There is, after all, a difference between a big house in some less glamorous town in France and a tiny villa in the Reviera. As for "we are what we buy", I think this is essentially universal across cultures

France/America: IDEA/SPACE TRAVELER - ideas vs. actions

Germany/America: ORDER/JOHN WAYNE - liberators and benevolent cowboys

Britain/America: CLASS/UNASHAMEDLY ABUNDANT - extreme and try to win at any cost

These people found "home" by moving elsewhere. Their homeland was an accident of birth; they found a permanent place to live when they life it to come to America... Americans can also find their "true home" culture elsewhere.

** These archetypes exist, but aren't they also "stereotypes" too? Of course, there is a fine line between the two types. Plus, culture evolves. Some countries may stay relatively the same for centuries, while others are perceived very differently (for better or worse) today than they were, say, merely 50 years ago.

American President - MOSES

We don't want our president to think too much. We want them to respond from the gut, to have a very strong survival instinct... We want someone with a highly developed vision who makes us pay attention when he speaks. We want someone with a strong reptilian side who can take care of our country... We don't want a father figure. We want a biblical figure.

There is a sense in which the president is the "entertainer-in-chief." His primary role is to inspire us, to keep our spirits up and to keep us moving in a productive fashion.

We debate major issues... for a very long time before we make any movement at all. In fact, it is likely that the debate on any of these issues will extend beyond the term of whichever president we happen to be electing at the time... the basic components of the country really do not change very much during one presidential administration. What does change is the spirit of the country, the sense of optimism or lack thereof.

** Well, who is more "reptilian" this time?

America - DREAM

We see ourselves as "new"... as "occupants of vast amounts of space."

Within the vast spaces one can find both tremendous diversity and unity.

Limitless opportunities... optimism.

Seperti yang kita lihat bahwa dalam sejarah, sesungguhnya Jung adalah murid sekaligus sahabat Freud. Namun perjalanan karir membawa mereka ke jalan yang berbeda. Dalam perkembangannya, Jung ‘menyimpang’ dari jalan psikoanalisa dan membangun teorinya sendiri. Salah satu teorinya yang paling terkenal sekarang adalah teori personality, yang sering disebut sebagai teori aliran Jungian. Tapi bagi saya sepertinya menarik untuk mempelajari apa yang telah ditulis dua tokoh ternama ini di masa lampau.

Topik ini mungkin bukan topik yang baru. Topik ini saya angkat dari sesuatu yang bisa jadi sudah dilupakan banyak orang atau hanya dianggap sebagai sejarah belaka. Well, kecuali mungkin bagi orang yang menekuni bidang psikologi. Tujuan saya sederhana. Saya sebagai mahasiswa yang hanya belajar psikologi dari buku dan internet ingin mengajak sesama pelajar atau siapapun yang suka menulis supaya tidak ragu untuk menulis apa saja yang menarik (bukan hanya dari topik psikologi). Banyak yang ingin menulis tapi mungkin minder karena tidak punya ide yang ia rasa menarik, atau takut salah. Dari tulisan ini saya ingin berkata: tidak usah takut salah, kalau mau nulis ya nulis saja. Salah kan salah satu sarana pembelajaran juga. Lha wong Freud dan Jung saja bisa salah kok…apalagi elo ama gue yang ‘jadi orang’ aja belom..

Jung: Dalam teori finalismenya, Jung menyatakan bahwa gejala psikis tidak disebabkan oleh faktor-faktor masa lampau, melainkan pada naluri masa depan[1]. Hal ini akan berkaitan erat dan berkembang dengan teori psikologisnya masa sekarang yang juga dirumuskan oleh Keirsey dalam versi yang sedikit berbeda (atau juga dikenal dengan Myers Briggs, dan ada pula yang versi socionics) terutama dalam deskripsiya mengenai INTJ. (Jika memakai pendekatan teori modern Jung sendiri mengenai INTJ, ia sendiri adalah seorang INTJ, sehingga kemungkinan besar pendekatan yang ia gunakan ketika menyatakan argumen ini adalah segi pemahaman ‘the big picture’ atau secara garis besar, tidak mendetil dan terfokus pada satu sisi seperti Freud, yang melihat dari segi seksual dan bawah sadar). Dan satu hal lagi yang perlu dicatat, bisa diasumsikan bahwa pernyataan Jung diatas sebetulnya tidak bicara tentang alam bawah sadar, seperti halnya teori Jung sekarang yang lebih banyak bicara soal kinerja alam sadar dan mindset.

