I’m not bothered one way or another. I’ve lived with daylight saving and I’ve lived without it. I know it really makes no difference either way. People talk about “losing” an hours sleep and “gaining” an hours sleep. So??? What difference does it really make. People travel through time zones quite happily and anyone who has travelled through time zones knows that a 1 hour time difference makes no difference to the internal body clock.

 However, I’ve been reading some of the forums and listening to some of the crazy reasons why people don’t want daylight savings.

 Here’s some:

“But the cows won't know what time to feed!!!”

“My curtains will fade”

“I am for it. it will mean that I get to sleep in even longer.”

“I am not in favour of daylight savings, as it doesn't really make a bit of difference to me, except that twice a year I’m going to have to readjust my sleeping pattern. oh and it will be extra hot at the time I leave work, instead of it cooling down already.”

“Electricity is great
If I want light I will turn one on
I don't need any more exposure to the sun than what I already endure”

“People would forget to cook the evening meal.”

”Early morning surfers wouldn't bother to go to work.”

“When Qld tried DST the last time, kids were perpetually tired.”

“Children won’t go to sleep cause it’s too light”

 The bottom line is not that people oppose daylight saving as such, I feel it is more that they oppose change.

 BTW cows can’t tell time.

 Madeleine

Thursday, 30 November 2006

I’m back on this topic again. Human beings seem to operate from two of these three. Most people do not function well in all three. This is what a lot of my counselling is about.

 I have a little triangle that I draw for people.

Some people are thinkers and doers. They are the ones who think things through and get them done. These people are seen as the high achievers and often quite respected. The problem is that often these people are over achievers, work too hard and have no idea about their feelings or what to do with them. When a person like this comes into my counselling sessions, they often don’t understand what their problems are because feelings don’t seem to have any point for them. These people often are highly stressed and can be at risk of arthritis and cancer due to suppressed emotions.

 Some people are thinkers and feelers. They think about things; they have lots of feelings about things; they analyse things. The problem is that they never actually get around to doing anything about their thoughts and/or feelings.  These are the ideas people. However, when they come in to see me, they are having problems accomplishing things. They may start projects and never finish them. They will think about changing their jobs, feel bad about staying in a lousy job, but won’t change jobs. These people can be quite exciting and/or exhausting to be with because they have lots of ideas and passion.

 Some people are feelers and doers. These people operate from feelings and don’t think about what they are doing. I suspect these people are probably the target of con artists because they don’t think logically about what they are doing. They tend to be impulsive and feel that something is a good idea without thinking through the pros and cons. These people are also often very passionate people, but can be quite impractical.

 As human beings we need a balance between all three positions.

 Which one are you?

 Madeleine

Tuesday, 28 November 2006

I am pondering the number of blogs on religion and the belief that there is a god; that what we do, think and/or feel is being judged by some higher power; and that humans need religion to guide their actions. There are quite a number of people who believe that their belief is the “right” way of thinking and that everyone else is “wrong”. The concept of a “god” is something human beings have had throughout the ages as a method of explaining the unexplainable including how the world began.

 A myth is:

“In these academic fields, a myth (mythos) is a sacred story concerning the origins of the world or how the world and the creatures in it came to have their present form. The active beings in myths are generally gods and heroes. Myths often are said to take place before recorded history begins. In saying that a myth is a sacred narrative, what is meant is that a myth is believed to be true by people who attach religious or spiritual significance to it. Use of the term by scholars does not imply that the narrative is either true or false.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth

 A cult is:

“The literal and traditional meanings of the word cult is derived from the Latin cultus, meaning "care" or "adoration", as "a system of religious belief or ritual; or: the body of adherents to same". In English, it remains neutral and a technical term within this context to refer to the "cult of Artemis at Ephesus" and the "cult figures" that accompanied it, or to "the importance of the Ave Maria in the cult of the Virgin."      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult

 Nowadays, we talk about Greek/Roman “Myths”. What we consider “myths” today, were once human beings explanations of the unexplainable and rules for their social behaviour. The Greeks truly believed that their religion was the only right way to believe and as Christians/Muslims et al do today and would fight wars over the validity of their beliefs. They had many gods to explain phenomena that, at that stage, could not be explained. For instance, Thor, the god of thunder helped people understand these great noises coming from the sky. Today, we know what causes thunder and don’t need a god to explain this phenomenon.

