Author Archives: Andersays

Unknown's avatar

About Andersays

I am just me. I have opinions, thoughts and ideas, I am trying to share them; Patreon: patreon.com/user?u=34619477 Buy Me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ADoseofD

Psychic In Today’s World?

Posted on by
1

As a longtime comic book fan, I often have thought of super powers. I don’t know any fan who hasn’t actually. Many are outlandish, or almost overblown caricatures of real-life abilities. I am a fan of Stan Lee’s Superhumans series. The one power I think that most people believe in, but has never really been proven, is Psychic phenomena. I personally believe in the possibility of it, and would love to see proof surface, but I fear it may never appear, at least in the Western world.
I say it may never for a couple of reasons. First though, I want to address the Comics and their portrayal, then the archetype that seems to prevail from it. Most comics books I know, and I am by no means an overall expert, so I will preface this with the fact that I have not read or seen all comic book psychic characters, just a few, and mostly Marvel. So though my experience is limited, I believe what I do know suffices for the sake of my argument here.
Comics seem to show psychic ability to be something easily controlled, something that manifests conveniently upon puberty, or slowly grows along with the child/hero and progresses with their growth. Any character that had trouble with their power, had a bad upbringing, or couldn’t handle their power, etc. I understand both the need and basis for this model, but I want to propose a variant, with only the most highest level of similarity. What if the person was psychic from birth? And the power was always there, but learning what it was would be the difficulty, only because the person is unable to know they are different.
The archetype of psychics, both for sale and in comics, is that the psychic somehow knows what they know. This is only possible if they had grown up, then acquired the power of hearing thoughts or reading minds, or what have you. I am limiting my exercise here mostly to telepathy, as the other “psychic” abilities, such as telekinesis, fit, albeit to a lesser degree. Imagine for a moment that you always heard other people’s thoughts. The trick would be to know which were yours. Sounds easy, because we always only hear our own thoughts. You hear only your own voice in your head. Any one who claims different, is, quite reasonably, called crazy, carefully analyzed, and treated for their mental disorder. But what if someone did make it without being detected, if they were able to somehow know they heard others, and they weren’t crazy. What could that person do?
I say it resembles the archetype in that as humans, all things require learning curves. Learning how to interpret that ability would be a monumental task. If we give it even a limited, comics-inspired physical basis, let’s say that their mental “view” somehow could sense the electric(magnetic) pulses that make up human thought. These are known to be cascades, like lightning arcing across the cortex. I am painting with broad strokes for the sake of argument here, for certain. Learning, as a child does with everything, how to start to interpret the things, the feel, from others, in the same frame as all other languages and communications. Would this person be considered Special Education? Would they fall behind because of it?
I believe this to be an “A-ha!” moment. When we now must ask, “What kind of person would make it through knowing, at least to some extent interpreting,others thoughts, while growing up in today’s world? And how much would location dictate that person’s character disposition? Since thoughts do not start out as words, and though spoken languages are pretty much universal for humans, they are all learned, so we have a penchant or attaching patterns to other patterns. I am trying to imagine getting the feeling, or other thought patterns, like mental pictures, or something primal, that anyone would understand, while learning this. Having the emotional thoughts be transmitted first would be my thought. Empathy would be the first form of telepathy, and, with the exception of telekinesis, possibly the first variant of psychic abilities to appear. Maybe this is as far as most would be able to interpret, as few other things are universally translated into thought patterns.

