Article Response to “20 Lessons on Dating”

If A Woman Is Willing To Do It All… Don’t Let Her

I read a two-part article titled “The 20 Lessons to Learn About Women and Dating or Be Single Forever” by Andrew Ferebee on KnowledgeForMen.com. Ferebee promoted his book The Dating Playbook For Men: A Proven 7 Step System To Go From Single To The Woman Of Your Dreams

in the article. Overall, the article was well thought out and seemingly accurate despite undertones of personal pain and rejection. Although I loved it- especially Part 2- I felt some clarity must be presented for those open to hear it. 🙂

I especially appreciated the emphasis on masculine and feminine differences and how each can promote the other (i.e., despite slight disagreements with it):

“Because when you’re soft (expressing feminine character), you put the woman above you on a pedestal (forcing her to take on the masculine role). Typically, a woman can only feel attraction for a man when she is in her feminine, therefore as a man you need to step into the masculine dominant role.”

Men are not the only culprits of this role-reversal. Women- perhaps after years of being “forced” into the masculine position or fighting for the rights to have that position- assert themselves as the caretakers of men (i.e., to fix or “mother” them) or to “get the job done” because the men in their lives choose not to take the lead. Men too have become accustomed to taking the softer role, but it doesn’t have to remain this way. My first article on TheSaltStone.com, “Men and Women Being Men and Women” briefly touched on these principles and the belief that men and women create Tao as complimentary opposites.

Ferebee used the phrase “put the woman above you on a pedestal” in two diverse contexts in the article. The first implies that a woman in a masculine role is in a superior role, yet the second described the “golden throne” men place women on when they adore them. Unlike Ferebee, I don’t believe the second is a bad thing, simply worded wrong and often prematurely executed. A woman should be her man’s queen on that golden throne: “Under every great man is a strong and dedicated woman that makes him a better man.” Now I word this with “under” instead of “behind” to maintain the idea of a pedestal. I do believe the man should be superior to the woman, but I also believe he must know his place as a spiritual man with a strong relationship with his God. His direction in leading the woman will be based on wisdom rather than whims.

She also has an important role as the feminine part of their unified relationship (i.e., premised by the note that I only describe the parts of her role in context to this article): She nurtures and promotes him. She holds the world, the worries, the values. She loves him in spite of his flaws, but emphasizes the amazing qualities that he has, so those flaws disappear. She follows his lead in decisions- even when “she knows better”- because she knows that learning from mistakes will build his confidence. Here is where most women fail…. they scold him for making a wrong decision. Most women are no longer in the habit of loving their man in his weakest, most embarrassing moments; hence, the stereotype that women nag and men refuse to make decisions.

A woman who is his queen will allow herself to be vulnerable so that he can be the protector: Feminists would disagree, but should digest my reasoning before making a rash decision based on that statement. A woman’s curse since the beginning of whatever time you believe in has been that she carries the world on her shoulders: Rearing children, solving problems, multi-tasking to no end. More recently in history, she has been made to feel as though perfection is par. Ferebee says, “Women are regular people who eat, shit, bitch, sleep and occasionally go through the McDonalds drive through at midnight just like you do,” yet we feel like we have to be those 9s and 10s we see in the media or in his article! Simply put, when the world demands so much from a woman, wouldn’t she want to come home and be vulnerable in her man’s arms? To “take a load off,” to have a listening ear and a warm embrace? I don’t want to “work” when I am with my man: I want the world to melt away. A strong and masculine man can create that environment because frankly, I don’t want that “one-more-thing-to-do.”

Another “issue” I had with Ferebee’s insightful take on how men should behave in dating became clear with the portion expressing that men should make women chase them. Yikes! A woman doesn’t want to chase a man, but she feels like she has to out of frustration to try to get him to open up. The article stated that a man shouldn’t be “feminine” by opening up to a woman because she will see him as being weak; yet, women expect this of a man in the initial phases of dating. The author didn’t state that once you have found a woman with whom the energy, passion, compassion, love, commitment, and stability can flow, it is appropriate for a man to disclose his inner thoughts and feelings to that woman. This intimacy sanctifies the relationship: It sets it apart from all others with friends and maybe even family. Intimacy is that energetic glue that binds two people together. A woman searches and grasps at this- yes prematurely- because she wants that “hard” tough guy exterior who can be “soft” around her only. It makes her feel special to be the only one he opens up to. It can be related to the generalization that men want a librarian on the outside, but a dirty and adventurous vixen on the inside. It makes him feel special when she reserves that secret for him.

