Greetings from the "Money Pit". This morning's news: upstairs bathtub drain backs up, small leak in basement pipe continues (both are unrelated to the Kitchen Project). After a visit from the very nice J, of Fox Plumbing, who explained the eminent need for new pipes upstairs (they're currently stainless steel, which does not age well) AND downstairs (previous residents installed copper for the washing machine set-up, which is good, but the installer didn't wipe the flux [an acidic compound] off of the joins, which is BAD). Upstairs will wait, downstairs will not - seeing as the leak we have right now is downstairs. Sigh.
On to comments. Thank you so much to those of you who comment on my postings. A couple of recent comments inspired more writing from me, so I thought I'd include the whole thing in a post, one comment at a time. Here goes...
Becky commented on "A Simplet Thanks" (April 24) and I wanted to expand on a couple of her points:
1) She noted that she has been called "oversensitive" to violence on T.V. I notice that people who have not cultivated sensitivity often downplay or even disregard its importance, considering it a weakness. In our culture, we are inundated with stimuli on all levels, and in a play to remain sane, many people disengage from their senses, rather than disengaging from the stimuli (which, admittedly, is hard to escape). This leads to desentitization, which essentially means that one cannot perceive a certain stimulus.
As a long-time yoga practitioner, I have nurtured my sensitivity, and am very perceptive to people's "energy"; I easily pick up on personality traits, moods, quirks and other intimate information that people may not intend to broadcast. This is very helpful in my work, and in my life, as my antennae are very well-tuned and the information I gather helps me stay away from trouble. That being said, because I pick up on more information than the average person, I owe it to myself to filter a lot of it. Just because I can read someone easily, doesn't mean that I should do so at every opportunity. It just gets to be too much. I don't necessarily want to know a lot about someone I just met, so I have developed tools that help me disregard the information that is not pertinent, without having to turn off my antennae, so to speak. This sensitivy, however, is not a weakness, but a strength! It is a tool that helps me navigate the modern world, and by nurturing it and developing it further, it has become a very valuable asset.
Now, if I were taking on the weight of the world, with all of its violence, etc., and feeling it as my own, this would be a problem. This is where sensitivity becomes sympathy, which means to feel another's feelings as if they were your own. Sympathy to the point of actually feeling another's pain is not productive, and it can create confusion regarding which feelings belong to whom. In yoga, much of our work [toward enlightenment] centers around the study of ourselves. This practice, called svadhyaya, teaches us who and what we are, where our weakneses and strengths lie, and ultimately the direction of our lives. As we become more tuned-in to our own inner workings, we become more sensitive to the goings on around us. In my experience, sensitivity is healthy if it helps you on your path, whether it's a path of political activisim, motherhood, healing professions, or poetry. If, however, you find that you are sensitive to the point where you can't function in the world without feeling everybody else's "yuck", then it's time to develop some protective and proactive tools.
2) Becky also observed that the bar of acceptable levels of violence on T.V. has changed. I wholeheartedly agree. There was an interesting talk on KUOW's "The Conversation" about this on Tuesday. For some, television violence is a great example of the chicken and the egg dilemma: have we become overly complacent with our standards and T.V. is reflecting that OR have we become desensitized to violence because of what we watch on T.V.? To me, the more pertinent question is, why would you want to watch violence? Why do people get excited about it? Why is violent content considered "entertainment"? Many people express concern over children's exposure to violence, but I would argue that it is just as important that adults limit their exposure to violent media. After all, it is adults who commit most violent crimes, not children.
Violence is damaging to all of us, it dehumanizes the victim and is a blatant expression of our most basic (primal, "animal") behaviors. Whether it is a fictitious depiction or news coverage of real-life events, the more we see it, the more we consider it commonplace and therefore unavoidable. This attitude leads to the more dangerous perspective that "there's nothing I can do about it anyway..." And that, dear readers, is the crux of the issue: if people (in this case the television watching public) think that X, Y, or Z problem is "unavoidable and that there's nothing they can do about it anyway so why bother"...then they become complacent. When the general public is complacent, it does not stand up for justice, truth, human rights, or anything else that's actually worth protecting. Instead, the public become more and more desensitized, watching more and more horrific things on T.V. in order to just feel something.
This week is "T.V. Turn-off Week". Even if you're starting late, I urge you to try a media-free week. See how you (and your kids, if you have them) feel, behave, play and rest when there's no television watching going on at home. Notice how quiet your home is, and how much time is freed up. Let go of the need to stay caught up on your favorite show, and get caught up on your life. Give it a try, and let me know how it goes!
Tomorrow: response to Jen's comment on the "Detail Oriented" posting.
Saturday: I got tagged! The Duchess of Yarnnation counted Seattle Yogini as one of the five blogs she reads that makes her think! I am honored, your highness. :-) I'll fulfill my "I'm it" duties this weekend. Stay tuned...













