Being "Real"

"At least I don't care what these god damn mindless people think of me" - Dutch Courage, The Spill Canvas -

Single. Again.
Yet, this time it is different. I learned a few things this time around - a few things that I am proud to have learned or discovered.

1. I am a real person. I genuinely am interested in and care for other people, and that's where most of my troubles starts actually - I do it at the expense of caring for myself (at times). I am not interested in what they may think of me, nor do I do it so that will "like" me. I just want to be there for being there - simply because I am happy to be there for someone else. Yes, it may be because I know the pain of not knowing someone be there for me. Yet, knowing that pain has provided me with an insight that others suffer too; if I am capable of providing them with any form of assistance in alleviating their own suffering, then I would like to know that I am able to do it.
2. I am a real person. I have come to learn that being real for myself does not mean I have to make it necessarily known to the next person. I simply have to be myself and allow the other person time to come and see it for themselves. It is not my intention to make people perceive me one way or another. It's more important for me to just be comfortable with myself and accept that I have no control over the perceptions of the other. As long as I am happy with my choices and the results of the decisions I make, it does not matter necessarily what another person thinks about them. This is especially true when that person's opinion does not sit well with me. What needs to sit well for me? I need to know that my thoughts and actions are in synchrony without detriment to another individual's feelings, etc.
3. I am a real person. I have qualities that can be seen as either strengths or weaknesses. As my friend, ES, put it eloquently, "Any quality of an individual can be seen as one side of a coin - a strength or a weakness." One of my strengths (or weakness - you, the reader, can judge as you will) is my tolerance and my patience when it comes to expressing strong, negative emotion. I use to be a rather emotionally labile and reactive person, and it has taken me a great deal of time and energy to become a more calm and level-headed person. I take great pride in my ability to sit with negative emotions, allowing them to pass and communicating them in a more clear, direct manner without a need to hurt the other person's feelings.

***

To add... there are certain things I need to review about myself and ask how better to handle in the future.

How do I better communicate my irritation, hurt, and anger without eliciting those emotions necessarily from the other person? I recognize that in this situation I may not have necessarily communicated it because I saw no need for reacting as I realize the impetus for the person's actions. Yet, I am aware that intimacy calls for me being able to admit when someone is hurting me even if it is truth(s) that might hurt the other person.

I need to appreciate that taking space and requesting for space does NOT mean that I am incapable of intimacy or that I am "disappearing" from the relationship. It simply means that I am entitled to allow myself to heal from my experience of negative emotions without allowing myself to hurt the other person - someone whom I care for enough not to want to continue the cycle of hurt.

[perhaps more to come... who knows *shrugs*]

Spare Us the Om
A new person joined my yoga class and has a habit of yelling her “Om!” She ignores the soft beginning and jumps in with a deafening wail, which she continues long after the rest of us are finished. Any suggestions?
Leslie Dumont, Manhattan
Smells like a hit: “Downward Dog” starring Ethel Merman!
A Zen yogi would find a way to accept the deafening chant as a lesson in tolerance — which is probably why you came to me instead. So, if the Human Foghorn is really bothering you, ask your yoga teacher to intervene. Or take a deep breath as you sit cross-legged on your mat and repeat after me: “May this be the worst problem I have today.”

Anselm's Proof

The Self-Thinking Thought

"Modern arguments and evangelists and New Atheists have duped us into thinking that the interesting question is whether God exists; no, what mattered for Anselm was how we think about God and about one another."

GOD, in and of itself, is an idea. An idea that dictates to us several other ideas. More specifically, it communicates to us how we should live our day-to-day existence.

[What is more interesting to me is that the author of this article runs a website "Killing the Buddha" that has in its manifesto an explanation for the name of the website:

The idea of “killing the Buddha” comes from a famous Zen line, the context of which is easy to imagine: After years on his cushion, a monk has what he believes is a breakthrough: a glimpse of nirvana, the Buddhamind, the big pay-off. Reporting the experience to his master, however, he is informed that what has happened is par for the course, nothing special, maybe even damaging to his pursuit. And then the master gives the student dismaying advice: If you meet the Buddha, he says, kill him.
Why kill the Buddha? Because the Buddha you meet is not the true Buddha, but an expression of your longing. If this Buddha is not killed he will only stand in your way.
Why Killing the Buddha? For our purposes, killing the Buddha is a metaphor for moving past the complacency of belief, for struggling honestly with the idea of God. As people who take faith seriously, we are endlessly amazed and enraged that religious discourse has become so bloodless, parochial and boring. Any God worth the name is none of these things. Yet when people talk about God they are talking mainly about the Buddha they meet. For fear of seeming intolerant or uncertain, or just for lack of thinking, they talk about a God too small to be God. ]

Several months ago, I was engaged in a discussion about spirituality and beliefs - how we are neurologically pre-disposed to be spiritually minded; if not for anything but that we can co-exist as a society. The end result of the discussion was my saying that "GOD, therefore, must be a idea that we created to understand this neural phenomenon that drives us to be spiritual."

Romantic Attachment Style

Out of curiousity, I re-did an old (validated) quiz on romantic attachment style:

[post dated October 06, 2008]

Fearful-avoidant attachment
People with a fearful style of avoidant attachment tend to agree with the following statements: "I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others." People with this attachment style have mixed feelings about close relationships. On the one hand, they desire to have emotionally close relationships. On the other hand, they tend to feel uncomfortable with emotional closeness. These mixed feelings are combined with negative views about themselves and their partners. They commonly view themselves as unworthy of responsiveness from their partners, and they don't trust the intentions of their partners. Similarly to the dismissive-avoidant attachment style, people with a fearful-avoidant attachment style seek less intimacy from partners and frequently suppress and hide their feelings.