I understand that men feel undervalued due to the role reversals and other social norms that have come to play in modern times. Yet, this thinking creates conflict, not love. One of the biggest complaints from women is that they are always having to guess at how a man feels about them. I describe it as flailing in a stormy ocean where the life preserver is drifting just out of reach. The article stated that men must use nonverbal communication to instill a sense of desire in their mate, which will make her “begin to seek validation from you vs what most men do is seek validation from her.” Yes! Women want validation! I wish the article took it further to express to men that the women will seek validation from him, but then “the man will give her that validation…” Most men stop at “women want me” and refuse to validate that “yeah, I’m diggin’ on you too! So don’t worry that I didn’t respond to that text right away, babe.” Perhaps this description can help men sympathize with those “crazy women” who bug them about their feelings and harass them with constant texts or who rudely attempt to pry into their emotions (did you detect the sarcasm?). Even the most sane of women have been driven to this feeling of insecurity and have been lumped in the category of “crazy” because a man has a fortress around his heart or too seriously “plays the game.” A bit overly dramatic, I know, but I want to bring to light what is going on in the woman’s head after having to overanalyze a man’s lack or abrupt reduction of communication. My response to women when this occurs is that the connection isn’t there if he is not willing to tear down the wall after an appropriate amount of time (i.e., look for someone who is willing to be intimate with you). Sometimes this “moving on” sparks action in a man, sometimes it just allows both to be open to a more suitable connection. (**His other bits of advice in Lesson 11: Communication are solid!)

I agree with the author when he states, “women hate being put on pedestals.” Although some women feel entitled to it, others believe they are not worthy of such adoration. Both are sad thoughts because women deserve to be treated like queens (*not the same views expressed by the author). Granted, they should be humble and not demanding of such treatment, but often feel that men don’t treat them as such so they will take it! This attitude does not enable him to make the choice to treat her like royalty. If a man is not able to treat you that way, then he doesn’t see you that way (or the woman doesn’t see herself that way and heavily resists being treated that way)! If he doesn’t see you that way, he is not the one for you! (If you cannot receive that positive treatment as a woman, then please consider seeking assistance from family, friends, counselors, massage therapists, artistic expression classes, etc.). There should not be any chasing or grasping at what is not there. The desire to give and receive love should flow freely without the drama that fear and insecurities bring about.

Ferebee brought up an excellent point, “Don’t change her mind, change her mood.” He stated that men often try to provoke change through logic instead of creating a sensory experience that enables the woman to feel differently or the needed change. As stated above, the role reversal leads to men being the ones who make self-serving decisions based on feelings rather than logical steps to create an environment conducive to feeling: “How does this girl make me feel?” “I will say I want to hang out with her because it makes me feel good to not disappoint her… but I have not real intentions of taking her out.” “This relationship doesn’t feel easy anymore, I’m out” (Yes, I too have undertones of pain and rejection). The logical man would question “Why does she react in this way and how can I reassure her?” “I will let her know flat out that I don’t feel a connection and would like to continue to explore my options even though she will probably be disappointed.” “This relationship is at the end of the “honeymoon period,” but I am willing to figure out a solution to maintain that passion we felt before.”

Whereas, women now overanalyze each text and lack thereof. We “read into” each instance of touch, location of the date, whether a response led to further conversation with questions or was just a quick phrased answer. Women must practice receiving and trusting again and letting go of the burdens of minor details or what-if worries in the dating process.

Women have become the thinkers/ “logical” and men are the feelers/ “emotional.” Honestly, it doesn’t work because it is so unnatural to play the roles we weren’t designed for. Men should be changing our moods with sensory experiences and reassuring words. Women should be okay in receiving these things from a man. Men must communicate with logic so that women are not left to wonder. Women should trust a man’s reasoning and decisions.

