(variable) x

Some days I feel like I am not speaking the same language as those around me.  I somehow miss important (to the speaker) cues as to the correct response--whether verbal or otherwise.  It has been brought to my attention, that I sometimes (always) have no clue why a person is upset with something I said, or a particular thought process.  I fail to see why a person would think that I was being negative by declaring that we will gain (variable) x instead of "Capital, Underlined, Italics X."  The difference is minute (in my mind) yet others somehow get the idea that I am cursing the "CUI X" noted above to fail when in my mind, I feel that I am remaining open to other possibilities.  If it were a Venn diagram, CUI X would fall into (variable) x. 

I see things very differently than others.  I tend to see life as a big giant variable x where anything could happen and often does.  I do not see the need to name x as CUI X, as I see it as belonging to the set already and as Murphy likes to insert his humor into the equation, it might not be CUI X but UIC B instead (which incidentally is also in [variable] x.)  Regardless of which option works out, I cannot be disappointed because I considered every possibility in the "x" whereas the other listed options named a specific point inside of "x."  How could that possibly be construed as negative thinking??? 

It seems in life that some folk get so hung up on a specific X that they cannot see any other possibilities.  It really makes no difference what X means, but if X does not happen, folks often will get pissy and mad.  I choose instead to live (variable) x as it includes every possibility.  It is the epitome of positivity.  How could I ever be disappointed when X is included in (variable) x as is B, C, T, etc...

In conclusion, I do sometimes fail to understand others perspective.  Though in truth, my perspective is just as misunderstood.  In the future, I will try to make others understand what I mean without getting upset.  I guess it would be too much to ask for the same courtesy??

Out of time?

As mother's day approaches, I find myself sitting here reminiscing about mom.  This will mark the second mother's day since her death.  Besides thinking about mom, I find myself also thinking about my own mortality.  Both of my parents died in  their 60's and I am but 14 years from 60.  I know death is inevitable, but I am scared.  Will I outlive my siblings, or the other way around?  There are many things I still want to do, yet I am afraid I am running out of time.  Anxiety about the future fills my days and tortures my nights.  I am feeling that no matter what I do, I will not complete the things I want to complete in my life.

In therapy, I told my therapist about my feelings of insignificance.  Of how I felt smaller than a single grain of sand on a beach.  Some days, that feeling overwhelms me.  The mundane things like dishes or laundry lose all significance as they will continue forever whereas I will not.  I do not fear poverty nor do I aspire to become wealthy.  Life is too short to waste it working my fingers to the bone only to die never having enjoyed the simple things.

I am moving to Arizona soon.  My siblings do not understand why.  I moved to Maine to be with my mom at the end of her days.  After she passed, I feel like my life is paused.  I feel like this book is completed and I am walking around directionless, waiting for a signal or a push one way or another.  Arizona will be my new book.  I will begin to live again and find pleasure is existence, where I find only melancholy and sadness here.  I feel like I only have another 20 years of living left and I am not going to waste it trying to live up to someone Else's ideal of how life should be.  I will live as I want to live...free...

spelling disaster

I just got done looking at posts on Facebook and I am appalled.  I look at the people that wrote these posts and I wonder how and why they graduated.  Is this how kids are coming out of school?  Unable to read, unable to write cursive, unable to read cursive, and unable to spell anything...what happened?  I have a thought on why...no child left behind...I think that if a kid cannot get grades good enough to get to the next grade, they should not.  I remember when I was in high school.  I had a horrible time in my 9th grade English class.  It was not because I could not spell, read or write, but because I did not do my work.  So, I had to take it again and not move up to the 10th grade.  I learned to get my work done and on the second attempt, I passed with a B.  If I had been passed to the next grade, it would not likely have damaged my ability to read and write, but, it would not have been fair to the other kids that worked hard to get their work done and turned in on time.  It would have sent a message that it did not matter whether I learned anything or not, I would still get passed to the next grade.  I think this is wrong.  Parents are not willing (or able it seems) to help their kids with their work as they are just as likely to be illiterate as their kids.  It is an indictment to the United States education system that kids are allowed to graduate without having the basic skills of reading and writing.  I am not saying that other classes are not important, but that without a fundamental knowledge of reading and writing, the other subjects become meaningless.  I think it would be like being dropped in Japan, never having learned Japanese, and being expected to learn Japanese History written in Japanese.  It would literally be impossible to learn anything in that class.  When we allow our kids to get a free pass to graduation, we do them a disservice as well as causing issues with employment and the economy.  A kid that cannot read or write, has limited potential as a wage earner and will likely remain in the lower end of the scale.  That is not to say that all people that can read and write will ascend the ladder, but they at least have a better chance than the illiterate one.  A secondary effect of the "no child left behind" is the rise of secondary schools that have ridiculously lowered the standard for admittance.  It is not uncommon (I saw this personally) for students to fail entrance exams several times before gaining admittance.  Not only is it not fair to the student to expect them to compete with others academically, but it is unfair to the American taxpayer who has to foot the bill for all the high interest loans that pay for the privilege of going to that school, which in turn will likely get defaulted on because the "graduate" will not have learned anything relevant to their employment aspirations. 

