Working Out at the (Implicit) Fitness Center

It’s fair to say that the filmmaker Alexander Payne takes a grim view of aging in America. In last year’s darkly comedic road film Nebraska, the highly praised Bruce Dern plays the alcoholic and incompetent Woody Grant, who suffers under the delusion he has won a million dollar sweepstakes prize. And Payne’s earlier About Schmidt is unrivaled as the most depressing cinematic depiction of retirement ever. Jack Nicholson plays the title character with sympathy, but there’s no getting around his pathetic and lonely existence. Both Grant and Schmidt are models of decrepitude as well. They embody our worst fears about the elderly body’s inevitable deterioration.

This may be brilliant filmmaking, but it’s not good psychology. Negative caricatures of aging are far too prevalent in our culture–and they are harmful. People, especially as they get older, assimilate such deprecating beliefs about aging, and start acting like the stereotypes, bumbling and shuffling and surrendering autonomy. These stereotypical beliefs are tough to dislodge once they are internalized. Simply telling people to think positively about aging doesn’t work, because the mind is very good at thwarting such explicit lessons.

There may, however, be a more subtle way to mitigate the deleterious effects of such caricatures. Yale University psychological scientist Becca Levy has been working on a novel intervention using subliminal messages to trigger a cascade of cognitive processes. She and her colleagues wanted to see if such implicit, positive messages about aging would strengthen positive age stereotypes, which in turn would improve self-perceptions of aging, which would in the end actually improve physical functioning.

To test this idea, the scientists recruited 100 volunteers, ranging in age from 61 to 99, for an 8-week study. There were four weekly interventions, in which some of the volunteers were exposed to subliminal and positive words linked to the idea of aging. Others were explicitly asked to imagine mentally and physically healthy senior citizens. Still others, the controls, were exposed subliminally and explicitly to neutral words and thoughts.

All volunteers were then assessed three times, the last time being eight weeks after the interventions began. The scientists asked the volunteers about their images of old people in general (other than themselves), and also their images of themselves “as an old person.” They also assessed each volunteer physically, using measures of gait, strength and balance that are routinely used to assess risk of disability.

The results were clear and encouraging. As reported in a forthcoming article in the journal Psychological Science, the implicit intervention significantly strengthened positive stereotypes of aging, and led to positive self-perceptions of aging. The intervention also weakened negative stereotypes and self-perceptions of aging. What’s more, this intervention led to improved physical functioning, suggesting that the volunteers had embodied the idea of healthy aging. The explicit intervention led to no such improvements.

Importantly, the subliminal intervention showed sequential effects over time. That is, implicit exposure to positive thoughts about aging led immediately to more positive age stereotypes. These positive stereotypes then acted in effect as a second intervention, leading to more positive self-perceptions of being old. And these self-perceptions acted as yet another intervention, leading at the final assessment to further improvements in gait and balance and strength. In effect, Levy concludes, this approach has constitutes an “implicit fitness center” that might be used to reverse our culture’s depressing image of life beyond the age of 60.

Follow Wray Herbert’s reporting on psychological science in The Huffington Post and on Twitter at @wrayherbert.

Black Life Is Expendable

Another day, another unarmed black man killed by police. We grieve their loss and pray God’s strength for their families:

Eric Garner, 43, strangled to death on a Staten Island sidewalk.

John Crawford, 22, shot to death in a Beavercreek Walmart.

Michael Brown, 18, shot to death, reportedly with arms raised, on a Ferguson street.

How often must we drink from this bitter well?

The disturbing nature of the frequency of recent news reports in which unarmed Black men have been killed by law enforcement officers is only exceeded by this fact: the act itself is deeply embedded into the racial fabric of our nation. Fifty years removed from the Freedom Summer murders of James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner — a conspiracy allegedly enacted by Neshoba County sheriff Lawrence A. Rainey — we still face the difficult reality that for generations unarmed Black men have met their demise at the hands of those sworn to serve and to protect all citizens.

