Weekend
 Wiki * IMDB

Review aside, the movie showed three instances of CCTV cameras, which made me think even further about the nature of suceptability of queer people (someone mentions a gay guy been beaten for cruising in a park), the suckiness/rite of passage characteristic of coming out, and the different kind of queers out there (which then have different types of gazes upon them).

First time there is a security camera near the building where Russ lives; the shot is a couple of seconds long and the camera pans from side to side. Being out sucks sometimes. It does have a liberating sense in which you are aware and feel empowered on how you are going to feel and how you will respond to others out there. But is painful sometimes too because it leaves you exposed to all the bullshit that bigots out there presume about your life, what you want to do with it, and how you behave. Russ says he is happy in his home, but his semi-out self feels uncomfortable sharing his uneasiness, as well as his feelings being queer with his close non-queer friends.

The second time is at the train station; the PA system reminds everyone that everything is being recorded for security purposes. Coming out (which is something you do for the rest of your life) does feel like a rite of passage. At this point, my choosing to share with someone about my boyfriend does little to the fact that I am indeed exposing myself to a non 'tolerating' opinion about who I am. As Glen helped Russ have that experience, I felt like I was also helped by several catalytic events in my life that pushed me to those moments. Regardless, I am happy they happened and I am glad the way they turned out.

The third time is right at the end of the movie; we see the CCTV camera again on top of the building when we see Russ in his window. No matter if you are the loud queer who talks and closes down a party everytime you get the chance about your struggle as a queer person of color, or the quiet passive one that chooses to pass by, the gaze is always there. Sadly, this is the gaze that turns some of us off, whereas it evokes a desire to speak in others. The gaze is sometimes too much to bear, like when you have to live in a time where the government decides the best way you get to enjoy your life living as who you are. The gaze is always there, and it is always watching how we comply...or not.

Ke$ha and Foucault are 'sleazy'

I'm reading the first volume of the history of sexuality by Michel Foucault concurrently with a friend, as we've decided to book club it. As I'm reading on the plane, I am also listening to my iPod while doing so. I noticed a particular song transition, that is very common in my music library: it went from a french opera (is on the Marie Antoinette soundtrack) to a song from Ke$ha. If you don't know Ke$ha, I'll gladly post a video here to illustrate.

The particular song that came up, Sleazy, is an interesting one. Ke$ha as a phenomenon of the pop scene, is also a good example of a resurgence of a movement that plainly speaks of sexual exploits, nightlife and re-showing us the simplicity of non-glamorous-hollywood outings, that any of us 'attend' to on any given day. Sleazy is not about going to the hottest club, but more about being comfortable in your own skin with your friends; even when that level of comfortability means being crass, vulgar and in her own words: "scummy".

More so, through the electronic dance genre that is nowadays more common in mainstream pop, the song proclaims the victory of a working class night out. It rejects the company of those that flash their presupposed upward mobility in bars/clubs. The bourgeoisie is called out and Ke$ha rejects any type of sexuality that is subjected to that discourse. The partygoer is on a selfish adventure in Ke$ha's posse and her group of "girls" and her "boys" to get "sleazy"; something not so subtly extrapolated when the song onomatopoeically sexualizes the activity by saying:

"Rat tat tat tat on your dum dum drum

The beat so phat, gonna make me cum, um, um um, um

(Over to your place!)"

And we come back to now start a discussion on how Foucault described discoursal scenarios such as this one in regards to the how we are 'conditioned' to repress the level of sexual detail we are willing to accept before we condemn Ke$ha to being a slut. I expect to have more answers and a better understanding on the phenomenon that Ke$ha exemplifies as I keep on reading. In the meantime, I will keep being sleazy in much the same way Ke$ha celebrates.

Howl's moving castle and a bit about race

SPOILER ALERT

I loved this book. 


