Therapists say that something that you do repetitively can become an addiction, and should not be done. I told her I’ve been breathing since I was born but I don’t think I want a cure.
Month: January 2016
AneCDOtes
Sometimes people can’t take no for an answer. They feel like they know what’s best for you and that you are to feeble minded to know what the problem is. You know people like that. These people try to force their views on you and trying to force your views on someone is like forcing a suppository, shit just won’t come out right.
FACT OF THE DAY!
The Psychology of Embarrassment
Embarrassment is a key human emotion that we’ve all experienced, usually at the cost of our own dignity. It’s a state of self-conscious distress that causes many of us to blush. And it’s something most of us work hard to avoid.
The APA’s Monitor has an interesting article this month looking into the psychology of embarrassment and the research behind it. Embarrassment can act as a powerful and beneficial social glue strengthening our social relationships with others.
But it can also have a dark side, as we seek to avoid it — sometimes at the cost of our own health or happiness.
While there’s little we can do to stop embarrassment in every situation, we can better understand the purpose it serves in our emotional health. Understanding how it can serve and hurt us means we’ll be better prepared the next time it pops up in our life.
Embarrassment has both good components:
The benefit of embarrassment, however, might depend on who’s watching. Anja Eller, PhD, an associate professor of social psychology at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, has found that people are more likely to be embarrassed when they err in front of members of their own social group. People are less embarrassed when outsiders see them goof up, especially when the outsiders are seen as lower in status.
… and bad:
Case in point: shopping for condoms. Researchers at Duke University found that buying condoms often elicits embarrassment, potentially putting people at risk of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies if they’re too mortified to take the prophylactics through the checkout lane (Psychology, Health & Medicine, 2006).
That’s just one of many examples of embarrassment affecting our well-being. Men may fail to get prostate exams, women could skip mammograms, seniors may avoid using hearing aids, and people of all stripes might fail to mention awkward symptoms or avoid the doctor altogether.
Researchers have found that embarrassment is adaptive. “Expressing the emotion tends to repair social relations and elicit forgiveness. And as [one researcher] has shown, signs of sheepishness may even advertise trustworthiness.”
So now you have a better of idea how embarrassment can both help and hurt you.
“QUOTE OF THE DAY”
Embarrassment is personified by the position you hold, slipping and falling is way funnier when you are famous.
FACT OF THE DAY!
The Human Voice – Pitch
Pitch
The human voice is a magical tool. It can be used to identify those we know and love; to create wonderful music through singing; it allows people to communicate verbally; and, it can help in the recognition of emotions. Everyone has a distinct voice, different from all others; almost like a fingerprint, one’s voice is unique and can act as an identifier. The human voice is composed of a multitude of different components, making each voice different; namely, pitch, tone, and rate. The following article, the first of a three part series on the voice, will discuss the pitch component of the voice. It will explore what voice pitch is, how it is used and how it can be influential. The human voice has many components and is created through a myriad of muscle movements. Pitch is an integral part of the human voice. The pitch of the voice is defined as the “rate of vibration of the vocal folds” . The sound of the voice changes as the rate of vibrations varies. As the number of vibrations per second increases, so does the pitch, meaning the voice would sound higher. Faster rates form higher voices, or higher pitches, while slower rates elicit deeper voices, or lower pitches. How are these vibrations and pitches created? The vibrations, and the speed at which they vibrate, are dependent on the length and thickness of the vocal cords, as well as the tightening and relaxation of the muscles surrounding them. This explains why women generally have higher voices than men do; women tend to have higher voices because they have shorter vocal cords. The length and thickness of the vocal cords, however, are not the only factors that affect one’s pitch. The pitch of someone’s voice can also be affected by emotions, moods and inflection. Interestingly, our emotions can also affect the pitch of our voices. When people become frightened or excited, the muscles around the voice box (or larynx) unconsciously contract, putting strain on the vocal cords, making the pitch higher. Again, not all pitch change is done unconsciously. A change in pitch is known as inflection and humans exercise this naturally all the time. People tend to exercise conscious control of the pitch of their voice when refraining from screaming, because it tightens and strains the vocal cords, or changing the pitch of our voice to mimic someone, for instance. The voice tends to change, sliding up and down the pitch scale, as we express different emotions, thoughts and feelings. Pitch is not solely an objective component of voice; research has shown that pitch is associated with attractiveness amongst men and women. Studies done by Collins & Missing and Feinberg et al discovered that men deemed women with higher pitched voices more attractive. This may be because higher pitched voices are associated with youth and fertility in women. Women, on the other hand, tend to find men with lower pitched voices sexy and desirable.