Overall, the article wanted a man to realize that he may want the woman of his dreams, but he should act as though he doesn’t need her. This is true to an extent. First we are dependent on our parents or caregivers. Then we find independence within ourselves, trying really hard to avoid co-dependent relationships shaped by our youth. Finally, we meet someone who is also healthy and independent and become interdependent with them. In ourselves, we don’t need the other. But having knowing them, it is hard to think about life without them. (My mom used to say this all the time, but I am not too sure where she learned it- so I apologize for the lack of proper credit).

I am grateful to Andrew Ferebee for bringing to light the importance of maintaining the natural balance of masculine and feminine energies within a relationship. However, there is a need for exposure of playing “the game” versus seeking a lasting love affair. Many of his insights lead to “more women,” yet some ideas ultimately lead to a lonely and unsatisfying end. I believe that men and women will find each other when they have that hope and openness to love.

Thank you.

Here is another link to the author’s book on Amazon:

Pray It Forward

I pray for blessings for all those in need.

I pray for good health and wellness, God’s speed.

That children may giggle and laugh

With their parents, without a care.

May friends snap a quick photograph

And post online to share.

I pray for handshakes and hunger to cease.

I pray for Earth: Environmental peace.

Knowing “All is vanity,”

Fervently as a quiet sage,

I strive to promote charity;

Wisdom’s not in this prideful age.

I pray for familial forgiveness.

I pray that kin truly know their richness.

That I enhance or change a life

With an unprejudiced “Hello.”

“Two are better than one” in strife,

“If they fall, one lifts his fellow.”

I pray for justification through trust.

I pray for sanctification or bust.

God modeled love on my behalf:

Saved by grace through faith in His son.

The law’s fulfilled: Sin knows His wrath.

“Love thy neighbor” for He has won!

-Aaron Mogilski

-Inspiration from Ecclesiastes and Romans

Constitutional Self and the Mirrors

Tao te Ching. Verse 2: Relativity

We know beauty because there is ugly.
We know good because there is evil.
Being and not being,
having and not having,
create each other.

Difficult and easy,
long and short,
high and low,
define each other,
just as before and after follow each other.

The dialectic of sound gives voice to music,
always transforming “is” from “was”
as the ancestors of “to be.”

The wise
teach without telling,
allow without commanding,
have without possessing,
care without claiming.

In this way we harvest eternal importance
because we never announce it.

Bible: KJV.
“Therefore if any man be in Christ,
he is a new creature:
Old things are passed away;
behold,
all things are become new.”
(2 Corinthians 5:17)

“In whom we have boldness
and access with confidence
by the faith of him.”
(Ephesians 3:12)

“… his divine power hath given unto us
all things
that pertain unto life and godliness,
through the knowledge of him
that hath called us to glory and virtue
whereby are given unto us
exceeding great and precious promises:
that by these
ye might be partakers of the divine nature,
having escaped the corruption
that is in the world through lust.”
(2 Peter 1:3 & 4)

Who Am I? Who Are You?
A friend posed the question about the old adage, “First you must love yourself before you can love others.” I’ve meditated, prayed, and contemplated this phrase for many years and have concluded that I cannot love what I do not know. I must know Self first: To love myself mustn’t I “know thyself”? Thomas Cooley said “I am not who you think I am; I am not who I think I am. I am who I think you think I am.” If his sentiment is correct, then I suppose I am who I am in relation to you. Now. In order to love myself… I have to know myself within the context of my relationships. The relationships might be with friends, enemies, wild or domestic animals, God and Christ, memories placed on “things,” or even a beach ball on a deserted island (i.e., thank you Wilson for clarifying that you CAN have a relationship with an inanimate object). Therefore, shouldn’t I know the person or object that I’m relating myself to? Well, no… not necessarily. As pointed out by my clever friend, these relationships that we must know are indeed more of a “mirror.” You needn’t have an intimate knowledge of your mirror in order to know what you look like or how you feel when you see your reflection. Hence, the mirror- lacking the ability to give its opinion on who I am- performs its silent duty of allowing me to anticipate what it might think of me. I am guilty of “constantly” saying “oh that person must think I’m nuts. I could just tell by the way they acted or looked at me.” Although I don’t always follow social norms, I have made it a practice to be aware of social cues and energies (now whether or not they are accurate… ???). In those situations, I’ve already determined that I must be somewhat of a weirdo because I’ve placed that assumption on others who may or may not of actually felt that way about me, yet I have named it upon myself in their honor! These relationships reflect the best and worst of us: They can be a human curse or we can make them work to our advantage. Ultimately, can’t I train myself to “see” any reflection?

