The end of a sorrowful Thanksgiving

A week ago I really felt bad for myself. But tonight I really feel sorry for my ex-bf. Tonight he went to his parents alone to have Thanksgiving dinner. He’ll come home alone just as I did. I know he’ll fill-up his schedule with dinners, movies, parties, and vacations with friends but won’t be able to look forward to doing those things with someone who is closer than a friend. For a year and a half he was able to be with someone who was more than just a friend or an acquaintance. He had someone who wanted nothing more than to be with him and make him happy. He had someone who was by his side and was happy to support him. For the first time in his 39 year life he was able to experience having a boyfriend and experiencing both the joys and the pains that come with it. Tonight I feel sorry that I have been the only person to see a side of him that no one else has seen and may never see. What’s even sadder is that he’ll never realize what he gave up until it’s gone. Maybe he’ll stumble on a picture or hear the song “Umbrella” and remember the past. Perhaps he’ll remember the nicknames, baked goods, or weird movie snacks. But he’ll never feel what he felt with me and although he can only think of bad feelings now I know someday he’ll realize that good and bad feelings together are still better than no feelings at all. A life without feelings is not really a life and for that I feel sorry for him.

For more than 2 weeks I’ve felt the pain of a broken heart and wouldn’t wish it on anyone. But tonight I am so glad that I can feel my heart even when it’s breaking. I know that my heart will break again in the future but that would never stop me from feeling. My heart could break from another boyfriend or it could break from a death in the family. But even though I don’t look forward to my heart breaking I’ll never want to shield my heart by not allowing others to get close to me. I’ve broken up with many guys before and I know I’ll have no problem falling in love again.

Tonight I am very thankful that I am healthy and happy. I must also thank my ex-bf for allowing someone into his family, friends, and more importantly his life. I can only imagine how hard it must have been to have someone wanting to be so close to you. Now you can rest easily.

Goodbye Tinman

The Last Tin man
How many times am I going to date guys who are unable to get close? What is it that I do to attract these people in the first place? Is it that I see something in them that no one else has seen or is it that I am just so desperate to have a close relationship that I ignore the most obvious signs? For a year and a half I dated someone who I should have dated for a day and a half. Why didn’t I realize that someone who never had a close relationship with anyone including his family would ever be able to have one with me? His friends are the most important part of his life but he doesn’t let them get too close either. But at least he’s relieved of the pressure from me to get close. He’s relieved of forcing something that he is incapable of doing. I do hope he’s lucky enough to meet someone who will love him as a person and not want closeness or intimacy. I hope he will be able to open up to someone and they stay with him. I know there is a big heart inside his chest that yearns for a touch of another; unfortunately he will never let it happen because he’s too afraid of opening up. I want him to prove me wrong someday. Show me that he’s not still living in his parents’ efficiency apartment with walls and shelves stocked full of super hero figures and boxes of comic books. Please don’t let him turn into a hoarder and distances him even further from reality, family, and friends. I hope someday he’ll realize that the people and places that were the hardest to deal with are actually what make him a better person.
Someday he’ll want to grow up and want to share his life’s accomplishments with someone who is more than a friend; I hope he finds it.
As my heart has been breaking slowly for months and I feel nothing but pain when I think of our relationship, But this I only blame on myself for falling in love with a fantasy of a close relationship. In the process I fell in love with someone who doesn’t know what love is. Tonight I heard the words that I need to hear “I am not in love with you”. Now I can let him go and I know I am now free. I know that my heart will be stronger and I will be able to love even more the next time. I will never stop loving. Goodbye Tin man I hope you find your heart before you rust.

Catholicvote.com spreading hatred the Catholic way

love the outspoken Catholics who think that they’re “doing God’s work” by getting other Catholics to vote for McCain and Palin. They are so worried that gay marriage will “teach their children how to be gay”. No, that job has been filled by Catholic pedophile priest. We should all look at the people who speak out the most on issues that affect them the most. The Catholic priests who are adamant about abstinence and against homosexuality are also probably the Boy Scout leaders and youth retreat coordinators who have been molesting children their entire adult life. As a recovered Catholic I realize the hypocrisy of an organization that preaches that homosexuality is wrong yet protects homosexual predators who teach our children right from wrong. Let’s look at how many millions of dollars the Catholic Church paid for damagers caused by moving known sexual predators from one church to another without any concern for a child’s welfare. Thank God the majority of homosexual men and women would never think of doing such atrocities as what has been proven in court to be committed by ordained Priests.

Send junk mail back to where they came from

Last year I started my own revenge on companies that were sending me junk mail. Rather than placing all of the useless and wasteful junk mail in the recycling bin I decided to reply to every company that supplied a postage paid return envelope. Instead of filling out their subscription or billing information I simply write “no thanks” and “please take me off of your list”. Then I simply mail back everything including the used envelope and any other paper products that were sent to me. I feel so good after doing this that I actually look forward to getting junk mail now. Unfortunately because I registered my name and address in the “do not mail” registry I don’t receive as much junk mail as I once did. But somehow a few companies slip through and I am so delighted when I see a subscription offer in my mailbox. But this isn’t just a matter of revenge it’s also a way to stimulate the economy.
Imagine if everyone used the postage paid envelopes instead of throwing them away. The companies that use postage paid envelopes are only charged for postage if the envelope is actually used. If you throw away the envelope the company loses nothing other than the cost of the envelope. But if you send it back the company has to pay the postage regardless of what is in the envelope. I’ve actually sent back large brochures and pamphlets along with whatever else came with the return envelope. Imagine how much postage revenue could be generated if everyone sent back their junk mail. The US postal Service would profit from such an increase in mail and operate as they do before Christmas or Tax day (April 16th). Maybe they’d even lower the price of a stamp. OK, that might be stretching it. But this is a way to stimulate the economy without costing the taxpayer a cent. So join me to reduce, reuse, recycle, and return junk mail.

Pass it on and maybe it will catch on.

Completely Helpless

The first time was after a two level spinal fusion. After the 9hour surgery and 10 days in the hospital I was allowed to come home to my small 5th floor walk-up apartment. My boyfriend at the time (J) helped me home and up those endless stairs. After finally reaching my apartment I told J that I would be fine and he could go back to work. What I didn’t realize at the time was that I was unable to sit or stand without someone’s help. After about an hour of concocting some way to sit without tearing out my stitches I finally sat down. At that moment the realization of my total helplessness caused me to sob uncontrollably. Not only was I unable to stand up again I was also unable to move from that seat until J returned 4 hours later. When he returned I broke down once again and explained what had happened. For the next two months I would have a fulltime nurse who would prepare meals, walk my dog, help me to the bathroom and even pull my pants up and down. I needed to transform my living room into my bedroom because I could use my loft bedroom. This meant that the nurse and I spent the entire day in the same room. Since I was heavily medicated and slept most of the day I insisted that she watch whatever TV channel she would like. This meant every soap opera was on the TV.

Paris and Harvard

I love how false rumors spread so much faster than the truth. When I heard the rumor that Paris Hilton was receiving a “woman of the year” award from Harvard University I thought this has to be a joke. But then I saw an advert for access Hollywood showing Paris Hilton on the Harvard campus. Unfortunately, I didn’t have a chance to watch the show but I immediately announced my new found information and my disbelief. I probably told at least 10 people and said this has to be a joke. I couldn’t imagine Harvard students especially females allowing a high school drop-out to receive any award at their university. But for a week I continued to spread the rumor without checking the facts online; after all, I heard the information on Access Hollywood. They couldn’t make up a story like that.

Finally after days of thinking that our world is turning to shit if Paris Hilton can show her tits and get a “woman of the year” award at Harvard I turned to Google. Google search is like the buzz-kill guy at a party who sets everyone straight. I simply entered “Paris Hilton” and “Harvard” and there it was. Paris was in fact on the Harvard Campus. She did receive an award for “woman of the year”. But I was relieved to discover additional information that would explain this odd pairing of Harvard and Paris.

The AP writes that “The Lampoon award is a spoof of the annual honors given by Harvard’s Hasty Pudding Theatricals. The nation’s oldest undergraduate drama troupe planned to present its “Woman of the Year” award to Charlize Theron on Thursday. “Man of the Year” Christopher Walken will be honored Feb. 15.” So in reality Paris accepted a spoof award from the Harvard Lampoon Magazine which makes fun of everything. But what makes all of this so much more enjoyable is the fact that Paris actually went to Harvard to receive this award. One has to wonder if she even realized that this was all a joke. Did she actually think that anyone with a brain would give her a legitimate award for anything that she did on her own? But she could get awards for being the dumbest and most spoiled girl or being the perfect example of any parent’s worst nightmare. She could easily be the poster child for what a young girl should never become—stupid and spoiled. I now want to make a t-shirt with Paris’ picture under the heading “Ignorance is Bliss”.

Language and Theory of Mind

Introduction
In an article written by Michael Corballis (2004), autonomous speech is considered as a critical factor in how humans became modern. The article focuses on the development of language from one that was dependent on manual and facial gestures to one that is autonomously vocal. But is autonomous speech no longer dependent on manual and facial gestures and completely autonomous? To answer this question one must look closely at the origins of modern language and the interwoven relationships involved in language acquisition. A possible alternative to Corballis’ (2004) theory of autonomous speech is the theory that modern language is still dependent on manual and facial gestures; however mental evolution created an interwoven relationship between language, a secondary representation and covert imitation. The present meta-analysis examines literature that explains how human cognition is different from nonhuman animals in an attempt to find the missing link in cognition that led to the evolution of language.