Freud: Basis pemikirannya berada pada peletakan psikoanalisis sebagai sesuatu yang berkonteks pada pikiran bawah sadar [bicara soal konteks, banyak yang harus dicermati dalam buku Freud, terutama penggunaan konteks alam bawah sadar], yang dianggapnya memiliki kuasa lebih besar dari pikiran sadar (dan yang dipercaya memang benar sampai saat ini sehingga dipakai sebagai pendekatan dalam banyak cabang ilmu, bukan hanya psikologi, tapi juga cabang ilmu lain termasuk komunikasi. Misalnya dalam teori hegemoni Antonio Gramsci, pendekatan Freud memiliki pengaruh cukup besar). Freud mengatakan: mimpi dan neurosa mengungkap “pikiran lebih tinggi” dengan cara sexual. Dan bahwa itu semua hanyalah pengungkapan arkais, (arkais = old fashioned, no longer in use, red) tidak cocok dengan kenyataan bahwa kompleks-kompleks sexual dalam neurosa berisi unsur libido yang telah ditarik dari kehidupan biasa (karena terepresi kedalam alam bawah sadar). Ini bukan hanya pengungkapan sexual, karena terjadi perubahan kekuatan libido[2]. Yang artinya, bisa disimpulkan bahwa Freud berpendapat gejala psikis lebih banyak dipengaruhi oleh represi masa lampau yang kemudian terwujud dalam perubahan libido dalam dunia nyata. Jelas sekali bahwa konteks yang digunakan psikoanalisis Freud adalah alam bawah sadar.

Pertama kali saya membaca kedua pernyataan ini, saya agak bingung. Seolah menemukan keganjilan tapi belum menemukan dengan pasti dimana keganjilan itu (dan juga karena belum yakin bisa dapat back up data untuk tulisan ini). Sejak semester 4 saya menyadari bahkan rumusan-rumusan para ahli super termashyur seperti Freud dan Jung pun bisa salah dan bahkan, banyak cacatnya. Waktu itu saya banyak menemukan rumusan-rumusan cacat dalam psikoanalisis Freud. Saya berpikir, apa hanya saya yang sok tahu karena jelas sekali, saya bukan mahasiswi psikologi (saya mahasiswi ilmu komunikasi) dan hanya mempelajari psikologi dari buku dan internet belaka. Tapi ketika saya berkonsultasi dengan teman saya sesama alumni Van Lith yang bekerja sebagai dosen psikologi di Universitas Bina Nusantara Jakarta, mbak Prima, dia mengiyakan pernyataan-pernyataan saya. Yang juga berarti, saya nggak bego-bego amat dan nggak cuma bisa sok tahu doang :p

Dua pernyataan diatas oleh Freud dan Jung adalah dua pernyataan yang mereka perdebatkan dan jika saya tidak salah ingat, menjadi salah satu akar permasalahan yang menyebabkan relasi kerja mereka retak. Padahal dalam konteks tertentu, bisa dilihat bahwa kedua pernyataan tersebut benar sekaligus tidak benar. Namun jika mengabaikan konteks argumen yang mereka perdebatkan, sesungguhnya: keduanya benar. Seperti yang telah saya garis bawahi diatas, sesungguhnya kedua konteks argumen Jung dan Freud adalah berbeda.