The friend questioned, “How do we know when the reflection is accurate and a true reflection of self?” Relationships change because the energy is fluid. However, there is the idea of a constant “constitutional self” that isn’t altered by a reflection of any mirror. Our superficial self reflects what we want in our relationships, but the reflection cannot change our authentic or constitutional self. Is this the one we must love before loving others?

How do we know this self? There is a survey based on Traditional Chinese Medicine that categorizes someone according to the five elements: Metal, water, fire, earth, and wood. Basically, one will answer questions based on whether or not he has had the characteristic all of his life. Although I marked a few in the other categories, it is overwhelmingly clear that I am the Water Archetype: The Philosopher. (I can privately email the self-assessment but was unable to post it on here except for the snippet of the picture at the top).
Erik Erikson’s stages of development might also establish a sense of self. His phases were in the either-or format: Has the individual progressed positively or is he stuck in one of the phases only spiraling downward as he grows older? I was inexplicably drawn to Erikson’s ideas, but when I discovered that he supposedly studied Taoism, I was hooked!
One might also pick 5-10 character traits that he has demonstrated all of his life to gain perspective of his constitutional self. For example, although people look at me like I’m weird (i.e., weird: the superficial self I establish through this assumption), I voice things that most people keep in their heads (or don’t think at all). I do this because if I don’t, I don’t feel like I’m being authentic and honest (i.e., drive toward being authentic and honest: constitutional self).
Another exercise might be to pick 3-5 of your closest life-long friends and family members: The ones who reflect the feeling of “true self.” Make a chart on “who you are” around those people. Also, interview them: “Give 1-3 words or phrases that describe me.” Are there common traits?
This authentic self cannot be changed- only hidden- by the reflection I gain from relationships. I might “see” certain reflections with certain people based on fear, lust, hurt, or lapse of common sense. Here are some examples:

My authentic self lacks energy despite a strong desire to change. The excitement of a new relationship can spark a flame that musters a bit more energy than normal, but once the newness has faded, so has the flame (not the flame of lust, only the physical energy); thus, changing the reflection of both parties. I see myself as undesirable because I cannot give him what he wants. He sees himself as conflicted because he wants to be with me, but he also wants to let off some steam from a tough work week. He changes who he is and stays home, but becomes more and more frustrated because his authentic self might need to be social and on the go. I didn’t mean to be dishonest in the beginning (especially since I pride myself on my honesty): I truly had more energy for a short time and enjoyed the “high.” Unfortunately, our mirror for each other became foggy: We lost sight of who we were in relation to each other. It’s only a matter of time before our authentic selves resurface in new relationships: It’s that infamous “honeymoon period” where bliss overwhelms the senses, leaving the self to only care about that reflection.
Men often say that “women are crazy!” There are some women that act crazy: I have been one of them at times. I was once called “the most emotionally unstable girl [this person] had ever met.” Looking back, there was some truth to his statement: I was going through a chronic depression and had little understanding of self. However, I’ve come to realize that craziness is not completely the woman’s fault. I may have acted that way with him, but not with others in my life, nor in other relationships within that time period. He reflected from me the feeling that he could not open up and talk with me when things bothered him: He kept it all bottled inside. I pressed and pressured him to open up because my constitutional self is a philosopher wanting to hash-out all the issues in life and then grow from what we’ve discussed. But… to no avail. His authentic self wanted to live in the moment, not talk about personal issues. This frustrated me and so I did or said things that made me appear “crazy.” I relate it to a life raft just out of reach. You feel like you are drowning and want something so badly, but despite your struggles, you cannot reach it. I wanted to “reach him” on an emotional level, but my flailing caused the ripples that eventually drifted him farther away. These relationships are bound to make any woman crazy. In relating that relationship to the mirror… You know those movies or dreams where you are running, running, running toward the door (well, in this case, the mirror), but it keeps moving farther and farther away? That’s what was happening. What does that say about self? I wanted to see something about myself through what I thought he thought of me, but I was never able to validate my assumptive reflection. I was a frantic runner, a drowning person, and a crazy woman. That is the reflection or self that I became in the context of “us,” but that isn’t my authentic self.

