Sem título

[mantopigtoman-blog]

The cult-like way with which some fans follow their favorite actors (and I guess this could be applied to any celebrity - from actors to musicians to sports players and even writers) in anything and everything they’re in and say “amen” to everything they do troubles me a little. Not that it’s any of my business, of course, but it’s just a concept I have never been able to grasp. I would understand it a lot better if fans kept it to “I’m a fan of the artistic side of this person so I’ll check out his/her professional projects” but most fans go beyond that: they enter the realm of personal idolization of these people and put them on pedestals and look at them as paragons of righteousness.

It gets so bad that whenever someone even dares to criticize a certain conduct of the celebrity in question, their fans immediately fall on the person making the criticism and bring out their “defense squad” strategies, which tend to include behavior that isn’t exactly nice to the person who dared to “attack the celebrity”. When, really, all that was being criticized was that celebrity’s specific behavior at a certain point in time, it was not an attack on their worth as a human being. We all screw up at times and that doesn’t mean we’re all awful people, why would these people be an exception? Why is it that we can never criticize any behavior we find problematic in a celebrity without their “stans” coming out to protect them ready to chop off heads? Why can’t these fans recognize that some of the things their idols do are not okay and are not an example of appropriate/nice behavior? Why is it that everything a celebrity does immediately earns them a “precious cinnamon roll” reaction from fans?

Does fandom affect that much people’s critical thinking that they’re completely blinded by the love they feel for someone they don’t even know? Does it affect them that much that they’re okay with subjecting themselves to feelings and experiences they know will be unpleasant to them just to “support” the celebrity in question? Celebrities are grown up people and as human as everybody else, why do fans think they need some weird sort of special “protection” and “support” of strangers they don’t even know exist? The moment a fan goes to any of these extents, they’re essentially putting themselves in a blatant position of subservience - they’re telling themselves that celebrity A, B or C is superior to them and they need to act as their subject and follower. This is scary to me. This is a self-dictatorship of the mind in which the tyrant is a projected image of a certain celebrity with people becoming slaves to it.

[temperanceofsleep]

It is through Temperance I have a greater purpose; to write about transmutation and using our dreams instead of failed romances and the ego tied to so many things. Performance as magic as opposed to vapid entertainment. Through Temperance the ego is destroyed, the vessel is pure. When you realize you are already asleep you regain power of your dreams. Physical dimensions extended beyond comprehension- the mind is an unknown toolkit at your disposal. You do not need celebrities or elected officials or priests to give your life value, substance, and meaning - all you need is yourself. We have been waiting for you for such a long time, please come back home to yourself.

[pompeianred]

Dog At Rest | 1650 | Gerrit Dou The Cavalier's Pets | 1845 | Edwin Landseer A Distinguished Member of the Humane Society | 1831 | Edwin Landseer

[wordpress-blaze-240321566]

Dating in the Modern World

By: Danthedad June 18, 2026

In my previous articles, I talked about sacrifice and rebuilding.

The sacrifice that comes with being a father.

The rebuilding that comes after divorce.

The process of losing part of yourself and then discovering that perhaps the strongest version of you hasn't even been built yet.

But eventually, after enough healing, after enough reflection, and after enough nights spent staring at the ceiling wondering where life went sideways, another thought begins to appear:

"What now?"

Do we put ourselves back out there?

Do we try dating again?

Do we risk opening ourselves up to someone new?

Dating in the modern world feels different than it did when I was younger.

Maybe it's because I've changed.

Maybe it's because society has changed.

Or maybe it's a little bit of both.

I remember a time when attraction felt simple.

There was a look.

A smile.

A glance across a room.

The subtle feeling that someone noticed you and you noticed them.

It wasn't necessarily spoken.

It wasn't logical.

It wasn't calculated.

It was energy.

Two people sharing a moment that existed beyond words.

The chemistry felt almost electric.

Like hearing a song that instantly changes your mood.

As I'm writing this, I'm listening to "Midnight Sun (Remix)" by S-Tone Inc.

The song has this gritty, energetic pulse to it.

It moves.

It breathes.

It creates a feeling that can't easily be explained.

That's how attraction used to feel to me.

A smile could completely change your day.

A conversation could leave you thinking about someone for weeks.

Life felt alive.

Connection felt alive.

Humans have been falling in love for thousands of years.

Technology may change.

Culture may change.

But the desire for connection remains the same.

We still want to be seen.

We still want to be understood.

We still want someone to look at us and feel something meaningful.

The Great Distraction

The biggest difference today isn't that people stopped wanting connection.

The biggest difference is that we're distracted.

Look around.

Go to a coffee shop.

Walk through an airport.

Sit in a restaurant.

Everyone is looking down.

Phones have become our companions.

Our entertainment.

Our escape.

Our comfort.

We're connected to everyone and somehow disconnected from the people standing right next to us.

The spontaneous conversations seem rarer.

The moments of chance seem fewer.

The simple smile across a room often goes unnoticed because someone's attention is somewhere else.

The world didn't lose connection.

It just buried it underneath notifications.

What Men Need to Understand

I think many men become discouraged because they believe attraction should work the way it did in movies.

The glance.

The smile.

The instant chemistry.

The woman immediately recognizing your value.

Life isn't that simple.

The modern world requires effort.

Real effort.

You have to leave the house.

You have to talk to people.

You have to place yourself into environments where life is actually happening.

The gym.

The hiking trail.

The coffee shop.

The bookstore.

The volunteer event.

The networking group.

Life happens where people gather.

Not where people scroll.

And that's something I had to learn myself.

Confidence Is Different Than Being Nice

One lesson I've learned through dating is that confidence matters.

Not arrogance.

Not ego.

Not pretending to be someone you're not.

Confidence.

The quiet confidence that comes from knowing who you are.

Knowing your values.

Knowing your purpose.

Knowing that if someone walks away from your life, you'll still be okay.

When I was younger, I thought being a good man was enough.

Work hard.

Be loyal.

Be honest.

Treat people well.

And while those things absolutely matter, they're only part of the equation.

Being a good man is the foundation.

It isn't the entire house.

You also need direction.

Purpose.

Passion.

A life of your own.

People are naturally drawn to those who are building something.

Not because of money.

Not because of status.

But because purpose is attractive.

A man who knows where he's going tends to create a sense of confidence that others can feel.

Purpose Creates Attraction

One thing I've noticed is that people are attracted to people who are engaged in life.

Not perfect people.

Not flawless people.

People with purpose.

That purpose can be anything.

Writing.

Photography.

Building a business.

Hiking mountains.

Learning music.

Raising great children.

Serving your community.

The purpose itself isn't what's important.

The passion behind it is.

After divorce, many men make the mistake of centering their entire identity around finding another relationship.

I understand why.

I've been there.

But relationships aren't meant to become our purpose.

They are meant to complement it.

The strongest version of ourselves exists when we continue building our lives regardless of who comes along for the ride.

The Real Secret

If there is one lesson that connects all three articles, it's this:

Stop chasing.

Start building.

Build your life.

Build your confidence.

Build your health.

Build your friendships.

Build your relationship with your children.

Build your purpose.

Because when you're living a life that excites you, people notice.

Not because you're trying to impress them.

Because your energy changes.

Your posture changes.

Your conversations change.

Your confidence becomes genuine.

And genuine confidence is hard to fake.

The right woman isn't looking for a perfect man.

Just like we're not looking for a perfect woman.

She's looking for someone authentic.

Someone who knows who he is.

Someone who can stand on his own two feet.

Someone who has weathered storms and kept moving forward.

Which brings us right back to where this journey started.

The sacrifice.

The rebuilding.