Not our hero though, this person has exceeded this, as other cognitive abilities develop, let’s assume our hero develops the pattern recognition ability even further, albeit unconsciously, Like so many others in preteen years, it is hard to know even that others aren’t like you, especially if you are living in a society that teaches that all people are the same, and you should “do unto them as you would have them do unto you”. So our young hero thinks everyone hears things the same way. I mean after all, to have it be otherwise would not only be impossible, it would be crazy, at least if it were complex things such as words, and voices, or pictures, or even fully formed ideas and other abstract object thoughts. Let’s say, by some luck of chance, our psychic has an ability that starts at emotions, and progresses along the same lines and human psyche. Instinct is first, Self-Preservation, then emotion. Let’s give Instinct the convenient and brief definition of cellular or genetic memory, or more importantly for us, inherent physical memories and/or abilities.
Understanding the development of others is probably the first place our psychic, as do most, would begin to develop the sense of identity that would allow them to understand that others didn’t think like them. Relative hierarchy would probably be the place it would be learned from in my opinion. What kind of person could read the basic intents and emotions of others in today’s teen world and not go stark raving mad? I am surprised any of the regular teens do, much less someone burdened by another form of communication that wasn’t supposed to be possible, and has to develop and learn on their own. I mean, in reality, where would the “first” psychic go to learn these things? More importantly, what would being able to “feel” others do to someone, and what could they learn?
I suppose here is where geopolitical factors, as well as environmental and nurturing states would all come into play. Never underestimate the power of humanity however, as the brain is plastic, and our psychic seems to have the natural serendipity to fall through the cracks of society, not fitting in would be a good way to do that. The top of the underbelly of the Beast is where most of those good souls that see through the B.S. of everyday Western life often land. Just bad enough to lie and keep secrets, just good enough to only do it to help each other stay afloat of the deeper depths.
I would think that something akin to a “spider-sense” would develop as a natural defense mechanism, just as with other preservation adaptations. Second would be Empathy, or feeling others emotions on some level. I believe that a form of “lie” detection would possibly be next. All of this would be extremely difficult mind you, if this were true, knowing what was, and what wasn’t, yours, would be a herculean task. I mean, not only knowing when a thought wasn’t yours, but that it originated in another AND it was fabricated? Getting to the level of whole thoughts, words, and pictures, while heavily dependent on exposure, would be even more so. Getting others to hear you, much less obey, would be an amazing development. Barriers in perception, interpretation, language, and emotional triggers, would be a seemingly impossible thing, on top of the impossible ability.
Again, what kind of person would be able to do all of this, and not hurt a bunch of people, or themselves, or just plain find someone, confess it all and get put in a looney bin? Would they know, and have the foresight to stay quiet, and stay out of the public eye, and make sure there was always doubt on what happened? I would think the latter would be necessary. I also think a fair amount of narcissism and humility would be needed just to even try, I don’t think it would be someone who craved the spotlight, as every movie fan, comic book fan, and just about anyone else knows, what we don’t understand, or we fear, we tend to destroy. Besides, the rewards of staying out of the light, outweigh being in it.
There are several prizes for someone who can publicly demonstrate their ability scientifically to many different organizations. But, consider for a moment, a high level ability, and the possibility that the benefits of quiet manipulation would outweigh the few million you could pocket going on a world tour, showing off. And besides, after a lifetime of hiding, a natural ability to shroud oneself would be highly likely to develop. An aversion to the public eye even? It would be hard to tell.
I don’t think we would see it. I don’t think the person would go for the smaller sum. That kind of ability is invaluable to governments all over the world. Business, stocks, or just personal protection or even as a weapon. The value of it as a secret, is far more than the value it has as public knowledge.
I give a caveat, Predictability. The very thing that the public displays intend to prove is what would drive someone to them. More appropriately, a lack of it. If there were errors in interpretation, the percentages would still be higher than chance, but there would be errors of processing. This is where I think the comic book archetype fails those who may see it first. That the complete ability to read everything a person thinks with utter, stark accuracy is like light speed, in that it is conceivable, but probably unobtainable because of inherent limitations. I do not think someone brought up in an average way would be able to know this. Let’s hope our psychic has at least an understanding of statistical variability. This hasn’t even touched on the social impact yet.
Imagine for a moment, labeled as “Psychic” in today’s world. Never being able to ever participate in competitions, or hold an intimate conversation. How many people would expect you to literally “read their minds”? Would you be able to charge for proof? What would the cost of being read by the world’s “only” psychic be? If you are interested in doing it for humanity, then you would take what would possibly be the most influential power in comic books to come into real life and not make tons of money with it. Could that even be done in today’s world? I am not sure. Today, it seems that it is better to get money, then use the money to help people. I think anyone able to manifest that ability, and control it with any degree of accuracy, would be manipulating as much of the events possible to make their fortune large, so they could maintain shadow operations. I believe it would be built into them, as a matter of human development. Maybe not, after all, Humanity is more than a species, it is a declaration of a kinship to some degree. Maybe that is even where the power might lie, only the hero would know I suppose.
And so I come back to the end. I don’t believe we would know, as a general public. I think that between the course of natural human development, and geopolitical environmental factors, would keep such a wondrous human achievement out of the spotlight. And if it was something inheritable, or even more frightening, teachable, then that person would be valuable in a whole different way. I shudder to think, what if we ALL could tell others’ lies, could read each others minds? Or the trait/ability was somehow distributed to the larger public, either by artificial means, or later evolution, what would our society be like then?
I personally hope that anyone who had that kind of power, would be like Buddha, or Jesus, or Mother Theresa. May probability favor us all if someone with a less Utopian lean were to gain it. I think the only option after that would be to give it to everyone. I also see it being distributed genetically as a means to fight a “Terminator”-like future state where machines and people are at war.
I am sure the detailed reasons and development variables could fill a book or a few comics at least, but I deeply question if there is any psychic abilities out there, that the general public would be privy to them. I just think that the incentive to stay hidden, and even slight exposure, or garnering the right friends, would just serve to keep it even more hidden. The competitive advantage of it being secret is just too great. The person would have to be of such high character, it would almost be a Clark Kent-ish caricature.

