Change your Attitude

 

This originated as a Facebook Note.  A bunch of my friends liked this passage, and then I shared it on my first blog, Caroline’s Chronicles of Crime.  I’m sharing it again, because it is still a worthy read. 

Instead of changing your attitude, make the changes you truly want.  Why should you have to change?  Why can’t the other people change instead?  In some ways, it’s good to change in the sense of learning and growing, but everyone needs to grow, not just the one getting fertilized with all the BS.

Changing the world is easier said than done, but changing your attitude is lying to yourself.  The world around you is going to change anyway, for better or for worse.  Some people sip their tea, watching the world burn with the consequences of others’ actions, and other people still believe utopia is possible.

The following is my original passage.  The last few paragraphs were my spur of the moment thoughts on the matter.

Change your Attitude

Whenever anyone is negative about work, school, or the doldrums of life, it’s not unusual to hear someone say, “Change your attitude.”  It’s supposed to be a positive statement, but in my honest opinion, it’s not natural.  It’s not good to just change your attitude about anything negative or painful.  Try telling that to a Holocaust survivor and their terrible memories.  O, just change your attitude and learn to like the Nazis….no.

While on the point of the Holocaust, I remember listening to an inspirational tape by Earl Nightingale, and he was a Holocaust survivor who believed in changing one’s attitude.  I give him kudos because he underwent indescribable cruelty.  He talked about his experiences being vivisected by the Nazi scientists.  The Nazis could do virtually anything, but he realized they could not control his choice of thoughts.  He could either feel like crap while scalpels were cutting into him, or he could change his attitude toward the situation.  I don’t know how anyone could be happy while undergoing vivisection, but I couldn’t call him phony for “changing his attitude.”

I thought about this for awhile because I always thought it was flaky and insensitive to tell people to just change their attitudes.  Then something clicked.  Vivisection is unspeakable enough that medical schools ban its practice on animals.  It’s traumatic for a human.  With trauma, come the mind’s defenses to get through it.  In psychology, they are called ego-defense mechanisms.  Changing your attitude is an ego defense mechanism, specifically Reaction Formation.  In order for Nightingale to get through the torture, he had to form an alternative reaction.

Besides extremes like torture, we are expected to change our attitudes when faced with problems.  For instance, if you hate math, staring at your homework and grumbling for a few hours will not get it done quicker.  If you pretend to like it, it gets done quicker.  It may be fake, but it works, and it’s better than feeling miserable.

Though in some cases, changing your attitude is not the best idea.  Let’s say you work at a department store and you don’t believe in the store’s overburdening policy to force-sell credit cards on every customer, driving more people into debt.  Bosses and stupid posters say “Change your Attitude.”  The reason for this is to keep you in your place.  Retailers have high employee turnovers, so management wants to retain its subordinates by keeping them “happy.”  If you choose to change your attitude, then, OoooHHhh my goooshhhh I LOVE SELLING CREDIT CARDS TO THESE DEBT-LOVING CUSTOMERS……This isn’t the only option.  You can get another job.  Then maybe your boss can change his/her attitude about the employee turnover rate.

You shouldn’t have to change your attitude all the time.  Sometimes it’s a good thing, and other times, it’s not healthy.  If you are in the military, should you have to change your attitude toward killing?  If you are a rape victim, should you just change your attitude toward rape?  There’s always that flaky person who says, “You have a choice.  You can either feel horrible or you can change your attitude and think happy thoughts.”  Try telling that to child porn victim!  Changing your attitude is not the best idea, despite it being advertised as such – it’s not the only idea.

Your initial feelings and thoughts are your truest reactions to any situation.  Changing your attitude masks those honest feelings with alternative, secondary emotions that we make ourselves feel.  It can be an emotional crutch, but you don’t always need a crutch.  It represses or denies our real feelings.  If someone changes their attitude too often, emotional compromise becomes habitual and at some point, the person may be confused on what their natural feelings really were.  They have emotionally lied to themselves so long that they don’t even know what their real attitude is anymore.

Tom Sawyer changed his attitude toward painting a fence to deceive the neighborhood kids to help him finish the chore/punishment.  The idea is that he changed his attitude as a means of deception.  Tricking yourself into liking math will get you through your homework so you can play your video games sooner.  Although changing your attitude may help to an extent, but if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.

