Theory on Phobias

It has been said that people fear what they do not know. I hold that is only partially true. It may be a tendency but I believe there is a rational about why it can apply. Now my comments are merely observations and a theory itself. I have no science to prove this is actually the case, only experience. Alas, I should at least say what my theory is.

                A “phobia” is defined as a strong fear or dislike: an irrational or very powerful fear and dislike of something such as spiders or confined spaces. My theory hinges on the idea of irrationality. I actually believe there is a level of rationality that appears to have been taken out of proportion. For instance I’m afraid of heights, so I can’t go on a Ferris wheel or a roller coaster. However, when I convinced myself to try and go on a Ferris wheel, I noticed when the fear struck me. I found out at what height I could not stand going past; it was the height where I was afraid of falling from. The fear of heights is not so much of the height as it is of the potential fall. When someone looks down, they become more aware of the potential fall. That’s why you tell someone “Don’t look down!” As long as the idea of the fall is not in his head, your friend might be able to handle the height.

                The reason for a strong fear to exist is a rational that became extreme. Another way of saying it is the phobia exists because of a real fear that happens to be the primary association of something. Some people might think a Ferris wheel just gives you a nice view. Some associate it with a date. Others like me associate it as something that is liable to break down and have you either stuck for a few hours or break apart, sending you for a long fall. Movies might be the culprit for this rational, but if that is the first time you’ve seen a Ferris wheel, especially as a little kid, that is how you are going to associate it for a long time. The reason why going through it a second time could cure the phobia is because you edit the primary association to that you will not fall or maybe to one of the other things I mentioned not just through rational, but through emotion.

                Now for another context. One person can be afraid of snakes and spiders, but be okay with frogs and mushrooms. All could be poisonous and deadly, but a lot of people don’t consider the typical frog to be dangerous. They might first think of Kermit the muppet, the princess and the frog story, or even biology class, but not likely that they will attack or kill you. So there is rational and emotion does amplify it, but there is rational nonetheless. Should we cure ourselves of these? Maybe if it keeps you from being able to function in life or be respectful to others. Otherwise, it does not matter too much, especially when you realize why they are. When you learn why they exist, you might actually develop more respect and considerateness for others. For example, someone might hate belts because they associate belts with abuse.

                One last point I have is to address what I meant in the beginning. Most people in their nature do not fear what they do not know. This is proven by the fact that we are generally curious as children. As children, we don’t understand the concept of danger so much and that’s why we need parents. They tell us what they know to be dangerous and try to keep us safe. However, the parents can also be the ones who establish our primary associations with things such as spiders by telling us that they can kill us and reinforcing it. As a result, as we grow older, we grow to be more cautious about things we don’t understand. 

Sexual Objectivity and How to Fight It

Dear Women,

                You are your own enemy when it comes to gender equality. I know that women can think as dirty as men when it comes to sexually objectifying the other gender. Just go to a college campus and listen to what the freshmen girls say and it’s obvious. However, we don’t hear nearly as much about men being sexual objects as much as women. Besides the people who refuse to believe that is the case, I can offer you a good reason why you don’t hear about it.

                Believe it or not, women, men dress better than you. It sounds wrong, but it’s true. Think about what it means for a man to dress up. He has a full suit or at least a long pair of pants and a long sleeved shirt. Only his head and maybe his hands are showing. Now think about women and what it means for them to dress nicely. It’s rare to hear about a modest dress being praised. In fact, most outfits showcased at events like the Academy Awards are sexual teases. At least some skin needs to be shown whether it is the full back, the upper half of her breasts, an entire leg if not most of it, and maybe some midriff, not to mention that they tend to be some combination of the above.  

                Women, you cannot demand that men stop thinking about you sexually if you continue to dress in ways that are sexually tempting. That includes wearing pants or shorts that actually reach your knees and not just your upper thigh. If you truly consider yourself to be equal to men, which you should, then why is it that men can handle the summer heat with modest shorts and a regular t-shirt, but women can’t? Again, why can men play tennis with the same style, but women need an incredibly short skirt or shorts? Why is it the case that the whole “It’s hot outside” argument comes from the gender that seems to get cold so easily? I find it incredibly ironic that attempts from the men to get girls to dress modestly is met with hostility from women.