And so I give you another Dose of Andrew. Read it twice, and comment in the morning.

On This and That

Posted on by
1

I bet you don’t even think of how you use those words. I have met very few people who do. You use them all the time, in a correct way, but it is likely, as is the case with so many words, you wouldn’t be able to tell others how to do it correctly, only correct them when wrong. Have you thought about it? What the difference is? One of the definitions for each word, and I believe they are etymologically connected, involves a frame of distance from the person or observer. I would say it is the main thrust of each word’s other definitions also. “This” deals with that which is close. Either physically, or within your mind. “That” deals with things that are further from you, either physically or mentally. When you say, “This is mine and that is yours,” the mental images or definitions do not place whatever that is closer to you than whatever this is. In time, if you say, “that happened ‘x’ number of years from now/ago” you are not speaking of this happening right now. If you just say, “this was just last week” it immediately implies an issue close to you temporally also, that references the past. Even within mental constructs, like ideas, the issue of closeness delineates the usage. To illustrate this, I will talk about different aspects of feminism, and only use the words this and that (and of course content of phraseology)to show what I agree with and don’t  by showing what is “close” to me.

Feminism is naturally divided. The basic structure of it is based upon division. Multiplicity in my moral compass creates a struggle within to remain under the banner of “Feminism”. “Women have it harder than men.” I have heard it many times.That bothers me. I have seen many more women being given a free ride than men. Granted, they usually have to serve or service men to get it, but it is somewhat “free” nonetheless.Men have less opportunity like that, but we have the “Bro Code” that gives an inherent advantage and preference, as long as we adhere to this unwritten, and largely misunderstood code. And I will tell you, that is a recipe for disaster, encode something, then don’t write it down, or give it distinct parameters. honestly, It is something that a woman would likely do, which leads me to believe it was developed as a defensive weapon in the war of the sexes. More likely a “Chicken and  Egg” argument, and a casual observation anyway. I would say this is dead even except for one thing, the “slut” factor. Men generally have a flaw in their logic, a double standard when it comes to women, and that is sexual promiscuity. We want to have it, we want our women to know what they are doing, and we don’t want them to have slept with other men to have got the knowledge. I honestly hang my head in shame just writing out that lengthy hypocrisy. So we want there to be a few women that sleep with every guy, never marry, and somehow convey this knowledge to other women via some process that doesn’t involve other men…… Umm, that’s crazy. Men can control what they do sexually, and should have every legal defense when it comes to sobriety that a woman does. Before we can call ourselves equal, we need to accept the histories that make us men, and women, as something to progress from. Women should earn the same pay for the same job. Whether subconscious or with deliberate intent, there is an income gap, and sexual trysts and power plays aside, I believe it has a lot to do with my next issue. “Women need maternity leave, and men do not” This first part I completely agree with, while that last part I disagree with completely. Mothers need physical time to recover, and time to bond with their child. This is something I wholeheartedly agree with and support. fathers need time to help with both the physical demands of immediate childbirth while the mother is less physically capable, and to also bond with their child, something undervalued in today’s civilized world, by society, by fathers, and children themselves. I understand that single mothers will not have another person to help and may have a more difficult time. This is also normal, and all the more reason to continue to have a job when they are capable of returning to work afterward. As it is now, There is a massive disparity between Paternity and Maternity leave. It is even considered a man’s duty to not be around while the baby is little. Something I find both strange and archaic.

Does the usage of this and that illustrate the closeness? Or perhaps it is more appropriate to say it underscores the differences?

I hope I at least got you thinking in a way you havent ever, or at least in a long while. This isn’t an Enlightenment post to be sure, but merely one to get discussion going, even if only within my noggin’. Much ado about nothing, if you will. None of this post was meant to be overly political, or insightful.

But, if this causes bedlam, I guess call a fireman. Sometimes to pique interest, I act like an arsonist, and randomly tell a story in a way that’s deliberately inflammatory. I hope you get this far through, so you can see the rhyme I left for you, it is for those that do, that I give thanks, through and through.