It is a beautiful story that borders on happy-go-lucky, without being too cheesy. But I found a detail in the end a bit disturbing; that is when Calcifer decides to come back to castle after everything happened. 
This reminded me a bit too much of Stockholm Syndrome, and I think without the proper context it might send the wrong message to some (by making it seem so trivial). But I don't think authors are necessarily in charge of the own social message they carry (at least I'm fiction)-if they want to make a commentary, they are more than welcome- so that some responsibility is carried over to the reader.

I realized later, that the book does try to give a proper context to the relationship of Calcifer and Howl in light of the nature in which i interpreted it. Even more so, the following books explain this matter much  better and deeper; problem is, I don't know what to make of their relationship. Is it co-slavery or co-mastership? Does this even matter? Regardless, there is the perception of a unequal power relationship and that caught my attention and was always in the back burner while I was reading the book. The author made this even more exciting by weaving the plot in ambiguous clues into the relationship of Calcifer and Howl (Howlifer as the tabloids would call it...no?)

On an unseeingly unrelated point, this made me think about conversations that I have had with friends and co-workers about race and Latin America. The main point in these discussions being that race in Latin America is so much more complex than in the US; and as such, trying to compare the black/white dichotomy of the Anglo colonial/republic discourse falls short when trying to talk about Latin America. The problem further complicates itself when all these studies (and scholars) that reside here in the north (see allusions to USA) accuse the Central and South Americas (including of course the Caribbean) of rampant racism and of using colonization as an excuse to ignore our blackness. Racism exists, but the situation is so much more complex than that, and more than often these accusations reek of ethnocentrism; and I'm more than willing to bring my lemon pledge.


One has to think of the colonization processes and histories of each country and their respective metropolises in Europe. While rampantly racist, Spanish colonization characterized itself with mestizaje (intermixing). The late enlightenment in Ibero-America brought to Spanish Speaking American countries a criollo (creole, local, native) pride in their respective national identities, so that the 19th century became a focal point of ethnic differentiation from Europe and independence movements that highlighted their mixed ethnicity as Mexicans, Venezuelans, Colombians, etc (of course this needs deeper discussion, but of course this intermixing was of course mostly 'white' with a bit of color-not too much, cause...apparently that was not cool back then...being brown and all). This happened in some Latin Americans countries where these conditions surfaced; except in the countries where indigenous people were still alive (they were mostly ignored by the new elite); except also in those countries where indigenous people were driven to extinction, (e.g. most of the Caribbean) and where these indigenous identities, now long gone, were romanticized; except in those places where blacks were the majority... maybe it wasn't that homogenous after all.

My point exactly...

There is too much diversity from place to place to talk about race in one sentence and try to express national identity, ethnic origins and racial politics. Sadly, the constant in many of these places was the reproduction of how we look at our African ancestry. In Puerto Rico, the extinct Taíno society became an emblem of the original settlers to drive out the Spanish colonizers; all the while reconstructing this past in lieu of our African culture.


Everyone (most) knows and acknowledges the influences of our African Ancestors as heritage and genetics; thankfully this heritage is not limited to people who phenotypically look 'black' (whatever that is). Also, nobody in Puerto Rico says they're Spanish, or Taíno (except a few people, and I have a strong opinion about this, but alas another time), or African. The shared knowledge of being Puerto Rican permits a fluid identity that has been discoursally fed through the state and cultural apparatuses; the same apparatuses that feed racism to all of us.

Nonetheless, the discourse and collective consciousness of being a mestizo society does not mean that our ideology is an excuse, but more so a different reality than the one in the US. Therefore, being Puerto Rican (in the island I must add, for pseudo methodological and theoretical reasons) allows you to not think about race in the same way that they do here in the US. To be honest, we are made 'aware' of these nuances and dichotomies of the racial headache of the US when we come to the mainland. The fluidity is amazing... and complex.

Why did Howl made me think of this? Maybe it was the connotations of negotiated meanings
in the relationship between Calcifer and Howl. Their co-dependency was filled with borderline hate, love and the life debt they owed one another. Who was really the slave and who was the master? Who was negotiating the meaning of the existence of the other? Why oh why did Calcifer come back?