Origins of Language
It is believed that modern language began with a primitive use of symbols without grammatical structure called protolanguage (Bickerton, 1995, as cited in Corballis, 2004). “Protolanguage is roughly equivalent to the level of language demonstrated by a 2-year-old child or a person with Broca’s aphasia” (p.544). Corballis (2004) makes a distinction between the evolution of language and the evolution of speech. He states that the evolution of language began with the mirror neurons. In monkeys the mirror neurons are located in area F5, which is equivalent to the area of the human brain known as the Broca’s area. The mirror neurons in monkeys were shown to respond not only when the monkey makes a particular movement but also when it observes the same movement performed by another monkey (Rizzolatti, Fadiga, Gallese, & Fogassi, 1996, as cited in Corballis, 2004). But the mirror neurons in humans are different.
The mirror neurons in humans are not object dependent (Rizzolatti et al., 2001; as cited in Corballis, 2004) and may reflect a more abstract representational system. The mirror neurons are predominantly left hemispheric, as is the control of speech and are shown to be active when people “read” speech from facial gestures. The mirror neurons in humans would have the ability to interpret gestures into audible sounds, which could have evolved into words and even complete sentences (Corballis, 2004). But rather than autonomous speech being a human invention, it might have been the result of a genetic mutation.
The FOXP2 gene (forkhead box P2) on chromosome 7 is believed to play a role in incorporating speech into the mirror system of humans. A point mutation on the FOXP2 gene appears to be responsible for a speech and language disorder found in three generations of the KE family (Corballis, 2004). This gene has been called the “grammar gene” (Pinker, 1994, as cited in Corballis, 2004), however, the core deficit was seen in the articulation of phonological units. Further research has shown that subjects who carried the R328X mutation, a “nonsense” mutation on the FOXP2 gene different than the mutation carried by some of the KE family, had severe problems with communication (MacDermot et al. 2005). A closer look at the FOXP2 gene finds no evidence for its role in the evolution of vocal learning in non-humans (Webb, 2005) and found no association between the FOXP2 gene and autistic disorder (Gong et al. 2004), which also shows severe problems with communication. Perhaps the mutation of the FOXP2 gene allows us to examine the relationship between the mirror neurons and the representational skills involved in the evolution of language and theory of mind.
Thomas Suddendorf and Andrew Whiten (2001), explained how “a gradual rise of representational redescription may have made representations ever more explicit, enabled the development of a representational theory of mind, and to invent language” (p. 644). By using Perner’s (1991) representational capacities Suddendorf and Whiten tried to bridge the cognitive gap between humans and our closest relatives. Perner’s three stage model consists of a primary representation, a secondary representation, and a metarepresentation. In the first stage infants are limited to see things in reality. In the second stage children are able to take a primary representation of an object and go beyond reality to model hypothetical situations. A child no longer sees the banana as just a banana; now the banana could represent a phone or a gun. Pretend play becomes very important to the child. The final step in Perner’s representational model is metarepresentation which refers to representing a representation as a representation (Perner, 1991, as cited in Suddendorf et al., 2001). Theory of mind would only appear as a result of acquiring metarepresentations. Rather than focusing on the third stage, Suddendorf and Whiten compared secondary representations of humans with other animals.
Previous studies suggested that theory of mind was built around the pillar of false beliefs (Premack et al, 1978, as cited in Suddendorf, 2001), which would only be available for those animals that are capable of metarepresentations. These studies also showed no evidence of false beliefs in nonhuman primates (Call & Tomasello, 1999, as cited in Suddendorf, 2001). Suddendorf and Whiten (2001) suggest that the acquisition of theory of mind could be better understood through the representational capacities that lead up to a representational theory of mind. Perner’s (1991) secondary representation could also enhance our knowledge of representational capacities that lead up to language acquisition, such as hidden displacement and means-ends reasoning
In Piaget’s hidden displacement task, an object such as a ball is placed under a small box; which is then placed under a larger box. The small box reemerges empty. Perner (1991, as cited in Suddendorf, 2001) argued that in order for a child to pass this stage of object permanence one must not only have a present representation (an empty box), but also have a past or secondary representation of an object in the small box under the larger box. A child would also need to have this ability of representing the present objects as well as the past objects when using language. Perhaps passing a hidden displacement task is the precursor to understanding the causal relationship between present or recent representations objects and representations of objects in the past.
Another example of a secondary representational model is found in means-ends reasoning where one must be able to not only hold a present representation or primary perception in mind; but also a secondary representation of a desired goal. Then one must mentally manipulate the primary representation before acting on the environment (Suddendorf, 2001). Corballis (2004) used this means-end reasoning to explain how autonomous speech allows communication when obstacles intervene between the sender and the receiver. In this way, an object could be mentally represented and shared with another person. Then by sharing a secondary representation of the desired goal, pedagogy could be performed in the dark. However, both the sender and the receiver must be able to hold both representations in mind and mentally manipulate the present object to match the secondary object. But means-ends-reasoning is not only found in humans. There is substantial evidence showing that chimpanzees are able to express means-ends reasoning, as well as some evidence that gorillas and orangutans are able to use means-ends reasoning (Suddendorf, 2001). However, none of these animals have language or theory of mind. Rather than looking at the secondary representation, we need to take a closer look at how the perception of a primary representation is translated into an imitative representational model in the brain.
The Missing Link for Language
In a paper written by Margaret Wilson and Gűnther Knublich (2005), perception and imitation were examined. They found that “various brain areas involved in translating perceived human movement into corresponding motor programs collectively act as an emulator, internally simulating the ongoing perceived movement” (p.468). This emulation could then be used as overt imitation, working memory, or understanding others’ behavior. Their findings suggest that mirror neurons play a substantial role in creating covert imitations of the perceived environment. But the fact that mirror neurons are found in nonhuman primates that do not imitate and do not have theory of mind, leads one to question if the missing link in cognition is at the level of imitation or emulation. To further understand this concept we need to understand how covert imitation functions as an emulator in perceiving conspecifics.
According to Wilson and Knoblich (2005), conspecifics can be thought of as postures and actions primarily of other humans and the movements they make with their arms, legs, facial muscles, and vocal tracts. In humans these conspecifics are “covertly imitated, routinely and automatically” (p.460). One example of this can be seen in the chameleon effect showing the unconscious tendency for people to mimic the behavior of others’ or to mimic a person’s facial expression (Wilson and Knoblich, 2005). Another example of imitation comes from observing infants. “Neonates show imitation of simple facial gestures such as mouth opening and tongue protrusion”(Meltzoff & Moore, 1977; as cited in Wilson and Knoblich, 2005 p.461). Infants also show an ability to connect speech to corresponding motor representations. With these examples in mind, Wilson and Knoblich (2005) suggest that mirror neurons are an evolutionary precursor to imitation allowing humans to learn; understand other peoples’ actions, intentions and goals; and perhaps more importantly to develop a theory of mind. But mirror neurons are not enough to propel nonhuman animals to have greater cognitive abilities.
As mentioned earlier, the mirror neurons are believed to play a part in speech (Corballis, 2004). But nonhuman primates with mirror neurons do not speech or have language. Therefore there must be a second mechanism involved in language processing. “For language to be successful, users must be attuned to the functional equivalence between certain perceived and produced speech forms” and “covert imitation functions as part of a perceptual emulator, using implicit knowledge of one’s own body mechanics as a mental model to another person’s actions in real time” (Wilson, 2005, p.463). A closer look of mirror neurons in monkeys shows that the mirror neurons that respond to a hand grasping an object will also respond if the hand disappears behind a screen. This only happens if the monkey knows that there is an object behind the screen (Umilta et al., 2001; as cited in Wilson, 2005), which could suggest predictive capabilities of mirror neurons. The monkey would have a representation of the primary perception (hand with object) and without seeing the grasping action, activate the same neurons that would be activated if the monkey were to perform the same grasping behavior. Then why can’t monkeys with mirror neurons imitate?
Wilson and Knoblich (2005) state that unlike other animals humans have preexisting resources for representing the body and body movements that are perceived and covertly imitated. Evidence of this can be seen in functional MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) studies that show an activation of motor-related areas of the cortex while the subject observes movement of a hand, arm or mouth (Buccino et al., 2001; Graften, Arbib, Fadiga, & von Cramon, 2003; Rizzolatti et al., 1996; Stevens, Fonlupt, Shiffrar, & Decety, 2000; as cited in Wilson & Bnoblich, 2005). They noted however, that movements that were impossible to imitate did not activate the motor-related areas (Stevens et al., 2000; as cited in Wilson & Knoblich, 2005). Another important fact is that the mirror neurons in humans seem to be active while an action is being imitated (Buccino, Vogt, et al., 2004; as cited in Wilson & Knoblich, 2005). This alone could show that covert imitation in the mirror neuron system played a large role in the evolution of language.
In conclusion, the factors that separate humans from nonhumans are language and theory of mind. But in order to understand how these factors separated us we need to look at the basic mechanisms involved. New research on the FOXP2 gene along with research on imitation and mirror neurons allow science to breakdown language and theory of mind into experimentally tested mechanisms. Rather than viewing language and theory of mind as a philosophical leap of consciousness, science has shown that simple mechanisms such as the ability to imitate motor control would allow humans to learn language through observations. Future studies could show that covert imitation of primary and secondary representations leads to metarepresentations found in theory of mind. The missing link in cognition could be simple covert imitation.