If you are not the kind of woman described above but instead the modest one, I applaud you. In fact, I find that an important quality in the kind of woman I want to date. To dress modestly allows men to see a respect you have for yourself. It is so much easier to respect a woman physically and mentally who dresses modestly than a woman whose entire legs and perhaps underwear show as soon as she sits down. By the way, the latter is not business appropriate; it’s playboy/prostitute appropriate. Also, I find it negative in a relationship. Not only would I not want you to tempt me and distract me from what’s important, I don’t want you tempting other guys. It only increases the probability of sexual harassment and bad situations.  

                So please! Stop undermining your causes. If you want men to not see you as sexual objects, then stop dressing and acting like sexual objects. If you want men to treat you right, then you need to stop undermining their efforts. Sexual objectivity will always exist in mainstream culture as long as women continue to support immodest outfits. That’s the truth so don’t believe any lies that tell you otherwise. Let’s do our part to curb the sexual objectivity of women.

Sincerely,

N. D. Moharo

P.S.  This is only one but a very important step. As long as women are portrayed sexually in commercials like Carl’s Jr., in movies, and magazines, it will still exist. But if anything, this will help the individual woman who does take this advice. Sexual harassment may not be completely gone, but it will limit it. When you meet new people, the way you dress will lead to how they will treat you.

Humanity versus Objects Prompt

I do not have my topic ready for this week as certain events, including the death of a friend, have prevented me from developing a position. In fact, I had forgotten which topic I wanted to write about quite a few times. I have continuously switched between a eulogy for my friend and something concerning humanity. So while I might write something to dedicate to my friend, I do have a prompt. Consider this claim: "Sometimes it is through arguing that we recognize someone as a human being." When are times that you find yourself recognizing someone else is a person and not just an object in some sense?

Perspectives

    This week, I do not have a letter for you all. Instead, I have an observation essay that likely will not be well-written. I also might readdress the topic at a later date. 

    Last week, I wrote “so-called American Revolution.” The basis for that phrase was based off the perspective of people who would say nothing changed. The slaves were still slaves, women could not vote, etc. However, on the other side, the government changed. The roles of the former colonists were given more rights. Also, the American Revolution started something, the French Revolution being part of it.

    So perspectives are important in making statements. It’s also important to determine which perspectives are valid for making a claim. Definitions are also interesting to consider. For example, are the changes I mention above a “fundamental change”? Personally, I don’t care to argue about that topic.  I care more about the ideas of perspectives.  For example, when someone uses a “racist” term, but a representative of the “offended” party says it was okay, does the opinion of the public matter?

    It is interesting that humans can care for things that do not concern us and not care for things that do concern us. The whole thing is a matter of perspective.

Avoid Extremes

My Dear Readers,

                I must caution you against extremes. When we give ourselves into the extreme ideas on a position, we can only cause more suffering. Some people might feel the only way to make things right is to swap the positions. However, what would that do but instead place the victims in the roles of the offenders? Nothing gets fixed, but instead the very little progress that was made gets destroyed.

                It also is not right to use extreme measures to make a point. For instance, it is wrong for a vegetarian, to explain why he or she does not eat meat, to kill a man’s child and serve it to him. Also, as ironic as it may be, it is wrong for a “pro-life” supporter to wish a “pro-choice” advocate that his or her parents had chose to abort the “pro-choice” supporter. Both, though in different areas, are wrong. They both undermine the goal of their position; the vegetarian is to respect all animals and life while the “pro-life” supporter is to say abortion is never right, regardless of how someone might turn out to be. In addition, the vegetarian would have committed murder and the “pro-life” activist used hate speech. The result of any of these actions would be support for the problem, not the solution.