Paradoxes, complications and a dash of racism? of course, but again, not just black and white. It's more grey, and we all fall in the middle.

Love, Hate...more hate than love

Writing...

I like to write, yet I find myself hating what I write. I find my topics, lackluster... And this is not something related to my blog or any type of scheme where I want to become rich/famous; more like I really and truly don't have any confidence in my writing.

I am not trying to rally up support by this, just venting my frustration, as my work and academic career depends on my critical analysis and writing skills. I am not recalling my last duchess flaunting the paradox of my skill with words. I want to learn and improve.

Where I try to write a coherent start to my comprehensive examination

I am medical anthropologist, in case you haven't noticed.

The topic of health and it's sociocultural variables has lately permeated our understandings of how we come to view and understand the health systems around the world. Globalization and social online media, has inserted in the front page of our lives a variety of topics. A lot of these topics are related to health: read the aftermath of Chernobyl, new debates about how to prevent HIV and etc...As doctoral student, I am expected to master the literature to the point where I am able to make my own assertions and contributions in the discipline. Given the abundance of information, here on the interwebs, I am challenging myself to use this medium as a way to start writing my comprehensive exam, that is coming up at the end of this month.

The Internet is a bit overwhelming with this information, and seldom one finds information that has been curated to scientific standards; but as an anthropologist, this overwhelming feeling is actually what I need to measure the discoursal themes running around a globalized world (am I allowed to make such a statement?). Regardless, given the new cultural importance of the online medium, I think of it as an appropriate way where I can start the reconstruction of my topic in medical anthropology, so that I can be deemed (at least) knowledgeable in the discipline. I will start with my own definition of the discipline.

It is my understanding that medical anthropology is primarily a subdiscipline of anthropology, that can be studied either from a socio-cultural perspective or a bioanthropological one. I am a socio-cultural anthropologist, therefore my focus is on examining and studying biomedical and epidemiological variables that public health professionals seem to reduce to certain signifiers, devoid of their social and cultural meanings.

It is our job to give meaning and study them, where others see none.
-
To be continued...

The body

American anthropology, specially medical anthropology seems to conceptualize the body in ways that it makes it a medium and point of convergence where experience takes place. Pain, suffering and illness all take central stage on the body, even though experience transcends it more than often. I would imagine that is especially particular to illness and our relationships with our health systems.

What makes even more interesting, is that anthropology has brought back historic notions of the body to IT; I mean, through critical analysis of social and cultural theory, the discipline has been able to bring back the factors and variables that many seem to ignore about the body and experience that deal with the body.

We forget that the body has a history and through it, has had different conceptualizations of it. The body of yesteryear is nothing like the body of nowadays. Sexuality, gender, age, aesthetics, desirability, all take place somewhat around the body, but it doesn't stop there; there is a continuum that seeks to expand the body and invade sociality and collective experience.

I was just thinking about this as I just completed my first week keeping a food diary, as I'm trying to lose weight, and I already lost 3 pounds.

P.S. Some of what I wrote is heavily influenced on a lot of Medical Anthropology literature. I don't take credit for being original about this, just theorizing...
P.S.S Main credits of influence go to Nancy Scheper-Hughes, Byron Good, Veena Das, Margaret Lock and Donna Haraway

Ingléñol (Cause I'm $%^& tired that Spanglish itself is a word in English)

English is retarded. Now, calm down, I don’t mean this in like: “ omg, that is so retarded” or “that’s gay”

More like, I truly believe english is a bit behind than some of its counterparts. And like a truly developmental linguistic disability, English is not dysfunctional, quite the opposite; but when you compare it to its sexy romance language cousins, English looks like a hipster in Columbia Heights, trying to not be mainstream on purpose and gentrifying everything around him/her.

Being bilingual...it sucks having to try to translate shit all the time. English as a second language, works as an excuse in class where you mess up words and pronunciations all the time... it also works when you just said something and everyone is looking at each other not knowing what the guy with the indecipherable (indecipherable in the way, they don’t know where in the world to place me) accent just said...basically, when you don’t know what the fuck you just said, you go into cute mode and utter: “but I don’t know, English is just my second language”.