On the night of June 21, 1964, a year after the brutal assassination of Medgar Evers, three courageous young men were also killed in Mississippi. The two white men, Goodman, 20, and Schwerner, 24, died of a single gunshot wound to the heart. The lone Black man, Chaney, 21, was tortured, then tied to a tree and beaten with chains, before ultimately being shot three times. Here, even amid brutalities, a clear distinction was made concerning the value of Black life, the white lives ended immediately, with diabolic mercy, the Black life made to suffer greatly before finally being terminated. In the search for these three men after their disappearance, eight more Black bodies were found having been discarded like rubbish across Mississippi lakes, forests, and plains. Undoubtedly, law enforcement had a hand in these deaths as well, Sheriff Rainey notorious for intimidating and killing Blacks.

Mine is not an indictment of all police officers. There are many men and women who put their lives on the line for the public good each day. Some I have been blessed to call mentor or friend. Many officers themselves have lost their lives. I honor their memories and ultimate sacrifice even as I offer gratitude for those who continue to work with great integrity to keep us safe.

Yet, unquestionably, there is cause for great concern as I believe that a critical mass of law enforcement officers find Black lives expendable. Towards this, I see this likely cause: there is a racially-motivated culture of fear that over-assigns threat to Blacks, especially, but not exclusively, to Black males, even when no justifiable threat is present. Recent findings from the American Psychological Association supports this fact stating, “Black boys as young as 10 may not be viewed in the same light of childhood innocence as their white peers, but are instead more likely to be mistaken as older, be perceived as guilty and face police violence if accused of a crime.”

Historically, Black bodies have been considered expendable and easily replaceable. Tens of millions of Africans were brought to this nation as slaves because Black life was considered expendable. If an African became gravely ill or died while in forced voyage to the “New World,” they were just thrown into the sea. While Black life was considered expendable, and the supply of other Africans on the continent was considered inexhaustible. Other Black bodies would substitute for any losses in future voyages.

During American slavery, Black babies and children were used as bait to lure alligators from the swamps for capture. This sometimes resulted in the maiming or death of these Black children because Black life was considered expendable. The United States Public Health Service used Black men to test the impact of untreated syphilis from 1932-1972 resulting in the death of many Black men and in the infection of their partners because Black life was considered expendable.

Environmental racism places the urban poor near landfills and factories that cause increased rates of cancer and other diseases because Black, and even poor lives, are considered expendable. Levies in New Orleans were poorly maintained and constructed near poor Black communities resulting in massive flooding after Hurricane Katrina because Black lives are considered expendable. Blacks receive harsher penalties for the same crimes, and, according to a recent Stanford University report, the disproportionate rate of Black imprisonment may actually encourage white support of racially-driven tactics such as stop-and-frisk because Black lives are considered expendable.

The expendability of Black life also extends to our national foreign policy. America’s response to acts of genocide, religious persecution, and the spread of infectious disease on the continent of Africa today is oft times delayed, if acted upon at all. When it comes to foreign policy, African Black lives are especially considered expendable, their difficulties rarely considered our priority.

Of course, Black life is not expendable! No life is, for all life has great value. Yet, the treatment of Black life as expendable reveals our deep and abiding malfeasance. We often fail to see the face of God in the face of our neighbor, especially if that neighbor is darkly pigmented. Since all human life was created in the image of God, we are guilty of no less than the desecration of God’s image when we ignore the brutalization of our neighbors, who we are commanded to love as ourselves (Mark 12:31).

It was while traveling the road to Damascus that Saul had an encounter with the resurrected Christ, himself a victim of fatal brutalities at the hands of law enforcement. To Saul, Jesus posed this powerful inquiry; “Why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 9:4)

For the recently fallen, Jesus surely weeps and asks his question, anew; “Why are you persecuting me?” Maybe it is because we see Christ as we increasingly see each other, and Black life; as expendable.

When the Image I See In the Mirror Isn't Just My Own

Sometimes, when I look in the mirror I see her. Her. It’s not just my own reflection staring back at me anymore, but hers as well now. It turns my otherwise innocuous bathroom mirror into the equivalent of one you would find in a so-called funhouse. It warps, it bends, it is anything but “fun.”

I hear her in my voice sometimes, too. In a laugh, an expression I say, in the intonation or cadence of how I speak — and a shiver instantly goes through me when I recognize it. When I hear her coming out of me. It is upsetting to recoil at the sound of your own voice.

There are gestures I make, stories I tell, how chubby my hands are — so many parts of me that remind me of her. And it is difficult to separate the resentment, anger and pain I feel towards her and make sure not to turn it on myself — to stop myself from shining a spotlight of self-loathing on these things that she has that I now have, too.

