hello.darkness

Where is my light, where does it come from?

Do you see it even when I don’t?

Where is my light, is it still shining?

Will you still love me when I can’t love myself?

I know I’m still growing, I’m not quite there yet

the seeds that I’m sowing wont be full of regret

My time will come, my dreams will find me

but will you be here while I’m searching blindly?

Where is my light, when will it find me

I can’t be in the darkness forever

Will you believe in me, when I can’t manage?

No one is shiny all the time

Where is my light? When will it find me?

When will I feel like I’m not faltering?

Blindly hoping that you’ll still want me

Even when I’m nothing. Nothing to myself.

I know you used to see it, but maybe now you notice

I used to be bright, but it’s all dull now

How do I hold on to you,

when I can’t get a grip on who I am?

Where is my light? I hope I find it

And I hope its not too late

Because when the day is dark as night

When you hold me
the spark turns me into my light.

jealous.much

I believe in listening to my intuition, to that gut feeling I get about something that is sometimes seemingly out of nowhere. Sometimes I have such strong emotional reaction to things that “shouldn’t” be a big deal, and it makes me feel crazy! In my case, the alarm usually screams from somewhere in my sternum, and moves it’s way up past my heart, and into my throat as the issue evolves, and eventually resolves itself through expression-whether that be to my partner, a friend, or through writing.

The latest of these feelings came in the form of a disgust-reflex I had at seeing a part of the movie The Seven Year Itch with Marilyn Monroe. Every woman I knew has grown up with Marilyn in the periphery of her consciousness. She is after all our modern Helen of Troy. I honestly hadn’t given her that much though until lately, but it seems as though we are going through a Marilyn-appreciation resurgence. When we (my partner and I) watched a segment of that movie, I really couldn’t suppress the disgust reflex that bubbled up. My partner shook off my reaction as jealousy at her status, or insecurity in my own looks, which is why he thinks I don't like Kate Hudson either. For a while I wondered if that was all it was. Am I just having a good old jealousy attack? But if it was as simple as that, then why do some woman make me have this feeling while others don't? I am not jealous of Amanda Seyfried or Angelina Jolie, both of whom are insanely beautiful. Why am I so bothered by some women and not others? The feeling didn’t go away, and I have come to trust my inner navigation system enough not to try to suppress it. When my radar beeps, I don’t just assume that it’s malfunctioning. And so I let myself feel what I was feeling knowing that the discomfort, much like a pocket of air bubbling up from my stomach, would cause more ache if I didn’t just let it out.

And here it is:

The problem with someone that is so praised for their beauty, and for nothing else, is that they are not valued for being human, messy, and complex. They are crafted into an artificial notion of perfection, and no doubt her humanity withered under the suffocation of that lie. As the film rolled on, I got more and more uncomfortable with all the aspects of it. That poor woman! She was not only the original dumb blonde, but she is so thoroughly objectified and made a fool of that no wonder her life ended the way it did. To see her beauty, which really is not only timeless but radiant, be so thoroughly exploited was really hard to ignore. And she set the standard for the treatment of “The Bombshell” for decades to come. I couldn’t just shut off my brain and enjoy the film, because I was watching history being made, and I could see how she has shaped the world I live in as a woman today.

When I saw her for the first time in that film, it was the same as when I finally got to see the Mona Lisa. For anyone who hasn’t seen the Mona Lisa, it is very disappointing! The painting is only 30 inches tall, and housed behind a thick bullet proof case, cordoned off by velvet ropes so that there is no person that is able to get within 10 feet of her. I imagine it must have been much the same case with Marilyn, which led me to compare the two phenomena side by side. The Mona Lisa was never commissioned for a famous patron, nor was the painting displayed for many years after being finished. When the painting was finally displayed, it did not revolutionize the art world immediately. Part of the reason the Mona Lisa is so famous now is because fame is somewhat of a snowball effect. A man committed suicide in front of the Mona Lisa (which might have been a coincidence), and it has also been stolen twice. Is it because she has a magical power over people? If you have seen her you will likely agree that it is probably not the case. But regardless, part of her fame is, I’m sorry to say, some hype.