And now the re-entry into the world.

We don't date because we're incomplete.

We date because we're ready to share the life we've worked so hard to rebuild.

And if love finds us along the way, then perhaps every storm we endured was leading us exactly where we were meant to be.

-DantheDad

Source: Dating in the Modern World

[ot3]

"gen ai output can never be considered art" I fundamentally disagree with you about what art is but I can understand what makes a person hold this opinion

"human creations can never be considered slop" you are a little newborn baby experiencing your very first day on the planet earth and aren't qualified to participate in any real discussions about art

[judasrpc]

WEIRDLY SPECIFIC BUT HELPFUL CHARACTER BUILDING QUESTIONS

What’s the lie your character says most often?

How loosely or strictly do they use the word ‘friend’?

How often do they show their genuine emotions to others versus just the audience knowing?

What’s a hobby they used to have that they miss?

Can they cry on command? If so, what do they think about to make it happen?

What’s their favorite [insert anything] that they’ve never recommended to anyone before?

What would you (mun) yell in the middle of a crowd to find them? What would their best friend and/or romantic partner yell?

How loose is their use of the phrase ‘I love you’?

Do they give tough love or gentle love most often? Which do they prefer to receive?

What fact do they excitedly tell everyone about at every opportunity?

If someone was impersonating them, what would friends / family ask or do to tell the difference?

What’s something that makes them laugh every single time? Be specific!

When do they fake a smile? How often?

How do they put out a candle?

What’s the most obvious difference between their behavior at home, at work, at school, with friends, and when they’re alone?

What kinds of people do they have arguments with in their head?

What do they notice first in the mirror versus what most people first notice looking at them?

Who do they love truly, 100% unconditionally (if anyone)?

What would they do if stuck in a room with the person they’ve been avoiding?

Who do they like as a person but hate their work? Vice versa, whose work do they like but don’t like the person?

What common etiquette do they disagree with? Do they still follow it?

What simple activity that most people do / can do scares your character?

What do they feel guilty for that the other person(s) doesn’t / don’t even remember?

Did they take a cookie from the cookie jar? What kind of cookie was it?

What subject / topic do they know a lot about that’s completely useless to the direct plot?

How would they respond to being fired by a good boss?

What’s the worst gift they ever received? How did they respond?

What do they tell people they want? What do they actually want?

How do they respond when someone doesn’t believe them?

When they make a mistake and feel bad, does the guilt differ when it’s personal versus when it’s professional?

When do they feel the most guilt? How do they respond to it?

If they committed one petty crime / misdemeanor, what would it be? Why?

How do they greet someone they dislike / hate?

How do they greet someone they like / love?

What is the smallest, morally questionable choice they’ve made?

Who do they keep in their life for professional gain? Is it for malicious intent?

What’s a secret they haven’t told serious romantic partners and don’t plan to tell?

What hobby are they good at in private, but bad at in front of others? Why?

Would they rather be invited to an event to feel included or be excluded from an event if they were not genuinely wanted there?

How do they respond to a loose handshake? What goes through their head?

What phrases, pronunciations, or mannerisms did they pick up from someone / somewhere else?

If invited to a TED Talk, what topic would they present on? What would the title of their presentation be?

What do they commonly misinterpret because of their own upbringing / environment / biases? How do they respond when realizing the misunderstanding?

What language would be easiest for them to learn? Why?

What’s something unimportant / frivolous that they hate passionately?

Are they a listener or a talker? If they’re a listener, what makes them talk? If they’re a talker, what makes them listen?

Who have they forgotten about that remembers them very well?

Who would they say ‘yes’ to if invited to do something they abhorred / strongly didn’t want to do?

Would they eat something they find gross to be polite?

What belief / moral / personality trait do they stand by that you (mun) personally don’t agree with?

What’s a phrase they say a lot?

Do they act on their immediate emotions, or do they wait for the facts before acting?

Who would / do they believe without question?

What’s their instinct in a fight / flight / freeze / fawn situation?

What’s something they’re expected to enjoy based on their hobbies / profession that they actually dislike / hate?

If they’re scared, who do they want comfort from? Does this answer change depending on the type of fear?

What’s a simple daily activity / motion that they mess up often?

How many hobbies have they attempted to have over their lifetime? Is there a common theme?

[wordpress-blaze-73006824]

Science and Happiness

I wrote this seven years ago. I still believe it. I also still fail at it.

The essay is about presence. About tasting the honey instead of thinking about honey. About noticing what's already here instead of departing into abstraction or memory or the next thing.

I wrote it then. I'm still learning it now. I still leave my palm tree garden while standing in it. I still wander into thought when I could be here.

But the problem the essay describes has only become more urgent. We have more tools for departure now. More permission to never arrive.

What follows is what I was trying to say—and why it matters that someone keeps saying it.

Science and Happiness

There is a strange problem with ancient Skepticism, or Pyrrhonism, as it is described by the best authority, Sextus Empiricus.

I have to confess that several features of this account of how the Skeptic will achieve ataraxia and happiness through epoche [suspension of judgement] are very puzzling...Now the so-called "Modes of Epoche" give us an overview of the kinds of considerations that supposedly lead the Skeptics to adopt a pattern of life in which they live by the appearances and do not believe any assertions or theories about an external world. But it is striking that all but one of these Modes are concerned with questions having no immediate relevance to the domain of values; instead they have to do with such questions as whether the honey is really sweet, whether there really are invisible pores in the skin, whether things really have the shapes they appear to have, and so on. Only Aensidemus's tenth Mode offers the sort of considerations that presumably bring the Skeptics to epoche as to whether things or actions are good, bad, or indifferent. Yet when (at PH 1.27f. and much more fully in M 11) Sextus gets down to the business of explaining in detail how epoche about the external world leads to ataraxia and happiness, he considers only value judgements. The Skeptic gives up any belief that judgements about good and evil have objective validity, and through his epoche in this limited area he achieves his ataraxia. Not even a hint is given of how the state of epoche on such matters as are considered in most of the Modes contributes to peace of mind. For these kinds of case we are left to conjecture that the relevant discomfort is perhaps the kind of frustration a biological scientist might feel at being unable to find the cause of cancer, or a physicist might feel at being unable to find a unified theory for all types of force."

Sextus Empiricus neglected to explain how scientific knowledge seems to be opposed to rest and peace of mind. I have already discussed that "science" (which has become too general and ambitious a word) uses as its ultimate concept that of work. Heidegger argues that it is work that prevents questioners from getting a word in edgewise. They are always "working on it" and, for now, we should content ourselves with the marvelous achievements we have, and not ask so many questions that they stop working.

It is exactly the Skeptic's situation that asking questions has won out as the dominant attitude over any entrenched scientific doctrine. There are some opponents of Skepticism that say such an attitude amounts to paralysis, and if not paralysis then to behaving eccentrically, and if not that then at least a Skeptic would speak strangely. Sextus deals admirably with these objections in his Outlines of Pyrrhonism.