And Bam, you just showed everyone that you’re slightly superior to them in a very backhanded way. It’s a nice way of saying: “I’m sorry stupid American, how many languages can you speak? Yeah, I thought so” SPANISH, ENGLISH, ITALIAN BITCH! and sometimes I lie and say that I know a bit of french, german, portuguese but who the fuck is going to challenge me at this point. But I digress...

I don’t mean to put down english completely. I know there is some beauty in it, but I’m slightly biased because I come from the marble-floors of the romance languages. I mean, they are called romance languages!!! English is a germanic language? right! Sorry guys, it just doesn’t sound sexy. But thing is that there are some things that will never translate. And those are some motherfucking roadblocks when you are trying to say something to others, and it just doesn’t come out. As an anthropologist, I bore everyone when trying to give them a proper context of where the concept I’m trying to properly say 'works' and how it came about. But sorry David, not everyone is interested in the etymology of why we call oranges “Chinas”. So there are feelings that will never translate, and some time ago I just gave up and started using English feelings with my  American friends.

There’s nothing like saying “Papi” to your father in any age in english without sounding pervy, like a child or just plain weird. Cause a 26 year old man calling his father daddy in english just isn’t right. Same thing with "Mami".

“Te quiero”... there’s no word or sentence in English that expresses this loving feeling of longing, caring and plain neediness that is less than “Te Amo” (I love you) but more important than I just like you. The closest thing is I like you...but, wtf I like you honey,but I also like hamburguerz. LOLZ 

I’m stuck between two different worldviews of feelings and translations. 

English get it together, you’re a globalized language.

Academia

Earlier today I felt like a failure, cause I compared myself to my more successful peers and felt short in my academic success. My coworker and friend told me that "that is such a pisces thing to do and more if you obsess about it" (she is a pisces too). For a while I was distraught. To be honest, this has been a tough year in my studies; mainly because I've been slacking off, my job is XXXL stressful (which shouldn't be, but...) and I haven't been on point this last year.

I guess that is one thing that often happens in academia: not everything goes your way or according to plan. Sometimes you get rejected from funding opportunities (3 times); sometimes you don't win the poster competition; sometimes you don't win the presentation competition; sometimes your pre-dissertation research doesn't take off; sometimes you get shitty results from your comprehensive exams; sometimes your boyfriend (who you are living with) gets the grant that you both applied to and you get an honorable mention; sometimes you break up with said boyfriend 3 weeks before your comprehensive exams and 2 weeks before you graduation and your-whole-family-is-coming-to-visit-for-graduation-and-to-meet-the-first-boy-you-are-living-with-and-you-don't-have-the-guts-to-tell-them-you've-broken-up... I always thought that I had everything figured out and that by know I will be on my way to finishing my exams and starting my fieldwork in my 4th year. Reality is way off.

I always sorta knew that great thinkers were drug users, alcoholics and so on, because they were so burdened with the reality and post-reality in which they lived and tried to interpret. Faith and conformity were not tools that they used for said purposes. Following this rationale, I went on a bender by which I lived life to the fullest and enjoyed myself. I embraced more my queer identity and started to go out and be out! I cared less about tomorrow and more about now. I had copious amount of sex, drank and "pained the fuck away"...I'm not ready to give all of this yet, but my resolve to do my degree is still there.

I love doing research; I love doing interviews; I love anthropology...yet, I'm burned out.

Not everything has been bad. I went to Mexico for a conference with my friends, and in the words of a friend who went with me "I have never seen you this happy"...How can you not be happy when swimming in a Cenote? It's just magical. I've also become closer with friends here; I even made new ones! This place is more like a home now than it was before. I have a great support system and people who love me.

I am involved with my community in the university; and while sometimes these commitments take time away from me, I am deeply satisfied working (even if it's in minute and small ways) towards the betterment of graduate student life in general and my anthropology classmates. So, my friend and coworker reminded me that indeed we have to remind ourselves of what we actually do and not minimize it. While i'm not going to list stuff that I do, I know that I do (and have done) a lot; though all that community service does not count for my academia cred.

