#(( but vicious cycles are doomed to continue regardless

[starsaught]

Octavia's type is someone patient. Who can make her genuinely smile & laugh. Someone dependable & honest, loyal. Who doesn't care about her status, but rather her as a person. Who will stand by her, to make her feelings feel validated. To listen to music & say nothing for hours, to enjoy the pleasantries of each other's company. Money, status, whatever means nothing to her ; who you are is far more important to her than any superficial thing.

[richwordsxoxo]

My hope that HeXie dynamics and fate is not solely defined or solely controlled by their mental illness.

Ch. 203 keeps bugging me because it feels like such an important moment in the book which depending on how Meatbun frames it eventually, could be the make or break for readers (such as myself). If there’s one take-away I got from just Ch. 203 in particular, it’s that love by itself is not enough to conquer mental illness (mixed with resentment and trauma). I am justifying HY’s treatment of XQC in Ch. 203 using his mental illness.

But it’s also just my personal opinion that while mental illness is a complex issue that in reality “complicates” character development and growth, I hope that beyond Ch. 218 where we see HY acknowledging openly the gravity of his non-con mistreatment of HY and apologising for it, HY (and XQC) by the end of the novel realise the need to seek continued treatment or help of sorts for their respective mental health issues. I really hope that HY’s guilt and realisation of how much he hurt XQC goes beyond Ch. 218. 

My personal stance (everyone can differ on this) is that I can accept non-con in a *fictional* book if it’s not made light of (because it is really serious), characters know the gravity of it, and they make the effort to seek ways to avoid repeatedly hurting themselves and those they love in the long term. It mustn’t be a vicious cycle even if character growth is non-linear. Non-linear growth still implies growth. 

Treatment (counselling/therapy etc.) for mental health issues is not the be-all-end-all cure that solves everything, but to me it’s one type of signal or first step that HY and XQC realise the impact mental illness has on themselves and the potential for it to lead them down an endless cycle of poor communication, mistreatment (or abuse if I’m to use harsher words) and just unhealthy and unsustainable ways of being together in a relationship. When HeXie choose to be in a relationship, they need to realise that their individual mental health issues affect no longer just themselves but also their loved ones. I think this applies not just to mental illness but the way everyone functions and interacts with others in society. Our actions have consequences on ourselves and others, regardless of whether it was intended or unintended. 

For me, there’s no need for Meatbun to write and frame their ending such that their happiness is a state of permanence (unrealistic). But there’s got to be at least a deep realisation/ wake-up call from HY and XQC that they can be ticking time bombs with the potential to hurt each other deeply again and again. But because they love each other, at the very least there’s some part of their consciousness that drives them to continue seeking help for their mental health condition, regardless of the outcome. This is my personal hope for HeXie’s happy ending, not just taking down the evil organisation and mutual reciprocation of love.

There’s no obligation for fictional authors to use their works to discuss “morally correct” principles or how you should or should not treat your partner. Everyone views a piece of fictional work differently and what they hope to get out of the reading experience differ, so we expect different things from a fictional work. For me, because Meatbun has explored so many other complex social issues in CFC and sort of made social commentary on them, I have unconsciously set a “standard” for her to approach sensitive topics too like mental health/illness and non-con in a way that is socially conscious & responsible (I have not thought of a better word HAHA) and empowering. Empowering in the sense that while mental illness is a complex issue, it is not the case that the relationships people form with others are doomed and the outcome is determined solely by their mental illness. There is hope at the end of the tunnel (and novel). 

If Meatbun intentionally set out to explore the topic of mental illness in CFC, she is somewhat successful I suppose (though I am not sure how much research she has done on it to ensure accurate portrayal of mental illness in a fictional book (ironic yes I know). For me at least, CFC has given me food for thought on how mental illness complicates love. However, I also hope that CFC’s plot can demonstrate optimistically that while mental illness is a multifaceted struggle where everyone’s experience of it differs, love at the very least can motivate one to strive to take responsibility of their actions at least to some degree, even if their mental health condition is beyond their control at times. I find it a pity to define HeXie dynamics and fate solely by their mental illness.

I know I’m asking a lot for a fictional work that explores heavy themes, but I just happened to look at CFC’s title again on JJWXC, and its first classification/ genre is a romance novel. So it’s still my unrealistic and naive hope as a too emotionally invested reader (HAHA I tried to stop), that the novel ends with a hopeful message: that for once at least in this book, love can conquer the biggest battles and the battles that matter the most in the grand scheme of the book as the novel comes close to ending.

Hexie is dark at times but also beautiful, because they are two flawed but somewhat realistic characters who found love and hope in the other, so I really hope they can be together in a healthier relationship that lasts.

P.s. I love online communities so much sometimes! Talking to people on Tumblr and Twitter really provides a person with so many perspectives to consider an issue!!! Thank you to everyone who has engaged with me in one way or another on this topic~

[mashounen2003]

Sonic opinions - 1

Honestly, I think it's time for me to give closure to the “Sonic fan phase” of my life. I’ll keep playing the games if they pique my interest, but in terms of the stories they tell and how their characters are portrayed, these games no longer appeal to me. The comic currently published by IDW isn’t complete garbage nor does it have so much drama and controversy surrounding it, in addition to having Whisper and Tangle, two characters I really like at least on a conceptual level, but the story and characterizations are leaving me deeply disappointed and sometimes fall even lower than the recent games written by Pontac & Graff, namely with regard to the characterization of Sonic himself.