Obviously, saya juga memiliki pemikiran tersendiri yang akan saya rumuskan dalam tulisan ini. Tapi setidaknya, saya menggunakan referensi-referensi yang terpercaya: situs resmi Jung, textbook pengantar psikologi dan psikoanalisis Freud. Jadi pendapat saya adalah:

1. Gejala psikis manusia secara keseluruhan dipengaruhi oleh represi masa lalu, dan juga naluri masa depan. Setiap orang memiliki represi masa lalunya sendiri-sendiri yang tetap memiliki pengaruh signifikan, sebesar dan sekacil apapun. Tapi tidak semua orang memiliki naluri masa depan yang kuat. (Karena Jung adalah seorang INTJ, maka ia adalah tipe yang anxiousity dan naluri terhadap masa depannya paling besar, namun ia sendiri sekarang ini menemukan bahwa tidak semua orang demikian. Tipikal personality yang lain mungkin memiliki naluri masa depan yang jauh lebih kecil dan bisa jadi tidak terlalu signifikan seperti represi masa lalunya, karena basis pemikiran dan mindsetnya sama sekali berbeda. (Untuk keterangan lebih lanjut, baca www.personalitypage.com). Intinya, asumsi saya adalah, dalam kasus tertentu, bisa jadi dalam kondisi psikis seseorang represi masa lalu dan naluri masa depan memiliki porsi yang berimbang atau sama sekali berbeda, tentu saja dalam konteks luas-baik dalam alam sadar maupun bawah sadar-atau bisa dikatakan dari segi mindset manusia pada umumnya, yaitu pendekatan yang menggunakan pemahaman keduanya sekaligus secara menyeluruh.
2. Output represi masa lalu, yang terungkap lewat mimpi, dan yang umumnya terekam dalam periode tertentu semasa manusia tidur tidak selalu bersifat sexual. Selain itu, jika dikaitkan dengan teori represi dalam mimpi[3] kita bisa lihat bahwa alam bawah sadar manusia memiliki sifat defensif, yaitu dengan merepresi mimpi yang nantinya bisa mengganggu kinerja alam sadar. Dan outputnya adalah, orang tersebut akan melupakan mimpi yang bermasalah tersebut. Yang juga berarti, kadangkala dalam kondisi normal, represi masa lampau yang terwujud dalam mimpi tidak akan memiliki pengaruh signifikan terhadap kehidupan alam sadar manusia (Hal ini nanti akan saya bahas dengan sedikit menjelaskan mengenai REM dan NREM sleep). Meskipun dalam kondisi/kasus tertentu, represi ini nantinya juga bisa menimbulkan masalah, misalnya seperti personality disorder. Karena bagaimanapun, represi tetaplah represi, yang nampak atau tidak nampak, ia tetap ada. (Saya tertarik dengan personality disorder, karena kehidupan pribadi saya banyak diganggu oleh orang yang menderita kelainan jiwa. Tapi kita akan membahas ini lain kali).

3. Disini nanti juga akan dibahas faktor tambahan diluar pendapat Freud dan Jung diatas, dengan beberapa teori yang menggunakan pendekatan Freud, yaitu mengenai REM (Rapid Eye Movement) sleep, NREM (Non Rapid Eye Movement) sleep, dan apa hubungannya dengan represi, alam bawah sadar dan variabel-variabel lain yang sudah disebutkan sebelumnya. Nantinya juga akan ditambahkan beberapa analisis lain, baik dari referensi saya maupun analisis pribadi saya.

REM dan NREM sleep

Dalam pengantar psikologi, biasanya kita akan mempelajari apa itu REM dan NREM sleep[4]. Singkatnya, REM sleep adalah fase dimana masa aktif tidur terjadi, dan terjadi kurang lebih 90 menit setelah manusia tertidur. REM sleep juga erat kaitannya dengan mimpi, yang artinya orang kebanyakan mengalami mimpi yang mampu diingatnya pada fase ini. Fase REM sleep terjadi 4-5 kali semalam dalam durasi waktu yang berbeda, rata-rata sekitar 45 menit. Fase REM merupakan masa aktif tidur, namun pada fase ini grafik otak mengalami pergerakan cepat dengan tingkat voltase rendah. Dan sesuai namanya, dalam REM bola mata mengalami pergerakan secara simultan. Lain halnya dengan NREM. Dalam fase NREM grafik otak mengalami pergerakan yang lambat, namun dengan voltase yang tinggi. Fase NREM juga dikenal dengan fase deep sleep, dan kebanyakan orang yang sedang mengalami fase ini tidak mampu mengingat mimpinya dengan jelas.