Not everything goes according to plan. I need to keep on learning on how to accept unsystematic changes and deviations to plan and just work with it. Regardless of how horrible this last year has been.

*Le sigh for Academia*

one room disco

is the colors?
the aesthetics?
the product of the japanese stereotype/culture/sociological habitus they (try to) represent?
What is it?

video link

Why Asimov is my hero

[In response to this question by Bill Moyers: What do you see happening to the idea of dignity to human species if this population growth continues at its present rate?] "It's going to destroy it all. I use what I call my bathroom metaphor. If two people live in an apartment, and there are two bathrooms, then both have what I call freedom of the bathroom, go to the bathroom any time you want, and stay as long as you want to for whatever you need. And this to my way is ideal. And everyone believes in the freedom of the bathroom. It should be right there in the Constitution. But if you have 20 people in the apartment and two bathrooms, no matter how much every person believes in freedom of the bathroom, there is no such thing. You have to set up, you have to set up times for each person, you have to bang at the door, aren't you through yet, and so on. And in the same way, democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive it. Convenience and decency cannot survive it. As you put more and more people onto the world, the value of life not only declines, but it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies.
Interview by Bill Moyers on Bill Moyers' World Of Ideas (17 October 1988); transcript (page 6) - audio (20:12)


--------
Very interesting thought...

Ex-politicians and their influence in politics

Politics in Puerto Rico is almost an everyday topic. The different discussions that might casually arise in the supermarket, talking with your neighbor or family member, while waiting at the barbershop/beauty salon, while riding the bus, sometimes take a weird turn into politics. Mind you, some people are blindly supporting this or that candidate for the sole reason that they belong to their particular political party. While this does make sense in ideological parties like democrats (who represents from time to time some type of progressive agenda) and republicans (who more often than not espouse a regressive conservative agenda), back home people align themselves with three main political parties that represent three different goals for the political status of the island. The pro-statehood party, the pro-commonwealth party (stay as we are now) and the pro-independence party. This particular phenomenon translates to individuals in the different parties that can range from progressive to ultra-conservative in any one of them. So, to talk about politics back home is to talk about political status more or less...which makes sense given the relationship of the island with the US and the ambiguous definitions of what it means to be both Puerto Rican and an American citizen. Here is a succinct link provided by Wikipedia on the matter.

Point in matter, is that politicians exert much influence in the local politics scene. The majority of people in Puerto Rico don't necessarily follow specific discourses, ideas or 'real' issues that politicians embody; more or less people just listen to what many of these people say and accept it as an informed truth, just because this person held (or holds) public office. In this case, some politicians are made out of almost everyone: from local council members, to city mayors, to senators and representatives some (depends on the body and the level of government) of these people in office are just regular Carlos and Carmen of the community. While this might be more true in city politics and a bit on legislative branches, a good chunk of the 'high posts' are still held by the elite. My problem with this dichotomy is that we then have ideologies espoused by the elite and engendered by the middle and lower class, even when those ideas don't reflect their reality.

Of course, you see the local city and 'non elite' politicians defending these ideas as their own as if they responded to the reality of their constituents. "Wrong, he was so wrong"...(Mean Girls reference by the way). Opinions are then polarized so that they are aligned with one's party as opposed to what is right or better.

I find myself in a difficult position in order to recommend a solution to this 'conundrum'. Do I then believe in a government of the educated 'elders' or some sorts? Some sort of Jedi council? Wouldn't I be replacing one elite with another?

Mind you, I thought this old draft of a post was relevant, seeing the recent attention that violent political rhetoric has gotten here in the US. Again, I'm not giving any answers, but some thoughts

"I'm sorry...it's my day off and i just want to dance"

I won't lie... I really like the beat of this song. I just want to dance. It also reminds me of the good times I spent with one of my new friends hanging out.