The continuity of the TV series Sonic SatAM and the comics published by Archie was always the branch of the franchise that truly caught my attention and is my main source of inspiration for writing stories; in fact, SatAM was the way I found out about Sonic and became a fan in the first place. But this “North-American continuity” is already as dead as the Mega Man Legends saga, and it looks like the vast majority want to forget it as if each and every one of its elements and ideas inherently had just been a massive nightmare regardless of its execution by the writers. At best, the fandom currently sees this branch of Sonic as some silly “edgy” attempt to take the franchise seriously, something that may have been laudable but was always foolish and doomed to fail and is such a risky gamble that it's not worth trying again.

I'm also getting fed up with the Sonic fandom in general, despite sharing a lot of opinions with some individual fans. Yes, I know there are already many who have declared this for the most varied reasons, be it the “shipp wars”, something in Sonic or even the franchise as a whole suddenly becoming “cringe” due to a whim of a majority portion of the fandom, or the way Sonic reuses "hackneyed" tropes in an alleged demonstration of lack of originality; however, when someone gives Sonic the middle finger for this kind of reasons, they usually do it hypocritically.

No, what got me tired of the Sonic fandom is the way everyone becomes obsessed with picking one branch of the franchise, calling it "the true Sonic", claiming this is the only pure and genuine incarnation of the “soul of Sonic” (if there really is such a thing), marking as “foreigner” every character, concept or element from any other branch of the franchise, and demanding from the fans of those other branches to get on their knees and be thankful that the "True Fans (TM)" even allow them to stay in the fandom. Note that I’m not accusing fans of only one specific portion of the franchise: there are such people among fans of the videogames’ continuity, @skull001 being probably the worst offender, but there’s also that kind of people among the SatAM and Archie-Sonic fans, such as the “nostalgic” delusional pissbabies, blatantly homophobic and conservative, who are now supporting Twitter hashtags like “Rally4Sally” and “Udon4Sonic”. You may think this is actually something typical of all fandoms, but it’s not: this is truly something unique to the Sonic fandom; I don't see huge hordes of Mega Man fans bullying the Legends fandom or making fun of them for the way their favourite saga ended two decades ago; even in the Dragon Ball fandom, despite constant discussions about what is canon and what is not, there’s some kind of tacit consensus that GT and Super are two offshoots of the franchise, equally valid although not coexisting in one same fictional universe (although Shūeisha itself seems to officially support this view, which certainly helps prevent some discourse), while the only part of Dragon Ball universally despised (and rightly so) is Dragon Ball Evolution.

I'm sorry if this hurts some people’s sensibilities, but if I decide to write a story with any given set of characters, elements, concepts, setting, internal rules and whatnot, the only thing in my mind will be to write a mildly decent story. I'm not here to “honour” -let alone honour at all costs- some supposed legacy and traditions that some people say should be upheld by each and every Sonic content creator. And let’s be brutally frank: we’re talking about a franchise that started as platformer 16-bit videogames whose sole purpose was to show SEGA’s consoles were better and handled speed better than Nintendo's; SEGA never really intended to tell a story or portray its characters consistently, only later did the cast begin to receive more defined personalities and the games start telling stories because SEGA suddenly saw this would make them sell more, and even that varied wildly according to whatever seemed more convenient at the time; not to mention SEGA's unique habit of entering vicious cycles of failure and over-correction, where Sonic Team makes a few mistakes in a game that did everything else more or less well, SEGA throws away the entire game along with the foundations on which it was built and the story that was told by that game, Sonic Team makes a new game with absolutely everything replaced and makes mistakes again but those mistakes are different from those of the previous game, the process is repeated ad nauseam and no-one is ever satisfied with anything. A few Sonic fans trying to impose on every other fan a supposed single Sonic canon with some kind of official approval seal by SEGA & Sonic Team is something quite backward, because that single official canon almost never really existed, and if it does exist, it makes no sense and is internally inconsistent, dependent on the creation of new games, and very likely to be retconned, overwritten and modified at any time.

There are other "bad habits" of the Sonic fandom that have led me to break ties with them. One of them is the way many fans take one trait of a character, be it simply one of many facets of their personality or even a physical trait, and turn that into the entire personality of the character; many of those same fans are also massive hypocrites, complaining (albeit rightfully) about how SEGA oversimplifies Shadow into either “Sasuke the Hedgehog” or “Vegeta the Hedgehog”, but then they do the same as SEGA. One of the cases in which this is most evident is when they make Sonic's personality boil down to "gotta go fast" and "be a free spirit"; based on that, they denounce that Sonic saying "I would slow down for you" to one of his closest friends (even if Sonic and Sally weren’t a couple when he said that and/or you don’t support that shipp, it can be said she was at least one of his closest friends in the SatAM-Archie continuity) contradicts the very essence of the character, or they do something even worse: saying that "being a free spirit" means being away from your friends and not having "ties" (like... literal ties, made with ropes, the ones that are actually a bad thing) with anything or anyone. It's like when Goku is portrayed by Dragon Ball fans as far more insensitive than the actual way Akira Toriyama had conceived him and always wrote and portrayed him in his official work.

There are also the plainly disturbing ideas many fans seem to have about personal relationships, judging by the opinions they give about the relationships of Sonic and the rest of the cast. In addition to making everything revolve around vaguely defined words and concepts they throw right and left almost without thinking about their actual meaning, they also seem to believe that having friends and caring for them, or any kind of responsibility no matter what kind it is, is nothing but a drag, like rat-s*** stopping you on your way to "freedom" (this is just amazing: they say the entire Western canon is edgy and the British comic’s Sonic is a jerk, but if you think about this for a bit, these fans’ version of Sonic turns out to be even edgier and more of a jerk than Shadow in his spin-off videogame); in the case of Archie-Sonic, there are all the abuse apologists supporting Scourge and Fiona being a couple, even though you don’t need any “meta” analysis to see he’s (at the very least) verbally abusive towards her and had attracted her by posing as someone else in the first place.