TODAY... I met the following criteria:

Secure Attachment Profile
Based upon your quiz answers, you appear to have a secure attachment style. People with secure attachments tend to feel comfortable with themselves and their relationships. Securely attached individuals tend to have happier, long-lasting relationships. You feel comfotable sharing your feelings with your partner and are able to turn to your partner for support.


You have described yourself as securely attached. This means that you are likely to have happier relationships and be better able to sustain commitments than people who have an insecure attachment style.You are likely to have more positive emotional experiences and to be more happy and outgoing in interpersonal relationships. You will be more likely to express what you really feel. You are more likely to be able to depend on others when it is appropriate, and yet able to function autonomously in your own sphere when that is appropriate. You are also more likely to raise children who themselves will have a secure attachment style.

***

Now, if I can just take it in and demonstrate to myself that it is possible for me to have a relationship as a securely attached individual.

"At this stage of your development in romantic relationships, you tend to be pretty evenly balanced in your attachment style. You are not significantly more anxious about them, nor significantly avoiding intimacy or emotional closeness in relationships. This is a healthy balance, but it also may mean that it is more difficult for you to find someone else who has achieved this same healthy balance! Most people tend to either have greater anxiety or greater avoidance in relationships. You'd probably be most comfortable and at ease in a relationship where your partner is also fairly balanced in their romantic attachment approach. So congratulate yourself!! You're a part of a well-balanced breed when it comes to your romantic attachment style. "

[Postscript: Thought this was an interesting statement about relationships... don't know if this is the appropriate blogpost for it...

Arendt’s and Heidegger’s love was a mirror. Their own intellectual genius reflected back at them. They could each have been Narcissus and the lake water respectively. But what is striking is that love transcended political unrest and religious and ethnic differences. They loved each other as they would love themselves. Considering the dark moments of twentieth century European history, this does not appear to be a profane love but rather a love that exceeds mere tolerance and reaches the sacred heights. Their letters reflect a long history of adoration. ]

Those Aren't Fighting Words, Dear

My friend ES shared this New York Times article with me:

Those Aren't Fighting Words, Dear

Upon reading the article, I found strength. Reviewing some of the readers' comments that the editors' selected to share with others, I found some that only bolstered the strength:

Absolutely brilliant. I can't help thinking of how many marriages fail because we fail to recognize the pain in our partners, take things on our shoulders because of our own misguided archetecture, make our own egos punish us as a result of our own inflexibility. I've heard this story before, from another woman whose's husband went similiarly nuts after a trauma. How she maintained her balance, and it wasn't easy, was a lesson to those that knew the couple and he eventually came back, grateful to have a son and a wife who were still there. There are lots of ways to commit suicide, most just leave a shell rather than a grave. Kudos to Laura for seeing so well into her husband's soul. A lot of us men reach his point in life and are not so lucky as he to have a woman like her. I've been lucky, and this article has helped me to see just how lucky I have been. -Pomeister-

This is a fabulous piece. I wonder how many marriages could have been saved if the wife was (1) wise enough to recognized that it wasn't about her (2) strong enough to stand her ground (3) patient enough to rise above his deliberate attempts to hurt and push her away.
None of these things are easy. It usually takes a long time and the perspective of distance to be that objective about someone you love and would hate to lose. We are usually most vulnerable to those we love, and they know better than anyone else what will hurt us the most. And when we are not the problem, abusing us does not resolve anything for them, it usually makes them feel worse. Bravo to you for giving him 'distance' and being straight up about it. This was truly amazing grace. -Right and Relevant-

I too have been feeling scared and stuck (and i'm only 26!) and thinking if only I could run away to another country where no one knows me and build a life from scratch, but this time refuse to compromise and fight hard for what I want. However, little by little I am realizing that no matter where I am and with whom, if I can not learn to be happy then I never will be. The grass can always be greener on some other side. There could always be a better spouse out there, or a better job and salary, or a better apartment. Eventually, we must be happy with our achievements and realize how many people have it much worse.-n.h.-

[Comments at a later time/date]

A Lila trying to be A Rita

I'm into the show Dexter. Currently, I am watching season 2.
The writing is brilliant. The character development - nothing short of impressive.
Lila - Sexy, dark, enigmatic, dangerous... knows what she wants and how to get it
Rita - Strong, straightforward, honest, patient... a human who simply tries her best

And I leave this note short with a rendition of Chopin's Nocturne Opus 9, No. 2.
(performed by none another than Rachmaninov/ff)

Fortune Cookies (without the calories!)

Fortune Cookies

Work with your destiny. Stop trying to outrun it.

I guess this fortune cookie dictates my life at the moment. I have spent the last 2 days and will spend most of today working on a project (one of four) geared towards my dissertation. However, I have made up my mind. This is my destiny - to get a Ph.D. - and then figure out what that means for me. No amount of grumbling, whining, or thinking thoughts that run contrary to this idea is going to help me. It's simply a matter of sitting myself down on this hard library chair, running data simulations and writing up my interpretations that is going to get me out of here. That, or choosing to take myself out of a program - one that I have struggle to keep myself in the past four years.