(how) did you fill out your census form?

Last week I filled out my first Census form ever. I admit, I was actually looking forward to receiving it and "being counted." lol. Most of my excitement was the ability to "check all that apply" under the race category. The 2000 Census was the first time respondents were allowed to do so. About 6.8 million Americans, 2.4 percent of the population, checked more than one racial box. I'm assuming my mom would have filled this out for me (and my other siblings) and marked the appropriate boxes, but it was nice to do it myself this time.

For multiple reasons, the Census is always a big strumu (that's a VI term basically meaning controversy in this instance, I have no idea the proper spelling lol) but particularly because it is a large determining factor for a lot of state and federal funding. In particular, advocates for minorities are especially concerned about their number being counted. It's actually quite a sticky subject. In fact, some black groups were against allowing multiracial individuals to choose more than one race, because of how this would affect the population counts. Kenneth Prewitt, who directed the 2000 census, said some civil-rights groups have resisted the concept of checking more than one race out of fear that it will dilute their influence. As someone whose job is all about data and statistics, I have to say that the more detail they collect the better. I did a huge project at work looking at racial/ethnic disparities in child health and believe me, these things make a difference.

Anyway, I did my duty and filled out my form the day I got it in the mail. And it made me quite happy to check two boxes :-)  This made me think about times when I couldn't check more than one box. I don't remember every time, but I actually think I would sometimes choose "black", sometimes "other." I would never check white if I could only choose one. I guess I've fallen victim to the "one-drop rule" mentality lol.

The whole issue of racial (self)-identificaton is fascinating to me. The other day I read a tidbit about how bi-racial actress (and wife of Ribin Thicke) Paula Patton is actually offended by the term biracial. This was quite perplexing to me as a headline, but she explains it somewhat in an interview:  “I find [the term biracial] offensive. It’s a way for people to separate themselves from African-Americans….a way of saying ‘I’m better than that...I’m black because that’s the way the world sees me. People aren’t calling Barack Obama biracial. Most people think there’s a black president….People judged me because I was light-skinned. [They'd assume] I didn’t want to be part of the black race.”

While I respect her opinion, I can't say that I agree with her. I identify as biracial not because I think I'm better than or want to separate myself from African Americans. I say that I am biracial because it is a more accurate description of who I am and how I identify. It would be even more accurate to reflect that I am West Indian or Caribbean black and white, but I suppose those specific categories are captured in other more detailed surveys by the Census Bureau and others.

In any case, I was happy to be able to choose more than one race on my form. I actually am happy whenever I fill out forms and am allowed to do so. The "check all" option actually occurs almost all the time now. I rarely am forced to choose. (By the way, there was a great study done looking at task performance of multiracial individuals allowed to identify all their racial components compared to those who were instructed to choose only one. Those who were allowed to choose more than one performed better on tasks than those who were forced to choose one!)

Of course, there are issues for other demographic groups as well. If you find this stuff interesting, check out this article.

So, did you fill out your Census form? Did you think about this stuff at all?? Any other issues come up for you filling out the form? What do you think about Paula Patton's comments?

Of course you know today's *big chune* had to come from a mixie right?? Remember the group Groove Theory, most known for their big chune Tell Me? Well, the lead singer is Amel Larrieux (black mom, white dad), who went on to release her own albums. I couldn't pick between two of my favorite songs of hers so today is a 2-for-1 ;-) She has some other great ones too though, so check her out.


"For Real"





"Weary"



:-D
  

you don't have to be irish to be lucky

I haven't given up on the blog! I just had a rough week and needed to take a little break :-)

Updates: As of now I haven't gotten into any of the grad schools to which I applied (hence my bad week *smile*). I'm still waiting to hear from two Master's programs - all the other "nos" have been from PhD programs...so no Dr. Brightside anytime soon. I'm not gonna lie, I was really really down about this last week. I put in a lot of work, time and even money into this process...and I came soooo close by making it to the interview round at 3 schools. I was sort of a hot mess for one day but now I'm feeling pretty good about everything.

Some people may think that saying "everything happens for a reason" is a way to take yourself out of the equation of life...and see yourself as being at the whim of the world. I disagree. I feel confident that I put a great amount of effort into my goal. Having fallen short of the ultimate goal (a PhD) I am now comfortable with the fact that perhaps that particular aim wasn't meant to be (right now if ever). The way I see it, maybe what life has in store for me doesn't require a PhD. Maybe it would have been something that I wasn't prepared for and ended up being stuck in. Whatever the case, I still have some options to go back to school, and I'm waiting anxiously on those. But don't worry, I already have some backup plans in mind :-)

In other news, I got all four wisdom teeth extracted last week...another big reason why I haven't felt like writing. I just felt ick all weekend...I spent the majority of the time lying around with Nix (she got her's out last week too lol) watching Food Network and movies. I saw The Hurt Locker, The Lucky Ones, The Hangover,  Did You Hear About the Morgans, and Up in the Air....as you can see I did a lot of nothing this weekend!