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Monday marks the first night of the Republican National Convention, and things could certainly be going better for President Trump.

He is trailing Joe Biden in the national polls as well as in several key swing states. And FiveThirtyEight’s presidential forecast currently says Biden — not Trump — is favored to win the election. In fact, circumstances seem so dire for the GOP that election handicappers like the Cook Political Report think the Democrats — once underdogs — are slightly favored to take back the GOP-controlled Senate, too.

So if Republicans were to lose on that scale — the House, the Senate and the presidency — that raises the question: Would the GOP change course?

This is a question I’ve thought about a lot, and it’s one of the reasons why I argue in my book, “Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop,” that America’s two-party system is failing us. With the two parties now fully nationalized, deeply sorted by geography and culture, and locked in a tightly contested, zero-sum battle over “the soul of the nation” and the “American way of life,” it’s nearly impossible to break that cycle. And so I think it’s unlikely that Republicans will become more moderate even if they were to take the shellacking I’ve outlined above.

The problem is that political parties are not singular entities capable of easily changing course. They are, instead, a loose coalition of office-holders, interest groups, donors, activists, media personalities and many others, all jockeying and competing for power. Think of a giant tug of war in which all the tugs have been toward more extreme and more confrontational versions of the party.

In the GOP’s internal rope pull, this has meant that over the past few decades, and particularly since 2010, almost all the would-be moderates have either gravitated toward Trump to stay relevant or simply broken away altogether. And all that momentum in the Republican party is pulling toward a more confrontational, Trumpian direction — even if he is no longer at the helm.

Moderate Republicans are few and far between

Back in March 2019, FiveThirtyEight’s Perry Bacon Jr. described five wings of the Republican Party from most to least Trumpian. The takeaway was clear. The fortunes of those who were the most solidly aligned with Trump (Bacon listed Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina as prominent examples; I’d add Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton and Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley) were rising within the party, while the fortunes of the so-called Trump skeptics were falling. Some, like Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, have left the party. Others, like Rep. Will Hurd of Texas, are retiring. And then there are the anti-Trumpers, like former Ohio Gov. and 2016 presidential contender John Kasich, who are now endorsing Biden.

Anybody with any ambitions within the party has, in other words, embraced Trump and Trumpism.

These recent shifts aren’t entirely new, either. They are the latest iteration of a decades-long transformation of the GOP. In short, moderates have been bowing out. And more conservative, more combative, more evangelical, and now more Trumpian Republicans have been stepping up.

In the 2018 midterms, for example, congressional Republicans’ biggest losses came among their most moderate members. The same could happen again in 2020. Not to mention, a good chunk of this cycle’s retiring Republicans are leaving because they not only are tired of Trump and Trumpism but also anticipate being in the House minority again, where they would be powerless.

As political scientist Danielle Thomsen has shown, more and more would-be moderates are opting out of Congress altogether, choosing not to run because they no longer see a place for themselves. This is true in both parties, Thomsen found — but especially among Republicans. Moderates increasingly feel as if they just don’t “fit.”

And that feeling of not belonging may stem in part from party leaders and party activists who want more extreme candidates to run. (It also helps that more partisan candidates are the ones who are naturally drawn to politics.) In a survey of party chairs at the county-level (or equivalent) branch of government in 2013 — well before Trump became president — local party leaders said they preferred more extreme candidates to more centrist candidates. This finding was true especially among Republicans, who preferred extreme candidates by a 10-to-1 margin. (Democrats preferred more extreme candidates just 2 to 1.) If anything, this ratio may be even more lopsided among Republicans. One of the underappreciated changes in the past few years is the extent to which Trump-styled Republicans have taken over the machinery of state and local parties, which means they’ll be able to shape the GOP well beyond 2020, too.

This swing toward more radical candidates may sound surprising — after all, shouldn’t party leaders want to nominate moderates to win? But considering that the overwhelming majority of legislative elections are now safe for one party, most parties can win regardless of who they nominate. In fact, there’s even evidence that the long-standing electoral price of extremism has all but vanished.

These patterns are all part of a vicious cycle that has been feeding on itself for decades. The more extreme the Republican Party has become, the more moderates have opted out or just been passed over. The more moderates have opted out or been passed over, the more extreme the party has become. And the more the Republican Party recedes to just elected officials in solidly conservative states and districts, the more they define the party.

Extreme right-wing media, activists and donors are increasingly influential

Of course, it’s not just elected officials in the Republican Party who are becoming more extreme. Conservative media is part of this trend as well, as it has long played a central role in shaping the GOP. On some days, it’s hard to tell who’s running the country — Trump, or the Fox News hosts who give him many of his ideas (not to mention the rotating cast of characters who have jumped between the administration and the network).

But, at its core, right-wing media is opposition media, built around rejecting liberalism. It is a business driven by outrage and anger. And in its increasingly prominent role in the GOP, it has helped set the tone for the GOP’s existential struggle against liberals’ so-called plans to control everything — media, culture, college campuses. So if Republicans were to go back to being the opposition party because of massive losses in November, right-wing media in its current form would also make it difficult for any would-be moderate Republicans to break through.