How does a constitutional self develop and how do parents influence the patterns of our relationships? I believe the constitutional self is fixed before we are born. The energy and Oneness of the universe, the Life Breath of God, and the mixture of DNA from my parents are all factors in who I am. The time, place, and circumstances set the mirrors in motion, but really…. I- the true I- could have been born anywhere at any time and would’ve still been eccentric and would still be a social fly-on-the-wall! My mother taught me, “As children we are dependent. Next we must learn to be independent and not co-dependent, before finally being able to be inter-dependent.” We are dependent on the reflection we gain from our parents: To some this is wonderful, but for others it can be detrimental. Others make it a lifelong goal to rise above the negativity of their parents and learn to avoid those kinds of relationships. Our parents are often the first mirrors we see. All too often, we take this to the extreme and become THEIR reflection instead of our own: A mirror-image of our parents. These first reflections establish a pattern: I see the learned role each member has in my family; as well as, the behaviors we have learned from our parents. Are they teaching us to be independent or co-dependent on others? Do we grow with the knowledge that we have a choice in the reflections we see or do we get lost in thinking we must be what we think others want us to be? I worry about my own children and what they will reflect from us. There are traits of injustice, passive aggressiveness, and lethargy that are being passed down, but I pray that my children take on the traits of love, kindness, commitment to them, and forgiveness. They are constitutionally strong-willed: I pray that I can teach them to use this in a positive way.

Can we change the reflection? There are different mirrors that reflect distortion or a “perfectly imperfect” self image: As such, there are people who reflect distortion, authenticity, and beauty. We can’t rely on knowing which is which. When my friend questioned this, I responded that you typically have a gut feeling as to whether you are being authentic to your constitutional self. The fun part about the superficial self is that it can change freely as you wish: You can be whatever you want to be for a short time. In addition you can always change your perspective. I believe an attachment to “what I think another thinks of me” would be considered a co-dependency. I strive for independence: You might notice what you think they think of you, but then… Let it go! Do not be attached to these feelings. They aren’t real- they are only what you’ve made them to be! Let’s say, you initially reflect self-doubt and ugliness when someone tries to show you hatred and irritation. You can choose to acknowledge and agree with the unkind words spoken to you or you can choose to let it go and change your perspective. Then, look into another mirror that reflects love: A mirror that wants to strengthen you. Instead of being “nagging and enabling,” you choose to see “strength in standing up for yourself and your children.” Instead of being “a waste and poor financial investment,” you can see “the chance for transformation and a power to overcome!” Instead of being “a doormat who must live up to a certain role,” you can be a “reflection of unconditional love and forgiveness.” Instead of being “an alcoholic,” you can see yourself as having “an opportunity for self-growth concerning personal or childhood issues.” Many people also choose the other route. Instead of being “love and silliness,” they might choose to see “inferiority and that they are being laughed at.” We don’t have to live with the reflection someone tries to project nor do we have to be around the person who reflects negativity.

My constitutional self is set. It is what it is. I am. My superficial self goes through whatever glorious change I want! I choose the mirrors that I look upon. The reflection or “what I think you think” is my choice too! Remember…. I am not who you think I am. I am who I think you think I am. Ergo, I think you think I am a bada$$, beautiful mother and super-intelligent, yet mysterious woman! Thanks… that is so kind of you to think that about me!

I love myself because I know myself within the context of my relationships. I choose to look upon those who I think see me as strength, wit, curiosity, forgiveness, authenticity, and growth. I choose to be a mirror that reflects God’s love and grace.

OR and here’s the kicker…. I could just throw all this “work” out and claim my inheritance… accept my Oneness with all of mankind… take a stand as an heir to the kingdom of Heaven as a sister in Christ. I accept.
I love myself because YOU first loved me. Amen.