Those are my major updates. I'll get back to writing more regularly from now on.

Since today is St. Patrick's Day, I wanted to write a little bit about luck. The interesting thing about luck is that it's sort of hard to define and people have many different views about it. It's generally thrown around in a nonchalant manner. People often speak of themselves as being lucky/unlucky but not in a very concrete way...after all, you can't really measure luck. One thing you'll often hear me say is that I have bad luck when it comes to chance (i.e., I don't win drawings or bingo or those sorts of things) but I have amazing life luck. Stuff works out for me! Another way I express this is by acknowledging and appreciating that I am blessed. But, this doesn't mean that everything in my life is perfect and goes exactly how I want it to...it just means that things happen in a way that I feel good about and that are providential even if not according to plan.

Those who think they're unlucky should change their outlook and 

discover how to generate good fortune.

The other day I read this interesting article on luck, based on research that revealed that lucky people generate good fortune via four basic principles. They:

• are skilled at creating and noticing chance opportunities
• make lucky decisions by listening to their intuition
• create self-fulfilling prophesies via positive expectations 
• adopt a resilient attitude that transforms bad luck into good

Unlucky people often fail to follow their intuition when making a choice, while lucky people tend to respect hunches. The article also mentions that lucky people are interested in how they both think and feel about the various options, rather than simply looking at the rational side of the situation. I tend to go on "vibes" that I get from things, people, situations.

Unlucky people tend to be creatures of routine....for example, taking the same route to and from work and talking to the same types of people at parties. Conversely, many lucky people try to introduce variety into their lives. The article gives an amusing anecdote about how someone thought of a color before arriving at a party and then introduced himself to people wearing that color. Apparently, this kind of behaviour boosts the likelihood of chance opportunities by introducing variety.

Lucky people tend to see the positive side of their ill fortune. One easy way of doing this is to imagine how things could have been (or could be) worse. For example, in one interview, a volunteer arrived with his leg in a plaster cast and described how he had fallen down a flight of stairs....he cheerfully explained that he felt luckier than he had before....because he could have broken his neck. Now that is one way to look on the bright side...although I guess it's more like looking at the darkside and being glad you're not there lol. I tend to do this a lot...

In celebration of St. Patty's Day, focus on your luck this week by taking notice of chance opportunities, listening to your intuition, expecting to be lucky, and being more resilient to bad luck!

Today's *big chune* is from Corinne Bailey Rae, who released her second album a few weeks ago. After listening through a few times, I've decided this is one of my favs.


:-D
 

would you rather become parapalegic or win the lottery? (natural v. synthetic happiness)

This week my brother sent me an interesting talk on happiness given by Harvard Psychology Professor Dan Gilbert. He's also the author of the book Stumbling on Happiness, which I just added to my GoodReads.com to-read list. For those of you who don't feel like watching the whole clip, that's what I'm here for :-)

Basic premise: Our "psychological immune system" lets us feel truly happy even when things don’t go as planned.

Gilbert begins by explaining that the prefrontal cortex -- which developed over time as human brains grew larger -- allows people to "have experiences in their heads, before they try them out in real life." More generally, the basic functions of the prefrontal cortex relate to abilities to:

• differentiate among conflicting thoughts
• determine good and bad, better and best, same and different
• think through the future consequences of current activities
• work toward a defined goal
• "predict" expected outcomes, based on actions
• exhibit social "control" (suppress urges that, if not suppressed, could lead to socially-unacceptable outcomes)

Of course, there are some glitches associated with these abilities...we are human after all. One of these is the notion of impact bias, which is the tendency for the simulator (prefrontal cortex) to make us believe that different outcomes (for example, getting or not getting job X) are more different than they actually are. In actuality, different outcomes tend to have less impact, intensity, duration than people expect them to have. A really interesting example given in the talk is the choice between becoming a paraplegic and winning the lottery. Pretty much all of us would go for the money!! But, a year after becoming paraplegic/winning the lottery, the two groups of people had generally the same level of happiness! Somewhat surprisingly, studies of
the experience of major life traumas suggest that if it happened over 3 months ago (with some exceptions) it has almost no impact. 

Now for the crux of it all....it turns out that happiness can be synthesized. We each have a psychological immune system that helps us change our views on the world so we can feel better about the world we find ourselves in. This reminds me a lot of Gretchen Rubin's commandment to Act the way you want to feel. Basically, "by acting as if you feel a certain way, you induce that emotion in yourself." Try it sometime!! Right now, for example. If you think to yourself, what a great day...and walk around like you're the ish...chances are you'll feel like your day is indeed a great one!