Perlu dicatat bahwa ada sebuah penelitian yang juga disebutkan dalam textbook Pengantar Psikologi yang saya baca, dikatakan bahwa sesungguhnya orang yang tidak bermimpi adalah orang yang tidak dapat mengingat mimpinya. Dan dalam penelitian lain, dikatakan bahwa kemampuan untuk mengingat mimpi terbukti sama sekali tidak bisa diasosiasikan dengan memory capacity seorang manusia.

Dari sini kita bisa melihat bahwa dari satu sisi, menurut asumsi teori represi, represi juga memiliki sisi dimana ia bisa terlepas dari alam sadar, sebagaimana kita lihat memory capacity seseorang tidak mempengaruhi kemampuan seseorang untuk mengingat sebuah mimpi, karena itu bergantung dari: pertama, waktu manusia mengalami mimpi (REM atau NREM sleep). Dan yang kedua adalah apakah ‘sistem ketahanan’ manusia menganggap mimpi itu bermasalah atau tidak (sehingga tersortir masuk ke alam sadar atau tetap terepresi di alam bawah sadar). Tapi satu hal yang tetap perlu diingat adalah, sebagaimanapun hebatnya proses represi sebuah mimpi yang bermasalah, jika kapasitas seseorang sudah melewati batas, fakta alam sadar yang terepresi kedalam mimpi tersebut, sekalipun tidak muncul kembali kedalam alam sadar (ingatan), tetap bisa menimbulkan masalah. Karena sekali lagi, ia hanya tidak tampak. Ia hanya terepresi ke alam bawah sadar, dan ia tetap ada, terlepas dari olahan fakta alam sadar dalam ‘mind and soul flow’ (saya mengistilahkan ‘mind and soul flow’ untuk hubungan kesinambungan alam sadar dan bawah sadar)manusia ini muncul ke alam sadar atau tidak. Manusia memang hanya bisa melihat secara kasat mata apa yang ada di alam sadar, tapi sesungguhnya apa yang ada di alam bawah sadar jauh lebih berpengaruh kedalam kehidupan manusia secara keseluruhan, dan pemahaman bahwa alam sadar dan bawah sadar adalah suatu sistem yang bekerja secara harmonis dan berkesinambungan, tidak terpisahkan, perlu ditanamkan.