Works Cited

Corballis, M., (2004). The origins of Modernity: Was autonomous speech the critical factor? Psychological Review. Vol. 3, No. 2, 543-552.
Gong, X., Jia, M., Ruan, Y., Shuang, M., Liu, J., Wu, S., Guo, Y., Yang, J., Ling, Y., Yang, X., and Zhang, D. (2004). Association between the FOXP2 gene and autistic disorder in Chinese population. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B (Neuropsychiatric Genetics). 127B:113-116.
MacDermot, K., Bonora, E., Sykes, N., Coupe, A., Lai, C., Vernes, S., Vargha-Khadem, F., McKenzie, F., Smith, R., Monaco, A., and Fisher, S. (2005). Identification of FOXP2 truncation as a novel cause of developmental speech and language deficits. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 76:1074-1080.
Terrace, H., Metcalfe, J., (2005). The missing link in cognition: Origins of self-reflective consciousness. Oxford University Press. New York.
Webb, D., Zhang, J., (2005). FOXP@ in song-learning birds and vocal-learning mammals. Journal of Heredity. 96(3):212-216.
Wilson, M., & Knoblich, G., (2005). The case for motor involvement in perceiving conspecifics. Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 131, No. 3, 460-473.

Kinesics and Culture

In order to study a specific culture one must first learn the language; but verbal fluency is only one component of communication. In many cultures, non-verbal communication plays a large role in individual expression and often replaces their verbal forms in specific situations. Kinesics is the study of non-verbal communication such as gestures, body movement, facial expressions, and certain actions, that relay information from one person to another. This component of anthropological research is vital in documentation of culture elements. If the researcher overlooks this aspect of communication, the conclusion could be incorrect or not fully understood. In addition, a researcher must distinguish variations in non-verbal communication in relationship to sex, age, income level, familial status, ethnicity, or personal preferences. An example of non-verbal variations between men and women is illustrated in the documentary film of a family in Cortile Cascino.
In gathering information from the Documentary film, one would realize that an abundance of information is discovered in an extremely miniscule amount of time. This documentary centered on a family in a small Sicilian town called Cortile Cascino, located in the heart of Palermo. The environment of Cortile Cascino was relaxed while also being hectic at the same time. The women in the household performed most of the chores including laundry, childcare, cleaning, and cooking. The men of the house appeared to relax more while they were home. They were seen playing cards and socializing with other men. Italian was the only language observed throughout Cortile Cascino; however, communication was performed not only in spoken language but also in gestures with the hands, face, and body.
Physical contact was observed to play an important role in an individual’s form of communication. This contact varied in severity from male to female members. This was illustrated when the father reprimanded his daughter for not eating. Within a short span of time, the father found it necessary to reprimand his son for the same infraction. The daughter received a glare of disapproval while the son received a slap on the head. Variations also occurred when members who were in the same age range spoke to each other. Women appeared to speak to each other with fewer instances of physical contact while men exhibited physical contact in most conversations with other men. In conversations between men and women, physical contact was not exhibited; men appeared to refrain from physical contact with women. Both men and women expressed themselves using their hands and shoulders. In some cases it appeared as if they were dancing when they described events of the past. These expressions reminded me of stereotypes some Americans put on certain ethnic groups such as Italians.
Culture teaches us which style of communication we should employ. Children learn how to express themselves or how to respond from others around them. In North America, non-verbal communication varies dramatically from male to female. Women in the United States tend to be more expressive when they convey thoughts, feelings, or emotions to another person; men tend to be more conservative in their non-verbal communication. An example of this would be hand gestures of males and females. Women tend to be more animated by utilizing more body parts to express themselves. Many men in the U.S. are taught at a young age to inhibit their expressions. This is accomplished with the use of comments like “you’re acting like a girl” or “Don’t be a sissy.” Many women are also taught at a young age how to act and what forms of expression are preferred. Girls are often forbidden to demonstrate physical prowess.
Dominant communicative styles are generally not considered a positive feminine trait. The non-verbal communication here would be in the form of: eye contact, eyebrows raised, a straight back, or folded arms. If a woman were to communicate aggressively she could receive a negative reaction. In some American communities, this type of woman might find it difficult to communicating with others. Yet a man demonstrating this same aggressive behavior would be complimented for being assertive. On the other hand, if a man were to demonstrate recessive expressions of non-verbal communication, he would be perceived as inadequate. Examples of this would be lowering of the eyes, little to no eye contact, a lowered head, or poor posture. A woman displaying these same characteristics would be considered feminine or ladylike. Sexual mannerisms play an important role in personal sexual identity. Men in North American society adopt masculine characteristics while females acquire feminine qualities. These differences are observed not only in establishing identities but also in forms of communication. These characteristics of non-verbal communication transfer information to others without permission. Our minds are constantly evaluating information from both verbal and non-verbal forms of communication.
One of the goals of an Anthropologist is the ability to acquire information simply through the use of observation. If an anthropologist has the ability to collect visual symbols of communication, he or she might be able to better evaluate their environment. A subject could say one thing but mean the exact opposite. Without understanding subtle clues in non-verbal communication, the researcher could have the wrong conclusion. Parents are well known to have this ability. When asked, “who ate al the cookies in the cookie jar?” the child would answer “no.” The mother is able to interpret the differences between the truth and a lie. Even though the child said “no”, the mother knows he is lying and is the culprit. She translates his subtle clues of non-verbal communication. He might look down as he answers or he hesitates before giving an answer. Teachers acquire this ability when they ask questions in class. Teachers are able to identify the students who did not complete the reading assignment simply by observing the student’s body language. Subtle clues appear in the student’s actions. The student might hide behind another student or might be pretending he is writing something. Students sometimes wonder how the teacher knows who did not complete the assignment.
Profiling is another form of non-verbal observation. Police officers learn how to detect certain clues that warn of potential criminal behavior. When a person is pulled over, the officer must observe all forms of communication. Certain actions by the subject could be used as evidence for a search. Drivers would appear to be intoxicated, but when asked if they had been drinking, they would answer “no.” The officer could arrest an individual due to non-verbal evidence.
In conclusion, communication is very complicated. Language is only part of this intricate puzzle. Observation of people and cultures must include non-verbal communication in order to convey the information properly. An anthropologist could have an inadequate observation if he or she were to miss this element of culture. Kinesics is a vital part of Anthropological research that is always changing. Kinesics is also visible in other careers enabling people to develop a greater understanding.

Independence or Insecurity

The Family Visit

The plane lands in Louisville’s Standiford Field on a beautiful spring day in May. My friend Michele has accompanied me to witness my baby brother graduating from law school. Michele is eager and excited to meet my parents and spend some quality time with them. I, on the other hand, am stressed and overflowing with anxiety. Although Michele has heard innumerable complaints about my parents, she still believes that I must be exaggerating. Michele could not believe that a parent-child relationship could be so dysfunctional and unattached. But, as I introduce Michele to my parents, her eyes begin to see a relationship very different from the one to which she and her parents are accustomed. Michele is very close to her parents and must be in contact with them on a regular basis. I on the other hand, have a very distant relationship with my parents and interact with them mostly out of obligation. In only a week, Michele has learned to appreciate the bond to which she has with her parents and the struggle I have establishing one with mine. As the week ends, I wonder how Michele’s parental relationship could be so different from mine. Why are some people very close to their parents and others very distant? Is attachment the cornerstone of social, psychological, and physical health? Could someone repair or replace these attachments later in life?






Methodology

This research paper originated more than 15 years ago as I searched for answers to my own psychological health and well being. In that search, I uncovered possible explanations for the problems I was facing. One explanation involves the relationship between a child and a parent or a caregiver. It is this relationship in which I am the most interested.
My paper reviews existing research and follows a child from a zygote, through childhood, young adulthood, and into adulthood. I show how various other behavioral researchers also use attachment in their investigations into human development and behavior. I will examine my own life and apply these theories to myself and my family and I will show how attachment is the cornerstone of a socially, psychologically, and physically healthy human being. Finally, I will show ways of overcoming attachment issues later in life. But where does attachment begin?





In The Beginning
After fertilization, a zygote grows and attaches to the mother’s womb. This physical attachment enables the embryo to receive nourishment and protection directly from the mother. As the embryo develops, a psychological attachment could also be developing. Before birth, the fetus is able to hear and sense environmental stimuli, respond to the mother’s voice, and develop preferences to certain sounds. This observation brings up a very important question: Could psychological attachment begin before birth? The answer might lie in genetic research and the study of temperament.
Temperament is the way in which a person interacts with his or her surroundings. Temperament is very important in the way a baby and a caregiver respond to each other. This could prove to be an important factor in establishing an attachment. “The New York Longitudinal Study (NYLS),” begun in 1956 by Alexander T. Thomas, Stella C. Chess, and Herbert B. Birch, is considered the pioneering study on temperament” (Papalia 202). The New York Longitudinal Study established three different styles of behavior in children. These categories were easy children, difficult children, and slow-to-warm-up children. The study also observed that goodness of fit was “the match between a child’s temperament and the environmental demands and constraints the child must deal with” (Papalia 203). The study observed personality and disposition differences in fetuses. This could suggest that temperament is inborn or inherited. Nevertheless, this does not rule out the possibility that the environment or the mother’s behavior could have an effect on establishing the fetus’s temperament. Other studies also suggest that some aspects of attachment begin before the infant is born, such as the research on imprinting.
Newly hatched chicks will follow and become attached to the first moving object they see. The ethologist Konrad Lorenz, who got newborn ducklings to "love him like a mother," called this behavior imprinting. Thomas McAvoy/Life Magazine © Time Inc.

Konrad Lorenz also studied attachment in animals and believed that this mother-infant bond was a genetic characteristic. In his research, he observed newborn ducklings and found that they formed an attachment to the first moving object that they saw. Lorenz called this imprinting and observed it in adopted babies and caregivers other than the mother. Perhaps imprinting could also be found in newborn human infants and developing fetuses could be the important building-block of attachment. Konrad Lorenz observed a critical period of development. In this critical period of imprinting, the newborn ducklings formed an attachment. Could humans also have a critical period of attachment?
“A critical period is a specific time when a given event, or its absence, has the greatest impact on development. For example, if a woman receives X rays, takes certain drugs, or contracts certain diseases at certain times during pregnancy, the fetus may show specific ill effects. The amount and kind of damage will vary, depending on the nature of the "shock" and on its timing” (Papalia 118). The concept of a critical period was used in language acquisition. Eric Lenneberg proposed that there was a small window in which a child could learn a language. He believed that this period was from infancy to around puberty. If language was not learned in that timeframe, the child will have inadequate language skills. Perhaps there is a critical period for establishing an attachment either before birth or as soon as the fetus becomes fully developed and is born.