A study done by Putz found that women associated low-pitched men’s voices with uncommitted sex, making these men sexually preferred. Putz also discovered that women’s desire for men with lower pitched voices increased with fertility over the ovulatory cycle. These findings may be shocking to many as so often it is men that are deemed those who are searching for uncommitted sex while women are searching for a man offering fertility and stability. Similar to the aforementioned studies, researchers from Harvard University, Florida State University and McMaster discovered that pitch predicted reproductive success of males amongst hunter-gatherers. These researchers, studying the reproductive patterns of the Hadza, a tribe in Tanzania, found that men with lower pitched voices tended to have more children. This could be because the Hazda women chose men with lower pitched voices because they believed them to be better providers. In addition, studies have shown that low pitch voices are associated with higher levels of testosterone, so women may have chosen these men because they perceived them to be better hunters. It seems voice pitch, an arbitrary characteristic, can certainly have important impacts on human sexual preference and mating, as well as what we find attractive in the opposite sex. The pitch of our voices is created through vibrations of the vocal folds. The rate at which these folds vibrate changes the way our voices sound, with faster rates equating higher pitches. Studies have shown that women tend to prefer men with lower pitched voices and find these men more attractive. Furthermore, it has been discovered that men with lower pitched voices seem to have more children, perhaps owing to the fact that more women are attracted to them or that these men are viewed as stronger. The pitch of one’s voice can help in unconsciously divulging the feelings and emotions, but can also be consciously manipulated so as not to put strain on the vocal cords or to create a certain sound. The voice and the way it is used are unique to every individual.
“QUOTE OF THE DAY”
I once worked up the courage to go speak to a woman at a coffee shop and as I was approaching she got up with her stuff and said “I love the way you speak” I said “I didn’t say anything” she said “Exactly” and gathered her stuff and left.
Demo Debate 1/17/16
The Demo debate started the same way all other debates did, with the candidates walking out on stage. There was no dancing, no hip hop or as my grandfather would say, “hippity hoppity goings on”, there was no fireworks or ballyhoo. Just straight walk to the podium. Sometimes it’s alright to tune in a little late to a debate.
The debate started with a simple format, the candidates were first asked for their opening remarks and to name three things they most care about . They all pretty much parroted themselves without the awkward gaawwwk sound in between speeches. The Demos started with business as usual. Poor people are being picked on and it’s the Repubs fault, Big business runs the planet, climate change is going to give you a perpetual winter and since you are poor you can’t have skis or a fur coat, minimum wage needs to be raised and that you are still poor and it’s still the Repubs fault, health care, especially mental illness, is a problem mainly because they feel you must be crazy if you don’t vote for them and green energy, living wage, family care and medical leave act, gun control,campaign finance and about five or six other things. I don’t think they understood the concept of three. Right after two and before you hit four. Three. I couldn’t write fast enough and my TIVO was busy recording the football game, alright Homeland. Either way I couldn’t get their three issues down.
GUNS
Sanders – I am relooking into our position of gun control. For now it remains don’t grasp the weapon to tight or it will throw off your aim. Don’t see the need for military style weapons, even for hunters. Background checks should be made for everyone. When questioned about his support for weapons, Sanders said he has a D minus rating by the NRA and did not support going after small dealers for the actions of crazy killer people.
Clinton – All guns, except for my secret service guys, should be in your homes. No immunity for gun shop owners. Gun violence is a plague and they don’t donate to my campaign.
O’Malley – For President in ’20 or ’24, depending.
My take is guns are going to be used whether you try to control them or not. Criminals always find ways to get guns. Banning long guns makes no sense because long guns are easier to take away from a person then a pistol. Most gun assaults happen within 30 feet of the person and very few are sniper shots and shooting on automatic, instead of semi automatic is way less accurate. Their reasons for gun control are not great. You may want to ban weapons that the Secret Service uses to the general public or any weapon that doesn’t have a good kick on automatic, beyond that and without banning weapons completely, you really should look at how to make it so you can disable a weapon by remote use. That’s the only way to stop mass shootings.