Further, we are told in several places (e.g., PH 1.191, 194, 207) that the Skeptic uses language (katachrestikos) "loosely" and does not join the Dogmatists in fighting over words or in seeking to use them with philosophic precision (kurios). In view of this we may conjecture that a sophisticated Pyrrhonist, following the ancient maxim of lathe biosas ("live in such a way as to escape notice"), would also be inclined to follow the advice to "think with the learned, but speak with the vulgar.""p72 Mates 1996

The way the Skeptic uses language is related to the problem at hand: how to show that scientific work is not conducive to rest and peace of mind, or of leading a happy life. How? Sextus says at the beginning of his Outlines  that

if the theory is so deceptive as to all but snatch away the appearances from under our very eyes, should we not distrust it in regard to the non-evident, and thus avoid being led by it into precipitate judgements?” p92 Sextus in Mates 1996

The Skeptic takes appearances as not open to question, so they are not nihilists. And they question doctrines that attempt to undermine appearances. Take the famous example of Sir Arthur Eddington (1928) on the term "solid." As a scientist, he argued that a common table is not actually solid, because it is mainly made up of empty space. This goes against the table's appearance of solidity, and was famously rebuked by Susan Stebbing (1937), who said that tables are things that help us know what we mean by "solid." From a pragmatic point of view, a table is solid,

but Mates points out a problem with Skeptics in siding somewhat with the pragmatic use of words. He points out that at first we learn to say "the honey is sweet" and that is the correct and normal way of using language, while the Pyrrhonist would, at least a little later, assert that it merely appears to be sweet, and since this is not the way a child would normally use language immediately, it is a kind of abuse of language. To be more precise, Mates' problem is that he thinks "the honey is sweet" and "it appears that the honey is sweet" are meant differently by a child. What exactly does a child means when she says honey is sweet? I would bet that the child is referring to an appearance, not a property of an external reality beyond such appearance, independent of a perceiving mind. The added word appears is merely a clarification for realists, not a modification of what a child means or how she uses language.

In other words, we were not born with the distinction between Berkleyan idealism and naive realism, and both suffice for the purposes of the child saying the honey is sweet. Indeed, that is the only way to really "go by appearances" as a child does, by experiencing the sweetness of honey without bothering about the realism or idealism (or both, or neither) of its appearance.

This leads directly to the central point that a scientific attitude is not a way that leads to very much happiness. When we study honey with a microscope so that we "know" things with the eye or with the mind about honey, so much that when we taste honey all we think about are these concepts and sights, not the taste, we miss the enjoyment in knowing the truth of this appearance of sweetness. Applied to our lives in general, the scientific attitude will quickly make us miserable. The way to know about the sweetness of honey is not any other way than to taste it yourself. Maybe an equivalent to a microscope can be invented for the tongue, and that would yield interesting, if warped, results, but is the world more enjoyable if we walk around with telescopes attached to our eyes?

Also maybe the difference between a scientist and a happy person is not so clear as this example, for take a wine connoisseur who can identify all the qualities of all the flavors of any particular wine. The question then becomes: does a wine connoisseur enjoy wine better than someone who is just really good at paying attention to taste and doesn't know anything about wine or its ingredients?  The answer, under the economic principle of diminishing returns, is a resounding no. The wine connoisseur has tasted so many wines and has remembered and analyzed it so well that they do not enjoy it as much as they used to. In effect, they get burnt out, and the pleasure diminishes. The pleasure diminishes for the Pyrrhonist too, (it is doubtful she will taste wine as many times as a connoisseur) and she may learn to taste wine better, but the pleasure diminishes in a different way: the Pyrrhonist returns to ataraxia or dispassion and peace of mind because there is no identifying with or grasping for any "being," there are only appearances. Without their external reality appearances are like water flowing through your fingers. Grasping after it is obviously futile. The Skeptic believes appearances are states of their soul, not external objects. So there is nothing to know more about, no endless searching to know and enjoy a tiny new thing about wine.

But this is the same with language use. The person who really enjoys language is not the analyzer-knower type, but the one who can appreciate vagueness. The person who enjoys the word solid uses it for a table, not a tiny particle. Not that particle is any less poetic than table: particle is still infinitely large compared to the infinitessimal, and the infinitessimal, which may escape being poetic, emerges as a piece of mysticism.

I hope this clears up Mates exasperation about Sextus not going into detail on why a scientist trying to cure cancer would not be as happy or have as much peace of mind as a Skeptic who has cancer. If the scientist didn't have at least some skeptical approaches to life he would not taste honey, or feel the solidity of the world around him. The appearances of art would not be felt by him. Would you rather be him or the skeptic?

Of course, the idealized scientist doesn't usually happen, and most scientists and other specialists move from their work to a more skeptical attitude at home or outside work. With a very flexible mind, a scientist could still be mostly a happy person. So this message is more for science education and communication. I had to argue with my mom that the things she sees in day to day life were more real than invisible particles. Sometimes people can't live the skeptical life until they have reached the forefront of research in an area, just to confirm that appearances are just as good or better than the truths found in research. (example: me) I have to argue with my students to see the world of appearances. There have been projects such as logical positivism with a goal to make general language use more analytical and scientific. So the relevance of this argument has more to do with taking away the authority of the scientist to "discover" things that don't appear to us, and giving appearances back to regular people, even if that makes the job of the scientist less valued and harder to communicate. We should educate and communicate with science in a way that empowers regular people and makes them happy, that is more important that the work of science.

Source: Science and Happiness

[wordpress-blaze-32719779]

There's a Ladybug in My Bed

The following poem is about a ladybug who takes a little girl on a dream filled journey to a magical town of ladybugs. One, who is charmingly eccentric, dazzles you with her exceptionally fashionable clothes while one owns a bakery and can make the most exquisite pastries …still another has a house with so many stairs that you lose count. With coordination and grace, one can be seen riding a unicycle while another one rides a tricolored tricycle. There's a ladybug who scoots around in a sporty car…why there's even an opera star, yet another who claims he's been to Alpha Centauri and Mars! But no town would be complete without a Mayor who loves to orate in the town square about new plans for Ladybugville which make all the ladybugs ever so happy!

There's A Ladybug In My Bed There's a ladybug in my bed, painted on a pillow case beside my head. I see her black spotted and red with a little mischievous grin, and a tiny dimple on her chin. When I fall fast asleep, I could swear she comes alive and holding onto my hand, together, we fly to a wondrous place far away where ladybugs live and play.

There's a ladybug who has a house with so many stairs that I lose count.

Another whose taken such care in the selection of her fashionable clothes that I've ever seen anyone wear

Then there's one who owns a bakery who makes strawberry tarts with the most delicate puff pastry; they can only be described as scrumptiously tasty.

Why, there's even a town square with a banner hanging over the rostrum; to a crowd still gathering… a microphone squeaks, suddenly, the Mayor begins to speak.

One can see his distinguished figure with his stove top hat towering above the rest- in tuxedo he is dressed. As he speaks about the plans for the new year there is a slight pause… before the ladybugs breakout with thunderous applause. There's a ladybug who drives a sporty car. One who even chauffeurs, with Rolls Royce, an opera star.

With coordination and grace, another ladybug rides a unicycle while a very little one can be seen riding a tricolored tricycle. But the one that captures my imagination by far… is the one who insists he's been to Mars and Proxima Centauri, the sun's closest star!

The next morning I wake to find myself back in my cozy bed with the little ladybug painted on a pillowcase beside my head. Lying perfectly still, just as the ladybug prints on my quilt, I say to my little friend, "why… I think I see a twinkle in your eye."

~ Lora Hollings

Key Takeaways

Source: There's a Ladybug in My Bed

[wordpress-blaze-77156169]

Should I Be Worried? Part 2: How Worried Should I Be?

Don't worry. Just calm down.

These are things people say to anxious people. They imply that anxiety is optional — a choice you're making, and could just as easily unmake.

I'm a worrywart.

This is something people say about themselves. It reframes anxiety as a personality quirk — harmless, maybe even endearing. Nothing to take seriously.

I'm panicking.

This is also something people say about themselves — about a deadline closing in, a difficult conversation that didn't go well, a moment when everything feels like it's coming apart at once. And often, what they're describing is real. The distress is genuine. But "panicking" collapses the distance between high anxiety and something more specific — a full physiological crisis that has its own distinct experience. The language doesn't mean the feeling isn't real. It means we don't always have precise words for how bad it actually is.