I share with her DNA, genetics, molecules — life at its most base level. I share with her history, memories — things I have no control over. I share the reflection in the mirror with her — but that is only glass. It is only one dimension of who I am and that is all. I need to remind myself of that. I need to remember that the sound of my voice and my handwriting and the cellulite on my thighs are as much a part of who I am as they are who she is.

And I need to remind myself that these are the only things I share with her now. I don’t share my life, or my marriage, or my children, or my accomplishments, or my setbacks, or my fears, or my dreams with her.

I don’t share her perspectives on how to treat people. I don’t share her outlook on what love is and how to show it. I don’t share holidays or birthdays or anniversaries with her. It was their anniversary this weekend and I had forgotten until the very end of the day — and that was an accomplishment for me. It was so freeing in a strange way. So many people in the world strive to remember things — as do I — but this, her, I want to forget.

She hasn’t seen her grandchildren in over two years.

They don’t remember her anymore. They don’t remember either of them. Last month, I was at a gas station and a man was at the pump across the way and Parker pointed to him and said, “That looks like your dad.” And he did. And I asked her how she knew, and she said, “From the pictures on the computer.”

That’s who they are now. People they see in pictures on the computer. “Your mom.” “Your dad.” Not Grandma, or Grandpa, or Nana, or Poppie. They are “those people.”

And I think that it is better this way. I know it is.

I wrote her a letter in April of 2012 telling her that I was walking away. That it wasn’t healthy to be around her, that it wasn’t safe for me or for my family anymore. I asked her to respect my wishes — not to call, or email, or show up at the door as she had in the past.

And she didn’t do any of those things. She didn’t call, or email, or show up at my door when my grandmother passed away six months later — I found out from my cousin. She didn’t call, or email, or show up at my door when Owen had that horrible diagnosis a month after that. She didn’t contact me, or anyone else, to find out if he was OK. If we were all OK after another bomb had been dropped yet again. She didn’t call, or email, or show up at my door for any of the four birthdays that her grandchildren have had since then.

For the first time in my life, she has listened to me. She has respected my wishes.

And this brings me great relief. And at the same time it brings me great sadness for my children that she didn’t fight for them. And I realize that those are mutually exclusive, and unfair to ask for from the same person, but I have earned that. She took her pride and her martyr complex and chose them above all else — as she always does.

And all of this mirrors what I feel when I look in the mirror. I see someone I despise, that I fear. And I see someone that I am getting to know, and trying to love. And while my exterior may reflect hers back in the mirror, I take comfort in knowing that our interiors could not be more different.

You can follow Jamie at JamieKrugAuthor.com, as well as on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

Is a Crisis Brewing in the Market For Sub-Prime Loans on Used Cars?

In a long front-page article in the NY Times last month, Jessica Silver-Greenberg and Michael Corkery answer this question affirmatively. Their article cites numerous parallels to the conditions that led up to the crisis in the sub-prime mortgage market in 2007-8. The similarities include:

  • A surge in lending to unsophisticated borrowers with poor credit, many of whom cannot afford them.
  • Lending standards that have weakened, with increasing numbers of loans based on incorrect or falsified information that don’t meet the standards that exist.
  • Interest rates (termed “exorbitant” by the authors) that are much higher than those on prime auto loans, and also higher than those on sub-prime mortgages.
  • Emergence of lenders that specialize in the riskiest loans that carry the highest interest rates.
  • High incomes earned by loan originators with strong incentives to close deals but no interest in the aftermath, who in this market are used car dealers.
  • Packaging of loans into securities that carry high ratings from credit agencies, despite the poor quality of the individual loans.
  • A strong demand for the securities by all kinds of investors looking for attractive yields.

To the authors, these add up to a “sub-prime auto bubble”, and since bubbles must burst sooner or later, the reader is left to infer that a new crisis will emerge. But they don’t define “bubble”, and they don’t explain how the parallels between the two markets will generate a similar if smaller crisis.

A bubble is a rise in prices that is unsustainable because it is based partly or entirely on expectations that prices will rise. Bubbles are vulnerable to shocks that raise questions about the validity of the price expectation.

The sub-prime mortgage market grew within a home price bubble. While the long-term rate of appreciation in home prices is about 4%, during the period 2000-2007 the growth rate was about 10%. Expectations that nothing bad could happen were supported by the fact that on a national basis, home prices had not declined since the 1930s.