                 When I look at literature that involves a revolution, I am certainly more cautious about whether I agree with it or not. At the moment, my opinion has been shaped to not praise a revolution unless a solid plan of operation is in place. One thing I praise about the so-called American Revolution is that it only really removed who was at the top. They kept the local governments in place to keep things in control. Then they laid out how they were to run the government, addressing many of the problems from before. While I doubt it was entirely peaceful, that is far better than anything I can say about the French Revolution. When a plan is laid out that does not simply swap who is where in power, but works to treat the citizens correctly, even those who were previously in power, there is hope for progress. Otherwise, there can only be a Reign of Terror and the destruction of progress.

                I turned in to a Japanese murder mystery. At the end of the show, the main character realized that revenge never ends unless someone is ready to forgive. That is true. That is why it is important to teach people how to forgive. We all offend someone one time or another, and sometimes it is truly grave. However, we need to act not only to reconcile our actions, but to forgive and move forward.

                So I say to you again, do not be easily swayed by the extremists in their positions. It is not hard to find that the extremists actually attack the very people they say they are trying to help. Actions must be kept in check by reason and love, and if everyone adopts that, we will make progress.

N.D. Moharo

Post not ready; apologies

Hi everyone. While I do have a topic planned for this week, I have not been able to come up with a draft I am satisfied with nor do I think I will have time to work on it this weekend. Hopefully it will be ready by next week. Until then, I will simply point your attention to J. D. Nyle's story Neostriker: Shining and ask, "What do you think would happen if your dream came true? How would you act in that situation? Would you consider it real or not?"

Support the Local Arts

My dear readers,

                I must start off with pointing your attention elsewhere. J.D. Nyle over at his recently launched blog has begun serializing his story Neostriker: Shining. Now I will admit that I have been a part of the process for the development of his story. I cannot say it is great, but I do like some of the ideas in the story and I think the right kind of audience would appreciate it as well. I certainly enjoyed the second half far more than the first. I would also say the writing drastically improves then but that is only my opinion. Mr. Nyle says the story was written as a tribute to the development of his Neostriker series as well as a tribute to the various series that have played a role in inspiring it. I know Mr. Nyle hopes this will help him build an audience to whom he can eventually release his next work for. So I ask you to support him in his efforts. If you can think of people who might enjoy it, I ask you to spread the word on Mr. Nyle’s behalf. Thank you.

                Now, the whole thing above is the inspiration for this week’s topic. I believe it is very important to support the local arts. A society is built upon the use and study of the sciences, but a sign of when it thrives is the presence of its arts. Arts help convey the values of a society as well as say when it is doing well. This is why the arts flourish in prosperous times.  

                However, art does not simply appear out of thin air. While talent grants a nice jumpstart, it has its limits. A lot of great art, whether in paintings, music, crafts, or anything else comes from practice and work. Some may argue that great artists don’t practice. I, on the other hand, argue contrary. I believe that each work of art is practice, whether the artist sees it that way or not is a different story. Either way, when I hear how some simple pieces of art can take its skilled artists over 3 hours to make, I definitely will say that it took a lot of work; far more than I would give.

                As a result of the work it takes, I encourage you to support the artists from the beginnings. They may not be perfect, and they may simply play covers of popular songs or repaint the Mona Lisa. However, just the effort itself is something worth praising. And simply to receive some recognition and praise can help push an artist to become the best he or she can be.

                I recall one day as I sat outside a movie theater waiting. On a bench across from me, I saw a man playing a saxophone. It was actually very pleasant to listen to and others agreed by giving him money. Unfortunately, the mall security came by and forced him to stop. While I could partially understand why, I was very disappointed. Hearing simple music in the air helped establish some life in the environment. It was not overbearing, but acted simply to add something nice to people’s ears as they pleasantly conversed.

                I have to admit, sometimes the stuff I see makes me very much depressed. But when I see some nice music played by happy artists, it totally makes me believe in society again. This is one reason why I’m a fan of the Lindsey Stirling videos Electric Daisy and Spontaneous Me. The music is great, but the dancing completes it and brightens my mood. I hope more people are inspired and allowed to play like that and I think we should provide environments where they can be free to do so.

N.D. Moharo

P.S. You can find the story at NeostrikerShining.blogspot.com