***Disclaimer***

I used to be a very angry person all the time at everyone and everything.  The deletion of anger from the majority of my life was/is a wonderful thing.  It takes more energy than I have to be angry all the time.

As I have matured (gotten older,) I have begun to listen to more and more talk radio and television shows that discuss current events.

A lot of the discussions in talk radio and current events television (especially in this election year) revolve around political issues.

And, unfortunately, a lot of talk radio and current events television feature men and women of all ages yelling at each other, being disrespectful toward each other, being loud, abrasive, and angry.

Try making it through a trip in your vehicle these days without getting a horn blown at you.  It is almost impossible.

***Disclaimer***

I drive my vehicle a fair amount.  I have never been much of a horn blower.  Maybe that is because I am not that skilled of a driver.  I tend to sympathize with someone who does something wrong or stupid on the highway because I have probably done something similar, worse, or more stupid or are about to do so.  (I once changed all my clothing, top to bottom, while driving to participate in an improv show causing damage to my and other’s vehicle along the way.)

I have a voice that “carries.”  For those of you who don’t speak old guy that means that I am loud.  Inside or outside I tend to speak more loudly than the average human being.

Twice recently inside of separate restaurants I have been verbally assaulted for my volume.

Here are the direct quotes…

“You are so loud !  You are ruining my dinner !”

“You are so f*cking annoying !”

Perhaps I am giving myself too much credit, but if I was on the other end of the situation (having to listen to the loud person) I would hope that I would have handled the situation much differently.

I think that I would calmly approach the person and say, “Could you please lower your voice, you are disrupting my dinner ?”

I consider the former response(s) a ten and the latter response a one.

Isn’t there a compromise out there somewhere ?  Why does every human interaction need to occur at the most extreme end of the anger scale these days ?

These days our elected officials mock the term “moderate.”  A majority of them proudly stand at the extremes of their political parties while denigrating their opponent in the angriest and most disrespectful possible tones, words, and actions.

I understand that economic pressures are causing a majority of human beings more pressures than ever before.

I understand that “the American Dream” is crumbling down around a lot of us.

I understand that the country (the United States of America) in which a majority of us populate is going through a lot of challenges these days.

I just don’t understand why we are so angry and why we are taking that anger out on each other on so frequent of a basis these days.

My solution to the problem is to do my best to be less angry.  If I don’t add to the problem, I can be part of the solution.

It has taken me awhile to become less angry, but it can be done.

I invite those of you of whom this is an applicable discussion to join me. ~Scott

Courtesy www.psychologytoday.com

Anger Problems: What They Say about You

Do you see anger or resentment in the mirror?

Published on December 29, 2008 by Steven Stosny in Anger in the Age of Entitlement

Anger is the primary protective emotion, designed to protect us from harm or from loss of something of value. The most physical of all emotions, anger sends action signals to the muscles and organs of the body to prepare us for one purpose and one purpose only: to neutralize or defeat the perceived threat.

Two factors go into the formulation of anger: current vulnerability and magnitude of the perceived threat. Relatively little threat will cause anger when vulnerability is elevated, for example when physical resources are low – you’re tired, hungry, sick, injured, depressed, anxious, stressed – or when self-doubt is high, making you more easily insulted.

Problem anger (that which leads you to act against your long-term best interests) is caused by high vulnerability. It is the most self-revealing of emotional states, pointing directly to a powerful cause of vulnerability: a sudden drop in core value.

You experience a state of core value when you think and behave in accordance with the most important things to and about you. It includes a sense of authenticity (you feel genuine) and self-regard, which, together, lower self-doubt and vulnerability to threat. 
. 
For instance, if it is important to you to be fair in your dealings with others, you will regard yourself well as long as you are fair, and feel guilt and shame when you are not. If you use the guilt and shame as a motivation to be true to your core value, i.e., to behave more fairly, your self-regard will instantly improve; you will act with conviction and not need anger for defense.

