A lot of psychological research is behind the current system.  It isn’t just a coincidence that almost everyone is having personal financial issues when such issues weren’t common in yesteryear.  The current system has normalized debt so it doesn’t turn people off like it used to, and has made it far too easily accessible to most people.  Likewise, the consummate consumerist society we live in has resulted in the masses (especially newer generations who have known nothing else) engaging in constant one-upmanship, feeling they can’t live without the latest toys, competing for the most/best stuff, worrying what others will think if they don’t have the same things, etc.  None of this mattered nearly as much (it always mattered a little) in the past.

It’s a perfect equation for those at the top of the corporate ladder (and their politico bedmates).  Unnecessary but attractive wants + easily accessible destigmatized debt = a financially enslaved population.  Why wait for people to save money so they can buy your product when you can loan them the money instead, and collect even more money as they pay it back?

It seems a lot of people don’t recognize these psychological underpinnings of the current system.  Whether people want to admit it or not, humans can be easily conditioned, especially when it’s indirect conditioning.  Neuroscience proves it.  The desire for things we really don’t need and which really don’t make our lives any better after the initial honeymoon period has been conditioned into us through advertising and media.  We are so technologically connected nowadays that it’s hard to escape those forces.  And the fact that it’s been this way for decades now does not help.

So the answer, if you don’t want to become a Luddite, is to consciously reject the desires the system is ingraining in you.  Start looking at advertizing for what it really is – a ploy to get you to buy a product, whether you need it or not.  Understand that the mainstream media is controlled by those who benefit most from the current system, and thus their stories and reporting are at least somewhat biased by it.  Stop and really consider what you need or really desire for your life, and act based on that.  Think of the long term consequences of relying too much on debt, and/or spending beyond your means (even without debt, failing to save for the future is a problem).

Beyond that, take a further step back and look at what is important to you in life – really important, not what you do to appease/compete with others.  For most people, time spent with loved ones, meaningful (or at least somewhat enjoyable) work, pastimes that enrich your life, and a particular few luxuries are what their desires boil down to.  Everything else isn’t really necessary and is only sustaining the broken system we have in place.  The first three really can’t be bought, though obviously some costs are involved, depending on how you spend time with loved ones, what type of work you do, and what your hobbies are.  As for the luxuries – they are far more satisfying when you have to save for them and delay gratification; the anticipation involved in having to wait and the effort required in having to work for them make them all the more appreciated when they finally are achieved.

I find it funny that many understand the point of delayed gratification when it comes to sex, and how much better it is when one avoids it (intentionally or circumstantially) for awhile, or even when one delays orgasm as long as possible.  Yet these same people cannot see the parallel in our financial lives.  Perhaps it’s simply because the powers that be have not focused as much on sex, other than to use it as a marketing ploy.  Or maybe people are just less easily influenced by such powers when it comes to sex.  Or maybe fewer people understand delayed sexual gratification than I realize.

Regardless, we currently need both political & socioeconomic shifts to deal with the problems, but also a shift in individuals’ consciousnesses to extricate themselves from the current system as much as possible and determine what they really need to have a good life.  Many won’t fully be able to determine such needs until they have tried living more meagerly and/or without relying on debt (as much as possible) for awhile.  I suppose therein lies the rub.  We’ve gotten so used to instant gratification in our lives that it can be a very difficult task to learn to delay gratification.  But it is well worth it.

I’m not sure what the solution is, how you get the masses to take a step back and really consider how they’re living their lives and whether they’re on the path they want to be on.  For many it’s painful to think about how far off their desired path they are, and what it will take to get back to it.  But to ignore it and roll along with the status quo is far more damaging in the long run, and far more likely to lead to regrets in our later years as we approach our individual ends.

But as it went on… ugh, it’s just nauseating.  Not only do I find people are even MORE shallow online now (which is irritating, because I sense in the beginning, before there were many dating sites, people cared more about finding kindred souls online… but maybe that’s a myth; I never tried it til I was 27), but I find that the dating sites also end up making ME more shallow, which makes me irritated with myself.  Often there are just SOOOOOOOO many people on there, you have to filter somewhat to get a handle on it — and often the easiest things to filter on (website-design-wise) are the trivial superficial things that really don’t matter to me in real life.  But with no sense of chemistry, and knowing that not all of it is truthful…