The Baby is Born
From birth until the age of 3, the child grows in one of the most critical periods of attachment. Mary Ainsworth was interested in researching attachment in a child’s most critical period. Her research uncovered just how important this relationship is for both the child and the parent or caregiver. Attachment is defined as “a reciprocal, enduring emotional tie between an infant and a caregiver, each of whom contributes to the quality of the relationship” (Papalia 211). In studying patterns of attachment, Ainsworth was able to observe the relationship between children and their caregivers. She then classified the behavior of each child into distinguishable patterns. These patterns of behavior were observed in 1 year old babies and were called secure attachment, avoidant attachment, ambivalent, or resistant attachment. Later, another pattern of behavior was added because of additional research. This forth pattern was called disorganized-disoriented attachment. However, before one can classify a particular behavior, one must first understand how attachment is established.
Ainsworth explained how babies and adults respond to certain behaviors such as crying or smiling. The simple touch of a mother’s skin, the smell of her perfume, and the sound of her voice all establish an attachment. Although a baby may not respond differently to people in his or her surroundings for the first 2 months, he or she learns to move toward the mother after only 8 to 12 weeks. This is observed when babies cry if someone, other than the mother, holds the baby or the baby actively searches for the mother with his or her eyes. By 6 or 7 months, a baby’s attachment to the mother is more defined. Fear of strangers could appear at anytime between 6 and 8 months. Ainsworth used this concept of fear of strangers as a way to assess attachment. She also observed the children in their homes. In order to achieve reliable results, babies were studied in a controlled environment and were subjected to a technique called a “strange situation.” In this form of a laboratory experiment, the baby’s attachment to the mother or caregiver can be adequately classified (Papalia 211).
Classifying a child’s behavior in a strange situation is very important in establishing the type of child-caregiver attachment. The child’s behavior is observed when the mother is present, as the mother leaves the room, while she is absent, and as she returns. The child’s behavior determines which form of attachment is present between the mother and the child. If the baby uses the mother as a form of security and appears content and happy in her presence, the baby is considered to be securely attached. In this form of attachment, the child becomes very upset if the mother leaves the room and is very happy when she returns (Papalia 212). The babies who do not appear to use the mother as a security figure and do not go to her in times of need are considered to be in an insecurely attached relationship. This is also called avoidant attachment. In this form of attachment children tend to be more angry, dislike being held, and dislike being put down. Another form of an insecure attachment is called ambivalent or resistant attachment. In this form of attachment, the child sends mixed signals to the mother. The child may seek out the mother while at the same time resisting contact. “Resistant babies do little exploration and are hard to comfort” (Papalia 212).
Disorganized-disoriented attachment was added to the list of attachment patterns as research continued in the field of child behavior. The babies with disorganized-disoriented attachments appear to be the most insecurely attached of all children. Their behavior is not consistent and may show behaviors of all patterns. One minute the baby could appear happy when the mother returns and the next minute appear ambivalent or resistant. “It is most likely to occur in babies whose mothers are single or are insensitive, intrusive, or abusive (Papalia 212). No matter which form of attachment an infant has, he or she must still grow and develop. Perhaps the picture below shows how strong the idea of attachment truly is and that a duckling, baby monkey, or child will find attachment without a mother.

In a series of classic experiments, Harry Harlow and Margaret Harlow showed that food is not the most important way to a baby's heart. When infant rhesus monkeys could choose whether to go to a wire surrogate "mother" or a warm, soft terry-cloth "mother," they spent more time clinging to the cloth mother, even if they were being fed by bottles connected to the wire mother.Harry Harlow Primate Laboratory, University of Wisconsin

Growing Up Unattached
As the infant grows and develops, his or her senses begin to operate. The brain of the baby is very sensitive to the environment allowing him or her to learn and remember, even early in life. The research of Harry and Margaret Harlow showed a different aspect of attachment. They showed that monkeys that were raised with a soft cloth surrogate mother were more likely to explore. One could compare these monkeys to securely attached children. The monkeys that were raise with only a wire surrogate mother were not as willing to explore but were also not securely attached. So what happens to children who are not securely attached? It appears that most psychologists, theorists, and researchers, attribute some, if not all, of psychological dysfunction to attachment.
Sigmund Freud was the first person to show how attachment is important in a child’s development. He believed that boys develop a sexual attachment to their mothers and girls to their fathers. Although many dispute Freud’s psychosexual stages, he was able to show that development occurred in stages. He was also the first researcher to show the importance of the mother or caregiver.
Erik Erikson followed in Freud’s footsteps and viewed development has periodic hurdles that must be successfully jumped. Erikson called his developmental crises psychosocial stages. Erikson showed how important the child’s attachment to the mother was in the child’s development. The first stages are basic trust versus basic mistrust and autonomy versus shame and doubt. One could easily understand that problems with attachment could prevent a child from successfully passing these crises. Should a child develop a basic mistrust perhaps this could lead that child into developing shame and doubt. But is every insecurely attached child destined for failure?
Erikson’s first stage of basic trust versus basic mistrust is very dependent on the relationship between the mother and the child. One would theorize that an insecurely attached child would develop a basic mistrust. Perhaps the answer could be found in Harlow’s experiment of infant rhesus monkeys. Without a mother, some of the monkeys developed an attachment for an artificial clothe mother. Those monkeys that were given the clothe monkey and became attached behaved similarly to securely attached children. As the research continued, it was observed that the monkeys did not grow up naturally and were unable to nurture there offspring. One could then argue that Harlow’s monkeys did not successfully pass through Erikson’s stages of development due to an inadequate mother-child attachment. Unlike Harlow’s rhesus monkeys, human children are able to find more alternatives and perhaps better solutions. As Erikson’s research continued, he realized that his psychosocial stages of development could be revisited and revised. If a child did not successfully pass one stage, he or she could successfully pass through that stage later in life. Successful passing of stages could be accomplished through learning.




.




Finding Alternative Attachments

Thankfully, not every psychologist, theorist, and researcher believes that a child’s attachment is the only marker of a psychologically healthy future. Many see a child as an independent organism that has choices. These behavioral choices are learned from experience or adapted from the environment. The learning perspective tries to explain the laws that govern behavior. Children learn through conditioning by using rewards, reinforcement, and punishment as the major factors for change. In this perspective, an insecurely attached child could learn the behavior that is needed for proper development. Classical conditioning could also be used to remove undesirable behavior. Social-learning theorists consider that children learn in a social context by observing and imitating other people around them. As a child eventually grows and interacts with his or her environment, the norms of behavior are constantly being tested. The behavior of an avoidant child could be just as unacceptable as that of a securely attached child. On the first day of the new kindergarten class, all of the students must leave their mothers. Securely attached students must learn to accept the absence of their mother.
Reflecting this research onto my own life, I could understand the important of learning in psychological development. Perhaps my attachment as a child could be considered as avoidant, ambivalent, or resistant. But I strongly believe that my extended family created an alternative to the traditional mother-child relationship. By finding alternative attachments and learning from others, I could pass each psychosocial stage. Urie Bronfenbrenner also believed that development occurs through interactions between a child and his or her surroundings. The bioecological theory uses “five interlocking contextual systems of influences, from microsystem to chronosystem” (Papalia 30).
Letting Go

As an adult, one could easily find a mother, father, or caregiver as the root of all psychological problems in which are inflicting an enormous amount of pain and anguish. But by stating that the child is unable to remedy situation as an adult, one must also state that the mother, father, or caregiver, is also confined to that same rule. Would this mean that a child from an unfit mother must become an unfit mother? Would this also mean that an insecurely attached child will only raise other insecurely attached children? Research is finally showing another aspect of development. Modern perspectives consider that individuals have the power to foster their own positive, healthy development. Therefore, no one is at fault or everyone is at fault.
As a child develops into an adult, he or she is faced with many challenges in his or her behavior and thought. The humanistic perspective considers that people have the ability to change their lives and encourage their own development. Abraham Maslow’s self-actualization theory places the power of psychological development back into the individual’s hands. Through the hierarchy of needs a person can rise from only having safety and security to becoming self-actualized.
My best friend Michele and I once again board the plane. This time we are returning to New York after a week with my parents. As wheels leave the ground, Michele turns to me and says: “I’m so glad we going home.” I tell her: “So am I.” Although I am happy to return to the life I have established, I find myself still wanting to be near my parents. Although my attachment may not have been Mary Ainsworth’s best choice, it was my only choice. As I become older and hopefully wiser, I realize that attachment is important in development but is not a clear marker for future psychological health. It is but one more step on a stairwell to somewhere. Although it is more difficult to climb steps without using every step, one could still reach the highest step.