Instead of creating attitudes to protect your true but vulnerable feelings, embrace your honest feelings.  Even though sadness may be horrible, it’s at least real.  Tears release toxins.  Anger is your mind’s alarm system, letting you know something is wrong.  Sweeping your problems under the carpet will build up over time.  Even though sadness and anger are painful, they are a part of your psyche.  Denying the fact that you hate certain things is ignoring part of your character.  Get to know yourself for how you really feel and think.  Self awareness is the first step of self-actualization.

Changing your attitude is not the best answer to life’s problems.  Learning to like a messy house will not keep the cockroaches away.  (Don’t learn to like the cockroaches, either).  Instead, look at the problem from different angles.  Don’t change your view.  Change your viewpoint.  By viewpoint, I mean an intangible standing point to view a scenario.  From there you can draw more than one judgment and develop many attitudes naturally.  Keep your first view, because all views equally exist, just like your attitudes whether you repress them or not.  Instead of thinking like someone else, you can think like many different people.  It’s multi-dimensional thinking.  Looking at situations from multiple angles enables analytical abilities.  Take into account the positive, negative, and neutral standpoints.  If you only think positively, then you are ruling out the negative, which is biased – not positive.

Here are my key points.

1. Changing attitude is Reaction Formation, an ego defense mechanism.
2. Like other ego-defense mechanisms, they can be good or bad.
3. Don’t change your attitude if you have other options.
4. Don’t change your view.  Change your viewpoint.
1. Look at things from multiple stances.
5. Your first feelings are your most honest.
6. If you can, embrace your feelings, and know yourself.

If you are traumatized, don’t pretend you aren’t.  If you hate stuff, you don’t have to pretend you love those things – unless you need to tackle the chores or homework, then just fake it for awhile.  If you have a problem, do something about it.

I’m just throwing this in here.  I once read that some murderer was happy while being executed.  While the lethal injection was being administered, he said, “This is awesome!”  Did he change his attitude or was that his real attitude?

Curious to note, when Earl Nightingale said he changed his attitude towards vivisection, he did not mention what his new attitude was.

 

 

Originally posted: February 5, 2014

Two Hermits

 

There is an essay that I posted in my first blog, which I feel is good enough to share again.  It was a midterm response for a college class, and the prompt was to compare two people reading historical texts at the time they were written.  The books were the Book of Matthew and The Poem of the Cid.  For even comparison, I chose the reader to be the same role, a hermit.

I arrived at Clapp Hall on time, and the midterm started immediately.  There was still one thing I needed to do.  I asked a TA for permission, and she let me out into the hallway to look up one last thing, warning me that it was taking up my testing time.  Outside in the vestibule, I combed through The Book of the Cid just to count how many times God was mentioned.  I noted the number, took the midterm, and aced it.

Here are the links to my first blog, Caroline’sChronicles of Crime, and original entry, Two Hermits.

Then the following is my essay.

Caroline Friehs
University of Pittsburgh
Western Civilization I
Section: 10AM
Date:  3-31-03

Midterm Question:  Take two people from society, one from the time the Book of Matthew was written, and one from the time when the Poem of the Cid was written.  Write how they would have viewed the book.  Compare their views.

My Answer:

This is a comparison between two hermits; one who heard the Cid, & the other, the Book of Matthew.  It’s important to compare the two characters as the same roles in society to make a better comparison of time.

Matthew:  In given the Circumstances, I am a hermit living in what seems to me the middle of no where.  I was a very educated man enough to have read the Bible, and my favorite book was the book of Matthew.  That was well before I became a hermit.  It wasn’t until my incurable illness developed that I headed to my cave for the sake of others not catching it.  I look back at the book of Matthew, and I even kept a copy to read before I die.