African American Rights-Civil Rights
Moderators made it clear that Clinton leads Sanders in the African American vote,, they asked the candidate why does he think that is.
Sanders – Mostly responded because he is an unknown commodity and when they get to know me they will change their mind. One of Sanders biggest moments of the night came about the unequal treatment of minorities. His biggest reference was to how a young black man will see jail time for marijuana possession but CEO’s who defraud the government and are made to pay a fine of 5 billion dollars don’t see one day of jail time. It echoed loudly. Marijuana now seems to be more dangerous then ripping off the government. He went off, HE WENT OFF, that means he did really well and was very emotional about the issue and not that he nodded off, because he’s old, it’s funny because he’s old. Sanders was also the first to mention Latino voters. Sanders also said that changes should be made in policing, that it should be community policing and not para-military, that answer came from a video question from the public
Clinton – Stated that she has a long record of fighting inequality. Wasn’t overly animated about the subject but was on point, as usual. Referenced several cases and people that she has worked with over the years. Clinton also said that the war on drugs should be treated as a medical condition, I wonder if that means El Chapo needs a therapist.
O’Malley – For President in ’20 or ’24, depending.
This round went to Sanders on the virtue of pointing out the injustice of socioeconomic situations and how the justice system is blind unless it smells cash, then it peeks through it’s blindfold. Don’t tell Bernie Madoff though, he didn’t get the memo, I guess you can’t rip off rich people. O’Malley said something too, can’t remember what.
I believe that drug addiction is something that doctors should treat but if you stop the entry of drugs into the country then there will be less need for interdictions. It should be fought on many fronts.
Health Insurance
Sanders – Free universal health care that you have to pay for. Ha, actually, he will tax you on your income for it but he will eliminate the need for Insurance premiums which he boasts that in the long run would save you $5,000.00 or so a year. Sander’s plan was put out two hours prior and given a sneak peek to some economists which said that it isn’t as outrageous as it sounds. I don’t know if that is an endorsement or not.
Clinton – Build on the existing plan, the ACA, and make it better. Work out the bugs and make into a plan for everyone. For her part, saying that starting over with new legislation will be to difficult.
O’Malley – For President in ’20 or ’24, depending.
This round was a weird arm wrestling match between Sanders and Clinton. Clinton kept stating that starting over would be to hard and Sanders said that it wasn’t a tax even though I’m going to tax you, because you won’t be paying Insurance premiums, which would offset the tax that isn’t a tax. I’m confused. In this, the round goes to O’Malley, who didn’t speak. Health Care is a difficult issue and the person that has to address it, no matter who, is going to have a difficult time. Good luck to the next President on it.
Bringing The Country Together
Sanders – For his part never changed his position, get rid of special interest, you get rid of your problems. Class warfare. Special Interest’s fault. Drugs, inequality, high taxes, herpes, special interests fault. I see a theme here.
Clinton – Says she is a uniter of people, don’t know if she meant like match . com or like a boxing promoter. Her biggest hurdle will be congress, who have shown a little bit of a disliking for her, even though she says she has worked with them in the past and will do so in the future. The dislike could easily be because she is seen as the front runner for the Demo’s, Sander’s is creeping up in the dislike poll for the Repubs.
O’Malley – For President in ’20 or ’24, depending. I think he said, can I say something, the moderators said commercial break!
Round Clinton, because she answered the question, even though I liked Bernie’s persistence that the world is rainbows and lollipops if special interest hadn’t stole them.
Big Business
Sanders – Sander’s bread and butter. If you are to big to fail you are to big to be. Not exactly Shakespeare but close and he might have known William personally, because he’s old, that’s funny because he’s old. He also made a reference on how under dressed jails are and need more suits in there, that they are attached to bankers is a plus. He feels that CEO’s should face the power of the Department of Justice’s sword with full ferocity and know what it’s like to see the world obstructed with metal pinstripes instead of the gold shiny ones on their suits.