I think the same could be said of Marilyn Monroe. She was, no doubt beautiful and likely had an enigmatic quality about her, but now that she is gone what are we left with? You cannot reproduce the light that someone has, and so by reproducing this limited image of a smiling Marilyn over and over again in our culture, leads me to wonder if we are not just in love with her artificiality. After all, she was not even a natural blonde. She also had a stutter, and spent much of her childhood in foster homes. There is nothing perfect about her if you consider the whole picture, yet she seemed to do everything to try to escape those aspects of herself, and in our continued idealization of her we are trying to suppress her humanity (and perhaps our own) as well. That is not much of a tribute, in my opinion.

In the end, that is what sets my radar off, and ultimately bothers me about some people (famous or otherwise) and not others. How well do they embrace their humanity, their complexity, and their messiness? Sometimes I get the feeling that someone’s whole life is a performance, and usually my radar goes off when I am exposed to someone like that. It does not mean I am judging them as frivolous and inconsequential (well at least I try not to) but it does mean that I do not see them as strong women, and I do not appreciate them as much as someone who just goes about her life-strong in her sense of self, and not putting on a show for anyone.

child.like

Everything old is new again

Do you ever get the feeling that your life seems really uneventful, or kind of empty? Well, here is a seemingly unrelated question: Do you ever remember backing out of the driveway, or driving to work? Chances are, unless you hit a child or another vehicle, you usually don’t remember these things. That’s because your brain saves precious energy by putting you into autopilot when doing familiar tasks. 80% of the total amount of glucose your body uses gets used by that tangle of nerves between your ears, which makes your brain a very energetically expensive piece of machinery to operate!  So whenever your brain can save some energy, it will. This cognitive efficiency is great in theory, but is actually contributing to a problem in modern society. That’s because our perception of how “full” life is depends on how many memories we have, or in other words, how many events stand out to us in our memory of the day. The more events you remember from the day, the “fuller” your day will feel.

Memory has three components to it: Encoding, Storage, and Retrieval. Encoding is done through attention, and thus when you are not consciously paying attention to a task it does not get committed to memory at all. This means that all of those times you are on autopilot will be chunks of your life that will feel like they never really happened. So, when you don’t pay attention a thing/setting/person/task that you are familiar with, you will be unable to encode that event. And since encoding leads to memory, and memory is a crucial measure of how full, satisfying, and eventful our lives feel, not paying attention is one of the biggest reasons for feeling like you have an unfulfilling life!

But alas, knowing the problem is easier than fixing it. I can’t believe people are still giving the advice: JUST BE MINDFUL! I’m sorry, yogis are good people and all, but they really need to elaborate on that notion, because any advice that starts with “just” and that can be summed up in one phrase is, frankly, just bullshit. Mindfulness is a practice that, not only takes skill, determination, and a lot of free time, but also takes an insane amount of energy. Being mindful all of the time will actually result in mental fatigue. It would be like reasoning that because exercise releases endorphins, if you want to feel happy, just exercise all day! Don’t get me wrong, mindfulness is definitely a habit worth cultivating, but it is not really something you can do all day. Especially not if you have a life where you are not taking serene walks in nature, or doing yoga all day. Think of mindfulness like trying to walk up straight, or suck in your gut. If you’re not used to doing it, you will remember for about thirty seconds before you get distracted, and next thing you know you will catch yourself slouching again.

Our brains are built for efficiency, and they are not going to expend considerable resources reminding us to suck it in, walk up straight, or to be mindful. Thus, intention alone does not a lifestyle change make! When it comes to feeling like you have a fuller life, your secret weapon is Dopamine. Dopamine is the neurochemical responsible for all the greatest things in your life. Being the “reward chemical”, it is released when you get a new sexual partner, buy a dream car (or buy anything exciting), win the lottery, eat chocolate, go on vacation, or have an orgasm. It is the chemical that tells your brain: FUN, YAY, and MORE! Dopamine is also (surprise, surprise!) responsible for encoding very significant memories. This is because your brain has evolve, not only to reward you for behaviors that are essential for survival, but also to make them stand out in your memory so that you do them again.  Eating high calorie foods; having sex-especially with a new partner; shopping-which is the evolutionary equivalent of stockpiling up for the winter; and exploring-which was essential for finding new food sources and territories, are a few behaviors that release dopamine, and dopamine is like a giant flashing sign that says: PAY ATTENTION, ME LIKEY! In short, anything that can be considered a novel experience will release dopamine, and so, new experiences will stand out in your memory because of the dopamine release that facilitates very effective encoding.