Wild Rice Risotto

Wild Rice Risotto

Wild Rice Risotto

Ingredients

1 1/2 Tbsp coconut oil

1 Tbsp garlic, smashed and torn apart

1 medium onion, chopped

3 stalks of celery, chopped w/ about 1 Tbsp leaves

3/4 cup Texmati Wild Rice mix

1/4 cup white wine

4 baby bella mushrooms and/or porcini, shiitake, button, or a mix

1 Tbsp fresh thyme

2 cups chicken broth, warmed

1/4 teaspoon cinnamon

1/4 teaspoon ground sage

sea salt and pepper, to taste

cocounut oil, dollops for garnish

Procedure

  1. Heat coconut oil on medium-low to medium.  Add garlic and cook until aromatic, about 1 minute.
  2. Add onion and celery with leaves.  Saute 2-3 minutes.
  3. Stir in wild rice mix to toast slightly.
  4. Deglaze the pan with the white wine.
  5. Add mushrooms, thyme, and a dash of sea salt: Cook a few minutes for the mushrooms to start releasing some liquid.
  6. Stir in 1 cup chicken broth and reduce the heat to low.
  7. Simmer- stirring frequently- until almost dry. Taste and add a dash of sea salt, if needed.
  8. Add another 1/2 cup of chicken broth and simmer until almost dry- stirring frequently.
  9. Add the last 1/2 cup of chicken broth and simmer until almost dry- stirring frequently.
  10. Take off heat and add cinnamon and ground sage.
  11. Taste and add a dash of sea salt and pepper, if needed.
  12. Plate and garnish with a few dollops of coconut oil and sprigs of fresh thyme.

Technology and the Psycho-Social Development of the Child

Whole foods recharge my internal battery: My technologies seemingly amp my spirits, but inconspicuously drain my life force.


I had to laugh while watching a commercial of a popular educational app because it portrayed the child as “so much happier” and claimed that he “loves to learn;” however, take that technology away and see how that kid will function.  I bet the kid would suddenly get moody or throw a tantrum, refuse to learn using other resources, and would nag the mother as to when he could play again on that device.  Let me preface by stating that not all kids are the same, I know.  But we’ve seen it first hand – most kids have iPads provided by their schools and once you take it away…. it’s like Jekyll and Hyde!  [Granted some children have varying disabilities which contribute to their inability to adapt to a change or they may need adaptive technology for communication- Those individuals show the same behaviors, yet often need the technology to “level the playing field”].  We’ve seen the behaviors with our own son and his “typical” friends.  Technology is messing with our kids’ bodies and minds!  One study concluded that the increased use of “communication technologies” (e.g., texting, email, Facebook, Twitter) is linked to higher levels of social anxiety and internalization of emotions, peer aggression (both cyber and physical), and an overall maladjustment related to relationships and social development (Cyr, Berman, & Smith, 2015).  Another article- unrelated to technology- noted that aggressive behaviors are often caused by social and emotional issues, attention problems, ADHD and PTS, narcissism, and self-esteem issues brought on by the mother (Priddis, Landy, Moroney, Kane, 2014).  [Question: Is it possible for an undeveloped mind/ child who may not be able to separate reality from what they see on the screen suffer from PTS b/c they internalize the story as their own?  Possible study idea?].  These precursors may be exacerbated in young children after prolonged use of technology.  Previously, I thought it was just the violent superhero shows or video games with scary creatures and fighting, but it seems to be usage of any TV, computer, or mobile device.  I believe that kids are hypersensitive to the content and stimulation that these technologies provide.  Even though they seem zoned out when watching, they are really immersing themselves into the stories or playing the games.  They are bombarded with commercials having a plethora of colors, lights, sounds, and even varying dimensions.  They have been trained- by all the coming attractions- to lack attention : Always…. what’s next, what’s next, again, again.  Shows, movies, games, and commercials present reality and fantasy without distinguishing which is which.  When they are done, they have a great deal of “drama” and energy inside that they haven’t released and therefore, it manifests as disrespect (or an out-of-place assertion of confidence), anxiety and entitlement for more with no regard for what may need to happen in real time, physical over-exuberance, inferiority to their heroes causing a reduced self-esteem, and often a reduced ability to cope with real problems and people.  Before we pulled our son from the kindergarten class he was attending, we had noticed that since he started using the iPad daily, he had this glazed over look in his eyes.  He was often angry, anxious, and overly aggressive with his sister and me.  After many trials (to determine validity of my idea), I concluded that these negative attitudes and aggressive behaviors were not due to daily stresses, but due to “when will I get to play the iPad again.”