Work Cited
Comer, F. J. Fundamentals of Abnormal Psychology. (3rd ed.). New York: Worth Publishers, 2002
Papalia, Danel E., Sally Wendkos Olds, Ruth Duskin Feldman. Human Development. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2001

Men and Monogamy

Introduction

For most of my adult life, I have been searching for the perfect relationship. My goal has always been acquiring and maintaining a long-term monogamous relationship. Growing up in a conservative Catholic family, my options were very limited in the type of relationship in which I would feel comfortable. Open relationships and infidelity were never an option for me. Even today, the notion of going outside of the relationship for sex has a tremendous amount of negative connotations. Perhaps my parents, my religion, or my environment has influenced my goals.
Seven months ago, I began dating and fell in love. As our relationship continues to change I feel a sense of insecurity about our future. I wonder if two people are able to remain in a committed monogamous relationship or if I am just fantasizing about impossibility. I truly want to believe that monogamous relationships are possible; however, history, statistics, and my own experiences have not supported this ideal. Our history is loaded with stories of infidelity. Novels, plays, poems, and short stories about failed relationships involving infidelity date back to the first written manuscripts. Statistics also illustrate the small percentage of couples who are committed to a monogamous relationship. I have found an enormous amount of statistical information going against my hopes and dreams. Finally, my experience in relationships could definitely support the notion that true monogamy is impossible. So what are the correct answers to these difficult questions? Where did the idea of monogamy come from? How has it shaped our society? Why is monogamy so important to many and yet so unattained? Can couples be faithful and remain content? Before answering these questions, one must have a full understanding of monogamy, the terms and conditions surrounding it, and the methodology for gathering research materials.



Monogamy and Methodology
One must have a clear understanding about monogamy before the debate begins. Monogamy is the sexual exclusivity of one sexual partner to another. Nonmonogamy is having more than one sexual partner (Byer, 2002). For the sake of clarity, I will focus on absolute heterosexual monogamy between two committed heterosexual adults. Although many of these couples could be legally married, as one will see later, marriage is not a necessary component of a monogamous relationship. Furthermore, monogamy is not a necessary component of marriage. Bill Clinton publicly proved that point on national TV. After admitting to his affair with Monica Lewinsky, his wife Hilary Clinton remained publicly by his side. This brings up another point of defining sexual exclusivity.
Before one can commit to sexual exclusivity with a partner, one must first define sexual intercourse. According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, sexual intercourse is “coitus between humans or the sexual union between humans involving genital contact other than vaginal penetration by the penis.” The dictionary also defines coitus as the “sexual union between a male and a female involving insertion of the penis into the vagina.” Therefore, any activity involving the genitals of another person shall be considered sexual intercourse and the Clintons would not meet these standards of a monogamous relationship. It is important to note that sexual monogamy in humans is an elected behavior. A person is physically and cognitively able to choose his or her sexual activity.
There is another term that is used by sociologists and social psychologist called serial monogamy. This occurs when a person participates in relatively short-term and frequent sexually exclusive relationships such as multi-marriages. "Most divorced people remarry only once, but a smaller number marry three or more times." (Schulz & Rodgers, 1980, p. 12) Elizabeth Taylor, Ronald Reagan, and many other celebrities appear monogamous to their partners until they decide to end the relationship.


Origins of Monogamy
Evolutionary psychologists have interesting perspectives on the origins of monogamous relationships. One perspective involves the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STD’s) in a sexually promiscuous society. STD’s have been a part of human reproduction since the beginning of homo-sapiens. “The thesis that humans have been vulnerable to STDs for a long time can be inferred from the specificity of the pathogens: whether the pathogen is a virus, a bacterium, or a metazoan. For example, herpes simplex virus (HSV) Type 2 (HSV-2) is transferred sexually and has specialized in the genital area. Sakaoka et al. (1994) have suggested that the split between HSV-1, usually transmitted non-venereally, and HSV-2, usually transmitted venereally, occurred several million years ago.” (Mackey & Immerman, 2000, p. 50) If STD’s were affecting the reproductive viability of early homo-sapiens, the number of sexual partners would increase the risk of infection, infertility, sterility, and even death.
“It is suggested here that the counter pressure that was most effective in minimizing STDs within the group was pair bonding. Although pair bonding is often found with the lesser apes (e.g., gibbon and siamang), these animals are arboreal, are relatively small, and have little sexual dimorphism ( Jolly, 1985). Late australopithecine/early Homo was fully bipedal, increasingly terrestrial, and relatively large and had high sexual dimorphism. Models that presume universal mating within a tribe or troop that harbors an STD indicate that nearly all females become infected, and fairly quickly so.” (See Immerman ∧ Mackey, 1999, for examples.) (Mackey & Immerman, 2000, p. 52)
However, early homo-sapien females could have used sexual exclusivity as a form of currency in exchange for food, safety, and the protection of her children. Early homo-sapien males would have also used a steady supply of food as an assurance of easily accessible sexual contact. Pair bonding could have gained momentum if STD’s were to increase. Infected females would be less desirable because of the symptoms related to STD’s and would be less willing to mate. A woman who forms a pair bond with a man has reduced chances of (a) ectopic pregnancy, (b) infertility caused by PID, and (c) infirm offspring. In addition, both the man and the woman have reduced chances of being harmed by the negative consequences of STDs. (Mackey & Immerman, 2000, p. 53)
Another perspective on the origin of monogamy involves the use of evolved mechanisms such as jealousy. "Mechanisms that solve adaptive problems are like keys that fit particular locks. The efficiency, detail, and complex structure of the key must mesh precisely with the inner 'problem' posed by the lock.“ (Buss, 1995, p.12) Evolutionary psychologists try to uncover these keys for better understanding. Monogamy could have evolved because of the learned behavior of jealousy or visa versa. Jealousy is found in every part of human behavior. "Because both men and women over human evolutionary history have been damaged by relationship loss, both sexes have faced adaptive problems to which jealousy may have evolved as a solution.” (Buss, 1995, p. 14)
Evolutionary psychologists also link our behavior to the presence or absence of a father figure. There is some evidence that father absence during childhood shunts individuals toward a more promiscuous mating strategy, whereas the presence of an investing father during childhood shunts individuals toward a more monogamous mating strategy (Buss, 1995, p. 11) But where evolution ended, cultural practices continued.

Culture of Monogamy
If monogamous pair bonding was a characteristic of homo-sapiens, then monogamy would be the norm instead of the exception and infidelity would be limited. Instead, the condoning of premarital and extramarital sexual intercourse has been a norm rather than an exception. But why was sexual monogamy introduced into early homo-sapien lifestyles? One answer might simply be trial and error.
Although STD’s had an enormous impact on sexual viability of early homo-sapiens, so did the restrictions placed on the number of sexual partners. But reducing the number of sexual partners would have different outcomes. "Unfortunately, both our phylogenetic heritage as terrestrial primates and the ethnographic archives suggest that reciprocal monogamous mating has little chance of success." (Immerman & Mackey, 1997, p. 447) This is evident in the woman’s fertility, which is much more vulnerable than the man’s. Also STD’s are spread more efficiently from male to female than from female to male. If trial and error were used as a tool for establishing norms, repeated sexual trials of STD’s would have suggested that female monogamy would be more advantageous to the survival of early homo-sapiens. Females, easier to restrain physically, would be the more practical choice for cloistering. Thus, any preexisting tendency toward a double standard of sexual restraints would be reinforced, to minimize the level of STDs within a community. And such, of course, is the ethnographic reality: Sexual constraints, across cultures, are more severe on wives than on husbands. (Immerman & Mackey, 1997, p. 447)
Cultural norms were established because of underlying psychological mechanisms that had positive outcomes. As mentioned earlier, jealousy proved to be useful in protecting one’s investment by fighting off potential threats. Trial and error could reinforce cultural norms to prohibit potential threats and promote jealousy. Eventually, these cultural norms became implanted in the teachings of early religions.
In a journal article entitled “The Suspected Adulteress: A Study of Textual Embodiment”, Bonna Devora attempts to clarify theological references to sexual monogamy and “purity.” In Judaism, the goal is to achieve “purity” by becoming closer in proximity to the God’s temple. This proximity could be thought of as a marriage, which is a holy union. The laws of purity are expressed in terms of one's being permitted to have access to a house, a place, the holy territory of the Temple. In the code of conduct in marriage, the laws of purity are expressed in terms of being permitted to have intimate relations with one's partner. (Haberman, 2000, p. 30)
References


Borgmann, A. (1999). Gender, Nature, and Fidelity. Ethics and the Environment , 4(2), 131-142.

Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary Psychology: a New Paradigm for Psychological Science. Psychological Inquiry , 6(1), 1-30.

Cramer, R. E., & Manning-Ryan, B. (2000). Sex Differences in Subjective Distress to Violations of Trust: Extending an Evolutionary Perspective. Basic and Applied Social Psychology , 22(2), 101-109.

Engels, F. (1902). The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (Untermann, E., Trans.). Chicago: C.H. Kerr & Company.

Haberman, B. D. (2000). The Suspected Adulteress: A Study of Textual Embodiment. Prooftexts , 20(1,2), 12-42.

Immerman, R. S., & Mackey, W. C. (1997). Establishing a Link Between Cultural Evolution and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs , 123(4), 441-460.

Iversen, J. S. (1991). A Debate on the American Home: The Antipolygamy Controversy, 1880-1890. Journal of the History of Sexuality , 1(4), 585-602.

Jann, R. (1994). Darwin and the Anthropologists: Sexual Selection and Its Discontents. Victorian Studies , 37(2), 287-306.

Jochens, J. (1991). The Illicit Love Visit: An Archaeology of Old Norse Sexuality. Journal of the History of Sexuality , 1(3), 357-392.

LeMoncheck, L. (1997). Loose Women, Lecherous Men: A Feminist Philosophy of Sex. New York: Oxford University Press US.

Mackey, W. C., & Immerman, R. S. (2000). Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Pair Bonding, Fathering, and Alliance Formation: Disease Avoidance Behaviors as a Proposed Element in Human Evolution. Psychology of Men & Masculinity , 1(1), 49-61.

Mason, W. A. (1997). Award Address: Discovering Behavior. American Psychologist , 52(7), 713-720.

McLaren, A. (1992). Sex Radicalism in the Canadian Pacific Northwest, 1890-1920. Journal of the History of Sexuality , 2(4), 527-546.