Three phrases. Three different ways of getting anxiety wrong. We either dismiss it, shrink it into personality, or reach for the most extreme version of it to describe something that doesn't come close. What's missing in all three cases is the same thing: a map. A shared sense of what anxiety actually looks like across its full range — from the quiet hum of a passing concern to the complete takeover of a genuine panic attack, and everything in between.

These aren't just figures of speech. The way we talk about anxiety reflects how we understand it — and when the understanding is off, so is the response. People dismiss what deserves attention, catastrophize what is manageable, or push through what genuinely needs help. Without a shared framework for what anxiety actually looks like at different levels of intensity, self-assessment becomes guesswork. And guesswork, when it comes to your own mental state, tends to err in one of two directions: too much or not enough.

That's what the scale in this essay is for.

In my practice, one of the first things I do with a new patient is ask them to rate their anxiety on a scale of zero to ten. Not because I need a number for a chart — but because most people have never thought about their anxiety this way. They experience it. They suffer through it, manage it, avoid it, push through it. But they've rarely mapped it. And mapping it changes things.

The scale I use with patients is something I've developed and refined over years of clinical work — a description of what the human anxiety system actually does as it moves from quiet to full alarm — and every person can move through its full range, regardless of temperament, history, or how calm they think they are.

Here's what that looks like across the full range.

The Signal and the Noise

The insight is this: it isn't a scale of anxious people versus non-anxious people. It's a scale of one system — your nervous system — moving through its range. A 2 is what it feels like when something registers as worth monitoring. A 6 is what it feels like when that monitoring starts to cost you something. An 8 is what it feels like when the system has taken over. These aren't personality traits. They're intensities.

The inflection point that matters most clinically sits somewhere around 5 or 6. Below it, anxiety is doing exactly what it evolved to do — and what it's doing is helping. I wrote about this in an earlier essay, Should I Be Worried? — anxiety has two functions that work together. The first is the alarm: something important has registered, and your mind is alerting you early so you can act. The second is preparation: once the alarm sounds, your brain and body begin mobilizing resources toward the problem. The preoccupation, the disrupted sleep, the loss of appetite, the heightened awareness — these aren't side effects of anxiety. They are the mechanism. Your nervous system is redirecting attention, energy, and physiological readiness toward whatever needs to be solved. A 3 is uncomfortable, but it's purposeful. A 4 or 5 is more urgent, and you feel it in your body — but every one of those changes is in service of something. The anxiety isn't happening to you. It's working for you.

Above a 5, the signal begins to overwhelm the message. At a 6 or 7, anxiety has crossed from useful discomfort into dysfunction. Preoccupation sets in. The physical symptoms are no longer side effects — they're the main event. The thinking that was supposed to help you solve the problem is now part of the problem. You're not anxious about something anymore; you're just anxious.

By 8 or 9, there's no information left worth reading. This is suffering — full-body, sustained alarm. Insomnia, loss of appetite, physical pain, the activation of other vulnerabilities that were lying dormant. You can't think your way out of an 8. That's not a weakness. That's neurobiology.

And at 10 — a panic attack — the system has gone fully offline. The complete fear response, unopposed. Dread, helplessness, the overwhelming sense that something catastrophic is happening right now. Neurologically, the brain cannot distinguish this from actual mortal danger. It is one of the most distressing human experiences precisely because it feels so absolute.

Here is what I find most useful about this scale, and why I share it with every patient I see: it gives us a common language for a common experience. You have been at a 2. You have been at a 7. Almost certainly, at some point in your life, you have been at a 9. Not because something is wrong with you — because this is part of being human. We carry this hard-wired system with us everywhere we go.

That last part — awareness — is where the scale earns its keep. Most people who come to see me aren't struggling because their anxiety is unusual. They're struggling because they've lost track of where they are on the scale. They've been at a 6 so long it feels like a 3. Or they've hit a 4 and, not knowing what it is, treated it like a 9. The number isn't a diagnosis. It isn't a verdict. It's an orienting question: where am I right now?

Getting to the Right Level

That question is also where the scale becomes practically useful — not just as a way to describe where you are, but as a way to set a goal. Most mental health treatment, whether that's psychotherapy, medication, meditation, or any other form of self-regulation, works better when it's aimed at something specific. And more often than not, the goal isn't to eliminate anxiety. It's to get it to the right level so it can do its job. For someone stuck at an 8, the work is bringing the system back down into the active range — a 4 or 5 — where the signal is still present but no longer overwhelming. That's not a failure to fully calm down. That's success.

But the scale cuts the other way too. Sometimes a person is sitting at a 1 or 2 about something that genuinely warrants more attention — a health concern they're avoiding, a relationship problem they're minimizing, a work situation they're rationalizing away. In those cases, the therapeutic work isn't calming — it's clarifying. It's helping someone take their own concern seriously enough to act.

For many people, recalibrating anxiety is something they can do on their own — through self-awareness, mindfulness, or simply having a better framework for what they're feeling. But for others, the scale stays stuck. Trauma history, anxiety disorders, or deeply ingrained patterns of appraisal can make it genuinely difficult to move the needle without outside help. I explored why this happens in depth in The Roots of Trauma: What Shapes Our Sensitivity to Suffering. The short version is that early adversity, stress biology, and even inherited sensitivity can alter how the nervous system registers and responds to threat, making accurate self-assessment harder than it sounds. When someone has been at a 7 for so long that it feels like a 3, or when a 4 consistently reads as a 9, that distortion isn't a failure of effort — it's a signal that the calibration itself needs attention. That's what mental health treatment is for. Not to eliminate the system, but to help it work the way it was designed to.

The goal is the same in both directions: get the anxiety to the level where it's actually useful.

Not silent. Not overwhelming. Working — with you and for you.

If you recognized yourself in the higher end of this scale — and especially if it's been that way for a while — that's not a reason to push through alone. Anxiety that has moved beyond your ability to manage on your own is exactly what mental health treatment is designed for. Reaching out to a therapist, psychiatrist, or your primary care physician is a good and courageous next step.

Source: Should I Be Worried? Part 2: How Worried Should I Be?

[wordpress-blaze-190677660]

Stanley Tucci’s Favorite Zucchini Pasta

If I’m being honest, I’ve never been a big fan of zucchini. So when I saw this dish on Stanley Tucci‘s special, Searching for Italy, I wasn’t initially that interested.

But when he said, it was his favorite pasta of all time and that he made it at least once a week, I thought to myself I have to give this a try.

And frankly it blew my mind. It was a totally different flavor than any zucchini I had ever had before, and mixing it with pasta, and the fresh basil was a revelation.

What is the number one tip to make this zucchini dish incredible?

The number one thing you can do to make this dish sing is to let the fried zucchini rest in the fridge overnight. Trust me.

Ingredients

2 cups Sunflower Oil, infused with one lightly crushed clove of garlic. Removed before frying.

6- 8 medium Zucchini 

Extra-virgin Olive Oil

1 pound Spaghetti

Large bunch of fresh Basil, torn. Avoid the stems. 

3 cups grated Parmigiano-Reggiano and aged Provolone mixed or pure Provolone del Monaco if you can find it.

Sea Salt to taste

2-3 Tbsp Butter

Preparation:

Put the sunflower oil in a large pot and bring to 375F over medium-high heat. Infuse the oil with the lightly crushed clove of garlic, but remove before frying.

Slice the zucchini into thin rounds and fry in batches until golden brown.

Remove and set aside on paper towels to drain. 

