Election

I will be taking mother to the polls tomorrow. I assume she will vote republican; I will abstain. I don't trust Trump and I can't bring myself to vote for the party that condones turning little boys into little girls and vice versa. I remember a quote from Queen Victoria, "My only regret in life is not being born a man." Imagine her shock to learn that in the present day, there are men who are voluntarily castrating themselves to become members of the 'weaker sex' and yet feminists still believe that women are oppressed. In this age when gender should be irrelevant, it has instead become an issue surrounded by increasing confusion and disillusion.

Collectors

Why do people collect things? It seems like a particularly deranged psychology is necessary to assign inflated value to something simply because only one or a few people have something when the item or items themselves have no intrinsic value (i.e. you can't eat it or wear it or shelter under it).

Alpha Male

When I was growing up, my older brother claims that I was constantly attacking him verbally. He says I would make statements not obviously directed at him but passive aggressively trying to goad him into a fight. This he interpreted as an attack.

I think what I was really doing was testing him. I would make statements and ask questions, sometimes in response to assertions he made. My brother viewed this as a threat. I think, as the younger sibling and female (yes, at birth but is there really any other kind?), my behavior was actually quite normal. How else was I supposed to determine if he was really as confident and awesome as he tried to make everyone believe. How else could I know if, as a resident male, he was worthy of my allegiance? How else could I find out if he was capable of protecting me from the screwed up, scary outside world?

I think, in some sense, it was actually a mis-represented complement. The correct response was confident instruction, calmly explaining why I was wrong, or graciously being open to new ideas and ways of thinking. This would have made me feel safe, confident in the knowledge that he knew what he was doing. Instead, his reaction was to become defensive and degenerate into arguing and verbal abuse. This made me feel very anxious and probably contributed to life-long digestive issues.

As a child, I wanted to know if I could trust my brother as a protector, but I think the same philosophy translates into romantic relationships.

Men often think women are annoying and this is sometimes an excuse for knocking them around. Men think by doing this, they are asserting their dominance and, putting the woman in her place. But that could not be further from the truth. What they are really doing is asserting their intellectual insecurity and using their obviously greater physical strength to gain control of the situation.

I think many times when women are 'annoying' what they are really doing is testing men in an attempt to find out if they are really as awesome (smart, funny, patient, etc.) as they say they are. Ultimately, the woman's goal is to try and find out if this man is worthy of giving up the months and years of her life necessary to bear and raise his child. Of course, most of this is done instinctually and subconsciously, which is what makes it all so confusing for both parties.

Utopian Society

 What if the government made all the decisions but what if they made the right ones?

What if they supported sustainable agriculture and holistic medicine instead of letting the chemical and pharmaceutical companies run amok in private industry? What if treatment decisions were based on understanding human physiology instead of statistical associations?

What if they passed a law making it illegal to manufacture or own firearms? There would still be plenty of bows and arrows and knifes so hunters could still provide food for their families. (If a guy with no arms can do it, anyone can. #MattStutzman)

What if they promoted the acceptance of people who did not conform to traditional gender roles instead of supporting genital mutilation and chemical castration? What if they endorsed a woman's right to choose what happens within her own body but encouraged her to make that choice before becoming pregnant?

What if income was based on the creation of value? If I can't eat it or wear it and it won't keep me warm at night, I'm not buying it. That is not to say that entertainment and sports and iPhones have no value, but those industries are making billions of dollars while farmers and ranchers (who provide the basic necessities of food and clothing) struggle to make ends meet. (Yes, clothing, because the only things that should be rubbing against human skin are cotton and wool.)

What if all prepared foods with more than five ingredients were banned from grocery stores and home economics was required curriculum in public schools? (Final project: seven-course formal dinner)

No one will probably read this blog, though because I am not a rich and famous social influencer. What does Kim Kardasian have that I don't? Lots of money? How much of that money did she acquire by selling useless and over-priced belongings to impressionable young (and perhaps some not so young) women, desperately trying to change their lives by acquiring more stuff?

Second Brain

I have recently learned that personality (and mental health) can be significantly influenced by the bacteria in a person's gut. This phenomenon is referred to as the gut-brain axis and seems to be primarily controlled by the vagus nerve.

So who are we really? Is our gut microbiome a part of ourselves or should we view it as yet another environmental stimulus that influences our decisions? It must be noted that the composition of this internal microcosm, as opposed to the environment at large, is highly correlated with diet, and as such, we have some control over it. Therefore, it appears healthy eating habits can result not only in physical benefits but also mental ones as well.

Guns in America

The right to bear arms was an amendment crafted by the founding fathers so that the general populous should have the ability to organize against an oppressive government. They had no concept of the technological invention of mass killing machines that would take place in the future. Revolvers were not mass produced until the 1830s and rifles would not become mainstream until the invention of the faster loading Minie ball right before the Civil War.

This new technology was specifically designed for killing people, as efficiently as possible, usually in massive government wars. During the remainder of the 19th century, the maturation of such effective weapons of mass destruction would also result in the near extermination of a number of keystone animal species: grizzly bears, wolves, mountain lions, American bison, African elephants, rhinoceroses, and tigers.

Following the advent of automatic weapons (machine guns) just before the turn of the 20th century, people started turning gun barrels on private citizens with increasing frequency as more guns were being sold to individuals and ultimately finding their way into the hands of criminals.

Nothing good has come from this invention and yet, this mass slaughter of both humans and animals is all legitimized behind the veil of the second amendment. The founding fathers did not intend for their constitution to be used as an excuse for selling murder weapons.

Happiness

Some people seek happiness in the world. Some people seek happiness in God. I think both are missing the point. It is a well-known fact that happiness derived from material possessions is short lived. Neither can God make us happy, although He may want it so.

The Dalai Lama says the secret to happiness is love and kindness. We must learn to love each other. Anger never solved anything and will only antagonize the other person further. However, if one reacts with kindness, there is at least a chance of a positive resolution.

This idea is not unique to religion. Dale Carnegie said something similar in his book 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'... basically, something to the effect of "when you argue, all you get is two mad people." By the way, reading this book completely changed my perspective on how to interact with people. I think it helped me understand why many people act the way they do and how I could change my own behavior if I wanted to reduce the friction in my life.

Reacting with kindness is not without cost, however. Always 'turning the other cheek' at some point becomes too exhausting. You have to decide how much of yourself you are willing to sacrifice in order for the other person to get their way. Maybe that is where God comes in; He gives us strength.

"God called me in the morning and asked me would I do good for him alone without reputation." -Florence Nightingale