                It’s amazing that Jesus performed so many miracles, healing people like me, and it is ironic I was born later than his time.  I wonder if Jesus is with me even now?  I read now, Chapter 8.  In 8:2-3, “And behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.  And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean, and immediately his leprosy was cleaned.”  All it takes is his hand, yet in his physical absence, all I will get is his spiritual hand.  When that comes my ailment will be gone through death.  In the same chapter, there is a storm at sea, which Jesus calms.  It begins 8:24-26, “And behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.  And his disciples came to him, and awoke him saying, Lord, save us: we perish.  And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?  Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and then and there was a great calm.”  I feel the storm within me, this disease.  It grows more painful everyday.  I wish for the calm to come for me.  I flip the pages.  I feel so strongly about the mysteries of this faith because my death is underway, and the mystery will be solved.  I have faith that I will go to heaven.  In Chapter 13, the Parable which Jesus speaks of, about the sower and the seeds interests me.  I know that I am not the one among the thorns, nor am I the seed upon the rock.  I am still a Christian, and I believe in all the words of Jesus; no other, therefore I am not set out for animals to eat away.  I have strong roots in the good soil, and I have grown into a tree bearing good fruit.  This tree is about to die.  At the end of the book, Jesus is crucified, which he accepts.  I will have to accept my death if I am to transcend to Heaven.

 

Cid:  Long after that hermit’s death, time went on, and there was another hermit.  This is his story.

                Here in the mountains, in Spain, I dwell here for my own security.  I ran away at a tender age, and no one has yet found me.  If anyone does find me, I’ll claim to be severely ill.  By now, no one should recognize me, since I’ve aged so much.  I don’t even know my age any longer.  I ran away, because the dominance of religion in society was driving me into insanity.  The hypocrisies of the bible and the concept of worship give me rage.  To love only God is not to love thy neighbor.  Jesus is not the reason why I am an atheist, yet the arrogance of the people who are less than holy. 

I am not even literate anymore.  The last time I came across a book was a couple of years ago.  Along came a wounded traveler.  I helped him, and in exchange for my kindness I didn’t want any money, for I had not use for it.  Instead I wanted him to read me his book, the Poem of the Cid.  After he had read it, he was astonished at my reaction.  I hold him half of the time I was not listening to the story, but I manage to take note to the great number of references to God and Christianity.  In the book, god was mentioned 143 times, but the majority of the time, praise was given for unholy reasons.  The Cid and his followers killed and robbed people in the name of god, and at the same time not considering thy neighbor’s feelings or lives.  “I win battles as it pleases the Creator,” (p. 153, stanza 122), “I can be certain of defeating them with God on my side,” (p. 143, stanza 114), “overjoyed that by God’s favor they had won the day,” and “Attack them my knights, for the love of God!” – All these quotes cause me great anger over what God’s purpose is.  Yes, god spared their lives in time of risk, but they took other people’s lives, whom no one had the heart to mourn over.  Do unto thy neighbor as thou dost unto thyself.  How could they not recognize their hatred?  Even in the Bible it talks about how you treat others will be how the Father treats you after death.  Justice doesn’t seem to be granted for the Cid.  He always wins, and ever so simply, never even expecting victory.  He thinks his victories of blood and gold are god given.  The only time there is a loss for him, the loss is the treatment of his daughters.  Since he is not the one directly hurt, his sense of self worth is given more fuel to win the battle at the end of the epic.  It’s easy to always be the hero and always win, but he never experienced his daughters’ pain.  What would have happened to his confidence then?

Even though these two characters are hermits, they have polar viewpoints.  In one time period where God is important in terms of God’s teachings, the hermit feels strong about religion, and feels truly concerned about his afterlife.  The other, in times of war and persecution of Moors, becomes a recluse to society because of the misuse of god and religion.

Grade: A

Professor’s note:  I enjoyed this – Your 2^nd hermit did a good job to hide away – a skeptic like that would be a prime target of the inquisition!

A Guide to Handling Stalkers - Plus More Stalker Math

 

This is my third and final entry for Stalking Awareness month.  The following link is a detailed guide on how to handle five types of stalkers.  This guide is far more extensive than the one in my previous entry.  There are sections for physical followers, cyberstalkers, and for short and long-distance stalkers.  It's a long entry, so feel free to skip around to different segments.  Also included is a section for Stalker Mathematics, in which you can calculate the person's financial ability to drive a long distance to find you. 

This is my aforementioned guide from my crime blog, Caroline's Chronicles of Crime:  Five Types of Stalkers - How to Handle Them

The following is an addition to the math portion. (No puns intended!)

Here is some more Stalker Mathematics.  These ones are quick and easy.  All you need are two numbers and a calculator.

