I'm soooo bored!!! .....How do I fix it?

Have you ever felt like you wanted to just holler? Maybe like this little girl just let all the frustrations out in one giant scream?

I have never experienced "boredom" but I know of many who experience it regularly so I thought maybe I'll make a little enquiry into the term/experience.

According to Wikipedia: "Boredom is an emotional state experienced when an individual is left without anything in particular to do and has no interest in their surroundings".

There are different types of boredom(ennui in french)but it is suggested that all involve engagement with attention.

Or rather the problem of staying interested, attentive, engaged, with what is happening in the moment. The moment as we are experiencing it may feel lack-luster, non-stimulating, slow, or plain blah, blah, blah. Some suggest that boredom can be a response to ones perception of things moving too slowly, not enough stimuli or excitement, not enough "stuff happening".

If a person enjoys the outdoors, physical activities of all sorts, then maybe such a person might perceive a "Mindfulness Seminar" as boring. If a person enjoys to be involved in a myriad of different activities which involves other people, then maybe solitude can be experienced as boring.

Perhaps "French/Italian Impressionist Cinema" is what excites you, then perhaps taking part in a pick-up basketball game strikes you as boring. Cooking may be extremely exciting to you and a yawn to someone else.

Could it be that boredom is "in the mind of the beholder"?

If  boredom is perceived as something to be avoided, an unpleasant emotional state, is it possible that maybe there are other emotions involved? Heidegger suggests that in being bored we are confronted with the meaningless of existence, a sense of nothingness, and this can be experienced with great anxiety. To remedy this anxiety, we do things; after all, we live in an industrious age and there is no shortage of things to do and "i-thingy's" to use. The last time I was travelling on a commuter train I was struck by how many people were using "i-thingy's". Was anybody really on the train, or were most of us somewhere else? Not that there is anything wrong with that........using the i-thingy's I mean, I just couldn't help but reflect on the fact that hundreds of humans being were confined to a small space, yet very few of us communicated or interacted with each other.

Is waiting in line, commuting back and forth to work, sitting in traffic jams, waiting in airports, etc. "dead" time? Time that we need to bring to "life" by doing something?

Being where we are, focusing all our attention on the very moment we are in; listening, seeing, smelling, becoming aware of our experience of the moment, is that not also doing something?

I think it is.......but rather than being(/living) somewhere in the future or the past; being(/living) in the moment we are present in the only "alive" time that is available to us; NOW.

If we often experience feelings of boredom, perhaps it may behove us to ask ourselves: "Why, why do I have these feelings?" When someone tells me they are bored my first question is often to ask: "what would have to happen for you to not be bored anymore?" The most common answer is: "I don't know, something......anything really". In some cases, boredom may the symptom of something more than just lack of attention/something to be occupied with, such as depression, anxiety, feelings of helplessness, addiction issues, etc.etc.

If we find that very little tend to keep our attention or interest, then perhaps we could benefit from speaking to someone about it.

Some suggestions if you're slightly bored: get a cat, they are highly entertaining and very unpredictable, or place a beehive in your work place, it will make it very suspenseful(not really, but just imagine it), or listen to some music you detest, or speak without using the letter "e", or get a big canvas and brush, lotsa paint, blindfold yourself and paint, or only say "happy" things for a week, be Pollyanna so to speak....etc.

If "boring" is in the mind of the beholder, then as a beholder, we have the power of change.

 

“There are no uninteresting things, only uninterested people.” 
(G. K. Chesterton)

 

“I’m bored’ is a useless thing to say. I mean, you live in a great, big, vast world that you’ve seen none percent of. Even the inside of your own mind is endless; it goes on forever, inwardly, do you understand? The fact that you’re alive is amazing, so you don’t get to say ‘I’m bored.”
 (Louis CK)

 

(ps; the painting is a watercolour......)

 



Don't be so sensitive...........

Have someone ever told you: "Don't be so sensitive"?

Or maybe it was phrased: "You're being over-sensitive".

Is there an "under sensitive"? More to the point, is there a "right" amount of sensitive?

And if there is a right amount of sensitive, how was this established and by who?

Researching the word "sensitivity" I realised that the term is not easily definable.

So here is my definition: processing of sensory data.

According to a person's previous experiences, how we digest, observe, and interpret those experiences/data more often than not is coloured/influenced by earlier perceptions and emotions.

If our last experience of public speaking/public performance, was one of butterflies, dry throat and a wobbly stomach, we will probably become "sensitive" to the thought of another such event.

If as a child we were told: "Don't be so sensitive, just take it on the chin", we may deduce that the "right" behaviour in similar situations is to not display our emotions/feelings.

Basically we establish an approach toward a multitude of events/phenomenon that we feel comfortable with. We "play our cards close to the chest", become "an open book", have a "cautious approach", etc. In a sense we establish for our self a "right" amount of sensitivity.