As for the rest of the power players in the GOP coalition? They do not offer a moderating influence, either. Key GOP activist groups, including evangelical groups, anti-immigration groups, gun-rights groups, and billionaire donors are far more extreme than the rest of the party. For instance, the Koch brothers have organized something akin to a party within a party at the state level, where they have influenced Republicans to take unpopular positions on taxes, social benefits and climate policy. Libertarian megadonor Robert Mercer has also played an outsize role, funding a variety of conservative organizations that propelled Trump to power, including media outlets like Breitbart.

As a result of these groups’ efforts, elected Republicans are confronted with messaging and advocacy that paint the electorate as more conservative than it really is. This, too, has had the effect of moving the party further to the right. To be sure, the more libertarian business conservatives and more populist social conservatives maintain an uneasy partnership in forming this coalition, but the more they both occupy unpopular positions, the more they must stick together around the shared proposition that the biggest threat to their joint interests is the Democratic Party.

Voters are becoming more extreme

Finally, there are the Republican voters. The GOP is more and more a party of disaffected non-college-educated white people — especially men and those over age 50. And as the Republican Party has traded its younger, college-educated white people — especially women — for the Democrats’ non-college-educated, older white people — especially men — the Republican party’s primary electorate has shifted in ways that make anti-establishment, pro-Trump candidates more prevalent than they were even four years ago, and certainly eight years ago.

Consider, for example, fervently pro-Trump House candidates like Lauren Boebert, who won a surpising primary victory over five-term Republican Rep. Scott Tipton in Colorado; Laura Loomer, whose anti-Muslim remarks got her banned from social media, running in Florida; or Marjorie Taylor Greene, the QAnon enthusiast running in Georgia. These candidates are very much products of the 2020 Republican Party.

It has also meant that Republican voters are more anti-establishment and pro-Trump. Political science shows us that voters follow cues from their parties, and are more likely to change their opinions on issues to align with their partisan identity than they are to change their partisan identity to fit with preexisting opinions. So by redefining what it means to be a Republican, Trump has moved opinions of many GOP voters over the past four years.

It is possible that another leader could emerge and reorient the Republican Party again, as Trump did. But many of these trends predate Trump. So it’s far more likely that ambitious politicians will try to work with, rather than against, the sentiments that Trump has kicked up. Case in point: Republican senators facing reelection this November continue to stick with Trump, and almost all 2024 presidential hopefuls are tacking in a very Trumpian direction.

Some may point to Maryland’s Larry Hogan, the popular moderate Republican governor who has also been rumored to have 2024 aspirations, as a potential future for the Republican Party (noting in the same breath, perhaps, two other popular Republican governors, Charlie Baker of Massachusetts and Phil Scott of Vermont). These three governors, however, don’t fit with the national Republican Party. They represent three of the four most highly educated states, where the last vestiges of socially liberal Yankee Republicanism still thrive, and state legislatures are so Democratic that voters like having a check on runaway spending. It’s hard to see Hogan, or a similar candidate, having much appeal to Republican voters outside the Northeast. And even as popular as Baker might be in liberal Massachusetts, he is more beloved by Democrats than Republicans.

Public opinion flips between two extremes

But wait, you say: Isn’t America moving in a much more liberal direction? And, if nothing else, won’t that put pressure on the GOP to moderate? It’s certainly easy to think America is moving in a much more liberal direction if you look at trends in public opinion over the past few years. Historically, though, public opinion is most liberal precisely when liberal policies are least likely to be enacted (like now, and especially in 2017 and 2018, when Republicans had unified control in Washington).

Once Democrats regain control, however, and then try to enact more liberal policies, public opinion will likely shift against them, in a more conservative direction — or at least this is how it has worked historically. Americans favor government until they get it. (Remember in 2009 when it was fashionable to proclaim a permanent Democratic majority?) This is the great irony of American public opinion: It mitigates against moderation because it tells the out-party that they don’t need to move to the middle — that public opinion is moving in their direction. That is, right until they win and start governing based on it.

To be sure, Democrats’ electoral fortunes have risen considerably since 2016, enough to take control of the U.S. House in 2018 and pick up seats across multiple state legislatures. The political “mood” of the country (based on aggregated polling) has moved left, to levels not seen since the early 1960s. But it’s a good bet that this shift, particularly on social issues, is partly anti-Trump backlash, which will dampen when Trump is no longer president.

Few forces of moderation remain

Political analysts will sometimes recount how the Democrats, after losing three consecutive presidential elections, nominated Bill Clinton in 1992 and moved in a more centrist direction. This might feel like a tempting comparison to make with the GOP now, but the key difference is that the Democrats of the early 1990s had a more diverse coalition to draw on that made that kind of pivot possible (even as late as the 1990s, the Democratic Party had plenty of rural and Southern supporters). By contrast, the Republican coalition of today lacks any significant liberal or moderate factions who might pull it back to a more centrist position.

The bottom line: American political parties are not top-down entities, capable of turning on a dime. They are loose networks and coalitions of many actors and groups. And because the Republican Party has been pulling in a more extreme direction for decades now, most Republican moderates have either quit the team or reoriented themselves in a more combative, Trumpian direction to stay alive. And these forces will most likely continue to tug at the party, leaving would-be moderates with the same choice they’ve faced for decades: Quit, or get on board.

[chefjarredjarred]

We, Chef.

I quit drinking on May 21, 2019. I think. Or was it June? It was the day that the executive chef finally admitted what I already knew, that he had given his notice and was leaving the company. As his executive sous, this of course meant that I would be officially running the kitchen. Not after he was gone, but then, from the moment our conversation was finished. His notice was in, so his mind was already in his next life; he would now be, basically, worthless. Good for him.