P.S. – read this twice and email me in the morning. -Dr. A

Reestablishment of Prerogative

Posted on by
Reply

I started this blog to have a serious place to empty my mind. To show that I think of more than Social media chatter. I lost that. From anxiety about ideas going out that may go to the wrong place/people, to worries about actually emptying my mind, to generic apathy, I lost my concern for this blog. Not for the ideas, not for the passion to go do things, or speak up, but for the actual writing. Allow me to illuminate a dark secret: I do not like to write. Yep, I abhor the physical act of it, and the process of it tires me, and often bores me too. Typing gives me some help, but it is still a chore for me. I write precisely because it is a hard, tedious task for me. I have always heard poetry in the world around me, I hear rhythms (another secret: I can’t read or write music either) and intertwining harmonies of all sorts and kinds, but don’t have the tools to give the expression of them life. So, in order to not shirk that which is difficult, in order to bring greater richness and wealth to my own psyche and personal development, in order to hold myself to my own convictions and principles of finishing what I start even if neglected or partly forgotten, for the pure sake of doing it, I will be writing here more. My other blog gets more people, this one is more in line with my mentality. I also plan on making this a bit more proper. I do not do my due diligence on these and research at all times, I do not properly vet my own ideas and allow them the proper words, I just vomit them onto the screen and allow that to be OK. So to the few who do read this, you will begin to see more from me here, at minimum once per week. My life, my words, my ideas, my blog. Welcome to A Dose of Andrew, the Doctor is in.

Two sides of an eye

Posted on by
Reply

Flattery and deception aren’t the tools of humility
They’re the tools of cowardice and treachery
It’s good to know them and how they’re used
A love of using them shows signs of abuse
Not all things glittering are gold
Not all things unsaid are untold
Become what you behold in order to do right
Life experience, sleep with a demon for a night
Fight the good fight, even if you have to fight dirty
Fight for right with peace, openness, and honesty

Dear Jon

Posted on by
Reply

Dear Jon,

Is this what you call goodbye?

I mean, it seems like only last century you said hi

and I never would have envisioned

how much you helped with my Indecision

and like the holiday tree mission

you’ve become a bit of a family tradition

Come on man

none of this was planned

think of the kids

your unborn fans

I never had a problem with your infidelity

even that one affair with, what’s his name, Stevie?

It really was those daily doses

you’d show us of those calling farts roses

and I always looked forward

to your indecent exposures

every evening when we got cozy

I’m not mad

just a little sad

I hope you’re happy

I’ll pretend to be glad

but if this must be the end I will dry my eyes

I’ll keep my chin up,and the pain inside

if for everything there is a season

and even this has a reason

and all of the hope that you’re teasin’

to avoid the pain of you leavin’

don’t you give a damn?

I’m sorry, I hope you understand

It’s just that, well

We fucking love you man!

A Matter of Choice

Posted on by
2

Choice. It seems so simple. In this particular case, I am referring to the choice to give birth or not. It should be a simple thing, only women can do it, only women should be able to decide. It rarely ends up that way though. Take myself, if I had the choice, I would say that every woman under the age of 18 should have a mandatory abortion… but I will come back to that. I want to speak to some of the other views that irritate me. If there is one thing i will stand up for it is choice, so lets spend a minute defining that.

Choice. There are a few definitions in online and print dictionaries, the one I will focus on, mostly because the other pertinent ones are able to be encapsulated by this focus, is this one from Merriam-Webster, whose wording I personally like: Choice: the opportunity or power to choose between two or more possibilities : the opportunity or power to make a decision (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/choice) A poignant choice of words (pun intended). The Opportunity or Power… very specific. There’s an inherent nowness to those words. A prescience of presentness if you will. To mince words, and get into semantics a bit, any way you want to push the definitions (check the websites and print, this applies to all numbered definitions as far as I can tell) in order to make it about a future choice, you have to put a modifier on the word, like I just did. That is blatant implication of immediate present within the very word, and since words describe concepts, an inherent immediacy to the concept of choice, of choosing. A future choice is not completely foreseeable, and unmakeable. A past choice is unchangeable, so the present is the ONLY choice possibility. And therefore the power of choice rests in the right now. This may seem to be redundant, or unnecessary, but to establish that choice is a determination of the future that lies with the immediate present is important. Now then, since we have established that with a certain amount of reasonability, I will move on to the next part of my ranting.