Clinton – Best line of the night, “No bank to big to fail, No person to big to jail”. That’s an awesome slogan. With her, uh, pending review from the Department of Justice, it was a bold statement. The fact is Sec. Clinton is not going to be prosecuted and she is right on focusing her talent on giving us her best view of herself for President. She said that she has stood up against the Wolf on Wall St. and will continue to do so.
O’Malley – For Presi….. wait, in this argument he kept interrupting Clinton and saying she
was not being completely forthcoming. That she took donations from big business and that her rhetoric was all for show. Clinton fired back but since she is all for gun control, her gun had no bullets.
Round Sanders, did you expect anything else. I swear Sanders applied to work with one of these companies and they just pointed and laughed. Sanders dislikes, to say the least, the Wolf on Wall Street, maybe they stole his farm, I don’t know. He sees it as THE problem to address and he may be right. 16 years ago, he wasn’t, now, maybe. Timing, it’s what differentiates champions from the would be contenders. I think his timing for his disgust for big business might be what resonates the loudest.
IRAN AND SYRIA
Sanders – This would be Sander’s weakest attribute, mainly because anytime you ask him about anything, somehow, special interest makes its way into the discussion. How do you handle ISIS, take down Goldman Sachs. Not this time, he was concise, strong and well versed. I forgot what he said. Just kidding, he said, I’m not putting anyone in harms way so they can do something that other people should do for themselves. We’re not mercenaries for hire. Sanders, correctly stated, in my opinion, to focus on one thing and get it done. In this case, the threat of ISIS. We’ll handle Assad later, diplomatically. On Iran, Diplomacy was the word of the day. This is where the Repubs and the Demos differ.
Clinton – For the most part echoed Sander’s sentiments, a change from her previous positions as Sec. of State. Sec. Clinton has a checkered past in foreign affairs. That will happen when you are part of it longer than the people you are running against. That doesn’t excuse it but it can lead to some leeway, nobody is perfect, but she did previously say that taking out Assad was a priority, even through military might. Madam Secretary now says that diplomacy would probably be the best option. I don’t care about flip flops I care that you ultimately get it right. I think that is the right choice.
O’Malley – For President in ’20 or ’24, depending.
I was in the military, served my country during time of war. Didn’t see any of the candidates there, Repub or Demo, know what I mean. Quick to send someone in there to fight before trying something else, great, It’s your choice as Commander in Chief,( I swear it should be and but it’s in). Twenty-six of our 44 Presidents served in the military. Presidential Veterans often coincided with America’s military engagements. The last to serve was “W” in the Air Force Reserves, the last one to actually take up arms in a conflict was H.W. as a pilot who earned a distinguished flying cross and was shot down. H.W. enlisted on his own and was not drafted. Of the candidates that are vying for position to send young men and women off to die, none have volunteered for military duty or have worked at a VA. I’m not putting down these candidates, I’m just reminding them that there is more to fighting a war then appeasing their constituents, most who have probably not served either. I, personally, never made it to war and I’m probably luckier for it. But I joined, for personal reasons and knew people that served. I would definitely make it my last option to let anyone die over something that could have been negotiated.
The Rest Of The Issues
The candidates were also asked about Privacy, all of them for it, Lone Wolfs, all of them against it, Climate Change, Sanders blames Goldman Sachs, and asked about Bill Clinton. The last one was a surprise. I didn’t know that the former President was running again, I guess as a Repub? How did Bill become an issue? He is a captivating public figure with some indiscretions in the past. I don’t judge him by that, I judge him by his work as President. He’s one of the best in the last 50 years. That simple. His one gaffe, deregulation of the banks. Like I said, no one is perfect. Coincidentally enough, it came at the same time as Ms. Lewinsky, maybe a compromise with congress. Either way, he shouldn’t have done it, either of it. Sec. Clinton was asked about using her husband as an adviser, she said she would let him talk at the kitchen table, beyond that she would take it as it goes.