(Aside - this may not always work lol...Some friends of Nix and mine came to visit last year and I randomly stuck a post-it note on the door a few days earlier that said "today is gonna be a great day"...i thought it would be nice to leave home every day with that in mind...so the two friends go outside to move their car from our lot -- which is permit-only parking, btw -- and on the way out one of them reads my post-it and says aloud "it already has been!!"...2 minutes later we get a call from them that they can't find their car...it got towed!!! LOLOL....now i know you're wondering how this is funny....but actually it still ended up being a great day...we had quite an adventure going to get the car and doing other fun stuff...moral of the story...ish happens, get over it we're not victims of the world, we're victims of the way we view the world...so don't be a victim!...or something like that...whatever you take away from this story, it's one of my favorite memories and we still crack up thinking about it. )

Ok, back to Gilbert's talk. The idea of synthesized happiness is that we think it is a thing to be found, but really we can make our own happiness. We can synthesize happiness.

• natural happiness - what we get when we get what we want
• synthetic happiness - what we make when we don't get what we want

We all believe natural happiness is more valuable/better than synthetic happiness. Actually, when we want something more, we may even like it less...because want does not equal like, and vice versa. An interesting concept related to this is paradox of choice. Gilbert asserts that "freedom to choose is the enemy of synthetic happiness." Apparently, our psychological immune system works best when we can't choose, when we are stuck with a certain good/situation....you find a way to be happy with what's happened or what you've received. When life gives you lemons...

Gilbert does concede, however, that some things are better than others and we should have preferences...but when they drive us too hard and fast because we've overrated the difference between futures/outcomes we're at risk (for disappointment, discontent, unhappiness). He adds that longings and worries are both to some degree overblown, because we have ability to manufacture the thing we're constantly chasing when we choose between experiences.


This whole discussion also reminds me of the arrival fallacy, which Gretchen Rubin also talks about in her book/blog. Tal Ben-Shahar, a prominent positive psychologist, explains this as the belief that once you arrive at a certain destination, you'll be happy. We think: "if i could just X, everything would be perfect, i'd be happy, etc." Actually, arriving rarely makes you as happy as you anticipate :-/

It seems that working toward a goal can be a more powerful source of happiness than achieving it. (I know postpartum depression is complicated, but anyone else see the link here?) Finishing or accomplishing something can sometimes be a letdown. With all this in mind, try to focus on happiness in the present, in the atmosphere of growth afforded by making gradual progress toward a goal (pre-goal attainment positive affect).This can be difficult when the thing you're waiting for is something like a job. Obviously, worrying about where your income will come from is a huge boon to happiness, but for argument's sake, let's say we're talking about other sorts of goals. (For me, this idea applies to my grad school plans.)

Bottom line here: Don't be a victim. You can synthesize your own happiness. Nourish your psychological immune system like you would your biological immune system. Enjoy Now. 


Today's *big chune* is from one of the sickest riddims of all time - drop leap riddim. OMG there are sooo many big chunes on this riddim! Intoxication by German reggae artist Gentlemen is one of my favs. Btw, how awesome/crazy is it that this dude is straight German and has cred as an authentic conscious reggae artist?!


:-D
 

are you a dandelion or an orchid?

Blog Challenge Day 26

Most of yall know by now that I have applied to graduate programs for Psychology and hope to eventually get my PhD. I'm in the midst of the hearing back/interview process now, so send good vibes my way ;-)

Even before these plans, though, I've always found Psychology research fascinating. It's a field that (IMO) is really interesting and applicable to the lay reader when information is presented in a user-friendly manner. The underlying studies tend to be pretty esoteric, but the findings and takeaways don't have to be. Case in point...My brother recently sent me this really interesting Psych article from The Atlantic: The Science of Success. At a very basic level, the article (and studies on which it is based) discusses some fascinating work looking at how different people struggle/fail or thrive depending on their environments. Bottom line: similar to tending flowers, some of us are like dandelions who can do pretty well in a wide range of circumstances. Others of us are like delicate orchids, who will struggle and wilt without proper care...or can flourish if given some good old TLC.

Here are more details for those of you interested...and if you think my summary is long, you probably shouldn't try to read the full article!

A research team has been testing a radical new hypothesis about how genes shape behavior. In particular, they were interested in a new interpretation of one of the most important and influential ideas in recent psychiatric and personality research: that certain variants of key behavioral genes make people more vulnerable to certain mood, psychiatric, or personality disorders. In other words, people may be genetically predisposed to certain conditions. This hypothesis, often called the “stress diathesis” or “genetic vulnerability” model, has come to saturate psychiatry and behavioral science. Researchers have identified a gene variants that can increase a person’s susceptibility to depression, anxiety, ADHD, heightened risk-taking, and antisocial, sociopathic, or violent behaviors, and other problems—if, and only if, the person carrying the variant suffers a traumatic or stressful childhood or faces particularly trying experiences later in life. Plain English: many psychic and behavioral problems are seen as products not of nature or nurture but of complex “gene-environment interactions.” As the article explains, "Your genes don’t doom you to these disorders. But if you have “bad” versions of certain genes and life treats you ill, you’re more prone to them."