The very definition I used for choice implies a sort of consciousness, a minimum awareness of external circumstances and the separation of them from self. This is a minimum amount of awareness necessary to even establish the concept of self. That may be a bit esoteric for some people, so let me rephrase. In order to even establish the idea of self, yourself, or someone/thing else as self,  you must first be able to establish the thought process and idea of separation. The distinction of this from that, if you will. We often use those words without thought, and we instinctively know when one sounds wrong, but when pressed, I bet most people would be unable to provide a reasoning as to when and why you would use one instead of the other. Try it, try to explain in just words, no examples, of when you would use this instead of that, and vice versa. More difficult than it seems, yes? But yet you can do it instinctively, and you know that there is a separation between the two, even if you cant describe it. This is an example of that distinction. An inherent separation of 2 or more unitary ideas. The power of choice rests in separating self from the actions, in order to to have that opportunity, there must be enough consciousness to at least comprehend that  distinction, and I will state that it is the minimum necessary awareness for consciousness itself. The ability to determine the separation of self from all that is not-self. I believe, in a minimalist way, this is the definition of self-awareness. Anything without this has neither opportunity, nor power of choice. The privilege of choice is a different story, one of power and circumstance, but the definition of choice allows for any person/animal/thing that has such awareness the power of choice, and nature constantly provides opportunity. I will briefly mention that the constancy of choice is what gives rise to time, and is inherent to self-awareness. but that intertwining circular definition of time and choice is for another ranting, one which hits more upon Godel and the idea that no self-referencing system can be free of paradox. For now, I will stay with this definition, and leave the more metaphysical definition for the after-arguments. Right now, the minimum requirement for the power and opportunity of choice is that awareness of separation between self and all else. This is an important distinction, an instinctive awareness is good enough.

Choice, back to the heart of the matter. When making choices for other sentient beings that also have the ability to choose, the being taking that away is depriving the other of liberty, freedom, and they are reducing the sentience and consciousness of the being that is deprived to one of lesser status, an arbitrary and arguable reduction at best. When people do it to animals, we do it as a matter of conscience in order to feel better about the (arguable) necessity of killing other sentient animals for food or in order to usurp common living areas for only people to live in. This allows us to make a distinction between murder, and simple killing. Make no mistake, this is the only distinction, any argument other than this is a semantic one, a prettying up of the concepts. Structured choice produces similar reactions in all organisms, and we can easily group them as such, but in order to alleviate a moralistic inequality, we make a distinction between us and them. Now we get to the current political issue of choice in giving birth, the subject I opened this with.

I said at the beginning that i believed that every woman under the age of 18 should have mandatory abortions when impregnated. I hope that produces reflexive anger in people. I truly believe that is the responsible course of action given world population, natural resource use, and the psychological maturity of the majority of teenage girls who have the physical ability to give birth, but don’t have the mental development to properly give a child a sense of responsibility in the world. However, I do not believe I have the right to take away the inherent power of choice from the women who would, or would not, give birth. Their inherent right to make that decision is not something I can arbitrarily take away, nor can any society that makes claims to liberty, freedom and individualism. The right to choose is not given to the baby that is yet-to-be-born. Our previous definition of awareness precludes it. The pre-born (a term right-to-life folks use to give a sense of impending life, but I like it for different reason I will show in a moment) have not had the opportunity to establish a separation of self from environment. That precludes them from having the power or opportunity for choice, by previous definitions. They are pre-born, and therefore pre-aware, and pre-life, which places them, by any non-hypocritical definition, at a lower state of awareness and therefore right of choice, to even our animal friends that we routinely slaughter. An egg is pre-born, sperm is pre-born, DNA fragments floating waiting to be inserted into a cell is all pre-born. If that is the term, then pre-born is pre-life,  and has no rights at all. A rock has no rights, the basic chemical building blocks of life are all pre-born, and they have no rights, so without any non-arbitrary temporal distinction, pre-born is pre-life and pre-rights. Parents routinely make decisions for their children, and to take that right away from them is contrary to all belief systems that advocate for parental rights. A person has the power and privilege of making choices, but they cannot escape the consequences and responsibilities of those choices. A woman who makes the choice to give birth should do so knowing that she will have to take the responsibility of that child on herself, alone. A man cannot be involved in the personal decision to carry the child, and therefore should not be required to be responsible for the consequences of said decision personally. Society in general is by its nature, but individual males should not be making the decision to carry children to term, and also should be absolved of responsibility of the burden by legal requirement. That is a hypocrisy and laziness of the society requiring it. While I make no statement here about a moral obligation by a societal convention or paradigm, it should not be a legal requirement in a society that claims individual opportunity, liberty, freedom and responsibility. A man has no business telling a woman what to do with her body, and she has no business telling a man that he has to be responsible for her decisions, nor should the courts or other legal bodies. Her decision, her responsibility, her liberty and freedom. To take that right away is to reduce the consciousness of a woman to that of something lesser than man, and on a level with young children, and even animals. Every woman who believes she has the same rights as a man, and every man who believes that too, and that women are capable, intelligent, responsible, independent beings with the ability to reason, interact, and contribute meaningfully to society in a manner that is anything other than a lesser role to men should be standing behind this.