I wasn't scared to take over. No, hold on, that's not right. I was nervous, but I was glad that he was leaving. There, that's right. In many ways, unofficially, I had been the chef in charge for a long time. I was the buffer between my boss and everyone else because he was so hated and distrusted. Well, I was hated too, maybe more so, but my work ethic brought me the trust. So at some point of the year prior, once my chef had realized my potential to rise ranks, he stopped teaching me. Thus, my nervousness. I didn't know all the stuff I needed to know, but would have to take responsibility for the place—which wasn't exactly a sinking ship, but was taking severe hits to the hull—regardless, and even worse, I would be expected to keep a smiling face through the looming doom of it all. And that was the opposite of the reputation I had had for years. If I cared about the restaurant, and at the time I did, I needed significant change to help me defeat my defeatism and focus on the kitchen's (and my) success. The healthiest change was a no-brainer. Of course I had to ditch the alcohol.

Was it June?

I still don't know which came for me first, drinking or depression. I do know that kitchen work was third, and that thousands or maybe millions of other cooks share this ubiquitous kind of sob story. Drinking, depression, cooking: the sacred fucking mirepoix. It's the stuff that brings on those languid phrases like “inexorably linked” and other, utter shit. The symptoms and thrills of all three cannot even be efficaciously captured with any amount of sincere, thoughtful, long-winded language, although many of us continue to try. Ironically, for disciples of this trinity, more is expressed between us with the pained sigh; the round of drinks signal to the bartender; the clenched jaw. Each can be responded to with a “Heard,” that one word with endless connotations. You just either know, or you don't. But the paltry, effortless phrases like “inexorably linked” or “vicious cycle” are now insultingly euphemistic, or at least lazy. Weightless. Gutless.

The drinking, depression, and cooking devoured me and shit me out every day for years, but I get that I didn't pioneer the condition. The mirepoix eventually melds into symbiosis—one, weighty mass, layered like... You probably think I'm going to say an onion. I'm not, because then the puns of tears come too naturally. And I mean inextricably layered. I'm actually thinking of the old rubber-band ball we kept in the back of the kitchen for years. Every purple rubber-band that came off a bundle of asparagus became part of it, until it was almost the size of a soccer ball and probably heavy enough to give someone a concussion, if you were inclined to pitch it at someone's head, an urge I'm sure you're familiar with fighting if you do work in kitchens. So sure, the onion is layered and commonplace in kitchens and blah blah blah, but the onion is necessary. Was a huge rubber-band ball necessary? No. Did we ever stop to question it? No. It was just there, and we mindlessly kept adding to it.  

“Inexorably linked.” I could roll my eyes right out of my head. It's a stupid rubber-band ball and you know it. So let's stick with “inextricably layered.”  

Anyway, at that point, I didn't know anymore if I was Sisyphus or the boulder, but I was almost to the top of the hill.

I'm sure it was May...

Alcoholism, self-hatred, and wee-hour hot wings are fine as a sous chef; as exec, be it acting or officially, it means a heart attack, suicide, DUI into a tree, something. But something ending in death. I poured one out for Bourdain, and chose sobriety to be my change.

But it didn't help a damn thing.

I gulped the last bit of my third or fourth bourbon and thought, Now THAT is a dramatic start to this story.

Yeah. Whether it was May or June, my abstinence from alcohol lasted two or three weeks at most. Recently, I went six days.

Six days. Wow, good going, Jarred.

I started the story this way so you see here, early, that this will not be one of success, but of struggling, suffering, searching. (Don't hate me for the alliteration, I'm just a word nerd.) I'm not here telling you that I've overcome my troubles or unraveled all the layers. This is just another of my many different attempts to try.

If you can stand some more nerdy wordplay, let me just tell you the first set of layers I started picking at, and this whole thing will hit you like a big rubber-band ball:

Regret.

Anger.

Guilt.

Envy.  

Do you see it? Ha! You see it. I've kept this big ball of rage in the back for years. And just as I described above, I mindlessly added to it for so long, growing it until it was heavy enough to hurt someone. And what do you think I did with it? I hurt people, of course. Mainly myself, but I'm sure you guessed that much. Finally, I stopped to question it.  What the hell is this? Why is it here? It serves no purpose, it isn't necessary.

So I don't fucking want it anymore.

[kfs1001]

Maybe, I think like this because all this grates on my sense of the goodness of the human race. Maybe, that is the lesson – the human race was designed to be self-serving and vicious. Maybe our greed and loathing as a species will doom us all. Honestly, I am finding D and C a depressing symptom of a cycle I feel our species needs to break if we are to survive.

I may be Buddhist and I believe in the goodness that we all have, but that does not mean I am not human with human failings. Even the Dalai Lama says he has bad days, but then, the question is, what do we learn from this bad day.   

It is frustrating to see what is happening to two talented and caring men fighting to allow their true natures shine. I find it irritating, that in 2019 segments of society would still treat other elements as second or third class citizens. In the first third of the last century, marginalized elements of society were considered subhuman and we all know what led to.

When the highest laws (Constitution and Bill of Rights) of the land can be superseded by a legal piece of paper then you have a dictatorship based on a system designed to protect the power structure rather than the people it is meant to serve. It is the whole idea of democracy that the whole votes and those in office are our representatives based on that vote. What happened to this ideal? Is this the American dream? Well, in my view, It had been corrupted by power and control to the point where those with the power can apparently ignore or supersede the highest laws in the land. We have a good example of this north of the border right now where the powers-that-be have tried to circumvent constitutional power and it may end up with the government falling.