Add the basil, olive oil and put in the fridge overnight. Get it back to room temperature before using. You can skip the overnight rest if you’re in a hurry, but the overnight rest is a big improvement. 

Boil the pasta until al dente and drain, reserving about 1 cup of the pasta water.

Place the cooked pasta back into the pot over low/medium heat along with the zucchini mixture and combine gently. 

Add the pasta water, a little at a time, to create a creamy texture. You may not use all of the pasta water. 

Add some of the Parmigiano a bit at a time to the mixture and continue to combine by stirring gently and tossing. Finish with the butter, if using. Serve immediately.

Stanley Tucci’s Favorite Zucchini Pasta If I’m being honest, I’ve never been a big fan of zucchini. So when I saw this dish on Stanley Tucci‘s special Searching for Italy, I wasn’t initially that interested. But when he said, it was his favorite pasta of all time and that he made it at least once a week, I thought to myself I have to get this a try.And, it blew my mind. It was a totally different flavor than any zucchini I had ever had before, and mixing it with pasta, and the fresh basil was a revelation. Heavy PanStainless Pot 2 cups Sunflower Oil6- 8 medium ZucchiniExtra-virgin olive oil1 pound SpaghettiLarge bunch of fresh Basil (torn. Avoid the stems.)3 cups grated Parmigiano-ReggianoSea salt to taste2-3 Tbsp Butter (Optional)1 clove Garlic (lightly crushed. Optional) Put the sunflower oil in a large pot and bring to 375F over medium-high heat.Slice the zucchini into thin rounds and fry in batches until golden brown. Remove and set aside on paper towels to drain.Add the basil, olive oil and put in the fridge overnight. Get it back to room temperature before using. You can skip the overnight rest if you’re in a hurry, but the overnight rest is a big improvement. Boil the pasta until al dente and drain, reserving about 1 cup of the pasta water.Place the cooked pasta back into the pot over low/medium heat along with the zucchini mixture and combine gently. Add the pasta water, a little at a time, to create a creamy texture. You may not use all of the pasta water. Add some of the Parmigiano a bit at a time to the mixture and continue to combine by stirring gently and tossing. Finish with the butter, if using. Serve immediately. Main CourseItalianzucchini

Source: Stanley Tucci’s Favorite Zucchini Pasta

[wordpress-blaze-254473469]

The Silent Architect: How Ashish Kapoor is building India’s New Export Engine

By Sajith Menon

For months, a quiet curiosity had been building in the corridors of Kerala’s industrial hubs. In Kochi, whispers of a massive, game-changing venture under the name Suchinta Ericsson began to circulate, talk of a scale that seemed almost mythical. A homegrown enterprise carved out by its own unique vision of Make in India, Build for the World, it operates entirely independently, completely distinct from the global telecommunications giant, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (commonly known as Ericsson). As I dug deeper, fascinated by the sheer ambition of the expansion coming to our shores, I found myself tracing the footsteps of an unassuming genius: Ashish Kapoor.

Finding material on AK, as he is commonly known, was a challenge; he is a man of profound silence who shuns the limelight with practiced precision. But as sources slowly yielded their secrets, a story emerged that was not just worthy of the world’s attention, but essential to understanding the new global supply chain. This is the story of the "Dynamo" quietly driving the future of electronics manufacturing.

The 1998 Vision: Too Early for the World

The story of Suchinta did not begin with the modern "Make in India" hype. AK founded the business in 1998, envisioning a vertically integrated mobile component powerhouse at a time when the "mobile revolution" was still in its infancy. He was a pioneer in a market that wasn't yet ready for his scale.

Recognising that the ecosystem required more maturity, AK spent the next decade masterminding global service and creative "engines"—ServingMinds and Incessant Rain Animation Studios. However, these were merely training grounds for his true magnum opus. Following his strategic exits from the creative sector (2008) and the service sector (2010), he never took his eye off the hardware.

2010: The Return of the Dynamo

In 2010, AK returned to India with a singular mission: to reboot Suchinta. He didn't just start with the final product; he started with the "guts." Suchinta spent years mastering component manufacturing and sub-assemblies, all plugging into full products, building the technical rigour and control that would eventually allow for a massive scale-up.

The true inflection point came in 2016. As the global "China+1" strategy shifted from a boardroom conversation to a geopolitical necessity, Suchinta was already years ahead. It had the factories, the sub-assembly manufacturing, and the operational blueprint ready to catch the world’s most demanding brands as they looked for a new home.

The Scale of a Titan: Current Output and the Kochi Expansion

Today, the numbers coming out of AK’s "Silent Engine" are staggering. Suchinta is currently producing 3 lakh (300,000) smartphones every working day. This is not a simple assembly line; it is a deep manufacturing process where even the complex sub-assemblies are produced in-house.

But the 3 lakh a day figure is just the baseline. AK is singularly focused on implementing a gargantuan factory complex in Kochi. Its target? 15 lakh (1.5 million) units per day including wearables. This facility is being prepared for Global Export. While this capacity is being implemented, the full revenue from this 15 lakh a day output is estimated to be added to the company’s ledger in two years, marking a massive secondary wave of growth for the company and turn it into a empire.

The Art of Silent Leadership & Radical Frugality

AK’s most effective tool is his discreet persona. He operates in the "white space" of the industry, avoiding the limelight to focus entirely on strategic growth. Personally, he is known to be extraordinarily frugal and low-key, almost eccentric, shunning the typical trappings of huge success. His company uses little used privacy laws to stay discreetly out of public records. Employees and vendors are known to be bound by strict NDAs.

His philosophy is one of hyper-reinvestment: every penny earned is funneled back into the business to fuel the next phase of growth. This fiscal discipline is what allowed him to build the massive "war chest" for the Kochi expansion without external noise.

His leadership model is one of extreme empowerment. He identifies world-class talent to serve as functional leaders, giving them absolute sovereignty over daily operations. This "CEO-Maker" approach allows AK to remain the high-level architect, the man who secures the land in Kochi, negotiates the billion-dollar export treaties, and imagines with audacity, the next generation of robotic manufacturing systems.

The Worth of a Shadow Empire

When you control a manufacturing engine that is scaling toward a future 1.5 million units a day, the financial metrics move into the elite tier of global industry:

Venture Valuation: The enterprise value of Suchinta is not shared, it can only be estimated, driven by its vertical integration and its status as the premier "China+1" alternative. It maybe worth lakhs of Crores, many times a Unicorn, and easily a Decacorn. Lessor and smaller makers in this space that are listed, are minting Billionaires, and but AK and his team goes about unassumingly. In perpetual stealth mode!

Annual Footprint: Based on the current output of 3 lakh units daily, the revenue handled by Suchinta is already in the multi-billion dollar range. The projected revenue from the 15 lakh units a day Kochi expansion will be layered on top of this starting in two years.

Personal Wealth: Operating as the private dominant co-owner of this massive infrastructure, Ashish Kapoor’s personal wealth profile again can only estimated, and is not public. Making him a powerful, yet least-publicized, industrial titans building unrelentingly for the future of our country and now our city.

Conclusion: The Man Who Waited, Then Ran

AK’s journey from a 1998 startup that was "too early" to a 2026 manufacturing empire is a masterclass in Operational Persistence. He is the engine that never stopped running, the silent leader who let his CEOs take the applause while he built the machine that changed the world’s smart phone supply chain.

When the first units roll out of the Kochi mega-complex, one thing is clear: The world will finally be ready for Suchinta!