Losses to lenders from defaults on home mortgages depend heavily on the value of the houses that serve as collateral. So long as borrowers have equity in their property, they have a strong incentive to make their mortgage payment, and if they can’t possibly pay they sell the house and pay off the mortgage in order to retain the equity. When collateral values increase 10% a year, it is very difficult to make a bad loan, and the temptation to make more money by making more loans, by relaxing or ignoring underwriting standards, proves irresistible. But bubbles always burst and this one burst early in 2007 when home prices began to decline.

Nothing like this is happening in the sub-prime auto loan market. With the unimportant exception of the collector’s market, used cars never appreciate, and the individual car begins to depreciate when the buyer drives it off the lot.

The role of collateral is very different in the market for sub-prime loans on used-cars than in the home loan market. It is common for the car purchaser to owe more than the car is worth, but that does not weaken the incentive to pay because the borrower needs the car. The importance of the collateral to the lender is mainly the power to take the car away from the borrower, and only secondarily is it viewed as the means to recover some of the unpaid balance of a loan in default.

We worry about bubbles because of the implied vulnerability to a shock, but none of the parallels to the sub-prime mortgage market indicate that the sub-prime auto market is in a bubble. The type of shock to which this sector is exposed is not the bursting of a bubble, but a major rise in unemployment that cuts the incomes of borrowers. At this point, no such shocks are on the horizon.

None of this should be interpreted to mean that all is well in the market for sub-prime auto loans. Sub-prime markets that cater to consumers with bad credit records attract the kinds of lenders who are comfortable deploying the kinds of unsavory tactics sometimes needed to deal with deadbeat borrowers. The best way to avoid such tactics is to graduate out of the sub-prime category.

Who makes the best fast-food chicken sandwich?

2014-08-12-ffc.jpg

The fried chicken sandwich is a fast-food staple, a go-to order for the burger averse and people who enjoy referencing deep-cut Insane Clown Posse lyrics. And though I’m sadly not a Juggalo, I have already knocked-off burgers, so I figured it was time I taste-tested the birds. But this go-round, I was (kind of) smart(er): I broke down the tastings over two days so I wouldn’t unfairly judge against sandwiches I was tasting later in the campaign, and also so I wouldn’t die from eating 6,300 calories worth of fried meat in one sitting.

How I did it: Unlike burgers, I opted to try all of the chain’s premium fried chicken offerings, rather than the lowest price-point chicken sandwich. As most consisted of some combination of breaded chicken fillet, lettuce, tomato, and mayo, I tried to stay as close as possible to that order (though, as you’ll see, sometimes it was challenging). The test was conducted in both San Francisco and San Diego over two days ending on August 4th, 2014. My mouth still tastes salty.

2014-08-12-ffc2.jpg

9. BURGER KING’S TENDERCRISP CHICKEN SANDWICH
Price: $5.19
The build: Fried chicken fillet, lettuce, tomatoes, mayo, on an “artisan-style” bun
Wait time: 2min 48 sec
Tasting notes: In high school, we used to go to the 24-hour Burger King off the Mass Pike by using a service road off a random side street in Natick to enter it without actually getting on the Pike. And we went there a lot — because of that, I would posit that I’ve easily been to Burger King 5x more than any other fast-food restaurant — and I’d always get the original chicken sandwich, and I have fond memories of high school, so my hopes were high with this one. But it just didn’t deliver. While the bun was pliable, squishy, and actually decent tasting, my taste buds were overwhelmed by a fried taste due to too-heavy breading that wasn’t crunchy in that satisfying way… or flavorful. It was also over-dressed with mayo, which took away from some decent lettuce and tomato action. Apparently there is a reason BK is not called Chicken King, despite that being a very catchy name.