Some will say I do not understand because I come from north of the 49th. I think it is easy to believe in human goodness. I think it is easy to see when human goodness is being twisted by greed and power. I think it is easy to be seduced by these things which can work against human goodness. My road to my current beliefs was not an easy one and I had my moments of abuse along the way―we all do. However, do we speak out and see it our voice can make a difference or do we hide? I chose to speak out and it garnered me some very powerful opposition. In the end, the power-that-be further up the food chain removed the powerful opposition and my speaking, along with others, helped change the culture of my government department. I found this invisible line in my work life. I felt the pressure from above and suffered the effects on my health.

Watching what is happening to these D and C, plus many others, makes me think we live in an illusion where we think we have our freedoms. These freedoms exist only until we cross a line we cannot see. It becomes visible when wealth and power can buy a lesser conviction or get off all together. We see it when wealth and power can buy entrance for their kids into a top-notch college/university displacing those who have better grades and who really want to be there.

I also believe in the right to privacy―personal, intellectually and politically/corporately. We all have this right, but I believe it is a crime against this right to use a legal document to suppress our right to speak out against misjustices and abuses. In my belief, CC is real, and the abuse is real. In such no contract should be able to stop them from expressing their constitutional rights to correct a wrong. I hate to say it, but D and C are just a symptom in a global pool of abuse, and we have chosen to focus of these two men. Being a CC believer, these two men need our focus. They are fighting an uphill battle against a juggernaut firmly intrenched with the illusion of freedom we live within.

When I look at what is happening in the world – the rise of extremism of all stripes – I can see the day when my door will be bashed in and I will be hauled away. People like D and C, who have a level of power themselves, could do many things to state their bit and hold the power structure responsible. It takes courage. The problem is the fear of the power-that-be stifles the opposition who (historically) do not act until the curtain falls and the barbwire goes up.

Okay, to the counterpoint, those who think my words are imposing on their rights and, to some degree, this may well be. However, if said beliefs marginalize other elements of society based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted, then they infringe on everyone’s basic human rights. Regardless of our beliefs, we are all human. We all want to live our lives in happiness and with those we love. We all want to achieve. Getting there should never be on the backs of others. 

Right, I am rambling and looking shaking my head. I should delete it, but I will not. It is what I feel. If CC is real, they must have a legal case and should sue for 500 billion similar to the collage/university entrance sandal. If not, we/they might as well content ourselves to live the darkness where the fear of legal action will be the least of our problems. D will be relegated to living his life wearing the ring of someone a contract imposed on him instead of the ring of the man I believe he loves.

Granted, I am not in their situation. I do not know the weight of the power Hollywood really has. I just find it hard to believe that over the span of the human experience on this world we have learned so little about ourselves. I can, however, relate, because I have faced off against powerful people working in an atmosphere controlled by the ‘Old Boys Club’.

I have studies history and history tells us, that (in general) a small hand full of people control the sheep which is the rest of the human race. They have power only because the sheep fear the consequences of expressing themselves or they have been beguiled. When the masses do express their displeasure it often ends up being a bloody chapter in human history. Sometimes, like in Gorbachev’s Russia, the powers-that-be side with the masses. Unfortunately, and often, when the powers-that-be fall, they are replaced for a time by someone or a group people who think of the whole but in time it falls back into the greed of control. Thus, the cycle continues. This cycle is not just political, because it permeates all society and the entertainment industry is not immune.

Right, shut up. This is it. Done. I am being pessimistic. I know the room always look darkest before the light shines, but I am tired of the dark. I see CC as the light. May these talented men shine brightly breaking the dim for all others lost in the darkness. 

[marketerarena-blog]

5 Signs You’re Prone to Emotional Eating

Are you a mindless muncher? A comfort food connoisseur? Or a break-up binger? Don’t be ashamed. For many people, emotions and food are so intertwined, it’s hard to differentiate between eating for fuel and feeding your feelings.

Hence the term, “emotional eating.”

There are two types of hunger—emotional and physical. Emotional hunger is the need to eat when physical hunger isn’t present. It is essentially feeding our feelings with food.

7 Reasons You Eat When You’re Not Hungry & How to Deal

Read More

Emotional eating is a vice. Food elicits a wide array of hormones and chemicals that dance around in our brains, sending us feelings of comfort, happiness and ease. According to the National Institute of Health, eating releases dopamine, which activates the pleasure center of the brain. The long and short of it? Food makes us feel good.

And while studies suggest thatpeople with a body mass index (BMI) in the overweight or obese range more commonly turn to food as a coping mechanism, determining the reason for thus is a bit of a “chicken and egg” situation; there is an ongoing debate over whether the binging tendency or the weight gain comes first.

What’s Your Number? BMI Explained

Read More

Like many vices, emotional eating is a health concern. It is obvious that eating beyond your physical needs can cause serious weight gain. And with excess weight comes an increased risk for diseases like cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, among others. Eating disorders can also develop when emotional hunger is accompanied by cycles of binging and purging. But the signs aren’t always so extreme or so obvious.

So how do you know if you’re an emotional eater?

Here are five common indicators that emotional eating is a problem for you:

1. You Turn to Food When You’ve Had an Argument with A Loved One

File this one under comfort food or food for comfort.

Difficult emotions are, well, difficult. An argument can cause stress hormones to spike. Initially, stress may decrease appetite, but as the stress persists, hormones are released that can increase your cravings. During prolonged periods of stress, appetite can remain high regardless of physical hunger or nutritional needs.