New experiences-->Dopamine=good feelings+more attention being paid= a more exciting life!

Unfortunately, a dopamine surge is very short lived, and so if you are depending solely on high-calorie food, shopping, and orgasms to get your dopamine fix, your life will still feel unfulfilling, except it will have an out-of-control, addictive bent. Even though the dopamine is there, the memory won’t last because the access is too easy, so you will crave the experience again soon after it has passed. You will also get used to the experience, and so you will be on autopilot up until the moment the dopamine hits, and then in a few minutes you will be back on autopilot. In contrast, if you get your dopamine from extended novel experiences where there is a prolonged sequence of novel stimuli that forces you to pay attention, the dopamine gets released over a long period of time, and that whole time you will be creating a new memory. That is why most people remember vacations so vividly. On vacation, almost everything you see is new and exciting, which releases an ongoing stream of dopamine, and forces you to pay attention and commit it all to memory. On the other hand, when you are firmly stuck in a routine, dopamine is almost never released unless it is in the short bursts during sex, shopping, food intake, orgasm or the like. That is why so many people get addicted to these things. If you find your dependence on these things growing, it could be symptomatic of a boring life!

Dopamine is also the reason why people find sexual excitement deteriorating with the same partner. Sex becomes like your routine drive to work -automatic. Mindfulness is one way to make sex more satisfying, and novelty is another. I would use a combination though, because just using novelty could lead to an “escalating” kind of behavior that leans more toward addictive than adventurous. But that being said, some people could definitely use some novelty-whether it be a new sexy outfit, location, or even just a different sequence of foreplay. Again, why do you think you have such great sex on vacation? It is because the novel setting facilitates dopamine release, thus making you pay more attention to every sensation you are experiencing, and committing the event to memory.

Another interesting fact about memory is that it is responsible for the sensation that life speeds up as you age. There have been many theories as to why it feels like life passes by faster and faster as we age, but the latest one again has to do with novelty. It theorizes that as adults age they become more and more cognitively efficient, and also more set in their ways. This results in fewer new experiences and thus fewer memories. That gives new depth to the notion of “living life to the fullest” because it literally means that filling your life with new experiences will essentially make it feel fuller, and like it is passing by slower. But you want to start incorporating more novelty into every facet of your life, not just in big chunks like on vacations, or in the beginning of a romantic relationship. We cannot have an endless parade of vacations, new cars, and varying adventures, so the challenge comes from incorporating some novelty into everyday experience. The best way to do this is to act like a child. This is the easiest if you have a partner and/or friends that are up for trying the experiment with you. Commit to one week of doing things that children would do, and experiment with turning your world upside-down as much as possible that week. I know the results will astound you, and it will become a regular activity.

Try brushing each other’s teeth before bed. Put your pillows on the other end of the bed and wake up with a different worldview. Have a picnic on your living room floor. Commit to trying different restaurants, or have some totally different dates doing things you wouldn’t usually do. Make a bet on who can go the longest through the evening doing everything wearing oven mitts. Blindfold each other and pick out the clothes you will be going out in that night. Or blindfold each other and stay in, trying to navigate the house, and each other. Have theme-night dinners where you choose a culture, and make a traditional meal. It will be fun finding the stores and shopping for the food with your friends or your partner. There is so much to do, but the point is-it all takes a little bit of effort. If you feel like your life is boring, you are not putting the effort in. Hopefully now that you understand why it is important, you will do it more. Mediocrity is a terrible ailment-but in the end it is one that is easily remedied. All you need are a few partners in crime! This brings me to my last point:  if all the people in your life are content doing the same things over and over again, then maybe the change of scenery you need is a new group of friends! I know it sounds mean, but life really is too short not to live it to the max every day. If you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with, then having boring friends without a sense of adventure can really rob you of a fulfilling life. But hey, hopefully you will be able to bring them over to the fun side instead? In the end, it’s all about acting like a child, seriously.