But if you blame your unfair behavior on someone else – a spouse or boss or the IRS – you will become angry or resentful and utterly powerless to restore genuine self-regard. That’s right, while angry or resentful, it is nearly impossible for you to restore self-regard on your own, because now it requires that someone submit to what you want. The best you can hope for while angry or resentful is a temporary sense of self-righteousness

When out of touch with your deepest values, you are more likely to act on ego – how you expect other people to regard you. Once again, your self-regard will depend not on what you do, but on the regard of others (who are likely to be preoccupied with their own self-regard.) In short, you will be become more vulnerable. Because it is controlled by others, ego requires manipulating the impressions of others to preserve and lots of resentment and anger to defend. Preserving and defending your ego will usually lead to violating your deepest values.

Problem anger comes in many forms, e. g, any resentment, restlessness, impatience, agitation, irritability, or sarcasm that motivates behavior contrary to your best interests. But the experience of these unpleasant emotions can be invaluable guides, if you use them like a gas gauge. They tell you that your current state of core value is too low and that you need to fill it up, that is, act according to your deepest values. If angry about the unfairness of someone else, you must be sure that you are being fair. Otherwise, you will merely react to a jerk like a jerk.

In your core value, you will act with conviction to achieve fairness, which is likely to be in your long-term best interests. In anger you will devalue others – at least in your head – which is unlikely to be in your long-term best interests.

Overcoming anger problems requires much more than managing the emotional feelings and physiological arousal of anger, as anger management classes strive to do. Eliminating anger problems depends on a choice of what kind of person you want to be – an angry, resentful person who struggles to manage negative feelings and arousal, or one who lives securely in your core value.

As I write this, the 2012 Academy Awards (the Oscars) are only a few hours away.

I don’t go to the movies very often these days.  I rarely rent them and I don’t download them online or from Netflix.

A lot of it is due to being a hobby that has becoming more expensive (money and time-wise) by the year, but most of it is being an adult with other priorities .

Besides, the bulk of the movies being produced these days are for kids and teenagers, not middle-aged men anyway.

That doesn’t mean that I don’t care about movies and/or the entertainment industry anymore.  I visit internet and blog sites daily like: Hollywood Elsewhere; The Hot Blog; HitFix; Entertainment Weekly; and ain’t it cool news amongst others that keep me up on my Hollywood and movie news.

My peak of actual movie (in a theatre) viewing was probably 1981.  I was a junior in high school.

I prepared a box where I would keep by ticket stubs and would (via my Dynamo label maker) make labels of the movie titles that I saw and then grade them.

I thought I might want to become a movie critic at that time in my life.

I and my high school friends made two 8mm movies (Animal Farm and The Three Musketeers in the 20^th Century) with the help of our classmates.   We later presented screenings of them at the location Croation Club.  We were hot stuff.  We got our pictures and a front page article in the Sunday Beaver County Times.

During one of my multitude of periods of unemployment I wrote three screenplays, but never tried to sell them.

And before I found my home (of going on 17 years) in Charlotte, NC, I visited Los Angeles to see if that was where I could make my entertainment dreams come true.

I later realized that I wanted to create works of arts rather than just watch and comment on others, not necessarily cinematically.

Some of my fondest memories are going to the movies as a child with my grandfather, my parents, and my friends.

I am old enough to remember when they made movie theatres in singles.

In the mid-seventies they constructed the first multiplexes in my area (Beaver County, Pennsylvania.)  I had died and gone to movie heaven.

And every year as long ago as I can remember I looked forward to watching the Academy Awards to root on my favorite actors and movies.

I will always look back fondly on my movie going experiences and those who shared them (and the passion of motion pictures) with me (past and present.)

When we are younger we assume that things will stay the same forever, but they never do.  But no matter how badly I/we want to go back or make things simpler, we can’t.

But when we are sitting in the theatre in the dark eating our popcorn surrounded by other people and watching a movie of any genre, the dreaming youngster in all of us is summoned back from the past.

Hopefully, that will never change,

Quiet.  The lights have just gone done and the movie is starting.  It’s time to become a kid again.~Scott

Oscar voters’ demographics less diverse than the movie-going public

BY JOHN HORN, NICOLE SPERLING AND DOUG SMITH

Los Angeles Times

LOS ANGELES – When the names of winners are revealed on Oscar night, months of suspense give way to tears, smiles and speeches. Yet when the curtain falls, one question remains: Who cast the votes?