Which varies from culture to culture, but in most societies there seem to be a collective agreement of an acceptable level of sensitivity as well as our individual perception.

If someone tells you that you are too sensitive, it is still up to you to decide whether you agree with the statement or not. Some of us are more aware of our inner emotional states and so process our sensory data on a deeper level with the result that our responses will vary from those with a more "relaxed" approach.

In 1996, Dr Elaine N. Aron coined the term, "highly sensitive person", a term/trait presented as a positive in her book "The Highly Sensitive Person". Some of the positive aspects she presented are: creativity, emotional awareness, a greater sense of empathy, a cautious approach to decision making.

Personally, the book encouraged me to carefully consider certain words from a different angle.

Such as: maybe "perfectionism" could be defined as "attention for detail", "over-sensitive" as "emotionally deeply aware", "doesn't play well with others" as "needs space to process", "introverted" as "rich inner life"?

If a society values "extroversion" as the norm, then "introversion" may be considered a peripheral behaviour; a less "normal" way to behave/act. Often when a behaviour is specified as "too-anything"  it is deemed so in conjunction with what the "majority" considers normal.(According to each culture)

What about some well known, not so normal people?

Names such as Vincent van Gogh, Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King Jr., Abraham Lincoln, Carl Jung, springs to mind...all considered sensitive people, not normal, yet their contributions to mankind arguably beyond reproach.

If we live in a society which values extroversion, then being a sensitive individual, (introverted), we may find ourselves questioning our behaviours and be tempted to view ourselves in a negative light rather than appreciating our inner awareness and sensitivity.

Perhaps at times shifting our focus to the "outer" world rather than the "inner" may be advantageous for the introverted, and perhaps at times spending a bit of time reflecting on the "inner" may be helpful for the extroverted,

after all, we all share the same planet and the more we understand each other, the greater the chance of us all getting along.

 

“In an extroverted society, the difference between an introvert and an extrovert is that an introvert is often unconsciously deemed guilty until proven innocent.” (Criss Jami) 

 

“Leave an extrovert alone for two minutes and he will reach for his cell phone. In contrast, after an hour or two of being socially “on,” we introverts need to turn off and recharge. My own formula is roughly two hours alone for every hour of socializing. This isn’t antisocial. It isn’t a sign of depression. It does not call for medication. For introverts, to be alone with our thoughts is as restorative as sleeping, as nourishing as eating. Our motto: “I’m okay, you’re okay—in small doses.”

(Jonathan Raush)

ps. the image is a graphite on cardboard, the model my son

 

Keeping up appearances...



Snow is amazing.

 

In a few hours a hostile environment can be transformed into a glistening, brilliant, sparkling,

mysterious, wonder world. What lies beneath may be all sorts of unfriendly and threatening, but with a good snow cover barbwire, rusty spikes, broken fences, sharp rocks and other potentially dangerous items, are gone. Well, not gone,...just not visible.

A husband and wife are having an argument, tempers are flaring and there is a lot of shouting. Suddenly the phone rings. The husband/wife picks up the receiver: "Hello, 555-375689.

Ah, it's you Bill. How are you, haven't heard from you for a while? No, I'm not in the middle of anything." Gone is the loud and impatient tone of voice.

The child finally has had enough of shopping and begins to pull things of the shelves into the trolley. Patiently the parent lift the items out of the trolley and put them back on the shelves. The child decides to sit down in the middle of the aisle. Gently the parent lifts the child of the floor. The child decides to cry loudly. With other shoppers now taking notice, the parent begins to feel conspicuous. "Look Oliver, I'm almost done, please stop crying, when we get home I'll give you some ice-creme." The child stops crying and the parent thankfully becomes an anonymous shopper again.

While waiting in line for the bus, the mobile phone rings. The young woman answers with a smile: "Hey, Justin, I was hoping it was you." In a few minutes the smile on the young woman's face has vanished and is replaced with profound sadness. As she finishes her call, her eyes are filled with tears. She quickly wipes her tears away and when offered a tissue from a man behind her, she replies: "I'm alright, I don't need a tissue thanks."

Old Tom is changing his work clothes when the boss walks in to the change room. "Now Tom, you know we've had to tighten the belt around here, and I'm sorry, but I am going to have to let you go. Nothing personal at all, just business." The boss pats Tom on the shoulder and exits the change room. Tom slowly empties his locker. The changing room door opens suddenly and Blake, the new guy, skips into the room: "Nite, Tom, see you tomorrow". Tom just waves and smiles as Blake skip out leaving behind him a misty cloud of after shave.