“Or have you only comfort, and the lust for comfort, that stealthy thing that enters the house a guest, and becomes a host, and then a master?”-Kahlil Gibran

un.colour

I love beige. But, not just beige: my reverence extends to tan, ecru, sand, buff, and khaki. To be honest, I feel unequivocal love for a whole spectrum of non-colours. Firstly, I would be amiss not to mention classic sports grey; an incantation of grey that is neither dark enough to be somber, nor light enough to be fussy, and that has an equally important place in my heart, and in my closet. Beige and sports grey, to me, are like blue jeans. I own so much of it that my laundry piles are divided into grey and beige, as apposed to the usual lights and darks. The fact that the two together prove to be a combination rivaling tomato and basil, only adds to their individual appeal. And whilst on the topic of grey, one cannot forget to mention the lovely wispy sensibility of a light dove grey: a grey that seems to me as light as a spider’s web, even when woven into a thick cable knit sweater. This grey is the most perfect grey: an allusion to silver, but without the narcissistic plea for recognition. Then there is cream; a (non)colour so richly saturated that it is almost regal. Cream has a palpable sophistication that somehow manages to be so spitefully self-effacing that one must yield to the superiority of any person that dares to wear it head-to-toe. Try it once. Your wedding day would suffice.

On the darker side of the spectrum black needs no introduction, but perhaps navy blue does. Navy blue, along with a few other colours that read as neutrals, are the tint equivalents of the newly rich. Not born into status and power like a true neutral, they nonetheless have earned their sophistication by proving that they are just as able to fit into the upper crust, albeit only through association with the original royal bloodlines. Like any advantageous marriage, a subdued colour can ‘marry up’ by pairing with one of the original neutrals: as in the case of navy blue with cognac or cream. Other notable bourgeoisie colours are dusty rose: pink without the juvenility and desperation, mauve: the older sophisticated aunt of purple, and olive green: the only green, in my opinion, with aspirations beyond kindergarten finger painting.

Then there is white. Oh the odes I could write to white! White is the omega of all the hues: with abilities bordering on supernatural. No other colour has its uncanny ability to accentuate shape and design, while simultaneously making its own statement. White speaks to the flawless grace of the person who chooses it. A person’s commitment to wearing this pure hue is, by extension, a commitment to self-possession in all areas of life. No saucy foods, no coffee to go, no red wine, no dirt on one's vehicle or in one’s home. The reason this acetism intrigues me is because we live in a time of overbearing stimulation. Even the topic of overstimulation has been discussed at-nauseam, thus bombarding us with warnings of how bombarded we are. Discipline in an age of laxity simply fascinates me. Restraint, whether it be in fashion, décor, or lifestyle is more than a palate cleanser- it is the antithesis to reality TV, junk food, and the attention grabbing antics of the rapacious media.

Clothes have become generic, and bright colours serve to distract us from that fact. Pigment used to be rare and costly, and therefore would be used sparingly, and to poignant effect. Now we are oversaturated with unnatural hues in cheap fabrics. The most criminal of the bunch are Hi-Lighter Brights. Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING should be the colour of radiation, especially not clothing. Just like we are overfed and undernourished, so our senses are being polluted with a disastrous array of tacky colour. Not to be excluded completely, I recognize colour as a potent seasoning, but alas, it should never be the meal.

Neutrals mean the absence of distraction, allowing one to see things as they really are. Neutrals reveal flaws in design, and highlights well made elements or good fabric. One cannot hide a flaw on white, nor can one hide behind grey. While a colourful outfit gives a lap dance to the senses, a neutral beckons one to come a little closer, and to take a longer look. Neutrals are stark in their confidence; colours are desperate in their ploy for attention.

cookie.jar

Professor Eric Anderson, Ph.D., is an American sociologist at the University of Winchester, England. He is known for his research on sexualities and masculinities studies. I start with this qualification because recently he has written a very controversial article for the Psychology Today website titled The Monogamy Gap: Men, Love, and The Reality of Cheating. In it, he argues that monogamy is simply too unnatural of a state for men to exist in, and thus will not remain the status quo for much longer. He posits that: "Despite...social-sexual progress… our culture has yet to erode the sexual taboo of engaging in—or even admitting to desperately wanting—sex with someone other than one's monogamous partner. Monogamy is so esteemed it remains virtually compulsory in our relationships."