Investigating this subject, the research team focused on the 25 percent (of a sample of 2,408 children) rated highest by their parents (and confirmed by observation) in externalizing behaviors (plain english: "acting out"). In an attempt to change the kids’ behavior, members of the research team visited each of 120 families six times over eight months; filmed the mother and child in everyday activities, including some requiring obedience or cooperation; and then edited the film into teachable moments to show to the mothers. A similar group of high-externalizing children received no intervention.

To the researchers’ delight, the intervention worked. The moms, watching the videos, learned to spot cues they’d missed before, or to respond differently to cues they’d seen but had reacted to poorly. The bad behaviors dropped. A year after the intervention ended, the toddlers who’d received it had reduced their externalizing scores by more than 16 percent, while a nonintervention control group improved only about 10 percent (as expected, due to modest gains in self-control with age).

Recently, an alternate hypothesis has emerged, suggesting that it’s a mistake to understand these “risk” genes only as liabilities. Basically, these bad genes can create dysfunction in unfavorable contexts, but they can also enhance function in favorable contexts. Thus, the genetic sensitivities to negative experience that the vulnerability hypothesis has identified, are just the downside of a bigger phenomenon: a heightened genetic sensitivity to all experience.

This hypothesis was conceptualized by another set of researchers in an article discussing “dandelion” and "orchid" children. Dandelion children—equivalent to our “normal” or “healthy” children, with “resilient” genes—do pretty well almost anywhere, whether raised in the equivalent of a sidewalk crack or a well-tended garden. In contrast, “orchid” children will wilt if ignored or maltreated but bloom spectacularly with greenhouse care.

What I found most interesting, is the application of this notion to family life. The research suggests that behavioral diversity - having both dandelion and orchid kids - greatly raises a family’s chance of succeeding, over time and in any given environment. (The article also discusses this with regard to the human population in a more general sense.The orchid hypothesis accepts that certain gene variants underlie some of humankind’s most grievous problems: despair, alienation, cruelties both petty and epic...But it adds that these same troublesome genes play a critical role in our species’ astounding success.) Dandelions in a provide an underlying stability. The less-numerous orchids, meanwhile, may falter in some environments but can excel in those that suit them. Together, the steady dandelions and the mercurial orchids offer an adaptive flexibility that neither can provide alone. Together, they open a path to otherwise unreachable individual and collective achievements. I'd like to think that this dynamic plays out (will play out) in my own family. In many ways I think my (5) siblings and I are still young enough that our lives are yet to be fully shaped, but based on our lives so far, I would agree that certain siblings' stability helps to support and even galvanize the others who may be - as I like to say - on different life plans.

With all this in mind, the researchers from the above study with children began to look at the genetic makeup of the children in their experiment. In particular, they wanted to see whether kids with a risk allele for ADHD and externalizing behaviors would respond as much to positive environments as to negative. Both the vulnerability hypothesis and the orchid hypothesis predict that in the control group the kids with a risk allele should do worse than those with a protective one. And they did—though only slightly. Over the course of 18 months, the genetically “protected” kids reduced their externalizing scores by 11 percent, while the “at-risk” kids cut theirs by 7 percent. Both gains were modest ones that the researchers expected would come with increasing age.

The real test, however, came in the group that received intervention. According to the vulnerability model, those who received intervention should improve less than their counterparts with the protective allele...based on this model, the modest upgrade that the intervention created in their environment wouldn’t offset their general vulnerability. BUT the toddlers with the risk allele saw drastic improvements - cutting their externalizing scores by almost 27 percent. Meanwhile, the protective-allele kids cut theirs by just 12 percent (improving only slightly on the 11 percent managed by the protective-allele population in the control group). The upside effect in the intervention group, in other words, was far larger than the downside effect in the control group. Plain English: Risk alleles really can create not just risk but possibility.


Soooo....for those of you that made it all the way to the end (lol), what do you think of this? Does this seem applicable to everyday life? Would you consider yourself to be a dandelion or an orchid? Can you spot these two types in the people around you? Does this change the way you think about them? If you're a dandelion, how can you be more supportive to the orchids in your life? If you're an orchid, what can you do to foster a "greenhouse-like" environment, versus being out with the weeds?

Btw, is it just me or is Google Buzz dangerous (in terms of productivity) during the workday...?

today's *big chune* is some salsaaaa to get your weekend started right. I actually hate Marc Anthony when he sings in english, but his salsa stuff in GOOOOOD! I am a BIG fan of latin music - especially salsa and bachata. I may not understand every single word they say, but I actually surprise myself with how much I am able to follow. This song is a duet with India - another of my favorite Salsa artists. I didn't realize how old this song is until I saw this video...i am MAD at marc anthony's hair...hottttt messssss. Oh well, still a big chune!!