The last guy I dated from an online site I went out with three times — and as much as being rejected/dismissed out of hand suck it majorly, it actually bothered me MUCH more (to the point of tears) that I could tell the guy REALLY liked me, but I found him somewhat dull and not engaging.  I stuck it out for three dates in the hopes that he’d have a chance to relax and I may find him more interesting, but while he did seem comfortable enough by the end of the second date (I conversed fairly easily, since I wasn’t all that interested, and so we talked A LOT), he just didn’t get much more interesting (to me anyway).  In the end, I just knew I wasn’t that interested in him, something wasn’t clicking, despite him being a really nice, responsible guy with some shared interests of mine.  I figured it would be worse to lead him on with more dates when I had no real interest in him, but could tell he was hurt when I confessed I wasn’t interested — because it’s hard for dating rejections not to be taken personally.  But oh did I cry that night when I got home, I felt like such a jerk.

That distressed me so much that I stepped back and really looked at what I was doing.  All online dating (or fix-ups, or whatever) can do is increase the number of people you meet — but then it seems you have to try so hard to market yourself, which is even more difficult to do without lying if you’re deemed “deficient” in the superficial stuff by our culture (ie. my size)… and even when you do find a few to meet, you have to go through the awkward “interview” process, and then if one likes the other more than vice versa, hurt feelings are inevitable…

I just started to think of all the time & effort that would have to be put into such a dating system to meet someone I even remotely clicked with (inasmuch as wanting a relationship with them), and figured I have other things I’m far more passionate about that don’t make me feel bad, rejector or rejectee, that I’d rather spend that time on.  And after reading an article about some survey that found that the average online dater will meet ~30 people face-to-face before they find someone they’re willing to date (not even long-term, just willing to date beyond the first few dates), and knowing I’m far weirder and probably pickier personality-wise than most since I’m not looking to “settle down” to get married/have kids… I figured I was probably looking at more like 50-100 guys, assuming I could find that many to even meet me face-to-face.

(Funny aside — I did the eChemistry site’s EXCESSIVE >200 question quiz, and it told me I was compatible with 1 out of every 125 guys… and that it had no matches for me, haha… what a waste of time.)

The article about online dating was actually advocating using multiple dating sites and going out practically every night of the week and really “working at it” — UGH!  No thanks, my self-esteem’s either too fragile or far too important to me to put myself through that.  And being an introvert, I find meeting new people (too many/too often) very tiring and somewhat unsettling.

I’ve never had a serious relationship nor fallen in love, and I would very much like to find both someday, but the current dating culture is just not the way to find someone I really connect with… unless I want to spend all my free time for YEARS sifting through profiles and going on date after date after date after date in an endless search, all the while stressing myself out for going against my natural introverted tendencies.  And even then, I may end up having to to choose between staying single and hooking up with someone I’m just not that into (a recipe for disaster).  I’d most definitely choose the former, and then I’d be kicking myself for spending SOOO much of my precious free time on that rather than taking classes, pursuing hobbies, volunteering, etc.

So I quit.  Now I’m just letting life happen and trying to forget about finding anyone, and if I happen to stumble upon someone someday that I really feel a connection with (happens once in a blue moon, but they’re invariably attached, so not an option), then I’ll go from there.  I just have had to accept that some things in life you just can’t force — people can go out and find companionship and someone to share a life with, but real chemistry and love are far more random.  I suspect many are eventually OK settling for the former (because they want the conventional life) after giving up on the latter.  I’d rather hold onto the possibility for the latter, and accept that there’s a good possibility I’ll end up single forever because of it.  Far better single than in an unhappy/unfulfilling relationship (since I wouldn’t stay in such a situation anyway).

Though I still hold onto a tiny bit of hope that my luck may change someday and I’ll find that random intense connection that they write the songs and stories about.  A romantic, through-and-through. 

i found the initial disjointedness of the home page a little “argh!” for my inherent orderly-lovingness, haha, but i checked it out… searched for “agnosticism” for kicks…

thanks for indirectly making me angry this morn, danno.  ;D  maybe i’ll check out a diff topic there next time, haha…

Yep, the whole “agnostics are just cowardly atheists who are afraid of admitting it because of what others may think” idea prevalent in most of the reddit threads on this topic (& linked articles) REALLY REALLY irked me.  Like I’ve ever been afraid to debate and explain my beliefs to others, regardless of their stance.  Why are people so ignorant as to not actually ASK people why they hold such beliefs before they choose to judge them or assume they know why?