Not only is the increased use of technology messing with the temperament and psychological development of our children, it’s creating a backslide in social maturity and relatability.  We invited one particular friend over who was supposedly our son’s best bud in school.  Our son isn’t attending that school anymore; therefore, one would think that these two would be excited to see each other.  However, this kid hardly got in our door and his iPad was already out with a game loaded.  He plopped down on the couch and started playing.  He barely said “hello” to our son.  It’s incredible that kids would rather play with a computer than with each other.

As a matter of “not” fact, but of observation and discussion, kids do not know how to play anymore.  I grew up with the understanding that children first learn to play dependent on their parents’ or caregivers’ modeling.  Next they learn to play alone (independent).  They begin to play closer and closer to others and then next to another child but not with him (parallel play).  Finally they learn to play with other children (interdependent) [Adults also demonstrate these stages in their relationships].  I once thought that sending our child to school would promote a healthy social life; however, we found a lack of social monitoring and teaching led to social regression, especially since school-age children are highly susceptible to external influences. Parents beware:  It isn’t necessarily the best placement just because there may be 12-30 other kids with whom your kid can play.  If the social interactions aren’t monitored with 4, 5, and 6 year olds, then kids are learning from kids rather than from the adults that should be teaching them.  The quality of social interactions with teachable moments is more important than quantity of interactions.  You cannot call sitting next to other kids and playing the iPad as parallel play: Kindergarten classes should have play house areas, puzzles, independent science exploration, etc. according to Froebel’s* original design.  If your kindergarten does not have these areas, beware- your kid will probably be doing worksheets or iPad play as “busy work.”  I’m so glad we pulled him out of the public school district and got rid of the iPad.  I know that I can’t deny that we are in an age where technology rules:  It is and forever will be a part of our lives.  However, I do believe the length of usage should be monitored in young children.  Our son has been a lot happier without the chance to play with the iPad looming over his head.  He still gets anxious with the chance of watching shows on the computer, but we’ve minimized the anxiety with a schedule of what needs to happen before he watches.  Therefore, he is responsible for time management and making the choice to get his work done to watch.  The days where he already knows he won’t be watching or consciously chooses not to get his work done are the best days (as far as behaviors are concerned).  We’ve even started to see that spark of life in his eyes again.

What’s more fun for a kid than watching TV?  Get a box with a hole in the top.  Turn it over on its side.  Gather some toys, dolls, and other props.  Take turns making TV shows.  The parent can make up social stories to act out in their feature presentation.  It’s fun for all ages!

*Friedrich Froebel brought kindergarten to America from Germany.  He believed children should learn through self-directed exploration.  They should learn mainly through play and daily chores.

References

Cyr, B., Berman, S., & Smith, M.  (2015). The Role of Communication Technology  in Adolescent Relationships and Identity Development. Child & Youth Care Forum, 44(1), 79-92.  doi: 10.1007/s10566-014-9271-0

Priddis, L. E., Landy, S., Moroney, D., & Kane, R. (2014). An Exploratory Study of Aggression in School-Age Children: Underlying Factors and Implications for Treatment. Australian Journal Of Guidance & Counselling, 24(1), 18-35. doi:10.1017/jgc.2013.12

Men and Women Being Men and Women

tao01

“I am not who you think I am; I am not who I think I am; I am who I think you think I am.”

(-Charles Cooley)

I am… in relation to you. I am…. in completion with you. (-me)

The Tao describes good and bad, light and dark, heavy and light as dependent on each for meaning: We must know darkness to fully understand light. We can “know” a “textbook” definition of one; however, without experiencing its opposite, we cannot appreciate the one. Men and women were created with opposing characteristics for a reason…. so that we may appreciate ourselves fully and completely! Once we know ourselves, we can know ourselves as a part of One unit. The circular symbol of Tao has white with a black spot and black with a white spot because although yin and yang are opposites, when interacting with each other, they demonstrate qualities of their opposite. The best example is the metaphor of the mountain: One side is mainly sunny with a few shadows; the other is darker with speckles of sunlight. However, as the sun shifts and our lives fall out of balance, the sunny side can become dark and vice versa.