Many of us have probably found ourselves in situations in which we felt we needed to put on a "stiff upper lip", to keep up appearances, if not for others at least for ourselves. Most societies have social norms; how common, unusual, acceptable or unacceptable a behaviour is. A collective code of conduct against which our behaviour is measured. Laughing when the code's considered acceptable behaviour require crying may raise a few eyebrows, using "outdoors" voice inside, displaying too much affection publicly, not showing enough emotion, speaking to yourself, gesticulating too much/too little and so on. Perhaps we also have an additional individual code of conduct we live by; proper ways of eating, sitting, standing, speaking, displaying emotions, etc.etc. On top of this we may also have a list of  ramifications we may suffer should we fail to keep up our appearances.
If I don't behave in ...........fashion, I will be rejected, excluded, not invited, alone for the rest of my life, .........................................(insert here all you can think of).
There is a word, etiquette, originally a french word but used in the English language since 1750, which means "a code of behaviour that delineates expectations for social behaviour according to contemporary conventional norms within a society, social class/group" which I find to be highly useful. What is the etiquette in 2012?
Is it acceptable to answer/speak on the mobile phone regardless of circumstances? Is it acceptable to deliver really bad news with a text? Is it acceptable to have a "Blue tooth" conversation in any public space? Is it acceptable to find a life partner on line?
Can etiquette (keeping up appearances/manners) be a good thing, or is it restrictive, or maybe both, or maybe we don't care either way?

At times a "stiff upper lip" may be what helps us cope with a difficult situation, yet in another situation it may prevent us from coming to grips with our emotions. Some people perhaps find strength in adhering to behaving/conducting themselves strictly in line with perceived social norms, others may find doing so very limiting and undermining their sense of individuality.

Maybe for some of us keeping up appearances affirms our sense of belonging, of acceptance.

Keeping up appearances may offer some of us a buffer from what is private and personal, visa vie what is public behaviour.

“Contrary to popular opinion, manners are not a luxury good that's interesting only to those who can afford to think about them. The essence of good manners is not exclusivity, nor exclusion of any kind, but sensitivity. To practise good manners is to confer upon others not just consideration but esteem; ........(Henry Alford)

Perhaps keeping up appearances/etiquette/manners is like snow; it offers a homogeneous covering.

Maybe we don't necessarily need to know exactly what lies beneath it, maybe we just enjoy and appreciate it because "skiing" would be rather tricky without it.

 



Being different....

 

Kermit the frog sang: "It's not easy being green........."what if you are blue, or just different?

In 1994 a book by psychologist Richard J Herrnstein and political scientist Charles Murray titled "The Bell Curve" was released. In the book the argument is that human intelligence is a good predictor of many personal dynamics.

Although the book is both controversial yet supported by some, the "bell curve" has assumed a role in psychological research and practise. In the book there are useful applications of statistical concepts, but in searching for "normality" in the data and its variables, there is a risk of treating the bell curve as an absolute.

If we agree that there is a "normal", how did we arrive at that conclusion? What is normal anyway?

"Conforming to a standard, expected, usual, standard" some say.

 "Normal is also used to describe when someones behaviour conforms to the most common behaviour in society (known as conforming to the norm)." (Wikipedia)

Is "normality" desirable or can there be too much normality? When does normality become conformity?

If we desire normality, what happens to creativity, ingenuity, imagination, etc.? In a normal world is there any space for Van Goghs, Da Vinci's, The Wright brothers, Einstein's, Kierkegaard's, etc?

In a normal world, would anybody entertain the notion of going to the Moon?

For some children being label "not normal" in school can haunt them for the rest of their lives. "Normal people don't dress, eat, look, think, behave, laugh, walk, etc.etc. like that" a catch phrase that can be very hurtful for a person being told so, and highly suspect since it relies on there being an absolute normal. Walking around naked bar a loincloth can have you arrested for lewd behaviour in one culture yet be normal in another, speaking/chanting against a wall will possibly have you carried away to a mental institution in one culture yet in another its common practise. Normal seem to be a word with much flexibility and many interpretations.

In school as a small child I was bullied for not being normal. Nothing about me seemed to be normal to others and there seemed to be no end to how many things about me was wrong; I mean; not normal. Is normal right and deviations from it; wrong? Do not most of us consider ourselves and our behaviours as normal?

For someone working night shifts eating breakfast at three in the afternoon may be normal, for a musician practising on an instrument for five hours a day may be normal, for a sportsperson working out for many hours a day may be normal, for a dedicated religious person praying for hours may be normal, for any person committed and dedicated to their work whatever it may be, spending many hours doing so, may be normal and so on.

Maybe normal like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder, the term is indeed very flexible.

So what if you are different, if your normal seems to be different from many others?

Most of us like to belong, to be included, to be accepted by the society we live in, and usually being considered "normal" is the ideal for inclusion, which may lead to a sense of pressure to conform.