Source: The Silent Architect: How Ashish Kapoor is building India’s New Export Engine

[calebsane]

i need to study the impacts of anti black racism on the epigenetic induction of autoimmunity

[wordpress-blaze-10694062]

Christmas and the Eucharist (and the way Jesus lays himself down)

God Running is a place for anyone who wants to love Jesus more deeply, follow Jesus more closely, and love people the way Jesus wants us to.

Bridge Over Troubled Water

Sometimes I get a song stuck in my head, and sometimes, I ask God about it.

"Why oh Lord, is this song stuck in my head? Please get it out, or replace it with a different song. One that's not so obnoxious."

Maybe He heard me recently, because over the last week I've had Paul Simon's song "Bridge Over Troubled Water" in my head (Sung by Art Garfunkel). And I haven't found it to be in the least way obnoxious. Quite the contrary. I started singing it out loud and immediately I felt deeply moved. Then I became curious about the lyrics. So I looked them up, and found them to be beautiful and inspiring.

When you’re weary, feeling small, When tears are in your eyes I will dry them all I’m on your side When times get rough And friends just can’t be found Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down

And I wondered.

"What is the story behind that song?"

When you’re down and out When you’re on the street When evening falls so hard I will comfort you

Because I found it so deep and profound and inspiring, I had a suspicion Jesus may have been involved somehow. So I looked it up.

It turns out Paul Simon heard a Gospel song, sung by The Swan Silvertones, called "Oh Mary Don't You Weep" (a great song in its own right). And there's this one line in that song where the lead singer ad libs:

"I'll be your bridge over deep water, if you trust in My name."

Paul Simon was inspired by that line. So inspired, he felt compelled to create a whole song around just that one line.

I’ll take your part When darkness comes And pain is all around Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down

Jesus Our Bridge

While I sang that song, I couldn't help but think of how grateful I am Jesus came into this earth and into the lives of human beings and into my life in particular.

At various times in my life, I've felt so small. I know what it's like to be alone without friends. I've felt evening fall so hard.

But Jesus.

He was there. Every time.

The problems Art Garfunkel sings about in that song are the reasons Jesus came. They're the reasons God sent His Son to be born into this world. Even the most casual reading of the Gospels reveals how Jesus was frequently surrounded by people who were suffering. And the reason he was surrounded by people who were suffering is because Jesus very intentionally engaged people who were suffering, and helped people who were suffering, Jesus healed people who were suffering.

Jesus Our Savior

And the truth is, the whole world was (and is still) suffering — because of sin.

But Jesus is the Bridge. He's the bridge over troubled water. And Jesus is the bridge between earth and heaven, between humankind and God.

In Genesis chapter 28, Jacob has this dream about a ladder.

And he dreamed, and behold, there was a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven. And behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it! And behold, the Lord stood above it and said, “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac. (Genesis 28:12-13a)

Centuries later, Jesus said to his disciple Nathanael:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man." (John 1:51)

Do you see? Jesus is the ladder Jacob dreamed about. Jesus is the bridge.

That's why Jesus came.

I will lay me down.

To lay himself down for you and for me. To be a bridge for people who are hurting, and to be a bridge to God and to heaven.

On Being a Bridge Like Jesus

Something happened to me, and it's something that happens to a lot of people who experience Jesus come into their lives and lay himself down. They become filled with the love of Christ, and then they want to lay themselves down for others in the same way. The way Jesus has laid himself down for me makes me want to lay myself down, for the people God puts in front of me.

During the first Christmas, the wise men gave Jesus gifts. And I think doing what we're talking about here, laying ourselves down for others, is one of the absolute best gifts we could give Jesus this Christmas.

Christmas and the Eucharist

I've written before about how our connection to Christ is the key to loving like Jesus. And that's what we're talking about today in this blog post about Christmas: how Jesus came to love us by laying himself down. And also, how you and I can lay ourselves down.

But to do that we have to be connected to Jesus, because that's where the strength comes from. And one of the most powerful ways to connect with Jesus is the Eucharist.

As Jesus said in John chapter 6, and as Jesus said during the last supper, He is present in the bread and the wine. We can engage with Him and connect with Him, and become more like Him, when we take communion.

A few days ago, my family shared some things with me about the Christmas story. (Have I mentioned lately: my family is awesome.)

Did you know the name of the town where Jesus was born, the town prophesied about in Micah chapter 5, Bethlehem — that name, "Bethlehem" — means "house of bread?" And the manger where Jesus lay on that holy night; it's a trough. That's what a manger is: it's a trough meant to hold feed. So laying in that trough was Jesus, the Bread of Life, the one who instructed us to eat of His body and drink of His blood.

Church Father John Chrysostom said this about Christmas and the Eucharist:

"The Magi worshiped this body lying in the manger.... Now you no longer see him in the manger but on the altar; you do not see a woman holding him in her arms, but the priest who is standing and the Holy Spirit who flies with great liberality over the offerings placed on the altar. You must believe that today too, it, is the same supper as the one at which Jesus presided. There is no difference between that Eucharist and this one. It is the Body that bled, pierced by the lance, from which flowed blood and water, the sources of salvation for the whole earth. Do not let them be an object of contempt among its members, that is, among the poor who have no clothes with which to cover themselves. Christ emerged from the abyss in radiant light, and leaving his rays here behind, him rose to the heavenly throne. Now it is this Body that you can see here on earth. Indeed, not only do you see it, but you even touch it; not only do you touch it, but you also eat it and go home having received it."

So, a few things to think about this Christmas:

This Christmas, thank God for sending His Son into our world. Thank Him for sending Jesus to lay himself down for us.

And connect with Jesus by experiencing the Eucharist.

And then, with Jesus inside you, go out into the world and engage hurting people the way Jesus did.

Lay yourself down.

Notes:

AJ Rock School Academy, The story behind "Bridge Over Troubled Water", YouTube

The Swan Silvertones-Oh Mary Don't You Weep, YouTube

Oh Mary Don't You Weep lyrics, Songfacts

Simon & Garfunkel - Bridge Over Troubled Water (Live in Central Park), YouTube

Paul Simon, Bridge Over Troubled Water lyrics, paulsimon.com

Bridge Over Troubled Water, Wikipedia

John Chrysostom on 1 Corinthians 10, New Advent

Nativity Painting, British (English) School; Nativity; Brighton and Hove Museums and Art Galleries, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

The Love Like Jesus Book

Available on Amazon, Google Play Books, and Audible!

Love Like Jesus: How Jesus Loved People (and how you can love like Jesus)

In this heartfelt, Scripture-rich journey, Kurt Bennett invites you to study not just the words of Jesus, but His actions—His love, His mercy, His boundaries, and even His naps.

Honest. Practical. Deeply human.

Love Like Jesus begins with the story of how after a life of regular church attendance and Bible study, Bennett was challenged by a pastor to study Jesus. That led to an obsessive seven year deep dive. After pouring over Jesus’ every interaction with another human being, he realized he was doing a much better job of studying Jesus’ words than he was following Jesus’ words and example. The honest and fearless revelations of Bennett’s own moral failures affirm he wrote this book for himself as much as for others. Love Like Jesus examines a variety of stories, examples, and research, including:

Specific examples of how Jesus communicated God’s love to others.

How Jesus demonstrated all five of Gary Chapman’s love languages (and how you can too).

The story of how Billy Graham extended Christ’s extraordinary love and grace toward a man who misrepresented Jesus to millions.

How to respond to critics the way Jesus did.

How to love unlovable people the way Jesus did.

How to survive a life of loving like Jesus (or how not to become a Christian doormat).

How Jesus didn’t love everyone the same (and why you shouldn’t either).

How Jesus guarded his heart by taking care of himself–he even napped–and why you should do the same.