Melihat bahwa alam bawah sadar memiliki pengaruh lebih besar dalam kehidupan manusia, sulit untuk mengatakan manakah yang lebih dominan: represi masa lalu atau naluri masa depan, terutama jika konteks casenya belum ditentukan. Namun sebagai sesuatu yang kasat mata, alam sadar tentu saja nampak sebagai sesuatu yang lebih dominan, meski sesungguhnya tidak demikian. Dan flow alam bawah sadar tetap menjadi sesuatu yang harus diwaspadai, karena sering kali manusia tidak bisa mengontrol ‘mind and soul flow’nya sendiri sehingga akhirnya ia tanpa sadar terkena personality disorder. Dan perlu dicatat pula bahwa personality disorder, termasuk psycho (fenomena yang sedang marak saat ini hingga di harian Kompas Minggu beberapa minggu lalu ada yang menulis tentang ciri-ciri psycho dan apa hubungannya dengan homosex-kaitannya dengan kasus Ryan), seringkali sulit untuk dideteksi. Hal ini disebabkan dari sisi alam sadar-dari luar- seakan sikapnya normal, wajar, bahkan berkepribadian menarik sehingga banyak orang yang tertarik. Padahal ya di dalamnya, tetap saja psycho. This is ironic and terrifying. Ini betul lho, karena saya sendiri pernah mengalami digangguin sama orang psycho, yaitu perempuan yang sekarang menjadi pacar dari mantan pacar saya. Kembali ke bahasan awal, intinya ya..betul kata Descartes: cogito ergo sum (saya berpikir maka saya ada)[5]. Kekuatan pikiran adalah sesuatu yang harus diwasapadai bahkan oleh si pemilik pikiran itu sendiri [kembali lagi ke hubungan kesinambungan pikiran sadar dan bawah sadar yang saling mempengaruhi sama lain secara simultan dan berkesinambungan-‘mind and soul flow’]. Dan bisa jadi, sebetulnya orang-orang yang kena personality disorder ini adalah orang yang relasi ‘mind and soul flow’ nya itu korslet, misalnya salah satu sisi terlalu dominan (FYI orang psycho tidak akan merasa bersalah atas apa yang ia lakukan, karena baginya hal itu adalah sesuatu yang wajar, atau bahkan dia sendiri tidak sadar sudah berbuat apa saja). Akhirnya, dengan berpedoman pada kata-kata Descartes, maka sayapun berkata: Life is only a mind game, but mind is not enough.

Yes, I've practically been living my life on my own terms for the past few months. I get up when I want, I do what I want, I sleep when I want, I watch tv when I want, I eat ... umm err actually, I don't really eat all that much these days (it's boring eating alone), and I work out whenever I want with no meeting or assignment eating into my time. My time has been just that: my time. I had entered workforce when I was 16 and, then on, I was responsible for paying my way through university and after. 10 years later, now, I have a chance to 'explore' myself, my interests and what I really want as opposed to running after what I always have: financial security.

Regardless of how liberated this new found freedom of having the entire day to myself feels, there's also bits of me which reprimand me for shirking the responsibility that I should be sharing with husband. It's true that he has been a strong force behind me to follow my mind and wants nothing else from me other than my happiness but still I feel guilty for not pitching in with the finances. Sometimes I feel I am being selfish and sometimes just plain lazy. I spoke about this to him last night even though I knew what his response was going to be. As always, he simply stated, "I don't expect you to pitch in at all. I know that when you are ready to earn, you will. Right now, you should keep your focus on what you are doing. Not everyone is as lucky as you to get this time. Use this time as you intend to. Learn things that you always wanted to learn. Do things that you always wanted to do. Explore your options. Aim to reach your potential. In the meantime, I'll try my best to take care of us. You have absolutely nothing to worry about." That finished off with a hug and a kiss ... guilt evaporates faster than water on a brick roof baking under a hot sun on a dry afternoon ...

... until it comes back again. guilt, that is

... and P has to repeat the same discourse all over again to make it disappear

... I have thought of recording him and letting my Ipod repeat it to me ;p

Anyway ... this morning, I came across two fantastic reads along the same lines of whether financial security is important or pursuit of dreams. The first of the two write ups that I am to mention addresses financial security in a generic manner albeit in an Indian context (as we discussed yesterday in the comments section as well) but the second write-up questions the place of selfish pursuits in a family setting.

First, mo writes:

We like to associate ourselves with glory. We all know "a cousin is a cricket player", "A friend who started his own business and made millions", "An uncle who won the Pulitzer prize", or the "colleague who ran the marathon". We didn't do it, someone else did. Then we spend hours evaluating whether s/he deserved it. If they are related to us, the glory somewhat rubs off on us, by law of association. If not, then we settle for dressing our envy with criticism -- how we are/were equally deserving and they cheated their way out of it, how we never had the opportunity. To give you a simple example, I love repeating that Anil Kumble was an alumnus of my engg. college. The sports teacher in college though, didn't have the nicest things to say about him.