i intentionally left out medical definitions of life, or humanity, or even a breakdown of a development of consciousness. that was done beautifully by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan in the book Billions and Billions. (Also in Parade magazine) Rather than plagiarize or redo their outstanding work, I will just reference it here. For me, it is a simple matter: the rights of the actuality override the rights of the potentiality, so the right of a woman to choose, overrides the right of the pre-born. Period. I quite honestly do not believe in the existence of rights for non-viable pre-born, and have limited belief in the rights of viable fetuses prior to actual natural delivery. i understand this personal belief is contradicted by medical interference and practice, and many fetuses have become living people with modern medical intervention and assistance. For me, this is a compromise, and my conservative nature allows this as a compromise, knowing that to do otherwise would then be legislating religious belief, which I am against as a proud American.

Choice. It’s a requirement for sentience, consciousness, and for a fetus to go from pre-born, to fully born, or to go from being pre-born to fully un-born. It is also required to give women the inherent rights they deserve: to be fully equal, independent and capable human beings with all the same rights and responsibilities as men in a free society.

Two Kinds of Romance

Posted on by
4

A Tale of Two Romances
I am going to attempt to illustrate differences in my ideas of romance by using two movies. They are both classic romances, though one garnered a much larger audience, especially among women. I am afraid it both illustrates my point, and underscores my fears. The two movies I will refer to are The Notebook and Notting Hill. I like both movies, and the stories, but one actually doesn’t fit my idea of a good romance, and the other seems a more realistic story.
First, The Notebook. While I like the movie, and the end scene is a tear-jerker, it seems to push a very materialistic view on romance. I am not against having things, for even the most Spartan-living survivalist will use modern tools, and sharing in a small part of the modern economy is a necessity in modern times. What I refer to is the unhealthy obsession with the leading lady in the story by the main man. She snubs him, she leaves him when he is poor and gone for another man with material wealth, and tells him he needs to get some, and finally comes back to him when he does acquire the equivalent of a small modern fortune. This is nearly incomprehensible to me. If this were to actually happen, the woman would be labeled a gold-digger (rightfully so) and the man would be borderline stalker. This seems to fly in the face of almost every single romance story except one: The that appeal to both sexes are the kind where the woman is there, loyal and loving to the man, who is loyal and hardworking. Modern ones may even have both the man and woman working hard, earning their own fortunes. Not this one, or this kind. This is the strange love kind, that so many women admire, and look for. Quite honestly, I think the leading lady character in this movie is laazy, and not worth his efforts. The undying love he has, and the depth to which he holds it, to the point of not living anymore without his love, is quite sweet, and the saving grace, so much so that you forget the crap she put him through because of her character flaws. Maybe it is just the kind of guy I am, but I prefer the stronger flavor of woman, as I heard it put once, I prefer the kind of woman you want to keep, over a kept woman. Which brings me to the story in the next movie, and its type.
Notting Hill is one of my favorite Romance movies. I have a few, as I am a sappy kind of guy who likes rom-coms (shh, tell noone) and watches new ones often. But more importantly for this piece is the two characters, and their differences to The Notebook characters. The main man in this one is a small business owner, not wealthy, but rich in character and friends. The leading lady is a wealthy and famous actress. It seems to be a reverse Princess story with a twist: the man declines the wealth, determined to protect himself from the trappings of fame and the wishy-washy nature of the lady’s business and life. This is a huge difference right here. He is protecting himself in a very special way, trying not to hurt the lady, while still telling her that he loves her enough to stay away. This is after he spent a year (beautifully shown with a single walk through seasons) pining and depressingly meandering through life wanting her. It sheds the materialism for more depth of relations. From the family interactions, to the tongue-in-cheek humor, to the hilarious go-for-broke ending where he luckily hasn’t destroyed his chances with the lady he obviously loves, and she shows him it was real too. This disrobing of the societal wardrobe to emphasize the everyday people beneath is more poignant to me. Her ability to be real despite her cultural status, and his ability to not be fazed by it underscores the main point of both movies despite the character differences: that two people who cannot stand to be without one another are usually happy with each other, and in love. The Notebook does it with two borderline sociopaths, while Notting Hill does it with two people in different socioeconomic statuses. The message is quite similar, but the circumstances are not.
I suppose that is part of the point. I watch and see the craziness of the first, and sigh wistfully at the second. I call it crazy for the first because I have made that mistake, and I know that I have difficulty respecting a woman that brings down feminism in my eyes. I am wistful of the second not because of the fame and fortune, but because finding a woman who is able to work hard, and still shed herself of that to believe in romance in a jaded world is difficult, a rarity in these times. The disparity of the two just emphasizes the character needed to do such a thing. Maybe it wouldn’t happen in today’s world, maybe it does. I have seen a few celebrity couples that seem to fit the mold, and give me such happiness to see, and I wish them well (J Lo & ARod). Perhaps the rarity of this is why I am still single and have never married. I am searching for such a rarity that I may never find her, perhaps I can’t extend my social network far enough to find that diamond in the rough, or even polished. After all, we watch these celebrities to give a template to our own ideas of romance and love, so we can better recognize them when they happen. I know I have had enough of crazy, I guess I am just looking for that woman who is able to stand in front of me, and just be a girl, standing in front of a guy, asking him to love her.