D = RT
(Distance = Rate x Time)

R = D/T
(Rate = Distance/Time)

T = D/R
(Time = Distance/Rate)

If you know how far away your predator is, good.  The more concerning variables are speed and the time you have left before the person finds you.  The following is an example is for time, and it's not based on anyone real.  It's just a theoretical example.

The creep lives 500 miles away.  The speed limit on the turnpike is 65mph.  How much time do I have before he shows up?

D = RT
500 = 65*T

500/65 = (65*T)/65     Divide both sides by rate, 65mph.
500/65 = (65*T)/65     The 65s cancel out on the right side, reducing it to lowest terms.

500/65 = T

T = 7.692 hours

It's about 7 hours and 41 minutes, given that the perpetrator does not make any rest stops.

Conclusion:  It would take less than half a day for someone living 500 miles away to reach you.  In this scenario, it would be wisest to go to your nearest women's shelter and request an emergency PFA (Protection from Abuse order).  Even if you are male, you still can ask for a PFA form.  If you don't know where your nearest women's shelter is, then call your local police station, and they can give you information on restraining orders and they will also be alerted in case the perpetrator shows up.

Ghosts and Boomerangs: My Guide on Dealing with Emotionally Unavailable Types

 

This is my second entry for Stalking Awareness month, and this topic involves emotionally unavailable people who make you feel like a stalker.  It also shows how to prevent yourself from crossing the line into the stalker category.  I wrote an entry in my crime blog about Ghosts and Boomerangs as a guide to deal with these types of people.  See the link below.

Most people are familiar with ghosting.  Once someone stops talking to you, you may attempt contact to figure out what happened to cause the ghosting.  Maybe there was a misunderstanding that could be clarified?  You may wonder, did I say something rude, or did I do something to hurt this person?  Since the person does not want to talk to you, they will not be willing to give you the answer.  The more you try to communicate, the worse it will be for both of you, and you'll look like a stalker despite your benign intentions.  The best course of action is to examine your own behaviors, and stick with a guess as to why they ghosted.  Stick with that guess, and your curiosity will be satisfied.

Boomerangs are people who go back and forth from being your friend to acting like a stranger who's never heard of you.  This person is nice to you for a day or two and then gives you the cold shoulder, but later returns to being your pal for a day.  The obnoxious cycle continues.  During the Boomerang's flight away from you, it seems like you need a VIP pass just to say hello.  You are just a convenience to them.  Boomerangs use people for temporary entertainment, like renting a DVD from Blockbuster.  However, Blockbuster is bust, and human beings are not for rent!

In recent years, I encountered a Boomerang in the workplace.  I had lunch with a lady a few times, and I thought I made a new friend.  Then the next time I had lunch with her, she completely ignored me.  I attempted to strike up a conversation, and she just stared at her phone.  I repeatedly tried to talk with her, and she acted like I wasn't there.  I understand people get glued to their cellphones these days, but you could still look up and interact and go back to Facebook.  She completely blocked me out, and I awkwardly ate my lunch.  Once someone acts like this, I want nothing to do with them.  I figured out when she went to lunch, and took a different time every day.  A few weeks later, I miscalculated her lunch time, and she sat at my table, expecting me to be a buddy all over again.  At this point, I realized she's a Boomerang, not a Ghost.  I just stared at my phone and devoured my veggie burger.  I left for my usual walk, then back to work.  She later complained to other coworkers that I wouldn't talk to her.  I ignored her sad, puppy eyes looking at me.  Ugh, how manipulative.  We're not in middle school; that doesn't work anymore!  I just kept subtly avoiding her in the break room, and now I don't even have to deal with her anymore.  This scenario ended with no drama and no stalking accusations - my intended outcome.

Here is my guide for how to deal with these frustrating people:  Ghosts and Boomerangs - Caroline's Chronicles of Crime

Stalking Defined

January is Stalking Awareness Month, and although this is my fun, potpourri blog, I still believe this issue is significant to be included.  In my crime blog, I wrote three entries regarding this topic.  I'll be posting an article each week from Caroline's Chronicles of Crime, just to raise awareness.

The first entry is on defining stalking.  The term, stalker, get used too casually too frequently.  It's ignorant that people joke about some innocent person being a criminal, which could lead to people downplaying the real crime.