Schulz, D. A., & Rodgers, S. F. (1980). Marriage, the Family, and Personal Fulfillment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Smith, T. S. (1999). Teaching Who We Are Testing Limits of Tolerance in a Course on Religion and Sexual Diversity. College Teaching , 47(2), 55-61.

Tiryakian, E. A. (1981). Sexual Anomie, Social Structure, Societal Change. Social Forces , 59(4), 1025-1053.

Westermarck, E. (1921). The History of Human Marriage (5th ed.) (Vol. 3). London: Macmillan.

Westermarck, E. (1936). The Future of Marriage in Western Civilization. New York: The Macmillan Company.

Spinoccoli Lasagna

Preheat oven to 350° F

List of ingredients:
2 Cups of fresh broccoli
2 cups of fresh spinach
1 lg. onion
1- 8 ounce package of feta cheese
2 tsp. of adobo (season salt)
1 package of lasagna noodles
1-16 ounce bottle of tomato sauce
1-8 ounce package of mozzarella cheese
1-8 ounce package of sharp cheese
2 tbsp. of Parmesan cheese
16 ounces of ricotta cheese

Directions:
1. Add broccoli, spinach, onion, Parmesan cheese, and feta cheese in a food processor until pureed.
2. Place mixture in a small bowl and refrigerate until needed.
3. Add lasagna noodles in a large pot of boiling water.
4. Cook noodles until they are al dente.
5. In large lasagna pan spread 3-5 tbsp. Of tomato sauce on the bottom of the pan.
6. Layer 1st and 2nd layer of noodles on the bottom of the pan with sauce in the middle.
7. Place broccoli and spinach mixture on top of 2nd layer of noodles and spread evenly.
8. Place 3rd layer of noodles.
9. Spoon and spread ricotta cheese over 3rd layer of noodles.
10. Place the 4th layer of noodles
11. Add tomato sauce to cover noodles.
12. Spread mozzarella and sharp cheese evenly over the entire lasagna.
13. Place lasagna in the oven and bake for 30 minutes.
14. Allow lasagna 20 minutes to cool and set.
15. Serve with sauce added on top of each peace.

This recipe was actually a combination of two of my favorite dishes, lasagna and a spinach and broccoli pizza. Part of the name came from Pizzeria Uno’s™ Spinoccoli pizza. This dish originally was part of my vegetarian diet. After the vegetarian diet died, this dish survived. One must not confuse the absence of meat with a healthy meal. This dish is loaded with fat and calories. But with all of the flavors from the combination of vegetables and cheeses, the absence of meat is hardly noticed. Enjoy.

Changing the World: One meal at a time

It is a beautiful mid-September day on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. I am enjoying my last hour of peace and quite before my visiting parents’ return from their shopping adventure. I am so happy to have come up with a perfect excuse for not going with them. I convinced them that I would make one of my famous dinners. Being the only member of my family who knows how to cook, they could not object. Just as the table was set the intercom buzzer rang. I pushed the door button on the intercom and prepared myself for the usual New York City complaints that always accompanied my parents. They hate my 5th floor walk-up apartment, the way people push and shove, the garbage, the pollution, and of course, the taxi drivers. But now they can relax and have a good home-cooked meal.
After a drink and a moment to relax, I direct my parents to the dinner table. They sit and eagerly await my return from the kitchen. The apartment is filled with smells of cheeses, garlic, onion, and oregano. Upon arrival to the table I see how happy my parents are by my choice for dinner. They love lasagna and they know that I use the best ingredients. I cut the lasagna into squares and place the plate in front of my mother and then to my father. After cutting out a piece for myself, I look up for more positive reinforcement. To my surprise, I see a bewildering puzzled look on my parents’ face and a hesitation to speak. Finally, my mother pushes herself to ask “Jay, where is the meat?” I tell them, “This is Spinoccoli lasagna; it does not have any meat.” Still puzzled, she responds, “There has to be meat; it’s not a meal without meat.” It was then that I realized how difficult the job of changing the menu would be.
The history of meat-eating humans started as our ancestors became hunters and gatherers. As evolution and time continued, meat became more and more important. Before long, meat became the symbol of prosperity, health, and a source for protein. As animal farming grew and technology increased, alternative-farming techniques became widely used. These techniques include different animal feed, hormone and anti-biotic injections, and inhumane animal treatment. Today, meat consumption is becoming widely known as oppressive and unhealthy yet Americans consume more beef, chicken, pork, and fish than any other country in the world. With so much information on the negative affects of meat consumption, why are we still making these choices? In order to change a certain behavior or action, we must first understand its origin and the meaning associated with it, point out all industries, companies, and organizations that influence our choices, hold these industries and organizations accountable, and finally create realistic alternatives.
Methodology

This research paper originated from my Spinoccoli lasagna and my parent’s reaction to my favorite recipe. My main focus centered on meat consumption in the U.S and the environment that supports it. This includes government agencies, capitalism, and culture. Most of my inspiration comes from the book Food Politics, by Marion Nestle and my own search for a healthy lifestyle. I have read books on the subject of culture, capitalism, meat production, and politics. I have also gathered information from the USDA and CNPP symposium- “Food Choices: Why we choose the foods we eat.” This was held in the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture’s Jefferson Auditorium in Washington DC on Nov. 3, 1999.
Factors of Why We Choose the Foods We Eat
It is almost impossible, nowadays, to hear, read, or watch mass media without information being given on the negative effects of eating meat. From Oprah Winfrey to Dateline, almost every pop-culture, current events or news-related shows promote either vegetarian or low meat diets. In April 1996, Oprah Winfrey devoted an entire show to the mad cow epidemic in Europe. Immediately after the show, Texas cattle producers sued Oprah for deformation. According to the cattle producers, Oprah´s show ¨was sensational and unduly alarmist.¨ They also claimed that her show triggered a reduction in beef prices. News programs such as Dateline, 20/20, 60 minutes, and 48 hours continually present case studies of food related questions and issues; most of these issues help to inform viewers on the hidden dangers in meat. Although these programs receive high ratings, indicating a large audience, Americans are still consuming an incredible amount of meat.
In 2000, Americans ate an average of 113.5 pounds of red meat per person. One does not need a Ph.D. in Psychology or Sociology to figure out the first problem; people are not changing their diet. The second problem requires much more information, knowledge, and education; we must understand the factors involved when we choose the foods that we eat; these factors are internal, external, and environmental (Center).
Internal factors for why we choose the foods that we eat are associated with biological and psychological theories. According to Adam Drewnoski Ph.D., @ University of Washington, internal factors are related to brain chemistry (Center). Studies have linked the intake of fat, sugar, and salt with altering certain chemicals in the brain. Humans tend to prefer all three of these foods, both singularly and in various combinations. There is also a direct relationship between taste, calories, and the density of food. The density of food is equal to the amount of calories per gram. In theory, the greater the food density, the greater the taste. Meat is a very dense food and according to most meat eaters, taste is an important factor in choosing to eat it. Taste and food density could have its origin in genetics. Dr. Paul Rosin Ph.D. at University of Pennsylvania believes the biggest predictor of food intake is taste, which has an important evolutionary value (Center). As prehistoric humans found better tasting foods, their caloric intake increased improving their chances for survival. Although biology is an excellent internal factor, it is not the only internal predictor of food choices.
Food psychology is another internal factor and an excellent predictor of food intake. Memories, behaviors, feelings, and experiences play an important role in our food choices. My parents are excellent examples of food psychology working very well. Although my parents consumed more calories and fat in my lasagna, they still believed that they were missing something. Luckily, my cheesecake helped to fill that void. Marketing and advertising companies spend thousands of dollars on food psychology research in order to capitalize on specific needs. By buying their product you will “feel” better, reminisce, and enjoy. McDonald’s commercials show unhappy, depressed, and dysfunctional families that are miraculously healed by stopping in at McDonald’s because “You deserve a break today” (Schlosser). This brings us to the next reason for choosing the food we eat, which are external factors.
External factors for making food choices may seem obvious at first, but can also be subliminal and hidden. The obvious external factors are capital (money), time, availability, and price. It is relatively simple to understand that someone with little time and money would buy an inexpensive, microwave-able beef TV dinner rather than pricey organic vegetables. External factors that are not as obvious are marketing, labeling, and food placement. One interesting observation was that marketing was found in all three factors of food choice. Many shoppers wheel up and down grocery stores unaware that they have been influenced by the food industry. Labels that contain words like fat free, lower fat, lean, and reduced fat are designed to draw your attention to the product.
Availability is also very important for the fast food industry. Besides fast food restaurants, fast food grocery products are designed to be “ready-in-minutes” or “ready to eat.” These exterior factors of food choice are created to produce the maximum profit in our changing lifestyles and greatly influence environmental pressure to buy and consume certain foods.
Environmental factors of food choice centers on culture and lifestyles. Cultural traditions involving food are very difficult to change because they are used in conjunction with internal and external factors. For example, the turkey served on Thanksgiving is a cultural tradition in many American homes. Every year, thousands of slaughtered turkeys flood American supermarkets on this holiday. In some cases, to change the menu could be perceived as denying one’s culture or identity. Doris Witt’s Black Hunger: Food and the Politics of U.S. Identity, explains how food is connected to an enormous amount of social and environmental aspects of American Culture from race and politics to gender and sexuality. Doris Witt brilliantly writes about the power of food as a means of communication bridging the gap between generations of African-American women. She also explains the power and symbolism in “soul food” and reasons why African-American women are concerned about the growing popularity of “soul food.” In one example, Ms. Witt explains how Vertamae Smart Grosvenor received an enormous backlash of African-American women who were outraged by her televised recipe of collard greens that substituted peanut oil and bouillon cubes for ham hocks (Witt 12). In the African-American culture, food represents history, oppression, and gender specific roles in the kitchen. After only reading the prologue of her book, I realized that completely understanding food and environment would require an enormous amount of knowledge. In this book alone, food represented race distinctions, heterosexuality, genders roles, and feminism. Witt’s book points out how food can be used to oppress African-American women (166). But these issues are not the only environmental factors for choosing certain foods; individual families also play a large role.
In Ruth Reichl’s Tender at the Bone: Growing Up at the Table, food became the main character in the story line. Reichl shows how her family’s food choices played a major part in her memories and attitudes about food thereby influencing her own food choices. Like Reichl, my family had a tremendous impact on my choices of food and according to my parents, those choices had to include meat.
Beef and pork were the staple crop in my family because it represented prosperity during a time of desperation. Growing up in the 70’s in Watervliet, New York, I saw my parents struggle just to pay their bills. Although both of my parents worked, their salaries for unskilled labor were very small. Luckily, my mother’s reception job at Tobin’s First Prize allowed her to bring home meats at greatly reduced prices. Tobin’s First Prize was a meat packing plant that slaughtered and packaged pigs and cattle. My mother’s mouth still waters as she describes the steaks, roasts, pork chops, hot dogs, and sausages that she would bring home. She explains “we ate like we were wealthy even though we had trouble paying for our utilities.” Eventually, my father found a higher paying job that allowed my mother the freedom to quit her job and stay home to take care of our growing family. Later she explains “I hated having to leave that job because we never ate as well as we did back then.” Somehow, I remember only the meals after my mother quit her job. She called the beef from the supermarket “poor man’s steak.” This consisted of Salisbury steak, cubed steak, hamburger, pre-packaged meatloaf, and roast beef in boiling bags. But this love affair between humans and meats did not simply begin with my parents.