I just want to be loved, is that so wrong?

-A Dose of Andrew

A Great Article

Posted on by
1

Well worth a read to help anyone understand relativity
http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/why-is-the-speed-of-light-unattainable-for-massive-objects/

Healthcare Reform

Posted on by
Reply

I am only going to make this short, as there is so many sites and others writing about this, it is easier and more efficient to post links and give an overview than to regurgitate all of the information. Mostly, I am going to push my opinion: the Affordable Care Act is a good thing. Here is why: It allows every citizen to be covered by health insurance, it stimulates economic growth by requiring private industry coverage, it makes it possible for people with little income to not have to forego healthcare because of economic hardship, like someone with Cancer or another devastating disease foregoing healthcare in order to pay rent or something like that, and it does something else that is very, very important; it makes us all financially invested in each others health. My tax dollars go toward healthcare, so everyone should take better care of themselves. In my opinion, it is not coincidental that the Farmer’s Assurance Provision (monsanto protection act – colloquially) is on the same budget that funds the Affordable Care Act. Keeping large corporate farms from being held legally liable for the things they are able to legally own, like DNA, while every citizen becomes financially invested in health is an interesting play. To my eyes it would mean that any large organization that engages in practices and/or business that harms the collective health, or has the distinct potential to do so now has a direct financial reasoning to be legally pursued: the public interest. If money is equivalent to speech, then every citizen speaks with their taxes and premiums that they most definitely want the health of the public to never be infringed upon by anyone, private or public. The ACA gives a fiduciary reasoning for legal action collectively. Also, it does invade a little bit of privacy, even though the coverage is privately provided, YOUR health is almost literally MY business. That has implications also.

For private industry, especially the fitness industry, it means a plethora of business opportunity. Healthy living is now federally supported, and it is supported by monthly premiums that people pay, and yearly taxes. If you don’t understand what that means, perhaps you may take this advice, and the insurance companies also: personal trainers, especially the people who are nationally or at least widely known, get your brokers license. Maybe as time goes on, the insurance companies will provide a specific license just for health insurance, but just think about getting a commission on every member who makes a commitment and sign up with you. That is only the beginning of what could be a beautiful partnership between insurance, and fitness, not just hospitals and doctors. Preventative and maintenance health will be a massive subsidiary to this reform. In 2015, when businesses must provide coverage, partnering with small business will be an excellent way to garner loyal following, as well as stable customer base, all while decreasing the overall public cost. It is a profitable business model, and one i believe, and hope, will be adopted in the next few years, the first people who can get it done, and get it done right will enjoy quite a head start.