More: The 33 Best Burgers in America

2014-08-12-ffc3.jpg

8. JACK IN THE BOX’S SPICY CHICKEN SANDWICH
Price: $4.79
The build: Spicy crispy chicken fillet, lettuce, tomato, “Mayo-Onion” sauce, on a sesame bun
Wait time: 1min 58sec
Tasting notes: Jack in the Box left me in a quandary. Last time, with the burger taste-test, I felt badly because it seemed like their non-basic options would test so much better than the lowest level, so I was excited to get to try something premium. But the only non-spicy upper-middle level sandwich they offered was the Homestyle Ranch Chicken Club, and that was too different and too bacon-y to compare. So I was left with a dilemma, and decided the spicy option was the most similar to all the others. And though it did have some moves — the lettuce and tomato were actually pretty crispy and juicy, which I definitely didn’t expect from Jack — the rest left much to be desired. Although the chicken coating was sufficiently crunchy, it was over-breaded, the bun was really soggy on the bottom, and there was too much Mayo-Onion sauce. Like, way too much. Like, it made some sort of mayo imprint all along the top of the chicken, which is not something I enjoyed typing.

2014-08-12-ffc4.jpg

7. MCDONALD’S PREMIUM CRISPY CHICKEN SANDWICH
Price: $4.70
The build: Fried white chicken breast fillet, leaf lettuce, tomato, mayo, on a “bakery style bun made with 8 grams of whole grain”
Wait time: 3min 23sec
Tasting notes: Ah, Mickey D’s. Like BK, I have fond memories of the McChicken Sandwich from high school, usually eating one off the dollar menu, along with two cheeseburgers as I thought about what I really wanted to order as my entree. And McDonald’s usually knows what it’s doing on the upscale chicken sandwich front, but this felt like a miss. And here’s why: the bun. It was just really, really not great. Maybe it was all that whole grain they shoved in it, or the weird topping that felt like it belonged on nine-grain sandwich bread, but either way, it was dry and a little crumbly and sacrificed what was otherwise a decent experience. The lettuce and tomato felt fresh(ish). The chicken was breaded nicely and offered a good crunch, but didn’t really provide a very distinctive fried chicken flavor. Change that bun, Chairman Ronald. With your powers, I’m sure you can tuck “8 grams of whole grain” into something a little more delicious.

2014-08-12-FFC5.jpg

6. WENDY’S HOMESTYLE CHICKEN SANDWICH
Price: $4.59
The build: “Specially seasoned” fried chicken fillet, lettuce, tomato, mayo, on a nondescript, seedless bun
Wait time: 4min 23sec (but I also got a Frosty)
Tasting notes: I like Wendy’s chicken sandwich game. If you asked me beforehand which chicken sandwich I’d like the best of the Big Fast-Food Three, I’d have said Wendy’s so quickly that you would get weirdly suspicious. I always get the Spicy Chicken Sandwich when I go there. Always. I never deviate, except once to get something on a pretzel bun, and that was a mistake I’m copping to now, because I feel like I can trust you.

Anyway, this was a perfectly fine experience. Although the lettuce was excessively limp, and the tomato was one of those tomatoes where the middle is basically all core, the chicken was moist, there was a good ratio of mayo, and the breading was peppery but not overwhelming, albeit a bit soggy. The bun — which Wendy’s doesn’t even talk about on their site in the description, a rarity amongst fast-food chains nowadays — was mostly pliable and a little sweet and soft. This is basically the utility infielder, the 1991 Steve Lyons of chicken sandwiches — it may not be your first choice, but it can step in and perform serviceably when needed (also, I feel like Steve Lyons is definitely the type of dude to Google himself, so, hi, Steve Lyons!).

2014-08-12-FFC6.jpg

5. SONIC’S CRISPY CHICKEN SANDWICH
Price: $4.75
The build: “Lightly seasoned and breaded” chicken breast fillet, lettuce, tomato, light mayo, on a “warm, whole grain Ciabatta bun” made with 10 grams of whole grain
Wait time: 5min 27sec
Tasting notes: Why you would ever go through Sonic’s drive-thru is beyond me. You have the option to park, hit a big ole red button, place your order, and a dude in f**ing roller skates will bring your meal to you. ROLLER SKATES! Anyway, outside of getting food from people on roller skates, the spice blend in the breading is the real champion of this very solid sandwich, with warm black pepper notes on the backend of each bite. The amount of mayo added was perfect, and the lettuce and tomato were crisp. The only issue was the Ciabatta, which isn’t as light or really very Ciabatta-eque as most breads that would dare use that Italian white bread moniker. All in all, extremely solid.