<sigh>  Atheists who believe all agnostics are just cowardly atheists can go to hell.  (even if they don’t believe in it, haha)

[This is a response to reading Hesse's Narziss and Goldmund, in which he presents the idea of Death as a mother with open arms, not a judge or condemner, but rather one who sent us off to Life for a brief visit, to enjoy and tell her tales when we return.]

And so I turned to solitude to be free of such worries, such hurtful comments and behaviours, to rest and restore in the absence of those damaging influences.

I cannot say this has changed much in my adult years, other than that I now possess a greater intellect and understanding of the world and people… which have only made me more aware of how unjust life can be, how truly hateful some people are, and how most others’ opinions and judgments are ill-informed, insensitive and inconsiderate, and yet clung to by their purveyors as though they were sustenance for life itself.  I do not know, maybe they are for so many people — maybe the only way they can feel good about themselves is to criticize others, to put others down, to raise themselves up on the carcasses of others’ self-esteem and dreams.  Maybe they cling to their ignorance because they don’t have the insight and humility to question whether they may be wrong, to learn the other side and reevaluate their positions, because they need to hold to such black and white views in order to make sense of the world, a world that, in truth, is painted only in shades of grey.  Most people cannot handle — let alone see the use in , the beauty in — uncertainty.

This is also likely why I love animals so — they are similar to humans in that we all belong to the animal kingdom, but they lack the ignorant judgments and egos masquerading as intelligence.  With an animal, a pet, one can have companionship for comfort, and all that matters is a mutual benevolent attitude, loving gestures, a shared reverence for nature.  They do not aim to hurt unless they feel threatened on a survival level, and even then do so only out of instinct.  And yet humans think themselves so grand.

I am realizing more and more of late that it is unlikely that I will ever find a truly kindred spirit in my lifetime.  I treasure the works of Hermann Hesse because he seemed to understand, to share the same frustrations with himself and mankind, to take the same pleasure and comfort in nature and solitude and art.  But a live human of this sort?  When I will only meet a minute fraction of the world’s 6.6 billion people?  It seems as though such kindred spirits are themselves a minute fraction of the human population, and so, by simple probabilities, how likely is it that I will meet one ever, let alone anytime soon?

Some would say it is best to just learn to accept others for who they are, for all their faults, but when these faults so often damage others’ psyches, how can I ever love being around them?  Sometimes it seems the only way to preserve my soul and limit the damage others cause to my spirit is to isolate myself from human contact, as much as I realistically can… because I do not know how I can make myself less sensitive to their barbs and inconsiderate words and actions — nor am I even sure that I want to make myself insensitive, as I may end up becoming them and thus cause others pain.

And so I am single, with no truly close friends, no confidants, and will likely remain this way for a long time yet, since I cannot resolve my inner being with the nature of most people I have encountered thus far in life.

I’m guessing not many.  I realize that thinking about things realistically, deeply, can lead to depression and a sense of frustrated helplessness given the state of the world.  But isn’t choosing not to think about these things just running away from your problems?  Shouldn’t we all choose to “man up” and face our problems?  And the first step in fixing things is THINKING about them, realizing there is a problem, pondering possible fixes, and discussing them.

I think that, especially as we get older and busier with life, it’s easier to just turn a blind eye to what’s wrong with the world.  There’s so much going on in life that we’re just tired, and don’t want to become depressed and more tired by focusing on our problems and trying to find real solutions.  So we turn to entertainment.  It has its place, but at this point it’s no different than turning to drugs or alcohol to avoid dealing with your personal problems.

I’m stuck in the same rut as pretty much everyone else; I do understand the human motivations behind ignoring these things.  But haven’t you ever tried to ignore a personal issue, possibly turned to substances (or entertainment) to forget about it, and it works for awhile, but months/years later you’re still in the same damned spot with it?  So those of us who are responsible will sooner or later choose to face it head-on and find a way to deal with it, and ideally fix it (or at least come to terms with it).

Why are societal/world problems any different?  I guess because unlike personal problems, there’s that sense of “it’s too big for me, I can’t fix it myself”.  But if everyone chooses to capitulate, then all remains the same, degenerates further… Everyone should instead change their mindset to not surrender to hopelessness and apathy, and then the masses may care, and would have the power to do something.

Food for thought.

“The opiate of the masses”; indeed, that is what it has become.  It makes me somewhat sad… it had so much potential to change the world.  OK, I guess in a way it did – in a depressing, bastardized way.