Although this is a controversial issue, I can’t help but agree with Dr. Anderson’s observation. Our polyamorous nature has been completely suppressed in the name of an antiquated Victorian notion that monogamy is proper, moral, normal, and natural. But, as is always the case with a contentious issue, it is not that simple. Anderson has written a brave article that brings light to an issue that is wrongfully condemned in our culture. It is such a blatant truth that men (and women-he would do well to remember) want to have sex with other people, and that it has no bearing on how much they love their partner. It is evolution, our genes, our nature...whatever one wants to call it. However, where Dr. Anderson fails in his reasoning is his claim that sexual jealousy is only a social script: “open relationships” he claims,  “can wither jealousy scripts that lead to emotional distress in a relationship.” I would argue that sexual jealousy is very much a product of evolution, and developed in tandem with--and as defense against-- our desire for extra-pair copulations. If sexual jealousy were not an adaptive trait, then it would not have survived natural selection because it would have served no reproductive purpose. The reason it has been adopted into our collective morality is because of its function in aiding the successful reproduction of our genes by guarding against cuckolding for males, and the sharing/loss of resources for females. Any introductory evolutionary textbook will tell you this.

In the case of Monogamy vs. Open relationships we are not looking at an either/or situation. Yes, even though it is human nature to try to wrap things into neat little packages, we are regrettably stuck with a both/and situation. We want to both have extra-pair copulations AND fidelity in a relationship. And so, even though Dr. Anderson’s attempt to shed light on the darker side of this topic is admirable, he has not afforded his readers the indulgence of a fully rounded hypothesis. Exposing readers to only the information that supports his thesis means he is treating them like children. I, for one, love the challenge of a paradox. It makes me feel alive and incredibly insignificant all at the same time. Like staring into space and contemplating infinity, I like not having a simple answer to a problem.

We must also consider the evolutionary context of our desires. The way the world is now is not the way it always was. In “caveman times”, as I like to call it, we were surrounded by very few other people, and thus exposed to very few attractive alternatives to the mate we have. Back then, one would encounter as many non-relatives in your whole lifetime as we encounter on one city bus today. This is much different than our current environment, where we are bombarded with encounters with people, thus greatly increasing the chances of seeing an appealing alternative. This has been exponentially increased with the advent of ubiquitous media exposure, where the ideal type (which consists of about 2% of the population) is seen 99% of the time. Unfortunately our brain does not know the difference, and thus we are “convinced” that there are plenty of more attractive options out there.

Cheating evolved as an adaptive behavior to ensure the best chances for our genes. In the case of females, it meant that cheating would occur in a case where extra resources could be gained, or where better genetic material was up for grabs from a very attractive partner. In men, it evolved as a way to ensure that genes are passed on by being indiscriminate with mating- an urge that is curtailed when a female threatens to withhold mating from a male if he is found cheating. Both strategies were adaptive because they ensure genetic material had a good chance of being passed on and that their survival was probable due to extra resources and the desirable genetics of the offspring. It is much like how our desire for high sugar and fat content in food developed in an environment of scarcity. The very tendencies that were beneficial in the past are now the tendencies that we must overcome to thrive in our current environment. Our sexual appetites also want us to indulge indiscriminately, but unfortunately the smorgasboard of sexual satiates (in the form of pornography, and alternative sexual partners) has become a threat to our wellbeing. Sexual habituation will never go away-- just like a sweet tooth cannot be cured by going on a candy binge, having novel sexual partners will be an endless cycle without much true satisfaction. But where does this “sweet-tooth” metaphor end? Should we be allowed to dip our hand in the cookie jar every now and then, as long as we are “committed” to our healthy lifestyle? Well, when we eat unhealthily it only affects us, not the person we claim to love the most.

So in conclusion, Dr. Anderson brings to light an important issue--one that has been swept under rug for far too long. But, I believe he is intentionally oversimplifying the solution. Because, if in the end, it is as easy as simply having your cookie and eating someone else’s too, then us crafty humans would long ago have changed the rules to fit our needs. I believe that there should be a choice in the matter of monogamy, and that the choice should be up for revision during a relationship. But, I also believe that overcoming what he terms ‘social jealousy’ will take a tremendous amount of will and personal justification. I would argue that it is just as unnatural as monogamy: from a biological and evolutionary perspective. And that friends, is a paradox! Like watching a cute gazelle getting chased by a mother cheetah, trying to catch food for her young, we are watching this paradox unfold, and cheering both for the predator and the prey...in each of us.