We know what to expect from normal people, but what about people who are different?

There is an element of the "unknown" with people who are different which at times may be experienced as uncomfortable by some.

Speaking too animatedly, laughing too loudly, displaying too much emotion, being over excited, using too much body language etc. according to the norm can clear a room, bus, train in no time at all. Of course in a different culture none of those things may be different but rather the norm.

To answer the question of what "normal" is, seems to be like answering how long a piece of string is.

If being different costs you fellowship with others, then maybe ponder if there is something you can change or modify that will make your fellowship more successful.

Maybe one can just remove the labels all together, different or normal, and just concentrate on discovering how to be who you want to be.

 

"A friend is someone who gives you total freedom to be yourself-and especially to feel, or not feel. Whatever you happen to be feeling at any moment is fine with them. That's what real love amounts to - letting a person be what he really is.” (Jim Morrison)
 

“Our lives are mere flashes of light in an infinitely empty universe. In 12 years of education the most important lesson I have learned is that what we see as “normal” living is truly a travesty of our potential. In a society so governed by superficiality, appearances, and petty economics, dreams are more real than anything anything in the “real world”. Refuse normalcy. Beauty is everywhere, love is endless, and joy bleeds from our everyday existence. (Domenic Owen Mallary)

 

 

 

 

 

Conflicts are conflicting.....

 

Before I begin, a brief definition of conflict: a disagreement through which the parties involved perceive a threat to their needs, interests or concerns.

(Of course I could also write a definition of "disagreement", "threat", "needs" and so on, however that would use up all my energy so I leave that for you to look up ...:)

Often in conflicts, we tend to respond to our perceptions of a situation rather than an objective review of it. As humans, most of us have "filters" and whatever we experience we run through those. When I use the term filter, I mean our values, beliefs, feelings, information, culture, etc.

If our belief is that all cats are spooky, chances are that the cats we come across, are spooky...

If our information tells us that teenagers are unruly, chances are that we will meet many unruly teenagers.

If our culture in which we are raised informs us that green people are better than purple people, then chances are that this is what we will encounter.

Some of us respond to conflict with fear, others with anger, some with conviction, some with an urgent need to remove themselves from the situation, some of us maybe with all the above and some of us may just want to restore peace; equilibrium, and rather forfeit our stance rather than continue a conflict.

In a book written by Danaan Parry, "Warriors of the Heart", he recalls a story about conflict resolution that made a profound impression on me. While working in Ireland in the capacity as a "conflict resolver" he tried a daring method of helping the conflicting parties to understand each others view. Parry organised a large hall, invited all the warring members to attend, then waited. He was not sure that anybody would attend, but to his surprise, a number of them did. Parry invited them into the hall and asked them to be peaceful, respectful and allow him to suggest a possible way of understanding. The two warring tribes were standing on each end of the hall with the hall divided in the middle with a large yellow line.

"Ladies and gentlemen, all of you who have lost a parent to this conflict, please take a step forward.

Now, all of you who have lost a brother or a sister to this conflict, take a step forward.

Can all of you who have lost a lover please step forward.

All of you who have lost a friend, step forward please.

All who have lost a distant relative, someone unrelated but important to you, please step forward."

A hush fell on the hall as the warring tribes realised that they were all standing at the yellow line.

In conflicts there is often a considerable level of misunderstanding due to different perceptions which may fortify the disagreement, but if we can understand each others positions and perceptions, we may be able to find common ground, a beginning for a resolution.

As the warring parties were starring at each other across the yellow line, they realised that they all were affected by the conflict in some way or another; their common ground was loss of someone they cared about.

M.Scott Peck states in one of his books: "More than anything else, people want to be right".

Is being right more important than being understood? Is being right more important than finding a resolution to a conflict?

Is there the possibility that in a conflict/disagreement both parties involved are right?

What is the desired outcome we are looking for? Are we seeking to find a way to resolve the conflict, or are we seeking to prove the other wrong?

There are indigenous peoples who use a "talking stick" and whoever holds it, is the only one allowed to speak, the others must listen. Maybe we can incorporate the notion? Perhaps the beginning of resolution is listening, allowing the other to speak without interference regardless of our opinion of what is being said. Staying calm and respectful may also be useful. Avoiding assumptions and instead being precise, making sure that what is said and what we hear is the same; i.e. "so what I heard you say is..........is that correct?"

In conflict lies a possibility for change, for learning new aspects, for growth.

 

"Creativity comes from a conflict of ideas". (Donatella Versace)

 

"Change means movement. Movement means friction. Only in the frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or change occur without the abrasive friction or conflict".

(Saul Alinsky)

 

"Peace is not the absence of conflict, it is the ability to handle conflict by peaceful means".

(Ronald Reagan)