For every one of them that succeeds, there are thousand others that fail. And naturally, we are not willing to take any such risks.

We don't aspire for glory, we aspire for mediocrity under the garb of security.

On the other hand, Pr3rna writes:

There is nothing wrong with living life on one ’s own terms but if you want to do that, you shouldn’t start a family. It is not justified to leave all the responsibilities on  your partner,  male or female, while you indulge in your hobbies.

But why can't one have both? Aspire for glory perse and have a family? Why can't me and my partner openly communicate our goals to each other and work towards a happy medium where both of us are happy? I am not passing judgments on anyone's opinion ... merely questioning.

When you're young, you live as per your parents ...

When you're a teenager, you again live as per your parents ...

When you become an adult, you are expected realize the importance of 'security' in life ...

As you grow a bit older, you are expected to get a life partner and settle down ...

Settle down? When do I get to live for myself? Why would it be so wrong for a partner to help his/her partner to pursue something that really makes him/her happy? I agree that it could be tough for the couple financially but these things can be worked out. Buy a smaller house. Buy a cheaper car. Don't eat out often. Wait for movies to come out on DVDs. Travel cheaply. There's many ways to cut the costs to live within a budget. If that's all that it requires for someone to achieve happiness, why wouldn't a partner help out? If P comes home tonight and tells me that he wants to be a bassist in some unknown band full-time, I'd be all for it and will be brushing up my business contacts riteaway to get back in the workforce. But it's just that both of us need to understand that our lifestyle won't be the same as it would be with two incomes ... and that needs to be acceptable to the both of us. If it is, .... then, well, moon ain't far, m'dears.

I am weak, broken and void of most that I once deemed important. I cannot keep playing the game, the game I created, the one I recognized was a losing battle. A change of scenery should have simplified life, yet I find its been further complicated. I am the king of excuses who is sick of making excuses, I am unsure as to what I should do or where to go. Shrouds of secrecy only goes so far and create the facade of friendship, friendships so brittle and thin even the mildest of things shatters it beyond repair.

If the saying is true you must be completely broken down in order to be rebuilt , Im on my way down hopefully nearing the bottom and heading back for the surface. Im not strong, stable or indifferent, these are all just defense mechanisms to distract from the real problems. What I am is hurt, lonely, and humbled.

This is not written for attention nor sympathy, nor is it meant to be morose or depressing in context, I write that which I can not verbalize, it is my therapy, my medicine, my cure. I write if only to be honest with myself, Im neither depressed nor sad, I merely write with open and honest evaluations of self.

This is life they say... a roller coaster, controlled chaos...

The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over.
Hunter S. Thompson

All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses.
Friedrich Nietzsche

War:
Rival religions fighting for their cause... Christian vs. Muslims, Capitalism vs. Communism, Hell's Angels vs. 1960's Society and Cops, U.S. vs. Iraq Iran Afghanistan hell most of the middle east , Democrats vs. Republicans, Ford vs. Chevy, Thunder vs. Lightning, Men vs. Women, Love vs. Hate, Liberal vs. Conservative, Heaven vs. Hell, Fox vs. ABC, Domestic vs. Imported beer... you get the idea.

Acceptance:
The ability for the clashing of opinions (war) to come to a generally accepted truce and acknowledgment that neither has accomplished anything nor will...

Peace:
The ability to understand the previous three categories and realize life is about variety and quality of quantity. The ability to look at another human being and initially not judge upon ones character based off of religious, political, or philosophical views, until one has given the individual a chance to show through actions and personality who they really are as a person. The ability to live, learn, and love harmoniously with its surroundings... this is peace.

Pointless:
Taking offense to any of the four categories above, intentionally causing animosity, trying to prove one is right when neither can in all reality prove anything at all. Greed, bickering governments, bickering religions, bickering housewives upset their new oven is an off shade of white not egg shell white, arguing religion, lingering drama, advertising campaigns pushing products we dont need, changing who we are because we are told to do so to be accepted, worrying about the sun that supposedly might burn out in 7 billion years, violence, rape, murder, extortion, theft...