How Jesus loved his betrayer Judas, even to the very end.

With genuine unfiltered honesty, Love Like Jesus, shows you how to live a life according to God’s definition of success: A life of loving God well, and loving the people around you well too.

A life of loving like Jesus.

(Kindle, hardcover, and paperback now available on Amazon, the ebook is now available on Google Play Books, and the audiobook is available on Audible.)

Now you can take Love Like Jesus with you wherever life happens. We recently released the audiobook version, beautifully narrated by Jonathan St. John. And it’s available on the following platforms:

Audible

iTunes/Apple Books

Audiobooks.com

Spotify

It’s also available on Amazon, Hoopla, Audiobooksnow, Chirp, Libro, Overdrive, and virtually everywhere audiobooks are offered.

You can listen right now!

Source: Christmas and the Eucharist (and the way Jesus lays himself down)

[wordpress-blaze-37717455]

Now Available: Tony Deal’s ‘But that’s not true!’ – A Tale of a Land Run by a Lying King

LENOIR, N.C. – Tony Deal’s book, “But that’s not true!” is available for purchase online effective today. It can be purchased at Seedbed Press.

In my recent interview of Deal, he explained he wrote the book because he was motivated by an urgent desire to address the loss of truth, trust and the Golden Rules that have guided the American people and ideals for 250 years.

Deal says, “Not since Thomas Paine’s ‘Common Sense’ in 1776 has America so urgently needed the written word, the arts, and humanities to rally citizens against the rise of another king. If not now… when?”

He continues, “But That’s Not True” sounds the alarm. It holds a mirror up to complacency and fuels the ‘NO KINGS’ movement.

“Through storytelling, humor, and satire, this book sparks a vital conversation about leaders who value truth – and the dangerous consequences when they don't.” He notes it contains vital lessons for youngsters and adults alike:

For younger readers: It is a fable about the virtues of trust, and a reminder that a free society is always just one lie away from tyranny.

For adults: It is a sharp, accurate satire of today’s political landscape and how falsehoods are used to divide us.

He explains, “I am not a career writer or a professional author. I am just one person who refused to sit by and stay angry. I had to do something. This book is my effort.”

Buy the Book

The book can be ordered from Seed Bed Press, Inc. On the Web: seedbedpress.org. Contact: [email protected]

Deal is planning events in the region to discuss the book and make it available for purchase. The Appalachian Chronicle will keep you informed of those events.

Related Articles

Tony Deal’s New Book, ‘But that’s not true!’ is a ‘Modern Parable’ about U.S. Politics

What Happens after ‘No Kings’? If Past is Prologue, Lenoir Will Play a Key Role as it did During the American Revolution

The People Convene: In Our 250th Year Citizens Gather in Lenoir to Invoke the Declaration of Independence and Constitution

Lenoir No Kings Rally Fills the Downtown Square with People and Signs Asserting Their Constitutional Rights

A ‘No Kings’ Letter to the People – Reaffirming the Democratic Roots of Our Rights

Signs of the Times: Lenoir and Surrounding Citizens Say NO! to King Trump at No Kings Protest

Peaceful and Exuberant ‘No Kings’ Protesters Crowd Lenoir’s Town Square – A Photo Gallery ‘No Kings’ National Day of Defiance Set for Lenoir on Sat. June 14 in Response to Trump’s Authoritarianism

Trump’s Tyranny is not New: Read what Our Founders Wrote about Kings in The Declaration of Independence

© Michael M. Barrick, 2026.

Source: Now Available: Tony Deal’s ‘But that’s not true!’ – A Tale of a Land Run by a Lying King

[wordpress-blaze-210392503]

Encounter by the sea

She glowed in the soft light of the night, as if she had stolen the moon’s radiance and hidden it within her skin. There she sat, her face directly across from me, gazing off into the night, searching for the horizon. It was wonderful to see her like that; I wanted to tell her so, but my mind wouldn’t let me.

She had already been walking back and forth for eleven hours, working herself to the bone for a measly wage and a crowd of stuffed tourists. It was late; I was sitting on “her” terrace and asked if she ever got anything to drink during the day. She told me her boss only let her drink tap water, so I offered her a Richie’s, and that’s how she ended up sitting at my table for a while.

A shiver ran through me when she said how sweet that was. For a moment, a thought brought me to a halt because I remembered that whenever a woman used the word “sweet” with me, it usually ended badly, but the red wine caressed my palate powerfully. All taste was sucked from my tongue, so that my mouth, completely numb, wouldn’t utter any foolish words, and at the same time I lost control of my negative thoughts. From that moment on, every word I managed to utter to her became an enchantment, a symbol, an expression of a repressed consciousness—the little boy inside me who made jokes, listened, and empathized. She could smile wonderfully broadly, skip away when she needed to, after which she served with a spark yet remained elegant. She was beautiful, smooth, playful, but was she also honest? That little fear kept me at a distance and at the same time drew me toward her; I could only truly get to know her if I dared to open myself up—so far, my self-help conclusion.

That night, through a few deliberate choices—and what seemed like a coincidence to her—we ran into each other again on the beach. She was pleasantly surprised; we walked a bit, and since she was already so tired, she invited me to the studio she was renting near the seawall. A simple space, white walls, with just a small painting of a large ship’s mast on one, followed by a kitchenette with a fridge and a separate room with a shower.

“Want something to drink?” “Water is fine.”

She gave me a glass of water and poured herself one too. She dropped a few ice cubes in it, and we sat down on the couch.

“I often see you sitting there with a book and a glass of wine.” “Yeah, that’s my way of disappearing for a bit—into words, into stories, away from… well, the world as it is.” “You’re different. Different from those guys out here on the terrace who want to pinch my behind or ask for my Instagram right away.”

I smiled. Yeah, no, I might want to, but I wouldn’t dare, and certainly not if I didn’t know her yet, or hadn’t had a normal conversation with her.

“It’s actually the first time I’ve come across someone like you here. All alone, reading a book, and so well-mannered. I think you have an old soul.” “Thank you, unfortunately I feel that way sometimes too.” “You certainly don’t look like it. More like a scared little boy,” she said teasingly. “You know, I was adopted at a young age; I haven’t seen my real father in over 15 years. That makes me cautious and thoughtful—that’s how I dealt with my parents’ divorce, always thinking before I said anything. My real dad could explode at the most ungodly moments, and my mom would run away. And I’ve learned to hold back, sometimes a little too much, so it weighs on my mind.”

She paused for a moment and took my arm, as if for support.

“You’re pretty intense right off the bat, uh, we’ve only just met and you’re already an open book.” “Sorry, it doesn’t happen often that I meet someone who actually intends to listen.”

She smiled. I went on, telling her about how I got a new father and a new name, how we moved far away and I had to adjust all over again, to a different school with people who spoke differently and had different customs than I did, the little boy who came from a big city.

She listened. But the conversation didn’t go on very late, because it was already past midnight and she had to start early the next day. I wanted to tell her so much, so I flooded her with concepts like “illusions, (de)constructions, flawed rituals”—in short, all the dark spots burned into my soul.

The night was too short, and behind every word with which I overwhelmed her lay another night. I don’t know if she understood much of it—she gave that impression—and I sometimes thought I might be overdoing it; bombarding someone with your own intellectual and emotional ramblings might not always be such a good idea. Meanwhile, she took a Frisco from the fridge, offered me one too—which I refused—and sipped the red, with its yellow and orange sculpture shaped like a rocket. She let her breath expand into smoky, sensual shapes, only to have them float around me in slender arms to cradle me.

It went too fast, it was too short, but I knew now that she had a feeling I was looking for, something that would make us both stronger.