Happy Friday! :-D
  

living your strongest life

Blog Challenge: Day 18

Today's post is the final follow-up to the last two posts I did about the decline in women's happiness and what happy/successful women do differently. In the article written about what happy women do, the author concludes with a discussion of what he calls "The Strong Life Test."

As he explains, "there are so many voices in your life demanding your attention, so many 'have-tos' and 'shoulds,' that it can be hard to hear the sound of your own voice." So, Buckingham designed the Strong Life Test "to help you cut through the clamor and find your strongest life."

It's described as an internal compass....measuring you on nine life roles-- Advisor, Caretaker, Creator, Equalizer, Influencer, Motivator, Pioneer, Teacher, and Weaver. While we may have to play each of the nine roles at different times, our personality doesn't entirely shift and morph per every unique situation. Rather, we have some consistent patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving...that are distinctive and that remain stable across time and situations. (Remember personality types and your individual type?) These patterns come together in a Lead Role, a role you return to time and again, a role that you and your closest family and friends recognize as the core of who you are. Your Lead Role will help you to know where to look, in any domain of your life (as a spouse, relative, mother, or employee), for the kind of moments that will strengthen you the most, invigorate you the most, bring you joy, excitement, and fun. The Strong Life Test doesn't give you all the answers, but it tells you where to start.

You can take the test right here. fyi, it's pretty heavily geared towards women.


I took it of course :-) And here are my results:

Lead Role: Teacher

You begin by asking:
'What can she learn from this?'

Your focus is instinctively toward the other person. Not her feelings, necessarily, but her understanding, her performance, her skills.

Your best quality: Your faith in the others’ potential

Always: Tailor your style to each student

Be careful you: Don’t come to believe that everyone is capable of everything

Your smartest career move: Any job where you’re paid to facilitate the success of others.

Supporting Role: Advisor

You begin by asking:
'What is the best thing to do?'

Your thrill comes from knowing that you are the person others turn to for the answer. You don’t necessarily want to be the person who actually makes the changes happen. Rather, what excites you is being valued by others for your insight and your judgment.

Your best quality: Your ability to find a solution

Always: Search for data to support your advice

Be careful you: Don’t get frustrated by other people’s failings

Your smartest career move: Any job where you’re paid to be opinionated

These seem pretty much on point to me. I love the idea of getting paid to facilitate the success of others. I originally balked at the fact that the results mention being paid to be opinionated (because I generally don't view myself as being strongly opinionated), but I think I can be opinionated about certain things...just not in the traditional sense of dichotomous this or that types of opinions. But, I do feel strongly about certain things, especially as I really continue to develop my passions. As I was reviewing my results I started to wonder to what degree these sorts of things are reflective of who i am versus who i want to be. In other words, am i truly someone who focuses on others, has faith in their potential, and wants to facilitate their success? Or, are these qualities that I value and not that I actually have? Food for thought for me on this Thursday afternoon...pre-Snowpocalypse Part II

As you can see, I love these sorts of quizzes....and i LOVE to hear your results. Please share in the comments, and let me know whether the results resonate with you. 

today's *big chune* is "Can We Talk" by Tevin Campbell. I listen to Pandora during the day at work and this gem popped up in my mix today. One of my favs! Classic R&B right here!

:-D

 

what the happiest women do

Blog Challenge: Day 17

Today's post builds on yesterday's, in which I discussed a series of Huffington Post articles concerning the decline in women's happiness over the past 40 years. In the third of the articles, Marcus Buckingham chose to focus on women who are indeed happy, as a way to glean insight as to the keys to happiness. In other words, he asked the following: If you could find the happiest and most successful women, women who had somehow bucked this downward trend in life satisfaction, women who had made life choices that strengthened them, who had become happier the older they got, if you could find these women and ask them questions and listen, what would you discover?

In actuality though, (similar to something Gretchin Rubin, author of The Happiness Project, often talks about) happiness doesn't come with a formula, so everyone's happiness secrets will be different. Nonetheless, looking for basic general patterns can be insightful. Buckingham asked: Despite all their differences--of style, age, career, wealth, value system--what if anything would they have in common? What would they share? Here is what was found:

What the Happiest Women Do:

1. Focus on moments, more than goals, plans or dreams. Certain moments in your life create in you strongly positive emotions--let's call these "strong-moments." Not all moments are strong-moments--some moments spark negative emotions, while some don't spark any emotions at all. But when you do experience a strong-moment, it is authentic. It is true, in the sense that the emotions you feel are true. You may not know exactly what you should do with your emotions, or what label you should give each emotion, but you know how a specific moment made you feel. You know this more certainly than you know virtually anything else in your life. (Miss A note: This makes me think of the concept of IMMD and the IMMD journal that I started with Nix. I talked about being mindful and how this helps me to take special notice of the little moments that add something small but significant to my days. Another benefit to this little email-chain-journal is that it will be cool to look back on later in time and remember the past in a different way...similar to a one-sentence journal)