2014-08-12-FFC7.jpg

4. CARL’S JR.’S BIG CHICKEN FILLET
Price: $4.53
The build: Crispy chicken fillet “dusted with Southern spices”, plus lettuce, tomato, and mayo, on a “fresh baked bun”
Wait time: 2min 37sec
Tasting notes: This is the new kid on the block, and probably the biggest surprise of the group. I didn’t know what to think of Carl’s Jr.’s new entry into the chicken sandwich wars, mostly because I’m so used to them strictly introducing stunt products that 21-year-olds really, really want to eat when they’re enjoying safe amounts of legal alcoholic beverages. But this sandwich was subtle and great.

The winner here was the fresh baked bun, which kind of looked a little strange (as you can see in the pic), but was squishy, lightly grilled and buttered, and stood up to the moisture really well. The actual fillet was huge, definitely the biggest of any of the restaurants, and the breading was peppery in a way I really liked, adding a little more spice than most of the standard builds. The only reason it didn’t move even higher was because the chicken got pretty soggy where it was posted up against the tomatoes, and so my middle bites weren’t quite as glorious. Still, even if you’re not 21 or named Connor, you should still probably eat this.

See which fast-food chicken sandwiches made the top 3 — only on Thrillist.com!

More from Thrillist:

The single best item at every US fast-food chain

The 10 Best Healthy (ish) Fast-Food Items

Follow Thrillist on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Thrillist

Americans Support Air Strikes In Iraq, But Strongly Oppose Sending In Troops

Americans back President Barack Obama’s decision to begin conducting air strikes in Iraq, but strongly oppose sending American ground troops to fight the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds.

Fifty-eight percent of Americans in the new poll supported Obama’s authorization of air strikes against insurgents in Iraq, while 24 percent said they oppose the move. A similar percentage said they would approve of the use of drones. The air strikes brought a rare moment of bipartisan agreement, with 66 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of Republicans supporting the move. Independents expressed less positive opinions, with just half approving.

Polls have consistently shown Americans’ wariness of foreign intervention, as Obama noted in a Thursday speech. “I know that many of you are rightly concerned about any American military action in Iraq — even limited strikes like these,” he said.

Now that the decision to launch strikes has been made, though, Americans are considerably more supportive than they were in earlier polling that asked them simply to consider the possibility of such strikes. A June HuffPost/YouGov poll asked Americans to weigh possible interventions in Iraq, with just 44 percent in favor of air strikes and 33 percent opposed.

Approval of Obama’s handling of the situation in Iraq has also risen modestly. Two months ago, just 33 percent of Americans approved, with 45 percent disapproving; in the most recent poll, views were about evenly split, with 42 percent approving, and 40 percent disapproving. His approval on Iraq rose 7 points among Democrats, and 9 points among independents and Republicans.

Americans are divided about whether the U.S. government has been aggressive enough in its response to the situation in Iraq. Thirty-six percent of those polled said the American government should respond more forcefully to insurgents in Iraq, while 16 percent said the response should be less aggressive. Another 22 percent said the U.S. government’s response to insurgents in Iraq has been about right.

Desire for a tougher response, however, has exceeded support for actually sending in more troops. Only 15 percent supported sending American ground troops to fight the Islamic State, compared to 63 percent who opposed it. Americans were also opposed to sending American troops to assist Iraqi army units, though by a smaller margin of 45 percent to 30 percent.

Republicans were the most supportive of sending ground troops to Iraq, with 25 percent of Republicans endorsing the idea. By comparison, 12 percent of Democrats and 13 percent of independents said they would support sending American ground troops to fight ISIS.

The HuffPost/YouGov poll was conducted Aug. 10-11 among 1,000 U.S. adults using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population. Factors considered include age, race, gender, education, employment, income, marital status, number of children, voter registration, time and location of Internet access, interest in politics, religion and church attendance.

The Huffington Post has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. Data from all HuffPost/YouGov polls can be found here.

We Love You, Robin!

Yesterday afternoon when I saw the news that Robin Williams, a brilliant artist and fine human being took his life, I cried. When I went to pick my daughter up at camp, I found myself hugging and comforting others who were crying. I’ve been on several phone calls with people expressing their shock and sadness. People are posting on social media everywhere. No way can our oneness be questioned when you see how affected we all are when a brilliant light of our world, like Robin Williams, no longer shines to our visible eye. Or, when we see pictures of mothers and fathers around the world crying for their hurt children..