Unfortunately, carrot sticks and celery boats may not be enough to satisfy your stress-induced appetite either. Studies have found emotional hunger causes very specific cravings. Sad people prefer ice cream and cookies, not salad and broccoli.

2. You Overeat While Working Late or Studying

The big issue with emotional hunger is that we eat more than we normally would, which puts us at risk for weight gain. Psychologists call this unconscious eating. While performing a task like studying or working on a big project, we can let ourselves become too tired and too hungry. Hormones go crazy and send sudden urges to your brain requesting food. We polish off the entire bag of chips, box of cookies or gallon of soda. We finish the rest of the pizza or find ourselves elbow deep in a big bowl of buttery popcorn. Overconsumption of calories leads to obesity. Consuming foods high in sodium leads to hypertension. Saturated-fat-laden treats endanger our hearts. Unconscious eating, while seemingly innocent, can become a danger to our health.

10 Simple Ways to Stop Eating So Much

Read More

3. You Turn To Food When You’re Bored

The American Psychological Association found in 2012 that when boredom was added to the emotional eating scale it became the most commonly cited emotion while eating. Cravings can be specific for bored eating, too. Research has shown that people who eat out of boredom crave salty, crunchy snacks. Eating these foods releases chemicals in the brain similar to chemicals released by some drugs. Like a drug, food creates a soothing, calming effect. That’s why we look forward to food when things get a bit wearisome. As with all forms of emotional eating, eating because of boredom leads to extra calories, possibly spiraling into significant weight gain. Even in the absence of stress or sadness, bored eating can be the root of a failed weight loss effort or sudden jump on the scale.

12 Things to Do Instead of Mindlessly Snack

Read More

4. You Hide What You Eat

But why? Emotional hunger feels sudden and urgent. It’s irrational. We make bad choices. We eat too much. This causes feelings of guilt. The guilt can then create feelings of shame, which may further fuel the binge. The National Eating Disorder Association lists secretive behaviors such as eating alone, hiding or hoarding food as a behavioral characteristic of binge eating.

Shame and guilt are powerful emotions. A 2014 study found that feelings of shame coupled with anxiety elicited larger binge episodes in women compared to anxiety alone.

Are Your Friends Dooming Your Diet?

Read More

5. You Eat When You’re Anxious

We all get anxious: A new job, a big meeting, an intense social gathering… A study in 2012 found that higher rates of anxiety in college woman correlated with higher reports of emotional eating. At the beginning of the semester, anxiety was at its peak, with new classes, new faces and new adjustments. Of course, emotional eating was at its highest then, as the college students coped with this anxiety.

As far back as 1957, research has confirmed that overeating can be a means of easing emotional discomfort and anxiety. To complicate the issue even more, overconsuming high fatcomfort foods can exacerbate negative emotions and stress. Hence, the vicious cycle of overeating and anxiety sets in motion.

Emotional eating, regardless of the source, is certainly a cause for concern. The longer the cycle continues, the more difficult it could be to break from it. The key is finding new ways to cope with the underlying stress, anxiety and boredom, that don’t involve food.

How to Stop Emotional Eating… for Good

Read More

The next time an emotional experience has you plunging into the pantry, throw on your sneakers and head outside for a brisk stroll instead. A number of studies indicate that participating in aerobic exercise can help decrease tension, boost mood, improve sleep and improve self-esteem. The best part? You could experience anti-anxiety effects after just five minutes of aerobic exercise. Or, step away from the snacks and reach for the radio instead. Studies suggest that listening to music can elevate your mood and reduce stress levels. (Check out this article for even more reasons to crank up the tunes today).

Have a pet? Cash in on some extra cuddle time. Studies suggest that spending time with animals can help boost your mood and alleviate feelings of loneliness. Want even more reason to pamper your pet today? We’ve got you covered with this article: 8 Reasons Your Pet is Good for Your Health.

Other strategies for avoiding emotional eating? Try calling a friend to discuss how you’re feeling, or tackling that closet clean-out project you’ve been putting off. And, if you find that you absolutely cannot cope without sitting down to a snack, make sure you opt for a healthier version of the food you’re craving. If it’s ice cream you’re after, try one of these “Nice Cream” recipes. If crunchy, salty stuff has your heart, try making your own veggie chips or fries . You can also stock up on your favorite Nutrisystem snacks, so you’ve got healthy options on hand when cravings strike. Here is a list of the 20 most popular Nutrisystem snacks and sweets.

The post 5 Signs You’re Prone to Emotional Eating appeared first on The Leaf.

https://askfitness.today/5-signs-youre-prone-to-emotional-eating/

[ajewishamericandream-blog]

Research Paper on School Segregation

We’re All in This Together: Why Integrated Education is Necessary for the American Dream

          Although there are varying definitions of the American Dream, as diverse and unique as all of the individuals in the country that find themselves striving for it, almost every form of the Dream requires education. From being a participant of civil society, to attaining a reputable job and ample material success, to having a stable and caring family, education is the key to achieving personal goals. However, it is an unfortunate truth that not everybody in America has equal access to education. This problem is no more apparent than in examining the current state of the K-12 education system. Children from affluent families living in equally wealthy communities have access to the best quality public school, while the poorest children, tending to come from ethnic minority backgrounds, are doomed to attend inadequate schools, creating a vicious cycle in which the poor are unable to educate themselves and rise out of poverty. Even though deliberate segregation of schools has been officially outlawed, de facto segregation continues to exist, putting a multitude of students at a tremendous disadvantage. Rectifying unequal opportunities in schooling and taking steps to integrate public schools is necessary to keep the American Dream alive.