2. Accept what they find. When you search your life for strong-moments, you don't always like what you find. In the words of one of the interviewees: "It's hard to admit, but I don't like playing with my kids. My daughter would come up to me and say 'Mom, you play the mommy, and I'll play the baby' and I would think 'Not again. I am the mommy, you are the baby.' The moments I love with my kids are when I'm teaching them something, helping them learn, but I'm bored silly by playing another game of dress up. I got my life back on track only when I rejected the idea of being the 'perfect' mother, and accepted the reality of which moments energized me and which didn't." Acceptance doesn't mean resignation, giving up on your dreams. In fact, more often than not, accepting which moments strengthen you and which don't reveals to you exactly how you can live out your dreams, whether at home or at work. It means not only being comfortable in your own skin, but also being creative in your own skin. (Miss A note: this goes back to the idea of "Be Anna." You can't really do too much to change your likes/dislikes or strong moments. My sister often has a difficult time when invited to parties because she knows deep down that they won't be that fun for her and she'd rather not go, but she often feels pressure to attend anyway. Recently she's been much more willing to pass up the parties for quiet nights at home. And I do believe she's happier when she does. So, her strong moments may not be the fun things that happened at the party last night, while her friends' strong moments may be. And that's perfectly fine!)

3. Strive for Imbalance. When someone tells you to try to have greater balance in your life, your immediate and appropriate reaction is a spasm of disbelief. "Balance?" you ask yourself. "How does that work? For every extra hour at work find another hour at home? For every extra kid at home, reduce my workload by exactly the amount my new child requires? For every school play I should attend, cut out a presentation on the road? For everything I say yes to, say no to something else? Is that it?" Not according to the people we interviewed. They didn't talk about balance much at all. They seemed to realize that not only was a perfect equilibrium nigh on impossible to achieve, but also that even if they did manage to achieve it, it wouldn't necessarily fulfill them anyway--when you are balanced, you are stationary, holding your breath, trying not to let any sudden twitch or jerk pull you too far one way or the other. You are at a standstill. Balance is the wrong life goal. Instead, do as these women did, and strive for imbalance. Pinpoint the strong-moments in each aspect of your life and then gradually target or tilt your life toward them. This means being as deliberate as you can about making them happen. It means investigating them when they do happen, looking at them from new perspectives, and celebrating them. Above all, it means giving them the power of your attention. (Miss A note: I admit, this one is hard to really process, because the search for balance is so ingrained in our society. The sentence about tilting your life towards strong moments puts it in a way that's much more real to me.)

4. Learn to say "Yes." So often you are told: "You must learn to say 'No.'" But, to live your strongest life, do the opposite. Learn to say, "Yes." Yes, to the strong-moments in each part of your life. Yes, to the people who help you create these moments. Yes, to your feelings as these moments happen. Say "Yes" with enough focus and force, and yours will not be a balanced life, but it will be a full life.

So, there you have it. These are four things that happy and successful women do. What do you think about this list. Do you excel/struggle with these? Anything in particular stand out to you?


Finally, because i LOVE music, I'm going to start ending each post with a song of the day. It may be a song I'm loving at the moment or a song that seems to fit well with whatever i'm writing about. I like to think that I have pretty eclectic taste in music...you'll see soon enough ;-) Today's song is one that was performed during the Grammys and I've been playing A LOT since. It's called "I Need You Now" by a group called Lady Antebellum...a lil country flavor for your day.



:-D

women's happiness declining over time

Blog Challenge: Day 16

So I definitely almost forgot to post today!

Last fall, the Huffington Post "Living" blog ran a series of articles about the decline in women's happiness over the last 40 years. Based on data--gathered and analyzed in the paper "The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness"--Marcus Buckingham discussed the surprising fact that women's happiness has trended downward as compared to men's, despite gradual increases in power and prosperity. Here are the two principle findings:

1. Since 1972, women's overall level of happiness has dropped, both relative to where they were forty years ago, and relative to men. You find this drop in happiness in women regardless of whether they have kids, how many kids they have, how much money they make, how healthy they are, what job they hold, whether they are married, single or divorced, how old they are, or what race they are. (The one and only exception: African-American women are now slightly happier than they were back in 1972, although they remain less happy than African American men.)


2. Though women begin their lives more fulfilled than men, as they age, they gradually become less happy. Men, in contrast, get happier as they get older. By the time women reach age forty-seven, they are, overall, less happy with their life than men, and the trend continues on down from there.

Most people are-understandably-perplexed by this finding. You'd think that gender parity and increased quality of life would be leading to increased happiness, not the other way around. Buckingham puts it this way: "To use Thomas Jefferson's words, though women now have the liberty to choose whichever life they'd like, many are struggling in their pursuit of a happy life."

So, what's up with the findings?