The news reported that Robin Williams was struggling with severe depression and had had recent challenges with his recovery from substance abuse. It is very common among people in recovery to uncover depression and other psychological issues laying underneath an addiction. Spiritual truth is that we are more than any label. Yet, it is imperative that we not do spiritual bypass and ignore or deny what shows up in the human experience. We must be humble enough to admit what needs to be addressed on the human level. If you or anyone you know is suffering with depression, there are solutions. There is no shame in asking for help or admitting that there are some things that you can’t handle by yourself. Codependency, alcohol, drug, food and process addictions, such as porn, sex, gambling, workaholism are calls for love and only a spiritual solution is the answer.

Robin Williams’ talent was incandescent. His genius palpable every time he opened his mouth. He radiated brilliance. His comedy sublime, spontaneous and hilarious; his acting deep and touching. I imagine it must have been quite a feat for him to manage the creativity that continually burst out of him. He was candid about his challenges with depression and addiction, which was brave because there is still shame and judgment in our society regarding depression, mental illness and recovery. One of the people that I comforted said, “couldn’t he see that doing what he did would affect so many people.?” My answer was immediate, “no. He probably couldn’t even see out of his own pain.” I don’t know that he didn’t sense that it would cause his loved ones pain. I don’t think he took his life to hurt anyone but only to eliminate the hum of despair that continuously ran through his mind that caused him to take this action.

So, in this moment, let us pause, stepping away from the busyness of our day, and our minds, allowing everything that has come before this present moment to slip away, and bring our awareness to our hearts and breathe as though we are breathing through our hearts. Let us remember that love is our true nature for it is at the center of our being. Let us take a collective moment of silence for Robin Williams, a man who elevated comedy with his razor sharp wit and extraordinary talent, his family, his friends, colleagues, sponsees and sponsors as they all journey the path of letting go and grieving. I know that loving arms received Robin and that loving arms comfort his wife and loved ones as they do us. May we know together that his spirit lives on. May we remember that tears and laughter soothe the body, mind and spirit so we let them flow as they will without judgment. Allow love to fill your heart and extend over and around you in every direction, giving great gratitude for all that is in your life. We give Robin Williams a standing ovation for all he gave to us. In deep gratitude, thank you Robin! Peace be still!
And so It is!

We love you, Robin!

2014-08-12-Robin_Williams.jpg
photo credit: google

Wendy Silvers is a mama on a mission. She helps women, particularly mothers, activate their immeasurable power and value as changemakers in the world, and, parents stay sane in an insane world. She draws upon decades of experience in 12-step recovery, spiritual counseling, publicity, parenting, personal growth and transformation. Go to: MilionMamasMovement for more info.

Two-headed Dolphin: They Called Him Flipper, Flipper, Flipper, Flipper

Dolphins are cute if you ask me, just watch Flipper and you will see what I mean. What’s not very cute is this dead dolphin. It has two heads. Ewww. Conjoined anythings are rather disturbing.

dolphinmagnify

It’s hard to tell the size of the two headed dolphin monster from this image but it’s said to be about 3.2-feet long and about 12 months old. It’s hard to believe that the creature survived that long in the wild.

Right now, we have no idea what organs exactly the dolphin shared, at least one of the creatures eyes are said to be not fully formed. The dead creature washed up on a beach in Turkey and will be studied by marine biologists. If we ever get attacked by two-headed sharks, it may be two-headed dolphins that save us all.

[via Telegraph]

CyberLightning Raises $4.2M To Bring 3D Interface To Industrial ‘Internet Of Things’ Monitoring

CyberVille-GIS-Windmill_full When you think about the Internet of Things (IoT) you likely think of consumer hardware products like smart thermostats, WiFi lightbulbs or Quantified Self gadgets, such as various fitness trackers and other gizmos. CyberLightning, however, is an IoT startup of a different kind. It offers a platform for industrial IoT usage, such as utility companies or other providers of infrastructure, to… Read More

Apple’s Diversity Report Doesn’t Satisfy CEO Tim Cook Yet, Though Inclusion Is A ‘Top Priority’

hero_diversity_5 Apple has followed suit with a spate of big tech companies and released a diversity report today, in the form of a micro-site with numbers breaking down the company’s U.S. race and ethnicity distribution, as well as its global gender split. The breakdown reveals a workforce that’s 70 percent male overall, with a whopping 80 percent of its tech employees (engineers, Geniuses and… Read More