But, listening to the lyrics and watching the video makes me cringe on the inside. It's very hypocritical, for me to claim one thing one day and then just throw it out the window on the weekends when I'm raging in the city. Makes me rethink my values and my judgement.

It also makes me rethink how judgmental I can be (and how I used to be worse when I was young) of popular culture. I say this because it's always makes you feel better when you think you are 'better than that' and pass judgement on what others are doing; it does!

Is it ok for me to turn off the 'intellectualism' for a bit and just enjoy popular culture?
Can I rationalize then watching Jersey Shore for it's pop-culture value (and secretly enjoy it) but then bash the blatant objectification and obscene portrayal of latino society in this video?
Can't we just dance?

Anal sex and Women and the National Sex Survey

Thought these were some interesting articles about the sex behaviors of Americans; specially in regards to anal sex and women...  Interesting topics... is the taboo dwindling?

Here are the Links

http://www.slate.com/id/2270622/
http://www.slate.com/id/2269951/

My Tumblr Blog

I am updating this more frequently than this blog, as this one I see it as an outlet for more formal thoughts.

My Tumblr blog is fun and short... and sweet.

Link: Elitist Queerdo

Hispanic Heritage Month

Yesterday was the start of Hispanic Heritage Month. It didn't dawn on me until now, that even though this type of 'celebration' exists, there is very little acknowledgment of the Hispanic Heritage in American History, with the exception of a few places. But not nationwide!

It is even more surprising, that negative feelings against "immigrants" (which one can argue is disguised racism) still exist today, to the extent that racial profiling laws are burgeoning in several states. Maybe this is not surprising, given that still in 2010 several states are legalizing structural violence against the LGBT community; and as recent as 60 years ago, racial segregation was still legal.

So, even though Native Americans and African-Americans are still not treated with the fairness they deserve, they are still recognized to some extent as being part of the core value(as romanticized this notion is) of being American. This is not so with Hispanic/Latinos. Why? I really don't have an idea.

The USA is only 234 years old, but that is only because it started with the Euro descendant 13 colonies. As the new country kept expanding to French and Spanish colonies/territories in the continent it kept adding its anglo-puritan ideology everywhere it could, which is why it has taken so long to "accept" and incorporate in the official discourse of the state a diverse (yet limited) view of the population. What conservatives need to understand is that the US is not some ancient civilization that has been successful against the invasion of enemy ethnic groups. It is a mutt-a majority of multiracial/ethnic white Europeans that thrived in a land halfway across their original land. Why is it easier to recognize that American means Irish, Italians, Poles, Germans, Yoruba, Nigerian, Ghanain, Cherokee, Navajo, etc, etc, etc...but not Mexican, Puerto Rican, Salvadorian,Peruvian, Cuban, among others?

This is very hard for me to comprehend (and not go batshit crazy about it) and I'm not going to give a history lesson here (cause I'm in dire need to brush up on this types of histories too) but It's not that hard to see that Hispanic/Latino history in the US is equally American.

1) Remember the whole southwest? The war against Mexico that gained the US, erm, NEW MEXICO, CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, ARIZONA, TEXAS? This only happened approximately 60-70 years after the independence of the US... It's sad that people ignore the fact that these names are in Spanish: San Francisco? really?
2) Burritos, enough said! No really, Burritos started in Juárez, look it up. It was essential in the diets of Mexican Americans in the US around the 50-60's.
3) We fucking clean your hotel rooms! Which means that there is a documented history of Hispanic/Latinos being a subservient minority because of its legal status as non citizens.
4) The Monroe Doctrine!
5) September 11, 1971-look it up-

Like it or not: We're here, we're brown, get used to i!

-signed, angry Puerto Rican token guy

edit-----
PS: I ended going batshit crazy

Hurricane Earl-Email to a friend

I'm going to share an email I sent to a friend about Hurricane Earl, which passed closed to Puerto Rico yesterday night.