The article asserts that these trends are not caused by women working longer hours than men. We know this because women don't work more hours than men. Nor are they caused by gender-based stereotyping. Nor, are they caused by women bearing a disproportionate burden of the workload at home, the 'second-shift' as some have labeled it. While women still do more cooking, cleaning and child-caring than men, the trend lines are actually all moving toward greater parity.

On the other hand, we seem to know what is causing men's slight increase in happiness...it's increased prosperity. Over the last 40 years, U.S. GDP has had climbed 3.1% per year...and increases in national GDP correlate to increases in national levels of happiness....which makes women's decline even more odd.

While the articles don't actually offer too much in the way of definitive explanation for this, the one thing noted for certain is that women are harder on themselves than men. In national polls, when women and men are asked the question, "Which do you think will help you be most successful in life, building on your strengths or fixing your weaknesses?" men split right down the middle, while 73% of women report they would focus on fixing their weaknesses. Based on this, the author concludes that since women have (over the past 40 years) gradually acquired more and more domains in which they are supposed to succeed, one would expect that women characterize themselves more and more by who they aren't. In turn, they may become more and more self-critical, and more aware of their flaws and failings...all of which might well accelerate these dissatisfaction trend-lines.

This last part about having more and more domains in which we are supposed to succeed is especially relevant to us as younger women. Women can do so much more today than in the past...and as such, we feel pressure to do much more than ever before.

Thoughts? Does this seem like a plausible correlation? Do you feel this pressure?

:-D

what makes a man "put a ring on it"?

Blog Challenge Day 11:

[Writer's note: I really hate capitalizing...especially the letter/word "i"...it's my blog and i do what i want :-) ... so i'm not going to worry about capitalizing them anymore. and i may even get more lax about first-word-of-sentence capitalization as well. just fyi. don't judge me.]

Why Men Marry Some Women and Not Others

My friend T sent me the link to this article and it's a pretty interesting read. John T. Molloy's Book Why Men Marry Some Women And Not Others is based on over 3,000 interviews conducted by him and his researchers. They interviewed couples coming out of marriage license bureaus, and then a control group. Some of the resulting findings on the statistical tendencies of marriage are common sense, but other points are more thought-provoking, especially since they're backed up by data. As a budding research geek, I appreciate that.

I'm going to share some of the points from the book, with my own commentary (in bold). Let's see what my chances of marriage are! lol. By the way, I'm really not pressed/concerned about marriage right now. If it happens it does, if it doesn't that's fine too...or at least that's how I feel at the moment. Ask me when I'm approaching 30, you may get a different answer. lol.

The Six Basic Guidelines For Women To Get Married

1. Insist on it. [meh :-/ this sounds easier said than done]
   
2. If you find yourself in a dead-end relationship, move on. [i think i'm pretty good at this. probably too good lol]
   
3. Love yourself first. [i do! and i totally agree with how important this is]
   
4. Commit yourself to the idea of getting married [hmm. i don't know that i feel this way right now. but maybe that's a defense mechanism?]
   
5. Keep in shape, watch your weight, and take care of your appearance [yep, i do this]
   
6. Time is running out—use time wisely in your search for the marrying man [uhmmmmm, chicken little much?]
   

To maximize your chances of marrying, only date the marrying kind: [again, i may do this too well. lol]

• Most men will not consider marriage before they reach the age of commitment 
• For 80% of high school graduates, 23
• For 80% of college graduates, 26 [unfortunately, i feel like this number keeps getting higher and higher. try 30!]
  
• For college men, the high-commitment period is 28-33
  
• For men who go to graduate school, 30-36 [sheesh!]
  
•  Other key facts
• Men often marry women whose religion, politics, values, and socioeconomic status match theirs
• Men whose friends and siblings are married are more likely to marry [this is an interesting point.] 
• Avoid "stringers" except for Stringer Bell; he could get it, men who string along women but never commit. To filter them out, insist that he commit after six months. Then stick to it, no matter what excuses he gives. [i may struggle with this. lol]
  
• Consider unpolished jewels, men who are just as nice, intelligent, hard-working, and successful, but lack looks, height, or social skills. [this is a toughie, because physical attraction is important to me] 
• 88% of men over 50 who were marrying for the first time were marrying divorced women. The women told the researchers that they had already tried the tall, suave, type, and he didn’t make a very good husband. [hopefully i won't have to go through divorce to learn my lesson]
  
  
  
  
  

First impressions are important:

• Men are attracted by the physical, but marry character 
• Newly engaged men said that what attracted them to their fiancées was how classy, positive, energetic, enthusiastic, and upbeat their future wives were. [it's awkward for me to compliment myself, but i do think i have most of these characteristics]
•  While 68% gave a physical description of their fiancée, only 20% said that what attracted them was how gorgeous and sexy their fiancée was. Over 60% described their personalities, even if the women in question were very beautiful.
• Therefore, be positive! [no problem there!]
  