That wraps up my short post, mostly an opinion piece, so here are some links for the facts:

League of Women Voters: http://leaguelafayette.org/files/aca_mythsfacts120820.pdf

FactCheck.org: http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/obamacare-myths/

Veterans Administration: http://www.va.gov/health/aca/Fact-Sheet.asp

AARP: http://www.aarp.org/health/health-care-reform/health_reform_factsheets/

Health and Human Services website, lots of related pages and posts here: http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/bystate/statebystate.html

HHS with a state by state view: http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/bystate/statebystate.html

an Obamacare site that is quite level-headed about the whole thing: http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-myths.php

Fit Doesn’t Quit

Posted on by
1

adapted from a rough draft submitted to www.ThisFitsMe.com

Where Fitness Starts
Everybody starts somewhere. Being, or becoming, fit is no exception. Sure some people are born with a natural athleticism, but if they don’t watch it, or take advantage of it, they will get big and soft just like most everyone else. Understand that fitness is also a journey, and like any other journey, it really starts in your mind.
Let me back up just a minute. First, I am not a certified personal trainer, sports therapist, kenesiologist, or any sort of fitness guru. If I am certified in anything, it is being a normal guy who has struggled with fitness and his weight his whole life. So, maybe I am just like you. Here is one thing that might make me different: I have been through some pretty major injuries. I have literally spent years just being able to walk again… twice. Yep, I couldn’t walk, and had to rehabilitate twice. I am still currently rehabilitating. You may be thinking, “Yeah, but that is a good reason to exercise, I don’t have that.” And if you are, you have never had a major injury like that. I can tell you, it is HARD to get up and keep walking those extra steps when every little bone and piece that was screwed back together hurts. You just want to quit and let it stop hurting, just for a minute. I don’t like having it taken from me. You may take being able to walk for granted, but have it taken from you just once, and you never will again. I knew in my heart that walking again was in my power, and all I had to do was not quit. That is the big secret. That is what brings me to what I am writing about here. When you start your journey, you should be mentally prepared for what is coming, and for the journey to not end.
You read that right, I said not end. Fitness isn’t a goal, those should keep changing. Fitness is the journey, it is process. When you are rockin’ the pants or dress you only dreamed of, or when you are just starting out, you will have to look in the mirror and motivate yourself just the same. You have to understand that. Results happen after you have already motivated yourself. There are tons of sites, people, and resources for finding out some “secret” to losing weight, getting fit, and rockin’ your body. But the real secret is this: You have to want it. Bad. You have to know that you are going to make promises to yourself that you will keep, and some you will not keep. You have to love yourself enough to do this. You have to look in that mirror and know that you will make mistakes, sometimes falter, and it won’t stop you from going forward and continuing on your journey. When you set that alarm 30 minutes earlier just so you can get 20 minutes of stretching and movement in before you eat anything, you have to know this. When you cook the chicken breasts with only mustard, or hot sauce, or some lime juice and chili powder on them, and only have vegetables with them and worry about your tummy growling later, you have to know this. When you splurge and eat that ice cream, or spoonful of Nutella, or 2nd piece of pizza, you have to know that it is a journey, you will not stop, and little stumbles are a part of living, and you aren’t going to give up. You are changing yourself, the habits that got you where you are aren’t going to go quietly! They are a part of you too, and if you find yourself struggling with them, just remember they are tough, but you made them, and you can break them because no habit is tougher than than person who made them. Think on that for a moment. You are tougher than your habits. Believe that, and live it.
There are a lot of little changes anyone can make on their fitness journey, eating habits, exercise habits and so forth. But the most important one is getting that muscle between your ears in shape. Want it. Believe in yourself. It isn’t easy, few things worth doing ever are, but it is simple. There is a difference. If you don’t understand that difference, let me illustrate, becoming a parent is simple, being a parent is far from easy. That is why starting out with simple changes is important. Things like waking up a little earlier and doing some activity, cutting out as much sugar from your diet as you can, cutting most butter and fatty dressings from your diet, cutting out fried and fast food. Notice the ratio there? 25% activity, 75% diet. Simple, not easy. This is how it works, as you get more fit, your goals change, but the basics never do. Forgive yourself the occasional indulgence, you are still living life! But realize that they are little things, do not let them become habits again! Dance for 20 minutes to your favorite 5 songs before you let yourself watch TV, hell, sing along and have fun! There are so many things you can do, but I have one mantra that has helped me so many times:
Being fit means you never quit.
It even rhymes so you can keep it in mind. Maybe you will discount what I say because there aren’t a bunch of letters after my name, I used too much italics to emphasize, and that’s okay, I understand, this article wasn’t for you. But if you have struggles, if you find yourself splurging for one meal, and it turns into 3 days of overeating, then maybe you can understand. Use those indulgences to reinvigorate yourself. When you stumble, look at the ground, curse it for making falling hurt, thank it for teaching you the lesson, then get back up. You can always start over, keep your mind strong by allowing setbacks to never become failures. And whatever you do, don’t quit!
-AB