The History of Meat in America

In order to find the origins of meat-eating, one must travel back in time prior to modern humans or Homo Homo sapiens. Although there is still a scientific debate over the first method of acquiring the meat, it is generally accepted that Pliocene hominids were the first to have meat in their diet. The feminist theory in the 1970’s debated the “Man the hunter” origins, which led to the belief of opportunistic hunting of smaller prey and pirating of larger carcasses (Stanford 5). By studying early hominid evolution, scientists are able to theorize the consequences of increased carnivory. These consequences could have been an enlargement of the brain, increased sexual dimorphism, increased body size, longer life span, and greater intelligence using observation, memory, and association (Stanford 317). As Homo sapiens evolved into the modern humans of today, the method of finding food went from scavenging to hunting and gathering and then into agriculture.
Domestication of animals allowed hunter-gatherers to remain in one place and use little energy in gathering their new prey. American cattle ranching began in 1607. After 1611, herds roamed freely on open land far from town and were protected for three years. Cattle ranching became a popular and profitable endeavor sending cattle everywhere. As early as 1840, commercial feedlots began to pop up and by the mid-1960s huge feedlots began to dominate the cattle market (Skaggs 169). Most cattle spend the last few months of their lives in holding pens, routinely injected with growth promoting hormones, antibiotics, and unnaturally rich diets to fatten them up (Factory Farming). It was at this time that a growing number of Americans began the long battle against the meat producing companies.
The Meat Battle
Although meat eating may have had an enormous positive impact on our evolution, many would consider meat to be doing the exact opposite today. According Marion Nestle’s Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health, “the leading causes of death are chronic diseases associated with excessive (or unbalanced) intake of food and nutrients” (31). In 2000, almost 64% of American deaths could have been caused by our diet where as in 1900, poor diets could only be blamed for 21% of deaths. One of the major U.S. health problems is obesity in children. In January of 1977, the Committee on Nutritional and Human Needs released a report entitled “Dietary Goals for the United States.” Although the original report advised Americans to “decrease consumption of meat”, the National Cattle Association successfully urged the committee to revise the report and advise Americans to “increase consumption of lean meat” (40). But the amount of meat consumption is not the only health concern of American diets; meat quality is just as important.
There is a growing concern in America about the quality of meat products that are sold to consumers. Since agrifarming replaced most of the cattle ranches in America, cattle have been given a combination of growth hormones, antibiotics, and an unusually high fat and calorie diet. Corn fed beef producers pride themselves on the quality of their “Tender Beef” products. Corn provides a very high amount of carbohydrates and a very low amount of essential nutrients, creating an over fed and under nourished animal. “Tender” is taken to an extreme in Veal, where calves are placed in to small wooden crates, preventing them from moving, and fed a strict liquid diet that is designed to cause anemia.
Bacteria such as E. coli., have also been found in our meat supply, in some cases, causing death. Since meat by-products are reprocessed as feed, there is a growing concern that cannibalism might genetically alter the cattle. Some researchers believe that Europe’s Mad Cow epidemic might be related to the techniques used in cattle farming. Although these health concerns are very important for those who decide to eat beef, there is a growing awareness that the beef industry is affecting non-meat-eating people as well.
Environmental issues are strongly related to our cattle industry and are not contained in an isolated area; instead, these issues could have a global impact. The deforestation of much of the world’s forests is the consequences of over grazing and the need for more pastures. The greenhouse effect of an over abundance of carbon dioxide is closely related to the reduction of forest. Cattle farming could also be blamed for much of the hunger that is plaguing the world today. It takes over 100 pounds of grain to produce just one pound of beef. Multiplied by the 113 pounds of beef that the average American eats we realize that world hunger would be eradicated if Americans would only reduced their intake of beef and other meats by 1/3. But there are some benefits of eating meats.
Meat producers are very happy to see information that encourages Americans to eat meat. In the July 15, 2002 Time Magazine Article Should We Be Vegetarian, the question asks, “Can it be that vegetarianism is bad for your health?” (52). While some vegetarians understand that they must search for foods high in riboflavin and vitamins D and B12, many do not and score significantly lower in overall nutrition than nonvegetarians. Vegans are even more prone to deficiencies because of their strict avoidance of meat, eggs, and dairy products. Breast-feeding mothers that are vegans, run the risk of depriving their children with lower levels of vitamin B12, vitamin D, and DHA, which is important for vision and growth. High endurance athletes must consume more protein, calories, calcium, iron, and zinc. Seniors citizens also run the risk of not getting enough calcium and vitamin D (Time 53). After reading this article, I wondered who paid for the research.
Although the article focused mainly on the negative aspects of vegetarianism, it never mentioned the negative effects of eating meat. Perhaps there are too many articles already published and the scientific information that is available today would convince even more people to eat less meat. Perhaps this article proves Marion Nestle’s points about Food Politics and the struggle to educate Americans. If I was not in the middle of writing a research paper on meat, I might have been persuaded by this article to give up and get a Big Mac® at McDonalds™. So what can Americans do to eat healthier and help others as well?


Ways to Change the Menu
I had the pleasure of listening to Marion Nestle as she spoke about her book Food Politics and the reactions that followed after it was published. In her speech she points out the problems of our “Eat Less, Eat More” society. She also explains why it is so difficult to change our way of thinking about food. She believes that the most efficient way to change our eating habits is to change our policies. These policies must do the following: implement nation nutritional goals, state nutrition goals explicitly, use advertising, regulate TV commercials, adjust food prices, and adjust tax polices. After reading Nestle’s book and listening to her speak I realized that she would like our government to perform as well as the companies that influence them. I am always amazed at how large companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars in research, marketing, and advertising while our government spends less than 2 million for advertising fruits and vegetables.
The Time Magazine article Should we be Vegetarians?, hopefully woke some of us up in the first paragraph. It listed the five reasons for eating meat: taste good, makes you feel good, it’s a great American tradition, it supports the nation’s farmers, and your parents did it (49). Then the article informs you that the list was reasons to smoke cigarettes. Although Marion Nestle came under harsh criticism for her book, I feel that she did not go far enough.
Americans should hold companies personally liable for their products, actions, behavior, and influences that they have on Americans. The tobacco industry set an excellent example of showing how powerful these companies can become. Warning labels should be placed on products that contain high fat, sugar, and other additives. Incentives should be given to vegetable and fruit farmers to advertise and market their products. Meat alternatives should be readily available in supermarkets, schools, and restaurants. Beef must be highly regulated and prevented from using growth hormones, meat by-products, antibiotics, and corn. We must prohibit advertising of meats and other high-risk foods. Schools must be free of fast food and fast food advertising. But is this enough?
In Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal, we see how some fast food restaurants have more power and resources than most of the countries they invaded. Their power and resources were used to further stratify our nation. Companies like McDonalds™ have taken advantage of minority and under privileged teens, while our government rewards them. McDonalds receives over $2,000 in tax incentives for employing minorities and the disabled that they would have hired them anyway. Finally, campaign reform is essential to stop companies from influencing our leaders. Companies should not be allowed to finance any of our politicians. Strict laws with strong punishments will help to curve senators and congress officials from accepting any funds that would influence their vote. We must also hold our government responsible for their actions by ensuring that they will also be liable for the action.

In conclusion, by seeing how our history with meat made a dramatic change in our evolution, we might be able to accept its importance in today’s culture. But our history also shows how removing most of its nutritional benefits and adding harmful byproducts has altered our meat and financially benefited only the meat industry. By understanding our history and our internal, external, and environmental factors that influence our food choices, we are able to make realistic changes that will provide long term benefits for everyone. When I started my research on meat eating and vegetarianism, I thought I would become a devout vegan or at least a strict vegetarian. As I progressed, I realized that I must remain open to information and new ideas. Perhaps the best answer is not to remove all meat from our menus. Perhaps it would benefit us all to add new items such as tofu, beans, peas, vegetables, and fruit. Maybe it would benefit us to eat smaller amounts of higher nutritious foods so that we will not need to eat so many foods of little to no nutrition.
When I visit my family, I will still complain about their diet and they will continue to eat meat everyday. But now my goal is to encourage them to try new foods as a side dish or a snack. As their menu expands to include cous cous, vegetable pate, tahini salad, humus, miso soup, collard greens, and Spinoccoli Lasagna, the steaks and hamburgers might become less appetizing. After Marion Nestle spoke to the students attending Vassar’s Exploring Transfer Program, I asked for her autograph in my personal copy of her book. On the inside cover she wrote, “To Jay: Change the World by Eating Well.”