We said goodbye and decided to see each other again the next day, after her work; it would also be the last night I could stay here in Nieuwhaven. I had to see her again before I left with my parents.

Source: Encounter by the sea

[wordpress-blaze-232153810]

Do Babies Always Look Like Their Dads?

Newborn babies are often perceived to look more like their fathers than their mothers. While children inherit genes equally from both parents, evolutionary biology and psychology offer a compelling explanation for why paternal resemblance is so commonly noticed, and talked about, in early infancy.

When science baby was born, pretty much the only thing we heard for the first year or so was how much he looked like his dad! Which, as a mother (who had gone through the gruelling, invasive process of IVF, carried and grown this child for nine months, and gone through four days of induction and birth, not to mention feeding him from my own body and having my mind and body completely transformed by the process), was the last thing I wanted to hear.

The worst part was, they were right! This tiny scrap of humanity was a carbon copy of his dad. I could see it, and so could everyone else. It was lovely and horrible in equal measure! I clung onto those rare interactions where a kind friend or unsuspecting stranger said they saw my resemblance in him as well!

When I shared my frustration with those closest to me, it turned out that my experience was not unique. Lots of long-suffering mothers were caring for kids that (as far as everyone told them, at least) looked more like their dads. Which got me thinking, what’s the science behind it?

Do babies really look like their fathers when they are born?

Genetically, a baby is a mixture of their two parents. But the way genes are inherited and the way they’re expressed can vary on an individual basis. So things like eye colour and hair colour can be all mom, or all dad, or come as a surprise. There are lots of reasons why a baby might come out looking more like their mom or their dad. And that can change as they grow older, too.

But there’s one good reason why looking like dad might be a good thing, and that’s paternal confidence!

The vast majority of mothers have biological confidence in their children. After all, they literally grew and pushed (or had sliced) out this human being, saw them attached to their insides, and, barring any serious hospital mixups or misdemeanours, have an unbroken chain of custody from that very first cry.

Fathers, on the other hand, are never so sure. They were involved in the process just once, many months earlier, and have only the mother’s memory or loyalty to go on. Even IVF dads have to put their trust in the labelling of pots!

So, evolutionary psychologists have suggested that babies who physically resemble their dads are more likely to be accepted by those fathers. As a result, they’re more likely to receive care, attention, and resources, boosting their survival chances.

Dads go through neurological and hormonal changes (similar to what moms go through during Matrescence), with lower testosterone and higher oxytocin that supports nurturing behavior and bonding. It makes sense that they will only want to go through all of this for a child that is demonstrably theirs.

This has been backed up by data too. A study in 2014 measured facial resemblance between French children and their fathers, and rated how close those fathers felt to their children. The results showed that the emotional closeness and resemblance were correlated: the more a kid looked like their dad, the closer those dads felt to their kids.

I’m sure we’d all like to think that we’ve moved beyond these kind of primal, animal instincts, but in reality we’re not so different from our animal cousins after all.

Conflicting Evidence

So, if there’s a real evolutionary advantage to babies looking like their dads, then is it true that babies always look like their dads?

In 1995, researchers used an experiment where neutral observers had to match photos of 1 year olds to those of their parents. Significantly, the results showed that these people were better at matching the kid to the father than they were to the mother, strongly suggesting that there is a greater resemblance between dads and their kids than between moms and their offspring. This seemed to confirm it - on average, babies look more like their dads.

However, this wasn’t the only study that’s been done, and not all of the results say the same thing. Several studies have expanded on that same photo-matching research, using a wider range of pictures, as well as a wider age range of kids. And in all of those, people were able to match kids to their mothers and fathers with about equal success rates. That suggests that, on average, children resemble both of their parents equally. There was no consistent bias towards dad.

Interestingly, in evolutionary biology, researchers have found that when the paternity of a child is not certain, or where there's a high risk of conflict arising from paternity clashes, then ambiguous resemblance might actually be a good thing. In these situations, if a baby doesn’t strongly resemble the dad, then that father may be less likely to harm or reject them. One study in 2021 revealed that promiscuous fathers, who had many sexual relationships and several children raised by different families, ended up with sons who looked less like them.

The eye of the beholder

The thing that all of these studies have in common is that they used strangers to match the babies to their parents. And while these neutral, objective observers might be able to see no particular resemblance, it’s a very different story when you ask mom. Regardless of what strangers might think, moms frequently insist that their little ones look like their fathers (despite the self-sacrifice of motherhood!)

Psychologists believe this behaviour also has its roots in evolution. If a mother can consciously or unconsciously persuade a father that the baby is his, then she’s more likely to secure his care and protection. So it follows that she’s conditioned to see his features in the baby, to then pass on her certainty and ensure her baby’s survival.

And so, while observers tend to say babies look more like mom, mothers themselves unconsciously emphasise resemblance to dad, boosting paternal certainty, even while, in her conscious mind, it stings to admit it!

Nurturing resemblance

The studies seem to show that paternal resemblance is in the eye of the beholder. But there’s an intriguing twist to this tale - you can change how that eye beholds.

The more involved a dad is with their kid, the more similar they will appear to be - at least in the eyes of the father. In one study from 2010, dads were given infant massage lessons with their babies, and afterwards they rated their resemblance to those kids higher than they had before. Not only that, but the sessions helped to reduce their stress: win win! It’s important to note that a daddy-daughter massage won’t actually change how the kid will look, or their underlying genetics, but it does seem to shift how the dads see their offspring. And that, presumably, will subtly change how they behave towards them.

In other words, it goes both ways. Bonding boosts perceived similarity, which encourages more bonding.

So, Do Babies Look Like Their Dads?

There’s conflicting evidence out there, but the emerging picture is that, if you think your kid looks like their dad, then it’s all in your head!

But that isn’t necessarily a bad thing - because perception can be a powerful thing, and what you think influences how you behave. Mothers are hard-wired to care for the child they grew, but resemblance helps to illict that nurturing behaviour from fathers too.

Ultimately, that classic “He looks just like you!” often reflects a blend of genetic chance, mom’s persuasion, dad’s love, and deep-seated evolutionary psychology.

Source: Do Babies Always Look Like Their Dads?

[wordpress-blaze-212879708]

Silent Power- Part II

Today is a rare day, indeed. By that I mean that I have absolutely nothing to say. It is not that I am distracted; I remain in a constant state of reflection and analysis of how gaslighting operates. The malicious lies, slander, and gossip which define psychological warfare, along with the passive aggressive bullshit that becomes the weak man or woman’s weapon of choice, and the constant betrayal from those you once called friends-it is exhausting.

I have learned how to accept and subsequently work within the moments when my brain screams “Enough!” and simply let go of the negativity shrouding my research on gaslighting and the people who employ such measures for superficial gain. I have also learned to embrace the pauses as opportunities for personal growth.

I now let my silence speak the words I have no business saying, or the knowing smile I now wield to those still intent on stabbing a few swords in my back.

That is control, yes, but the kind one can wield only for or against oneself. It does not rely on the actions of others to obtain it, which is the only way true power exists. Those who rely on manipulation as strategy and treat gossip, lies, and slander as currency to be exchanged are trapped in the illusion of power and must rely on the masks they wear to appear powerful when they are anything but.

Heavy subjects, I agree, which is why my brain needs breaks. I do not fight it- it is not worth the struggle. Instead, I have learned to adapt, to go with the proverbial flow, and to watch as situations and experiences unfold.

And, so, this week, consider myself adapting, flowing with the fact that I am reading and absorbing more than I am blogging.

Until the next time, keep watching, keep waiting, and, most importantly, keep going.

Source: Silent Power- Part II