I've unfollowed all the gurus

samarttiw/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

I've unfollowed all the 'live your best life' and family / planning blogs I used to read.

I still like some of them. But I don't want their stuff on my Facebook / Twitter / blog feed anymore, and here's why:

They mostly don't resemble me.  While I admire anyone who is managing their life well, has changed their life or is energetic, achieving things, healthy, happy or what have you, I think of the people that run some of these blogs the same way I think of those motivational salesman of the eighties and nineties: admirable but basically of a certain personality type, once called "Type A", who is kind of wired that way.

Their lives are not mine. I'm not saying my life is more difficult or complex (it's not), but my life is my life, and the way I live it is basically working for me as is.

I've already found my methods. It's been trial and error, like everyone's life, and I'd never claim it's perfect, but through years of living it, I've found what works for me and my family, and the limitations of every method.

Their stuff doesn't work if you work full time in an office with a commute. All those slow-cooker recipes, housework schedules and the like, don't work if you work full time and don't work at home. I know these blog writers work hard, and they juggle as all of us do, but managing what you do before you "sit down to work" [in your house] is honestly very different from having to commute to work somewhere else, and do that every day.

I don't need relentless motivation and positivism. I'm not depressed (been there), and I'm motivated to get up and go every day by the need to keep my career going and keep a roof over my kids' heads. I get pleasure from the things I like and I keep active and interested in the world. That's all I need to keep going and achieve what I have to achieve.

Their stuff is repetitive. If you read any of these blogs for any length of time you'll tend to read the same intros, tips and pep talks over and over again. These blogs are designed so that anyone can pick them up at any time; the downside of that is they can irk you if you read them regularly.

We have a basic difference in life philosophy. I believe you can get nuggets of helpful information from just about anything you read. So these blogs can provide some good tips. But I also think life is messy and sometimes hard and you can't create a system that will keep you on top of it all the time.

I kind of resent what they do.  I'll admit it. There's something about running a blog about how to blog, or how to work or how to live, or how to manage family/home life, that seems like a bit of an easy out to me. I know that's irrational and unfair. Some of these people have really good blogs. But there are some I read which make me totally understand the existence of GOMI.

There's so much more interesting stuff out there to read. I read news, online magazines, blogs, tweets, fiction, you name it. I download podcasts and listen to them while I walk or while I lie in bed (but then I tend to fall asleep halfway through). There's so much to read, and so much to make you think and keep you busy, engaged and entertained. THAT'S where I prefer to direct my internet energy.

I prefer reading small blogs. Tiny ones in fact. I love reading the regular blogs I follow to read how people like me manage life, work, family and existential despair. Yes, that means you!

Do you read any of the 'big' blogs?

Do you follow any gurus?

The Antidote

I've just started reading The Antidote by Oliver Burkeman. Mr Burkeman writes a column for The Guardian called This Column Will Change Your Life, which is one of my favourite reads.

In one of those columns he recently said: "Happiness is reality minus expectations."

There's been a bit of resistance to the "pursuit of happiness"/positive thinking paradigms in recent years, with books such as The Happiness Trap reminding us that trying to be happy seldom makes us happy and studies demonstrating the value of pessimism.  Work-related articles on the internet are finally starting to look beyond the whole "follow your bliss" theme we've been fed for some time. The only self-help book that I like, Maurice Seligman's Learned Optimism, espouses realistic strategies using cognitive behavioural therapy to combat depression and anxiety, and rejects the more common positive affirmations and mantras that tend to irk people like me.

I'm less than halfway through The Antidote, but I like it a lot.


Here are some excerpts that grabbed me:

That we yearn for neat, book-sized solutions to the problem of being human is understandable, but strip away the packaging, and you'll find that the messages of such works are frequently banal.

There are good reasons to believe that the whole notion of 'seeking happiness' is flawed to begin with. For one thing, who says happiness is a valid goal in the first place? Religions have never placed much explicit emphasis on it, at least as far as this world is concerned,; philosophers have certainly not been unanimous in endorsing it, either. And any evolutionary psychologist will tell you that evolution has little interest in you being happy.

This last reminded me of what a psychologist told me, when I told her about the anxiety I felt every day when my children were little, terrified something bad would happen to them; how I couldn't watch them play in the park without visualizing them falling off things. I was not terrified all the time, and I didn't stop them doing normal things, but I would have these constant intrusive visualizations and then feel annoyed with myself, or anxious. While I expected her to counsel me on how not to worry, she told me instead that my worrying was what was keeping my children safe. "Your brain is not interested in keeping you relaxed or making you happy," she said. Once I accepted that this worrying was there to stay, I was able to accept it.