 Somewhere along the line, humans decided that it was “wrong” to believe in many gods and since then religions/cults of today tend towards the belief in one overriding “god” - a supreme being, who created the world, and who we have to answer to in the after life or the underworld, the place where dead spirits go.

 In today’s world, I don’t need “religion” or fear of an afterlife to guide my actions. Culturally I do what is “right” for the world I live in. This “right” is comes from myself, other people, the law, my own background and beliefs from my parents and many other places. And this changes over time. I am doing things now, that as a younger woman in a different time, I would have frowned on in myself. And it is not religion that is guiding these changes; it has more of a cultural basis.

 As intelligent human beings, why do humans still need to explain the unexplainable? What’s wrong with simply accepting that there are things in this world which are unexplainable, accept and enjoy the pursuit of trying to explain the unexplainable. Why do some humans need a belief in an afterlife? What’s wrong with accepting the fact that when we die, we become part of the earth as our bones or ashes disintegrate. I quite like the idea of a life that finishes, I become part of the earth again, and the world goes on without me. What is wrong with making my own decision about what I believe is right or wrong, without worrying so much about a vengeful god who will forever punish me if I think, feel or do something intangible that he/she believes is a “bad” thing to do.

 Will we, in the future, look at today’s religions and relegate them to the level of mythology and/or cult as we have other beliefs/religions of the past.

 Madeleine

Saturday, 18 November 2006

I find it interesting how human beings equate some thoughts, some feelings and some behaviour as being right or wrong. I regularly get people who present for counselling who have a thought, maybe something like “I don’t like that person”. Their immediate response to their own thought is: “I am a bad person for having that thought”. Feeling: bad, guilty, scared.

 Anger is an feeling that many people believe is “wrong” and/or “bad”. “Oh, dear, I felt angry at my child for pestering me”. Their internal response to that feeling might be something like: “Mothers should never be angry with their child”, or “mothers should be more patient”. The sense of glee when someone cuts you off on the road and a couple of minutes later you spot this person getting a ticket from the police. Thought: “They got their come uppance”. Feeling: Glee or spiteful. Thought: “That’s a bad feeling. I shouldn’t feel that.”. Feeling: bad, unworthy, guilty.

 The interesting thing is that all humans have these thoughts and feelings. I work towards people learning that the thoughts and/or feelings are neither good nor bad, it’s what they do with the thoughts and feelings that becomes the problem.

 Many of us are raised in the belief, often religious, that every thought and feeling we have is monitored; that if we have a negative thought or feeling about another human being or a situation, that maybe God will strike us dead, we will go to hell, that our thoughts have power over other people, that somehow these thoughts and feelings make us a bad person, that somehow the rest of the world will know about these thoughts and feelings and think less of us, that somehow because we have these normal thoughts and feelings that we are bad people, and that other people can read our minds and know the “bad” thoughts we are thinking.

 When you look at the reality, all human beings have all emotions at some stage. We all feel jealous, angry, sad, scared, disappointed, spiteful, gleeful, happy, contented, etc. We all have negative thoughts about other people at some stage. I might look at what someone is wearing and not like it, and think: “She looks like mutton dressed up as lamb”. This is just my opinion, my own personal like and dislike. It is neither right nor wrong, it just is.

 What I do with my thoughts and feelings can become the problem. If I go up to this woman and tell her she looks ugly, THAT becomes the problem. That is not necessary. This is not necessary. This is simply my opinion.

 If I get cut off by someone on the road, feel angry, follow them, wait til they park their car and scratch their car with my key. THAT becomes a problem. If I imagine myself following them, imagine waiting till they park their car and imagine scratching their car with my key. THAT is not a problem. That is simply a thought. It is neither right nor wrong, it just is.