----------------------------------------------------------------
Thankfully it was not a big deal, because it passed right by the island. So people back home felt tropical storm winds instead of full blown hurricane winds. The eastern part of the island took the biggest hit, as it almost always happens. Thankfully, my family lives in the north, near San Juan, so they are OK. Lots of flooding and no electricity, but that always happens with hurricanes so people are used to it. As such, there isn't that much damage compared to a full blown hurricane. As of now, I haven't heard of any deaths (they are pretty rare back home when hurricanes/storms pass). The government agencies in charge of emergencies are pretty good at this, and people that live in flooding areas are always ushered to secure shelters (mainly schools) and given food and stuff. My family is OK, I kept checking with them yesterday. My family's houses are sturdy, so I'm not worried. This is pretty typical. Here are some links to pics from the local newspapers., the captions are in Spanish but the arrows to next and previous are easy to figure out how to move back and forth. While the images might seem like a lot, it's nothing compared to what happens to Dominican Republic when this kind of thing happens (sadly). Here are two links, one is the official newspaper's pictures, and the other is people's pictures of the hurricane.

Thanks for your concern,
Dave the Half-Blood Roboto

(A lot of this pictures, apart from the obvious one show the impact of the hurricane on Culebra and Vieques (Puerto Rico's two island/municipalities east of the main island and people in the shelters)

Map of Vieques and Culebra east of the main island:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Locator_map_Puerto_Rico_Vieques.png


http://www.elnuevodia.com/fotodetalle-amenazaapuertoricoelhuracanearl-769539.html
http://www.elnuevodia.com/fotodetalle-imagenesciudadanas-769870.html

Paula Deen and deep fried yumminess

Talking to my coworker, I realized that once you turn 25 you start to gain more weight if you continue the same high calorie diet you previously had. Which is why I'm trying to eat better. Nonetheless, I must admit that a lot of the delicious food I eat is high on calories and other detrimental factors for your health. While I think on ways to change my behaviors, here is a link an article rightfully titled: Paula Deen Is Trying to Kill Us.

Enjoy

Writer's Block

The concept of writer’s block apparently came up in the 19th century in the romantic era in which literature, poetry and writing were activities that were considered as the result of passions; it could not be forced. The persons who dedicated their lives to such endeavors, were people that were 'skillful' in inciting their own emotions and passions by reeling in 'inspiration'.

As a student, trying to come up with coherent thoughts is hard enough, so I can't imagine what these artists where putting themselves through. They were perfectionists, but did so in their desire of fulfilling the purism expected of the time; a self-imposed purism based on the canons of good writing and the emotions stirred by art.

How hard is it when you think your life depends on your writing skills and you feel what you are producing is not good enough? When you are stuck and rightfully despair into doubt and preoccupation about your work, what should one do? Is it art what students do? I don't consider myself an artist for doing so, but as students we are expected to convey complex 'thoughts' and 'ideas' in a constrained and different language than the one we communicate every day. I bet that those of us who do a better job at this could be considered true artists as they convey 'thoughts' and 'ideas' to others; and by doing so, engage in dialogues that most often than not, stir emotional responses among us (or our professors).


I started this blog to practice my writing skills for my current and future academic life, but a lot of times I think of topics that I wish to elaborate on and fall short of elaborating them for fear that they might not be interesting enough. I think I'm still trying to find a style that suits me. So, I feel I should be writing something for the sake of practicing even though I feel blocked.



In reference to the New Yorker Magazine article: Blocked: Why do writers stop writing.

Learning to let go...

So, in order to move past the emotional circumstances that we go through, most of us need to learn to disassociate ourselves with the things that tie us down to those circumstances. I assume that these are distressful, because then there might not be a logical reason as to why one is leaving these experiences behind. Why do we attach ourselves to other people the way we do? Is this necessary at all? Is this behavior evolutionary? Well, in regards to this last question it appears so.