It has such ability to reach people – whether you’re illiterate, or deaf, or too busy to read the paper, etc.  It can disseminate information like no other medium.  It brings to us images of worlds, ideas, too distant to reach us otherwise, or at least not with the same power.  I recall reading a neuroscience article noting that the more senses you engage while doing something, the more you can integrate it into your thinking or memory.  TV already covers sight and sound, and as we are such visual creatures (is it 40% of our frontal cortex that’s devoted to visual processing?), it is a very powerful medium.

But what is it primarily used for?  Entertainment.  The news too, to an extent, though increasingly that leans toward entertainment or propaganda more than information.  (I guess one could argue that given that a lot of serious “news” isn’t practically applicable information, it is merely another form of entertainment anyway – but anything that serves to connect us more to each other and the world beyond isn’t merely entertainment.)  But how many dumb-ass sitcoms or reality shows or whatnot can you think of off the top of your head?  Documentaries and learning programs redeem this grand invention to an extent, but they’re scant in a sea of fluff.

I wonder if Zworykin or Farnsworth (the two most often credited with the invention of the TV) ever saw it being used primarily for entertainment.  When the first TV stations went on the air, did they imagine this medium’s future?

Obviously there is a place for both information and entertainment in our lives.  But it just seems to me that TV largely favours and encourages the pursuit of the latter.  (The same could be said of the internet.)   To the detriment of our society, our world, now more than ever.

I guess in the end it isn’t so much what TV has become; it is merely a reflection of what our cultural priorities have become.  Maybe that is what really disheartens me about the medium.

I have intense emotions – I don’t feel happy, sad, or angry; I’m more prone to be excited/laughing, depressed, or rageful.  (Though I do manage to control the rage… control the rage… CONTROL THE RAGE!  hahahaha)  Perhaps that’s why sometimes I wonder if I’m mildly bipolar, like cyclothymic; I do have a few bipolar cousins… (Though I cycle up & down too fast to fit the DSM-IV definition of cyclothymia.)  Even my looks are intense to an extent – the red hair, the deep-set piercing eyes, the super pale skin, the excessive curves, etc.  Even my voice is naturally loud, which is kind of funny, considering when I was younger I mumbled so much that no one knew what I was saying.

And aside from the inherent intensity, I am a lover of intensity.  I like intense ideas, intense conversations, intense experiences – perhaps that’s why I dabbled in ecstasy in the past, and still enjoy the more “natural” highs.  I love intense flavours – spicy, sour (I love lemons), tangy, etc.  I love intensely complicated television shows & movies, intense music (the kind that just reaches into you and rips the emotions out), intense reads (I’m heavy into the philosophy).  “The road of excess leads to the palace of knowledge.”  Thank you William Blake, I agree.

I wasn’t sure how to take it when someone first called me intense – we were doing mushrooms, I got off on a rant about the fashion industry and its effects on women, and the response was “wow,  you’re intense”.  I know she didn’t mean it as an insult.  And quite frankly, now I take it as a compliment.  Because there’s nothing sadder to me than the idea of being mundane, low-key, watered-down, “normal”.  I’m not even sure if I’m capable of that, come to think of it – it’d take some major self-restraint.  Life is meant to be lived to the fullest, and a life lived intensely – happy or sad – is a memorable one.

Intensity is my destiny.  (Hmmm, I like that… could almost make it a tattoo.)

So if we think of reality as subjective, then self-confidence becomes easier to those of us who may not have been naturally inclined to have it (or have had it “nurtured” out of us… in the nature/nurture sense.)  But if we determine our own reality, then it shouldn’t be difficult to have self-confidence.  Who is someone else to tell us that we’re less-than, unattractive, etc?  They are merely an entity in our version of reality and we choose how much impact their opinions have on us.

Now, obviously, given the previous reference to the mentally ill, you may think that this is a recipe for psychosis, or antisocial behaviour.  But the reality (haha) is that most of us just aren’t wired that way, and those that are will be, regardless of whether they recognize this subjective nature of reality or not.

Eleanor Roosevelt said “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent”, and she was bang-on.  Our confidence lies solely in ourselves and nowhere else.  It is only an illusion that it is dependent on what others think of us, what our life circumstances are, or what our heredity may be.  Sit back and observe enough people in life (which I did a lot, especially when I was younger and much quieter and even more solitary) and you’ll realize that regardless of their circumstances, treatment, and appearances, some people exude confidence whereas others in similar positions smack of low self-esteem.

It’s all in our mindset.  ‘Course, maybe that belief is due to my own version of reality.  ;D