Bibliography: Annotated

Center for Nutritional Policy and Promotion. Dietary Behavior: Why We Choose the Foods We Eat. 3 November 1999. www.usda.gov/cnpp/seminar/behavior/archive.html
This was an incredible symposium that gave me a great start in establishing my focus. The symposium centered on biological and psychological factors of food choices but also looked at food choices from a sociological point of view.

Clemen, Rudolf Alexander, M. A.. The American Livestock And Meat Industry. New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1923.
I have no idea if this book is going to help my research but it is a great old book.

Corey, Lewis. Meat and Man: A Study of Monopoly, Unionism, and Food Policy. New York: Viking Press, 1950.
This book gave me a little insight into the meat industry before 1950. It was very helpful in illustrating how important meat was in the American family.
Philip, Leila. A Family Place: A Hudson Valley Farm, Three Centuries, Five Wars, One Family. New York: Viking Press, 2001.
It was wonderful to read a historic reference in a narrative voice. This book was helpful in establishing some sort of writing style.

Reichl, Ruth. Tender at the Bone: Growing Up at the Table. New York: Broadway Books, 1998.
The book demonstrates the power of food in American culture and gives a great example of food psychology.

Schlosser, Eric. Fast Food Nation. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2001.
This book has been very helpful in establishing external and environmental factors of why we choose the foods we eat.

Stanford, Craig B. and Henry T. Bunn, ed. Meat-Eating & Human Evolution. Oxford: University Press, 2001.
This book is helpful in gathering information on the history of meat eating and its origin.

My Favorite Bench

I have finally picked my place where I could read, study, or just get away. Before coming to Vassar College, I would have described this place as simple a natural setting or a place where one could witness nature in motion. After being here for just one week my thoughts have changed about this place. I’ve learned that this place is not exactly nature; instead, it is simply an artist’s rendition of nature as she or he sees it. A week ago, I would have said that the only man-made object found in my place would be the bench. After only one week of studying at Vassar College, I’ve learned that everything is man-made. Just as a classical painter chooses a scene to paint, a landscape architect chooses a setting to build. A painter would use ink, dyes, oils, and latex while a landscape architect would use soil, shrubs, trees, and stone. A landscape architect, just as any commissioned artist, must translate the property owner’s ideas into something tangible. As one becomes more knowledgeable in landscape architecture, she or he also gains further insight into the ideas of the property owners. This was helpful as I was deciding which place to call my own.
My place is simply a bench placed, seemingly, in the middle of nowhere. Bench is not close to a path or a road. It is not found bordering a field or a stream. It appears to be simply misplaced. That is until you sit on the bench. To go to my place, one must walk away from the main building towards the ACDC building. After passing the geology building, you would find a paved path lined with old traditional red bricks. After walking about 15 feet on the path, stop and look over your right shoulder. Off in the distance you will find my simple park bench. In order to understand the placement of this bench, one must sit exactly in the middle of the bench and look forward. It is then that one discovers a perfect picture. I first noticed the perfect symmetry with the pine trees on the left and right. These trees frame the picture, directing your eyes to look forward. As you do that you notice another pine tree planted exactly in the center of the view. Only this tree is about 80 feet away from the bench and becomes my backdrop. In front of this enormous pine tree stand three dogwood trees in full bloom. Their beautiful blossoms complete this picture. As the sun sets and night falls, I am surprised to find a lamppost directly in front of me as it turns on. The next day I am amazed to realize that the lamppost is perfectly lined up, directly in front of the center pine tree, which is 70 feet away. The landscape architect was able to direct my eyes to the center and shift my focus away from something right in front of my face. Now my thoughts return to the bench.
The bench is a simple park bench similar to the ones found in Central Park. I wonder how many people have sat here, how long has it been here, and how many people notice the huge letters “VC” on the cement side legs. It took me three days to notice them. After reading “The Geography of Nowhere” by James Howard Kunstler, I imagine Kunstler would have a problem if Vassar College called this a public bench. Although there are no visible private property signs, could the landscape architect direct people away from this bench as easy as he directed my focus away from that lamppost? Does the landscape welcome the local public or provide psychological barriers?
These are the questions that are now swirling in my mind while I sit on this bench. I recall my first day, driving past the 3 foot high stone wall and through the iron gates of Vassar College. Then, from out of nowhere, I remember when the fast food chains explained how they were using psychological barriers on their tables. It was McDonalds who first installed a simple 3-inch high table divider. Although the tables were exactly the same, this device created a psychological barrier that allowed two couples to sit at the same table. With out this small divider, the table was considered to be for only one party. One could only question the intent of the stone wall and the iron gates. But the psychological effects of these features are obvious. When I sit here on my bench I do not notice local neighbors enjoying the trees and flowers. I also notice that the landscape hides buildings, walkways, and most of all, the surrounding neighbors.
I still love my place. I love my simple bench with these simple trees. Only now I can not simply sit. I am learning past the obvious. This bench was put here for a very specific reason. Perhaps that is why I am so drawn to this place.

Our Traditions

Have you ever wondered why we repeat certain events, not for the first time, but in repetition; or perhaps wondered why it feels so comforting to see life repeat itself in even the smallest of ways. Why does one serve a certain kind of stuffing for the Thanksgiving Turkey? Why do we save memories of our parents waking us on Christmas morning and want our kids to wake-up the same exact way. Why do we find comfort in seeing a mannerism that resembles her mother, such as crossing her legs a certain way. We observe the daughter pretending she’s putting on lipstick, with her lips all puckered up; she smiles into her upward facing hand in which has miraculously become the compact mirror. We notice the added steps a son adopts when throwing a baseball exactly as his father does with the exaggerated wind-up and kicking the mound. Although the son has no idea why these additional actions are needed, he adds them to his throwing technique as though they were a necessity. Maybe this son grows up and desires the same career as the father and his father before him.
We pass on traits from one generation to another subconsciously and are shocked and amazed that this descendant has stolen an attribute belonging to an elder like a pick-pocket in Times Square who is stealing from a tourist. Just as a vacationer would be unaware of this form of thievery so would are the parents. This truth is hard to accept when it involves negative traits. A father doesn’t want to believe his son takes a blue color job because he thinks his father would be proud of him. The mother doesn’t want to believe her daughter is abusing her children because that was the way she was taught. It’s ironic that this daughter harbors negative feelings for her mother’s style of childcare but will repeat this harsh treatment with her children. Because a family member is going down a road that another family member went down, we all assume he will end up at the same place, even if that place is not where we would like him to go. We let him go, because at least the road is familiar to us. We hope he’ll kick the same stones, jump over the same puddle, and go exactly the way someone else went before him.
I still feel so comfortable going down a dead-end street in my old neighborhood. Knowing it’s going nowhere; I would just drive down and try to remember my childhood. Sometimes I would even try to find specific things that would fly me back to those days, like a certain tree, or a crack in the road that I felt on my bike. One day, the road was closed for construction and a few weeks later I was back, this time to find the road no longer a dead-end, but a shortcut to a major highway. I knew that this was a good idea. I knew it made perfect sense and should have been done a long time ago, but I did not want it to happen.
I supposed if we were apes on the Discovery channel, someone would say that a few of our actions are instinct mysteriously passed on from one generation to another. When our knowledge or education just is not enough and survival takes over, that’s when a doctor would say this must be instinct. But what would they say if we chose to ignore knowledge and education in order to keep doing things that make us feel comfortable, like the doing things that our parents did and their parents before them. I’m sure they would say this is not survival am may actually say this could be suicide.
We find things like this everyday. It is now very well known that if you come from a smoking family, you are very likely to smoke yourself. Smokers will explain the feeling they get when they smoke is like a feeling of relaxation or being very comfortable. Doctors have also proven that drinking is genetically related. That we could actually have a gene passed on from one generation to another with this thirst for alcohol.
In the dictionary you will find the meaning of Tradition: The passing down of elements of a culture, mode of thought, or behavior, followed by a people continuously from generation to generation. A set of such customs and usages viewed as a coherent body of precedents influencing the present: followed family tradition in dress and manners.
Traditions make up so much of who we are. We keep these traditions alive as if somehow it is keeping the person who gave the tradition to us alive. We pass traditions from one person to another without even a thought on the subject, simply because it reminds us of someone we love very much, or it brings us back to a certain time when we had these people in our lives. We also keep traditions because we don’t know or don’t want to know any better and hate to believe that any of these traditions should never have been given to us.
It wasn’t until I went back home to bury my grandmother when I realized that so much of what we do, how we think, how we act, and why we go down certain roads is not something we would call traditions, but that is exactly what it is. In my grief I realized my grandmother died because of traditions that were passed onto her, things that, because of traditions, could not be let go or forgotten. Maybe she thought if she were to let go some of these traditions she would also be letting go of the people she loved the most. I am sure this way of thinking was given to her as a gift of traditions and as a good mother should, she passed those traditions on to her children.
I saw my grandmother in my Aunt Grace for the first time. I saw my aunt embrace my grandmother’s traditions as if she were embracing my grandmother. I am sure she felt comfort in that because I felt comfort in that. I too realized I wanted to hold on to anything I could of my grandmother, because now she’s gone. Traditions are easier to hold on to, they don’t take up that much space, and you can get a lot for little or no money.