I understand that there are special needs kids out there that require specialized instruction.  These kids can be taught basic life skills as well as reading and writing.  There is no reason for a country with the clout the USA has, to justify graduating kids that cannot read.  If their is a special need, then accommodate that need...but do not automatically let them graduate because it is time.  If they cannot read, they cannot graduate.  Period. 

Think of it this way...the kids we are allowing to graduate without basic academic skills are the same kids that will be taking care of us as we age...they are going to control the world...they are the ones that will decide whether to go to war or not...very scary thought is it not?

Last Chances

Tonight I watched a film that really made me stop and think about my life and where it is going.  It was about a woman dying of cancer and her two estranged kids.   In her last few days, she made simple cards from construction paper and pine cones with one simple wish for each one of them.  One of her wishes was for her daughter to "sing" and her son to "try".  It seems to me that in living life we forget to live.  We work so hard for things that we will never live long enough to enjoy.  Instead of taking a few minutes to take in the beauty of the world, we choose to adhere to imagined restraints.  We fail to notice, in the short time we exist, that there is more to life than stuff and money...beauty exists everywhere...if you take a minute to look at it...I have been carrying around my old life like a book that I finished reading 2 years ago.  As long as I keep that book in my hand, I cannot pick up a new one...letting go of a loved one is a very tough thing to do at any time...but to hold on to that dead person and fail to live is a travesty...Soon I will begin a new chapter in the life of Christopher...I am putting down the book that is finished and moving on to my future...whatever it may be...I know that mom would be proud of the man that I am and she will be there urging me on...showing me all the beauty in the world...Love always wins...even if it hurts...

Double Standards and all

I am sickened by the vitriol being spewed by conservatives regarding ABC's show The Fosters showing a same-sex kiss between 13 y/o boys.  It is as if gay people just all of a sudden appeared on the scene and started forcing their innocent love on the populace.  Why is it that two women can love, yet two men love and you would think that the world was coming to an end??  This is the 21st century.  It was long prophesied that marriage equality would be the law of the land, yet here we are fighting the fight like we were Loving v. W. Virginia all over again.  When will American people realize that all people deserve to love...no matter the combination...MM, FF, MF...all should have the freedom to love as they see fit...against gay marriage?  Don't marry someone of the same sex.  Simple.  Yet here we are trying to legitimize something that should be a no brainer.  I have nothing against opposite sex marriage...what about my same-sex one threatens you? 

I was born in the late 60's.  The 70's and 80's really did not offer much in the way of equality.  In fact, the 80's saw the recognition of HIV and AIDS, which somehow made gays the reason for it.  The 90's saw a bit of improvement, yet my own father told me he hoped he would be dead before same-sex marriage became legal.  So far 37 (38) states and the District of Columbia (AL, AK, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, HI, ID, IA, IL, IN, KS, ME, MD, MA, MN, MT, NC, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, and WY - plus Washington, D.C., plus most recently, Nebraska) celebrate marriage equality and he died before more than MA became legal. 

I am not saying that anyone has to accept anything nor am I wanting the US to force equality, but I will say that the US has a poor reputation with regard to civil rights.  The reason that SCOTUS exists is to balance EXECUTIVE and CONGRESS branches.  When the majority decides to discriminate against the minority, SCOTUS acts to balance the equation.  In this case, the majority is on the right side of history, and likely SCOTUS will decide once and for all that all marriages, regardless of the combination should be and are valid.  Love is Love...

Democracy for the people or Oligarchy for the rich?

I have been reading and doing research on communes (I think I am more of a hermit) and came across the idea of "communism" versus socialism -> oligarchy.  The United States has long had the idea that we are the premier democracy in the world.  Truth is, we are really nothing more than an oligarchy that has an elected dictator that rotates every 4 years.  Think about it.  The Congress has 535 members, most of which have been there for years running unchallenged or challenged but seriously overspending their challenger.  Think of Congress as the elite upper-class (they are actually-more than 50% are worth more than $1million [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/10/us/politics/more-than-half-the-members-of-congress-are-millionaires-analysis-finds.html?_r=0] ) who are critically out of touch with their constituencies.  Think of the President as the elected dictator as he has as much power as all of congress, though in different ways.  The president can veto a law and make an executive order, while congress can pass a law, override a veto, and make a statement by doing nothing.  Effectively, we are an elected oligarchy.  So, seeing that we have this issue, how do we fix it?

If one were to really look at the Constitution, they would see that congress was not intended to be a lifetime career.  It was considered a civic duty.  Over time, congress has modified this intention into the mess it is today.  Many have served more than 50 years in congress.   This is too long.  The problem is that in the last 25 or so years, technology has created a differential in the populace.  There has been a dramatic shift  in cultural identity in that time that honestly changes the way things should be done.