Sen Sanders was asked about his remark saying that Bill Clinton’s actions with Ms. Lewinsky very, very, very disgusting. Last night, when pressed about if he regretted saying that, Sanders looked peeved and rightfully so. This isn’t Days of Our Lives, it’s a presidential debate. Are you asking the man who gave an answer to a question, who was asked and didn’t just blurt it out, if he regretted saying that adultery is wrong about a very influential and liked former President in the Demo ranks? It was a lose lose question. You degrade the popular President and you screwed yourself, figuratively of course, you say that adultery is Ok, then you aren’t winning the nod. I’m going to give Sanders massive credit for doing something that he doesn’t normally do, thinking on his feet and finding a viable way out. He didn’t blame Golden Sachs, even though he probably thought about it, he said that action was deplorable but he wasn’t here to degrade anyone, that he was here to talk about the issues that concern the American people. It was a gotcha question by the moderators that got them. The question was in poor taste and do not see any good use for it, unless it was meant to trip him up. You can’t condone bad behavior but Bill is definitely still viewed positively in the Demo party. For his part Sanders handled it very well and shame on the moderators, bullies. The other person that handled it well, Sec. Clinton. She smiled and let it roll off her shoulders and thanked Sanders for his smart maneuvering.
Winner, Sanders but not by a lot. It was close until the Bill question. Then Sanders eeked it out.
As for Martin O’Malley, for President in ’20 or ’24, depending.
FACT OF THE DAY!
Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968) was a Baptist minister and social activist who played a key role in the American civil rights movement from the mid-1950s until his assassination in 1968. Inspired by advocates of nonviolence such as Mahatma Gandhi, King sought equality for African Americans, the economically disadvantaged and victims of injustice through peaceful protest. He was the driving force behind watershed events such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the March on Washington, which helped bring about such landmark legislation as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 and is remembered each year on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a U.S. federal holiday since 1986.
“QUOTE OF THE DAY”
A great man with great vision and in defense of our blog we are neither sincere nor conscientious.
FACT OF THE DAY!
“How EINSTEIN Arrived at E=MC2“
Dear Friend:
Most people think Einstein was a genius. Even though he did poorly in school, it is generally assumed that Einstein became a genius later on. It’s also widely believed that he used superior intellect and complex mathematical reasoning to finally arrive at E=MC2.
The truth about Einstein is altogether different. Even though he was pretty smart, his accomplishments didn’t come from a wildly superior intellect. He didn’t arrive at his famous equation by complex mathematical reasoning. In fact, he didn’t use mathematical or scientific reasoning at all!
If Einstein didn’t arrive at E=MC2 by mathematical or scientific reasoning, how did he get there? The answer is very simple…
He made it up!
That’s right. He took a wild stab. He guessed. He made it all up! Without any proof, evidence, or scientific reasoning, he just woke up one day and said “It’s got to be so.” Then, in 1905, he published his “discovery” in a three-paged article in an obscure scientific journal and…well, the rest is history.
Here’s what really happened.
Einstein wasn’t as big a genius as most people think. He did have a curious mind, however, and he wasn’t afraid to think differently than other people around him believed.
Around the time Einstein became interested in physics (1895), electricity, magnetism, and the phenomenon of light were all under intensive study. A number of scientific theories and mathematical equations had already been worked out. There was even a type of relativity theory in existence, called the relativity principle, which had been formulated centuries earlier by the astronomer Galileo.
Most scientists at the time were completely satisfied with these prevailing theories. There were a few situations these theories couldn’t satisfactorily explain, but these exceptions were considered insignificant and no one really paid much attention to them.
No one, except Einstein, that is.
Einstein was intrigued by these “holes” in the prevailing theories. In fact, he enjoyed posing “mind riddles” to himself, just to see if present theories could satisfactorily explain them.
One such riddle he posed to himself was this: If a person was flying in space at the speed of light (ala Superman) with his/her arm fully outstretched holding a facial mirror, what would they “see” in the mirror? Would they see their face? Would it be bigger or smaller than if they were stationary? Would it be distorted in any way? Would light waves have time to bounce off their face, hit the mirror, and bounce back to their retina which was also moving at the speed of light? And what if an observer was watching all this from the ground. What would he or she see?
This was the riddle that eventually led Einstein to E=MC2. As you can see, it’s nothing exceptional. You or I could have easily wondered the same thing.
What made Einstein different, however, is that he refused to give up until he solved the riddle. He didn’t stay with this riddle for just a week or two, as you or I might have done. He didn’t give up after a month went by without an answer. He didn’t even quit after a year or two of racking his brain.
This story is dedicated my son, don’t ever give up finding the right answer. Common sense is sometimes the answer.
For the conclusion of this story go to this link Einstein
mannysblog.com 