Good reads around the net this week
I thought this article was interesting! My mom has always told me that she thinks cilantro tastes like soap, and I had no idea what she was talking about – I taste no soap in cilantro. Apparently, she’s not alone! Cilantro Haters, It’s Not Your Fault
I’ve been reading a lot of things on the sex abuse scandal in the RC church. Here are a few I think are worth noting:
Worlds Without Women by Maureen Dowd, NYTs – Maureen talks about how I felt in my former life in the RC church.
The Church’s Judas Moment by Maureen Dowd, NYTs – more good stuff from Maureen.
Pope’s No. 2: Pedophilia Linked to Homosexuality This shit is just RICH…really. Somebody needs to sew up the mouths of the Vatican.
Vatican’s Point Man on Abuse Was Successfully Sued by Whistleblowing Priest (I thought this article was particularly interesting – especially in light of all the decrying of unfair treatment by the press, and an “improved” response on behalf of the church since they
were forced made adjustments to their previous policies (or lack thereof) during the initial break of this scandal in Boston.
Pedophilia and Homosexuality RC priest, Fr. James Martin sheds some light and sense on the non-sense spouted in the above article.
It’s Not About Celibacy: Blaming the Wrong Thing for the Sexual Abuse Crisis Another cogent essay by Fr. James on what celibacy is and is not. While I understand his points, I have some further thoughts about requiring celibacy to be a priest. I might write more about this if I get my act/thoughts together, because, I think the problem for me is in the requirement, not the call to celibacy in general.
I may, or may not write more about my thoughts about these articles if the ability to be measured and clear smacks me between the eyes – particularly regarding the view on sexuality, in general, in the Roman Catholic church. I may not be up to this though, and I don’t want my thoughts to degenerate into self-serving vitriol, so I’m cogitating before I write anything.
Insomnia – something I suffer with periodically. Ok – so it’s most of the time, but still! Here are some recent articles that are of interest, or that I find intriguing:
Requiem for a Nice Person Let’s just say, I can relate – sort of. I don’t have quite the misanthropy the essay author relates when I’m sleep deprived, but, I do get easily irritated or agitated when I’ve gone on an extended period of sleeping 2-4 hours a night (often not 2-4 hours in a row, and often for several weeks at a time!). The writer of the essay strikes me as someone who might be diagnosed as a mixed state bipolar – agitated, sleepless, irritated, but sort of depressed too. Just makes me wonder.
In Sleepless Nights, a Hope for Treating Depression Here again, is another article which intrigues my mildly bipolar nature. There is some research that suggests that postpartum depression might be more closely related to bipolar disorders than unipolar depressions, in that those with soft bipolar disorders tend to report postpartum depression more often than those with unipolar depression (Dr. Jim Phleps has a good online resource for soft bipolar depression here – I’ve found this site and his book Why Am I Still Depressed? to be quite useful). As sleep interference is a major component of bipolar disorders, the idea that sleep deprivation improves depressive symptoms in postpartum depressed mothers is a very interesting one to me indeed. This makes it sound like the sleep deprivation of early motherhood may have an adaptive quality in helping new mom’s to cope – or at least it’s a serendipitous by-product. So, I wonder, if sleep-deprivation in new moms is similar in quality to the hypo-manic, manic induced insomnia of bipolar disorder, rather than insomnia induced by anxiety or stress or other sleep pattern disruption. Makes me go, hmmm.
Calls for Civility in General:
Are We Becoming a Nation of Intolerance? I’ve been thinking about this lots as I watch the various debates in secular and church politics, and confessing my general left leanings, noting that the the mere mention of the name Chris Christie, Sarah Palin and/or Rush Limbaugh make me instantaneously and irrationally angry. It is far too easy to classify those who agree with me as “one of mine” and those who don’t as “them” – which is NOT at all conducive to creating the unified US our country needs us to be, if we are to function appropriately, and not slide into the mire of corruption and/or facism (and if you think that can’t happen here, I’d suggest you pay closer attention to the tactics of the Tea Baggers: foment anger, create chaos, and recommend a violent course of action and call it asserting ones rights! Ahem!). This article is worth a read, even if what the author writes of should be common sense. Apparently, lots of Americans need this reminder – me included.
And finally, a word on shyness:
Let us now praise…Shyness I have a shy nature – I always have. My grandmother used to characterize me as “stuck up” in comparison to my more “forward” cousins, and to some extent, brother. I’m not the kind of person who will immediately hug you in a way that makes you feel like we’ve known each other forever, and I tend to be quite protective of my own sense of “space”.
So, keeping all that in mind, do I think “shyness” should be a diagnosable disorder as the new DSM will make it (Social Anxiety Disorder)?
The answer is, only if it helps someone who views their shyness as an insurmountable issue to over come it. Having such a diagnosis should add something in terms of the etiological concept of “shyness”, under what conditions “shyness” becomes problematic and the diagnosis should lead to logical, practical alleviation of problematic shyness.
So, who defines “problem” or “insurmountable”, you might ask? Why, the person for whom it is an issue, of course. This isn’t the kind of diagnosis that should stigmatize or limit a person in occupational or social situations – although, by virtue of it being in the DSM, it will. Even though one will not be able to be committed to an institution because one has Social Anxiety Disorder, having this as a diagnosis could prove more harm than good. Shyness is a character trait – a personality variable. All character traits have adaptive and maladaptive qualities – it is the experience of the individual in terms of their own goals and comfort zones, which dictates whether or not or not a character trait is problematic. No character trait, including bizarreness, is an issue if the individual doesn’t perceive it as such, and is capable of social and occupational functioning. And good luck treating anyone with a character issue who doesn’t perceive the issue as problematic, ya know!?
Anyway…these are a few of the articles that have been capturing my attention that I thought I’d share with you all. Your mileage, of course, may vary.