 If I feel angry at my co-worker, that is not a problem. If I get grumpy, sad, scared, disappointed. These feelings do not cause problems. If I scream at my co-worker. If I call her a fucken bitch. THAT is a problem

 Sometimes the thinking goes: “If I have that thought that makes me a bad person”. This thought actually is more harmful than the original “bad” thought. This is an excuse to beat up on yourself for not being the perfect person. The person, who, of course, does not exist. Perfection is an individual judgement. It is not a reality.

 So feelings and thoughts are not the problem, it is what the individual does with the thoughts and feelings. If I actually do something wrong, then I apologise, make restitution in some way, and I let it go. Every human being makes mistakes. I remember the woman who had had a car accident 3 years ago. Her fault. She admits it was her fault. She was still paying for the damage. However, 3 years later, she was still beating up on herself for one instant of lack of concentration. Because that was all it was. A single second, driving, where her concentration lapsed, and caused an accident. We’ve all done similar things. However, does that single second of lack of concentration deserve 3 years of beating up on herself. No, I don’t believe it does. Time to let go of the bad feelings and thoughts. THEY are the problem, not the original accident.

 Next time you have what you consider a negative thought or feeling, instead of saying to yourself: “Ohh, that was a bad thing to do”; feeling: bad, guilty; think instead: “I’m human, and that is just what I think”; feeling: probably nothing major, relief, good about yourself.

 Allow yourself your thoughts and feelings. If you do something definitely wrong, apologise and let it go. Welcome to the human race.

 Madeleine

Thursday, 16 November 2006

DeBunkem (by Us2weeds Rambling In The Weedy Shack) got my imagination going with his URL of the parrots that live in London. Now parrots are hot country birds, not cold country. They are not native to England. So where did they come from? What I read doesn’t give my imagination any scope. Boring.

This story does tickle my fancy “Feral Parrot Population Soars in U.K., Study Says” http://tinyurl.com/6eypq

I like the idea of feral parrots. “Feral: wild; untamed; savage; (of animal species) living in the wild, especially after previously being domesticated; funereal”

However, I have great difficulty in imagining “savage” parrots.

“Various tales speculate how the birds first became established in Britain. Some say film studios set parakeets free after they were used on movie sets. Others suggest the birds escaped airport quarantine or arrived as bedraggled castaways that flew ashore after a cargo ship capsized near London.” http://tinyurl.com/6eypq

“Some even think that it was Jimi Hendrix who released his breeding pair into the London skies back in the heady 60s - but was that all a purple haze?” http://tinyurl.com/y7l3np

My imagination goes further than this. They have apparently been there for about 30 years. I reckon they’ve been there longer.

This is what really happened.

One day this young pirate and his best mate decided that if they were going to be good pirates, they needed a parrot. Now they didn’t realise that this was a pirate urban legend (no internet in those days). So each bought themselves a parrot from some port in the south seas thinking that all good pirates have parrots for pets. They took their new friends back onto the ship and the whole crew headed back to England.

The crew would have had some fun with the parrot mimicking swear words at other pirates. However, after 6 months or so at sea, the crew were becoming quite angry with our two would be pirates, their raucous pets, bird droppings in their stew, and the morning wake up call, even when they were hung over. As they neared London, the pirate crew threatened our two young would-be pirates with keel hawling , walking the plank or even worse, parrot stew, if they didn’t remove their pets from the ship.

Our two young would-be pirates had become attached to their pets and not daring to admit this to their cohorts were quite frightened. They knew that if they were keel hawled or forced to walk the plank, their little feathered friends would definitely become parrot stew. After many arguments, promises, and ruses to keep their pets safe, they convinced their crew mates that they would set the parrots free in London, if only the pirates wouldn’t eat their pets for dinner or alternatively kill the two young would-be pirates.

When our two young would-be pirates came to London, they decided that they really did want to be pirates, but would have to give up their lovely, green little friends. They found a nice leafy place for them and set them free.

As luck would have it, each time they returned to London, they visited their little friends and their chicks.

Hence, London has parrots.

Madeleine

Tuesday, 14 November 2006