On positive thinking:

...once you have resolved to embrace the ideology of positive thinking, you will find a way to interpret virtually any eventuality as a justification for thinking positively. You need never spend any time considering how your actions might go wrong.

And when bad things happen ("and such things will happen"):

Trying to see things in an exclusively positive light is an attitude that requires constant, effortful replenishment. Should your efforts falter, or prove insufficient...you'll sink back down into - possibly deeper - gloom.  

On 'positive visualization' as a way to achieve goals (a la The Secret):

...focusing on the outcome you desire may actually sabotage your efforts to achieve it.

...as the brain "subconsciously [confuses] visualising success with having already achieved it."


On outcomes:

[W]e habitually act as if our control over the world were much greater than it really is. Even such personal matters as our health, our finances, and our reputations are ultimately beyond our control

I think when it comes down to it, almost every philosophy we espouse is a way of convincing ourselves we can control what happens to us. We can do some things of course, and there's no benefit in being totally pessimistic and defeatist - but so, so much of what happens to us is down to luck.

That's no justification for inaction, just a way of looking at things and not shrinking from the bad:

'The cucumber is bitter? Put it down,' Marcus [Aurelius] advises. 'There are brambles in the path? Step to one side. That is enough, without also asking: "How did these things come into the world at all?"'

Of course, these philosophies are all easy from our part of the world, and when we're talking about the usual gamut of everyday trials and losses.   There are few among us who cannot ask "WHY?" when bad things happen. But I'm not a person who can totally embrace "positive thinking" and the type of philosophy this book promotes is indeed, for me, a good antidote.

What do you think?

A Quick Happiness Test

OK, so we're all past that whole "seeking happiness" thing, right?

We know life is hard, the human condition includes suffering and despair, and our brains aren't interested in making us happy, only in ensuring we survive? And that life is difficult and absurd with fleeting moments of bliss?

Cool.

Even so, every now and then comes a reminder that, during times not marred by horrible circumstances, it is indeed possible to choose to be happy, or at least not to be miserable.

Professor Ed Diener is one of the founders of positive psychology and a leading researcher into happiness and well-being. He is profiled in The Age today in 'The Happy Medium' (Michael Short, The Zone).

It's not really news to read that "Happiness is caused by relationships, goals and habits –and not by lots of money", that "happy people are healthier", and that "one of the best ways to be happy is, paradoxically, to not worry too much about being happy, but to focus instead on a goal".

We generally already know that "happiness" (in the sense of contentment or fulfillment), is a combination of a positive outlook, good relationships, having a purpose or goal and/or skill, and acceptance of circumstances.

But even if most of that is fairly familiar to us now, what I liked about this article was the reminder that we can and should seek these things - even while we know, of course, that awful circumstances can and do prevent happiness, and life can be cruel and unfair. But for most of us, life is a combination of good times and bad, so we do have the ability to seek contentment in some form.

The other thing I liked was this quick test to measure how happy you are (in case you are not sure):


Quick happiness test suggested by Michael Short and Ed Diener:

It's this: ask yourself or someone else what are the top 10 things you like to do. Then ask when you last did those things. While there can be compelling reasons why we are not doing what we like - caring for someone, investing time in study or other intensive projects - it's often the case unhappiness is caused by neglecting to do these things.  Crucially, almost without exception those lists contain an overwhelming majority of pastimes that do not require money.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/life/the-happy-medium-20130721-2qcrg.html#ixzz2ZlwGJKg9

For example, if you were me your ten (or eleven) things might look something like this:

• walking
• reading
• writing
• art
• talking with my kids - especially ideas, theories, how people are, how life is, etc
• cartoons / humour
• family gatherings
• coffee/dinner with friends
• spending time with or watching animals
• sitting on grass
• looking at the sky / stars

I do about half of these often, and the rest quite rarely, though I used to do them often.

It's an interesting point.

Personally I think being "happy" comes from relationships, having enough money so that life is not constantly stressful, being busy without being overly stretched, doing a job you don't hate, and having enough room/time for some hobbies. Sometimes, with luck, we may even manage all those things at once.

There's not much else. We're animals seeking to live, accumulate resources, and if we want to, to procreate. Everything else is a bonus.

What do you think about the happiness test?

maen_cg/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Just Believe!

How do you know when your daughter has watched too many Barbie movies?
(Real answer: When you know she has watched at least one...)

Here's how I knew.

A broken toy, a request to fix it. Knowing the toy was beyond repair, I answered that I couldn't fix it.
M. looked at me and said, "Did you try to fix it?"
"Yes," I said (lying - it was completely beyond help). "I tried, but I couldn't fix it."
M. looked at me earnestly. "You can Mum, " she said. "You just have to try. And believe in yourself!"

"Well, " I said, "sometimes, there are just some things you can't do, even if you really believe in yourself!"