The following is a short piece from Caroline's Chronicles of Crime, regarding how stalking is defined.  Feel free to click the link:  Defining Stalking

Analyzing the Media’s Racial Bias for the Quadruple Murder Case in Bucks County

Three years ago, four young men were murdered in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.  I wrote about this case and created an illustrated timeline in my crime blog, Caroline's Chronicles of Crime.  The Investigation Discovery Channel produced a short documentary on the incidents.  These crimes happened within miles of my home.  It was surreal for my parents to see someone from the gym mourning her son on the television screen.

The young lives that were cut short were portrayed as purely innocent despite that the murderous conflicts involved drugs.  Anyone murdered becomes innocent regardless of their past.  However, I can not help but wonder if this case happened a few miles away in Philadelphia and everyone involved was African American, would the media portray the black victims in the same light?  Would the case have been turned into an hour-long feature on Investigation Discovery?

The white skinned serial killer, Cosmo DiNardo, murdered four white males, but had DiNardo and his four victims been people of color, would the story have been told differently on the news?  No one is calling the case, “white-on-white crime!”

The sad reality that is somewhat taboo is that the murder victims were attempting to buy marijuana in wholesale amounts.  Since marijuana has a reputation as a soft drug, it is possible that the victims did not perceive the business to be as dangerous as dealing heroin or cocaine.  The victims most likely wanted to make some extra cash from selling it to friends.  Jimi Patrick, who was college bound, probably intended to make a few sales and become popular with partiers in his first semester.  Although it is saddening for these men to be brutally and coldly murdered, the victims were not perfectly innocent lambs.  If the victims were black men from North Philly, the wording would be changed in the columns.  Instead of “Four murdered in Bucks County,” the headline would probably read, “Four Drug Dealers Killed by Philadelphia Drug Lord.”

Regarding the victims, Jimi Patrick was straight-laced and clean cut with no criminal record, but Dean Finocchiaro was a rowdy boy who had a few run-ins with the cops for joy-riding.  The ID program treated his past as forgivable, and his father said he was “just a little immature.”  If Dean were African American, would the media downplay his rap sheet?  Would he be just a mischievous kid or would he be painted as a juvenile delinquent whose life led him to a deadly drug deal?

Don’t get me wrong.  These were horrific crimes no matter who fell victim.  Cosmo drove a tractor over Thomas Meo’s body while he was still alive!  Cosmo ran out of bullets and intended to stop Meo’s screams so distant neighbors could not hear.  Meo was paralyzed from the waist down from being shot, and there was nothing he could do but curse as he was run over.  He died next to his friend, Mark Sturgis, who was shot multiple times.  Cosmo DiNardo morbidly premeditated the murders, telling by how calculated his cover up scheme was.  He used the family’s backhoe to bury three of the victims six feet deep in a large, metal pig roaster.  Cosmo and his accomplice cousin, Sean Kratz, perpetrated the murders on an isolated estate belonging to their affluent family.

Despite the fact that everyone involved was Caucasian, privilege still played a role due to socioeconomic differences.  The murderer, Cosmo DiNardo, came from a wealthy family who owned a cement contracting business.  All four murders took place on DiNardo’s second property, a farm in Solebury Township.  When Cosmo was first taken into custody, Daddy DiNardo posted his $100,000 bail, setting a suspected murderer free to roam.

The last time Dean Finocchiaro spoke to his father, he said he would be “back in 15 minutes.”  I believe he was telling the truth.  Surveillance showed DiNardo’s silver Ford pickup truck driving away.  Drug transactions take a few minutes in a parked vehicle, but Cosmo had other plans for him.  DiNardo probably suggested on driving to a separate location for the transaction or that the marijuana was kept at the farm.  In less than 15 minutes, Dean was gone, and all his father would have were memories.

It’s vicariously heartbreaking to see the surviving parents grieve as they tell their stories.  Though do we get to share the heartache of black parents who mourn their late sons lost to drug and gang violence?  It doesn’t matter if it happens more often in one neighborhood or another.  Murder victims are human beings regardless of skin color, and their surviving families feel just as much agony.  At the end of the documentary, Mrs. Sturgis said she wished she could pick up Mark’s dirty socks one more time.  Don’t black mothers want to pick up those socks one more time too?