  
  • 
    
    
• All wives are trophy wives—men marry women whom they admire and like to show off (but not for their physical appearance) [makes sense, nothing wrong with that]
  
• Dressing appropriately sends the message, “I am wife material.” Men marry women they perceive as “situational virgins” who move easily in their world. 
• Editor’s note: In other words, don’t dress like a ho [LOL!]. Men see a sexy outfit as an invitation to have sex. 
• Most men decide within 10 minutes of meeting a woman if she’s appropriate for marriage, or just for a casual affair.
• Over 80% of men said or bragged that their fiancée was the kind of woman they were proud to introduce to friends and family
• Over 70% of men said that they knew that their future bride was a “nice girl” the minute they met
• Only 7 out of 2,000 men interviewed said that their fiancée was dressed in a very sexy outfit when they met.
• If you want to marry a man who is more attractive than you, go for a very good-looking man because he will actually place less emphasis on looks. [interesting. i would never be comfortable with a fine, fine man to be honest. lol. so i can have women trying to get him all the time?! no thanks.] Women see their own looks as a gift of nature equal to or superior to brains and talent. In contrast, 67% of very good-looking men think of their looks as a minor asset, and say they would rather be smart, rich, or talented. Do the following: 
• Approach him [yah, that's probably not gonna happen]. Very attractive men don’t make passes at women because they don’t have to. [rude. lol] 
• Let him put you on a pedestal. Don’t treat him any differently than you would another man, just because he’s good-looking. 
• Let him see your talents and accomplishments. Very good-looking men often marry women who have qualities they lack—education, professional accomplishment, social standing, and ambition. [but if they lack all that, why would i want them?] 
• Make demands on him. Advise him to go back to school or get a better job.
  
  
• Making a good impression on his family is almost as important as making a good impression on him.
• 5% said that it was their family that had convinced them that the woman was something special
• 30% said that their family’s positive opinion had influenced them
  
  
  
  
  

What kind of women get married?

• Women with a large number of female friends are more likely to marry than women with a large number of male friends 
• Men don’t go out of their way to introduce their female friends to other men
• If you reach 30 and want to get married, you have to make finding a husband a primary goal. Once your friends start getting married, they are less likely to have an active social life with you. Don’t be the last one off the bus!
• Women who get married, even those with high-powered careers, make getting married a priority that they work at.
• The larger the number of single men and women you work with, the better your chances of marrying
• If you work in an industry with few eligible men (e.g. the fashion industry, where most male colleagues are gay), or have other disadvantages, you’ll have to work harder outside of work to overcome them. It’s unfair, but suck it up.
• Women with unrealistic expectations often remain single 
• Much of the time, these expectations are imposed by others, who think that the men she brings home aren’t “good enough for her.” 
• Give men a second chance—20% of brides to be said that they didn’t like their husband when they first met him. [i'm guessing this doesn't apply to exes] 
• Self-confident men are attracted to accomplished, self-assured, and talented women
  
  
• Women who waste their time with stringers or men who don’t care for them hurt their chances of marrying 
• Women who marry refer to the men who broke up with them as losers. Women who don’t marry often make men who don’t reciprocate their feelings the center of their universe and still speak well of them.
  
  
•  Don’t date married or gay men.
• Women who live with their parents are less likely to marry
• Being slender attracts more men, therefore increasing your chances to marry
• Women who put effort into looking their best are more likely to marry than those who don’t
• However, men find women who are active and don’t spend all of their time primping more attractive
• Women who make an effort to seek out the company of single men are more likely to marry 
• Women who marry date more frequently than those who don’t, even it’s Mr. Wrong. [i need to line up some dates!]
  
  
  • Women who marry are three times as likely to participate in masculine activities in which they had no real interest.
  • Women who marry are twice as likely to have made lifestyle sacrifices (changing jobs or moving) to meet eligible men.
  Women who have active social lives are more likely to marry
  
  
  • Go out on Friday and Saturday, when other single people go out [i've been going out more recently. i just need to be selective about what i do and who i got with, so i ensure a good time]
    

Other than the thoughts I shared throughout the text, I don't have much to add. It seems like a tricky balance between making marriage a priority and getting so caught up in it that you "hate the idea of being alone" (e.g., the SATC gals, except for Samantha) or jump from relationship to relationship. I've never been one of the latter people. In fact I am very comfortable being single. I tell people (honestly) that right now i'm so happy  in every other aspect of my life, lack of a man doesn't concern me. In the past, I've thought "I'll never get married (*tear*)," but now I rarely think about it at all. The findings seem to suggest that I shouldn't be quite so lax about it. Oh well! Que sera sera!

Thoughts? Are the data a bunch of mumbo jumbo? Should women my age (23) be concerned about marriage? Are you concerned? Any of the points above surprise you? Any you especially agree/disagree with?

Remember, this is only a bit of the full findings, so if you want to see the whole write-up, click here

:-)