Throughout my childhood, I had felt more masculine than feminine. I was jealous of the girls who easily portrayed themselves as “girly” and feminine. I longed to be a part of a “girl group” as I tended toward having male friends. As an adult I have embraced my masculinity and have continually sought my inner femininity. During a creative arts course in college, I discovered that my goddess within comes in three stages: The sex vixen, the nurturing mother, the wise crone. However, I cannot fully appreciate these aspects of myself without my counterbalance, my opposites. I developed my inner femininity and now feel as though I am feminine with a touch of masculinity (rather than the other way around).

During my “the mother” stage- my husband was my counterbalance. We complimented each other because he could be described as masculine with a pinch of femininity. [I know, I know, most men want to be told they are “all man” or “not a bit feminine.” Come on, what does it say about women for a man to “diss” feminine qualities with such comments. Can you imagine the yin yang symbol as simply a half black, half white circle?]. We balanced each other and kept each other “in check” with our masculine and feminine qualities. I felt more feminine when he acted with more masculinity. I tried my best to empower him in being a man: I trusted him to keep our family safe (physically and financially). I gave him opportunities to practice chivalry and teach our son “how to be a man.” I upheld traditional roles concerning work: I didn’t want to work outside the home because I believed my gifts and knowledge were better suited for raising the kids while he was happier being the “bread winner.” I made minor decisions and collaborated on big ones; however, ultimately, he was entrusted with the final decision. I was a wife in joyful submission to my husband. I was the ruler of our home: Cooking, cleaning, organizing, decorating, gardening, religion*, rearing and educating the children were my domain. I did not feel like I was in an inferior role; quite the contrary, the work done in the home left a great impact on the world’s future. I was a worrier and more serious- often contemplating life’s meaning. He was carefree and “the fun one.” I could play the “social game” but chose not to. He enjoyed being around people, but sometimes “what others think” would get in his way. I was the dreamer and list-maker. He was the builder and action-taker.

We were different in so many ways, yet complimented each other; just as do the yin and yang. Our oneness worked because we knew our individual strengths, weaknesses, passions, and peeves: I loved myself with greater depth because I “experienced my opposite:” The yang to my yin. I was free to be a woman because he was free to be a man.

*Traditionally the man should be the “head” in this area; however, it was more fitting- for us- that I took on the role of spiritual leader for our family.

Question: Does this viewpoint mean that if one doesn’t find another person with whom to be in a relationship, he or she may never fully understand themselves? What are your thoughts? Check back for my answer to this question.

Hello world!

Thank you to my friends and family for encouraging me to get this blog “off the ground” and “out of my head.”

[Replacing the words to Billy Ocean’s “Get Outta My Dreams, Get Into My Car:” “Get outta my head, get into my blog… ooohhooohhh”].

When sharing my experiences and observations, I’ll try to keep the tangents to a minimum; however, sometimes, they are so “out there” or lame, that they are pretty funny.  Don’t worry though: I’ll always come back around.  There is a method to this madness.

Authenticity is key; therefore, here is why writing is such a huge part of my life.  Many who know me can attest that I hate crowds.  I hate parties with lots of people.  I do not do well with small talk.  I’m the gal at a party in the kitchen because 1) I just don’t know what to say to people if it isn’t meaningful dialogue, 2) I experience energetic sensory overload, and 3) being “busy” is better than being “antisocial.”  In this perfectly busy life, I don’t often get to sit at a coffee shop for hours discussing the philosophies of life [RIP Ike’s Truck Stop].  I don’t get to meet random people, dominate them in a game of chess, then drive 400 miles on a whim… all while discussing the philosophies of life.  I don’t get to smoke a bowl, listen to my friend jam on the acoustic guitar, and write songs… about the philosophies of life [You know who you are….You are an amazing artist: Follow your dreams!].  With three kids, that life just isn’t practical or safe.  So… in order to maintain my sanity, I must do something a little crazy: Spill it all in a blog.  The safe and practical way for the modern-day philosopher [and working single mom; aka “A boss”] to share the love of ideas and learning.

[Songs that best caption who I am: “I’d Have To Be Crazy” by Willie Nelson and “Wide Open Spaces” by The Dixie Chicks]

Happy blogging!