          The famous 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education was a unanimous ruling that the “separate but equal” doctrine, that allowed many states to divide white and black students into separate schools, was unconstitutional. As a result of the decision, all schools needed to be integrated as soon as possible by law.  As recently as 2015, however, “Brown’s promise is still lost in fantasyland” (Bond.) Children from disadvantaged backgrounds have historically not had equal access to quality education when compared to their richer and whiter counterparts, and this problem continues into today. The reason the Bond writes that the decision intended by the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education is in “fantasyland” is because, in many communities, children of disadvantaged backgrounds have been unable to reap the benefits of supposedly desegregated schools. Federal reports demonstrate that “the number of high-poverty schools serving primarily black and brown students more than doubled between 2001 and 2014” (Strauss). In other words, children from minority communities are getting the short end of the stick when it comes to education, being stuck in schools that have high poverty rates and low funding, and by extension little to no resources to provide for the education of students. The current state of segregation in schools is having a negative impact on students’ ability to achieve. Low quality schools fail to prepare students to meet the challenges of the real world, making the American Dream seem like a distant possibility to them. Schools serving as vast majority of African-American and Hispanic students usually tend to “have fewer resources and attract less experienced teachers, have high teacher turnover, and have higher dropout rates” (Quinlan). Furthermore, there exists a racial achievement gap, in which white students tend to outperform their minority counterparts in academic measures, which is exacerbated by white students usually having access to better quality schools due to living in more economically prosperous areas. America is a country that supposedly prides itself on providing an equal opportunity for all to succeed, regardless of their background. In order to preserve the idea of the American Dream, it is necessary that school segregation be eliminated, as it contributes to lower quality of learning for a significant number of students.

                      Lack of equal access to quality education, caused by segregation of minority and majority students, is a serious problem that requires complex steps to solve. In the past, efforts to desegregate schools have primarily focused on busing. Quinlan defines busing as a model of desegregation in which, “mostly black and Hispanic students are bused from their neighborhoods in low-income, urban areas to attend mostly white schools in more affluent, suburban areas.” This has proved to be unpopular in many communities, mainly because there is little evidence that the exorbitant costs are justified by meaningful gains in student achievement. Continually, busing fails to address the underlying problem that causes school segregation, and that is residential segregation. In neighborhoods all across America, it is an all too common thread to see members of certain ethnic or racial groups living in clustered communities. Residential segregation has most of its roots in racist public policy in the past. For example, in New York City, “when the federal government and city collaborated to build public housing in the mid-twentieth century, they built separate projects for whites” (Strauss). The persisting legacy of segregationist policy can be seen in the still-separate neighborhoods for whites and minorities in New York City, exemplified by places like Stuyvesant Town, Levittown, and the Williamsburg and Harlem River Houses. Therefore, a benevolent effort to desegregate schools will also require housing policies that promote integration. The American government can begin efforts to remedy this problem by reforming the Section 8 public housing system to ensure that diversity is maximized and areas are not being de facto segregated. In addition to fixing residential segregation, citizens have to take the difficult yet rewarding step to push their local school districts to desegregate. Although many school districts around the country have pending orders to integrate their schools, they are not taking meaningful steps to do so because the courts have failed to follow up and enforce their rulings (Quilan). Getting white families involved in this effort is especially difficult, for even though there is no evidence that integration of minority students into other schools hurts white students, stereotypes and misconceptions often prevail over facts (Bond). A combination of government efforts, community involvement, and education is key to fixing the segregation problem.

                      The impact that school desegregation will have on keeping the American Dream alive is one that cannot be understated. Integration of minority groups within mainstream American society is best when it starts at a young age, and there is no better place to do this than a public school. Minority groups fare better for themselves and contribute more to society when they feel included within America’s “melting pot.” For example, the 2001 National Jewish Population Survey reveals that most Jewish-Americans do not feel like outsiders in their community due to a combination of increased bonds within the Jewish community and feelings of belonging to a group outside of being Jewish (Alper & Olson). Because of their inclusion within the mainstream culture, American Jews have been great economic contributors and have bolstered America’s role as a booming economy. The Jewish community can be said to have reached the American Dream, but now it is turn for other communities to be able to say the same. Desegregation of schools has, on all fronts, contributed to both greater student achievement on standardized tests and a higher self-esteem among minority students (Quinlan). Although undoing decades of oppression and reversing patterns of segregation that have dominated society, taking the difficult steps to integrate young people of all backgrounds can make the American Dream a true reality.

Works Cited

Alper, Becka A. & Olson, Daniel V.A. “Do Jews Feel Like Outsiders In America? The Impact of Anti-Semitism, Friendships, and Religious Geography.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 50, no. 4, 2011, pp. 822-830.

Bond, Julian. “With All Deliberate Speed: Brown v. Board of Education.” Indiana Law Journal, vol. 90, no. 4, 2015, pp. 1671-1681.

Quinlan, Casey. “School Segregation Is Bad And Getting Worse, But It’s Supposed To Be Solved Voluntarily.” Think Progress, 23 Nov. 2015, https://thinkprogress.org/school-segregation-is-bad-and-getting-worse-but-its-supposed-to-be-solved-voluntarily-69409f507d1c.

Strauss, Valerie. “The reason America’s schools are so segregated - and the only way to fix it.” The Washington Post, 14 Dec. 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/12/14/the-reason-americas-schools-are-so-segregated-and-the-only-way-to-fix-it/.