 At its core, it seems that attachment is the sense of security that we are offered as we are socialized. Maybe it brings us further close to the core belief that we live in fair world where all of us deserve to attain what we were taught that we would obtain; family, friends, romantic love, sex, etc... Such is this belief that if we follow the rules, then we will be 'all right'; which also means that if these goals are not attained some rule (and probably your fault anyway) was not followed as prescribed. Social variables aside, what is the existential need for attachment?

 I speculate that we attach to each other to continue this sense of security going on. Important enough that a ‘human need’ for continuity in our daily lives is somewhat expected. We invest more resources on those things that we expect to deal with tomorrow, and brush aside and/or give little importance to the passing ones. Is there spontaneity in this attachment then? Maybe so, but the expectation that everything in the world is fair and all the efforts that we have invested in this other person will pay off somehow, is what makes us latch on like remoras. The end result is emotional, physical, sexual, economic and/or social rewards that positively condition these attachments. What happens then when the sharks wants to set loose? 



Why is it so horrible to realize that the other half of the symbiotic attachment is not there anymore? Rationally, one can give many reasons to explain such an event, but in terms of emotions your body and mind is trying to do you a favor by trying to die honorably at these new unfolding events...a Divine Wind;Kamikaze. The outside world is trying to pull you back in to their belief of a Fair and Just World, one in which the separation or death of this relationship does not equate physical, actual, social, literal death. But your emotions ‘know’ that with this death, there is no rebirth of the efforts that you invested; there is no change, no surplus...most (if not everything) of it is now lost! While some might dwell on what they have lost, others seek to provide themselves with a new outlook that presents them with a congruent and normal fair view of the world. "Why did this happen anyway? I followed all the rules, right? Why didn’t the other person follow them as closely as I did?" Such is life...right?

But we do that. We fail to follow the ‘rules’, we die, they die, we change, they change, he did it, she did it...did I do it too? The hard part is not the 'getting attached to others' (although some of us might argue just that) but learning to let go all that you invested...and it’s hard...totally hard! right?

1. Can you actually let go of people that died?
2. Can you let go of friends that are now toxic, but they are still your friends? “They were part of your life man!”
3. Can you let go of your romantic other? Your ‘soulmate’? Your husband? Wife? Etc?

How do we unlearn the attachment and truly let go? If we do so, are we kidding ourselves?

The existential despair of a Soccer Star

[Edit: This is not a great post, is full of grammatical mistakes but I don't want to touch on this topic any further but I still think there is something here to be discussed.]

I don't mean to be dismissing on another person's despair or sadness. But I just want to put it in perspective.

Yahoo Sports posted this online yesterday:

The existential despair of Cristiano Ronaldo

By Brian Phillips

The article blows out of proportion what Cristiano actually says. He just mentions his sadness at losing (something easily understandable at such a big and prominent event) and the article that actually mentions he being a 'broken man' is a link to a BBC interview with him. My first take on this is of disgust... my biases all seem to overtake me on this one, because he is just a month older than I am, has a better body and is on the face of the media constantly; something very much like the green eyed monster. To be honest, not that I want all that pressure on me, and that's why I shift from disgust to empathy on this issue. Though he will provoke little empathy from a lot of people (for being a model, a famous athlete, etc) he still is in a career that puts a lot of pressure on the him.

At the same time, I don't want to commit the same mistake my therapist did with me by saying: "Why would someone as successful as you, who obtained an all expense paid research experience to Cornell for the summer ever think that way about himself?" (This was at a time when I was feeling a bit sad). He still has the right to be "broken" by this event but he will be fine sometime soon when he gets back to the rhythm of things (I think). Anyway, to think about this and all the crap we grad students receive I'll share a Facebook status that I posted yesterday when I heard of these news:

"The existential despair of Ronaldo? Really yahoo sports? I mean existential? Just because his pretty face failed to qualify for the next round? When is Yahoo news going to do an article of the emotional despair of graduates students? i.e. getting rejected by grad school, getting rejected by grants/fellowships/funding, ...getting grilled on by how bad you write, receiving critiques that make you feel mediocre, never being good enough to your superiors in Academia, living on scrap money... how is that not existential despair? stupid stupid news"

Discuss