I have a feeling 60 years from now Ill be sitting in a recliner, pipe in hand puffing away, and Ill look back on my life wondering did I deter from the problem or did I contribute to its cause...

I really dont know what it is about simple questions, but I can never answer them... the all too common "how are you?" is by far one of the most difficult questions anyone can ask of me. I simply dont know how to answer, I hate saying good because its for one small talk which I hate and two my moods are far too complex to utter the word "good". Thats beside the point though, what is it that defines us?

I can see how some might say the things we do define us, but I don't think that is necessarily true. I take and at times create photography but it does not define who I am as a person, a random stranger can not look at one of my images and understand who I am. I play baseball but the simple act of playing it does not say much about me. I drink alcohol and smoke cigars but that does not make me an alcoholic or a chain smoker. Maybe I'm over thinking it but I'm honestly baffled by this, we put too much stock in the stuff we do...
is it our philosophies that define who we are as individuals, our culture, our religious beliefs?

Maybe our definitive moment, the definition of who we are comes the moment we die and the day immediately following. Funerals to me are what I like to call a life gauge, a culmination of a life once lived, its not necessarily the quantity that shows up but rather the quality of the quantity, maybe its those that we have and will come across at different times in life that define who we are, the lives we better or regrettably worsen...

What does it mean "when Christ who is our life appears?"  Considering the context, I am reminded of a few things.

First of all, our life is hidden in Christ. This exhortation is meant as an encouragement of believers as they are told to "keep seeking the things above."  We are dead to the things of this world.  Apparently the believers in Colossae were being encouraged to subject themselves to certain ritualistic/religious rites or philosophies in an attempt to gain a deeper sense of spirituality.  To Paul this was utterly foolish because true spiritual vitality/life was not found in these things but in Christ.  Hence the exhortation, also, to remain rooted and grounded in Christ.  So how then can we "find" what our life really is apart from in Him?  So many people go on "spiritual journey's" in an attempt to "find themselves."  Or else they search throughout all the worlds religions seeking to find God.  Christians sometimes even search outside of scripture and a true knowledge of Christ, in things like their jobs, economic status, family life, politics and other such things looking for what they believe to be their purpose in life.  To keep it short and sweet if we ever desire to understand what true life is, what our purpose is, where we will find true fulfillment, we must look to the giver of life, namely Christ.  Our life, as Christians is in Him.

Second, there is no life apart from Christ.  All of those other things that we may seek are dead ends, or at least shadows of what is true life.  Physical health is a noble end.  But it is only a subordinate end, because all of us (unless the Lord returns within our lifetime) will die.  And we can die while we are completely health, while we have a minor cold or because of cancer.  But we will die.  No amount of medicine or exercise can help that.  We die because of the punishment of death which God has rightly dealt to us because we have transgressed His law.  Apart from Christ, regardless of what physical health/vitality we may appear to have, it is but an illusion.  And the moment our time is up, so will be that illusion of life.  The curtain will drop and we will appear for what we truly are...mere dead men.  However in Christ, when He appears, what we truly are will also be revealed.  The true life, which is only found in Him, in that Day will shine forth brighter than the Sun on a clear Summer day.  He Shines.  And because He shines, anyone who is in Him will also shine.  But apart from Him, there is nothing.

Last, Christ is supreme over any other form or function of life.  If He is not so in your life, you should make Him so.  Because in Him is true life.  In Him is true Grace, true Blessing, true fulfillment, true rest, true love; from which we can never be parted.  All of these things we covet in our hearts.  All of these things we seek.  But apart from Christ; we will have none of them.  So it behooves us to make Him so in all of our pursuits.  To make Him the Ultimate end in all that we do.  To "do homage to Him," in our hearts and pursuits, as the true King and ruler of the Universe over which He eternally rules.

Christ is Supreme.  In Him is all the fullness.  And you are made full in Him.  Are you full today?