I watched a recording of the SOTU that aired last night.  I am feeling particularly energized by POTUS and feel that the Congress needs to listen up.  Sure, there have been mistakes made...but POTUS has reached across the aisle again to say "let's work together".  Despite that hand across the aisle, I have a feeling that Congress will try to push their way through to try to invalidate the work done, but will ultimately fail.  POTUS has vowed to use the VETO to block any back pedaling attempted by Congress.  All we need to do now is to get out and vote in 2016 and show Congress that a government by the people, for the people means that we call the shots...

Sexual maturity and the foods we eat

Let me preface this post by putting in a disclaimer:  I am not a Doctor, nor am I a scientist.  I am nothing more than an individual who is talented at research and forming an educated opinion.  I don't know if the linkage is legitimate or imagined, but, I would think that it is a very strange coincidence if it is not linked.  

I have been doing a bit of reading today and have come across an interesting hypothesis.  All our lives we have been taught that you are what you eat.  The startling idea that formed with that thought and a conversation with a friend, led me to hypothesize that perhaps there is a definitive link between the food we are feeding our kids and sexual maturity.  I know it sounds a little crazy, but let me explain the link. 

The population of the world is creating a strong demand for meat to feed it.  When the population was moderate, there was not a strong demand.  Many families raised livestock--cows, pigs, and chickens--with the sole purpose of feeding their families.  During this time, it took the calendar, and patience to get the animals to the right size and weight to make them ready for slaughter.  There was no feeding growth hormones or force feeding (other than goose for  foie gras, but that is not what I am talking about) to induce a fattening effect.  Quite simply, a farmer (or hand, or kids) would let the cows, goats, and sheep feed off the grass that grew naturally, toss seed to chickens (or let them scratch their own), and feed the pig leftovers.  As a child I can remember doing all of those (except the cows, goats and sheep...townships frowned on having them).  We had a bucket that all of the plate scrapings and leftovers went into all day.  After it was full, we would "slop the hogs".  The chickens we would let scratch their own food and supplement that with egg shells and seed.  When they were large enough, we would take the pigs to the slaughter house and we would kill the chickens.

In today's world, things are a bit different.  The life of a livestock farmer has really gone by the wayside.  People still raise chickens, but they feed them engineered food that makes them grow faster than natural and give them an antibiotic solution with growth hormone to prevent illness and  get them to lay eggs faster.  Industrial chicken houses have sprouted up all over where many of the chickens are kept in cages that are one foot square or in large warehouses. The cocktail of growth hormones that are given to these birds, causes them to grow at two to three times their normal rate and often cause the animals to develop musculature that their body cannot support. [http://www.foodispower.org/chickens-raised-for-meat/] Cows and pigs are generally treated to the same type of cocktail resulting in animals aging faster than nature intended. 

I discuss all of that to get to the point.  If we are feeding our children these animals that have been treated with all of these growth hormone and muscle building materials, could it really be that far of a stretch to assume that these same chemicals could be effecting our children?  Since the 1800's the age for sexual maturity (described as menarche for females and ejaculatory capability in males) has been declining.  In the 1800's girls were not having their first periods until an average of 17.  Today that number has dropped considerably to 12 years.  Boys in the 1800's usually did not gain ejaculatory capability until 16, but today 14 is typical.  At first glance, better medical care, better nutrition, and genetics play a role, but the growth hormones do also have an affect on human growth and development. [http://www.livestrong.com/article/98816-effects-growth-hormones/] 

As a result of the younger sexual maturity, teen pregnancies become a problem.  It is true that in today's world, condoms and sexual education, have both slowed the problem, but it does still exist.    [http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db89.pdf]  In the referenced document, it shows first an increase in teen pregnancies followed by a gradual decline.  This increase coincides with the use of growth hormones in food animals as well as a shift in cultural norms.  In the 1940's to about the 1960's, many families were very strict with regard to discussion about sexuality.  Often the only sex education one would get was on their wedding night.  In the 1960's many of the taboos were lifted with the idea of sexual liberation.  Many people were experimenting with sex in that time period.  On to the 1980's when HIV/AIDS made it's debut.  This ushered in a new era of sexual awareness which extends into today. 

I remember as a teen, we had a sex ed class that in retrospect was a laughable attempt at trying to make kids that had already become sexually mature, to understand the changes in their bodies.  When I was in high school, most of the boys had all the physical characteristics of sexually mature adults, some had some characteristics and very few (including me) had none at all.  Along with the stigma of being a "late bloomer", those of us that were late would often have to deal with bullying.  Our bodies still retained a good deal of the feminine quality that disappears when a boy enters puberty.  (Bullying is another topic for another post)

I believe that with the kids maturing sooner, it becomes imperative that a clinical sex ed class should be taught in the first year of middle school (the 6th grade).  With clinical education, ready availability of condoms and birth control pills, and parental involvement, we can teach our kids sexual responsibility and consequences before it becomes too late.