About 37 million people tuned in to the Academy Awards last year, and a great deal rides on the show’s outcome. Winning a golden statuette can vault an actor to stardom, add millions to a movie’s box office and boost a studio’s prestige. Yet the roster of all 5,765 voting members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is a closely guarded secret.

Even inside the movie industry, intense speculation surrounds the academy’s composition and how that influences who gets nominated for and wins Oscars. The organization does not publish a membership list.

“I have to tell you,” said academy member Viola Davis, nominated for lead actress this year for “The Help.” “I don’t even know who is a member of the academy.”

A Los Angeles Times study found that academy voters are markedly less diverse than the public, and even more monolithic than many in the film industry may suspect. Oscar voters are nearly 94 percent Caucasian and 77 percent male, the Times found. Blacks are about 2 percent of the academy, and Latinos are less than 2 percent.

Oscar voters have a median age of 62, the study showed. People younger than 50 constitute just 14 percent of the membership.

The academy calls itself “the world’s preeminent movie-related organization” of “the most accomplished men and women working in cinema,” and its membership includes some of the brightest lights in the film business – Tom Hanks, Sidney Poitier, Meryl Streep and Steven Spielberg, among others. The roster also features actors far better known for their television acting, such as Erik Estrada from “CHiPs,” Jaclyn Smith of “Charlie’s Angels” and “The Love Boat’s” Gavin MacLeod.

The academy is primarily a group of working professionals, and nearly 50 percent of the academy’s actors have appeared on screen in the last two years. But membership is generally for life, and hundreds of academy voters haven’t worked on a movie in decades.

Some are people who have left the movie business entirely but continue to vote on the Oscars – including a nun, a bookstore owner and a retired Peace Corps recruiter. Their votes count the same as ballots cast by the likes of Julia Roberts, George Clooney and Leonardo DiCaprio.

To conduct the study, Times reporters spoke with thousands of academy members and their representatives – and reviewed academy publications, resumes and biographies – to confirm the identities of 5,112 voters – more than 89 percent of the voting members. Those interviews revealed varying opinions about the academy’s race, sex and age breakdown: Some members see it simply as a mirror of hiring patterns in Hollywood, while others say it reflects the group’s mission to recognize achievement rather than promote diversity. Many said the academy should be much more representative.

The Times found that some of the academy’s 15 branches are almost exclusively white and male. Caucasians make up 90 percent or more of every academy branch except actors, whose roster is 88 percent white. The academy’s executive branch is 98 percent white, as is its writers branch.

Men compose more than 90 percent of five branches, including cinematography and visual effects. Of the academy’s 43-member board of governors, six are women; public relations executive Cheryl Boone Isaacs is the sole person of color.

“You would think that in this day and age, there would be a little bit more equality across the board, but that’s not the case,” said Nancy Schreiber, one of a handful of women in the cinematography branch. “Being a cinematographer should not be gender-based, and it’s ridiculous that it is.”

Academy leaders including President Tom Sherak and Chief Executive Dawn Hudson said they have been trying to diversify the membership but that change is difficult because the film industry is not very diverse, and slow because the academy has limited membership growth since 2004.

“We absolutely recognize that we need to do a better job,” said academy governor Phil Alden Robinson. But “we start off with one hand tied behind our back. … If the industry as a whole is not doing a great job in opening up its ranks, it’s very hard for us to diversify our membership.”

Independent studies of some film crafts show that the academy’s demographics mirror the industry’s. Women make up 19 percent of the academy’s screenwriting branch, and a 2011 analysis by the Writers Guild of America West found that women accounted for 17 percent of film writers. The academy’s producers branch is about 18 percent female, and the directors branch is 9 percent female, figures close to those in a study by San Diego State University’s Martha Lauzen. She examined the 250 top-grossing movies of 2011 and found that women accounted for 25 percent of all of the producers, and 5 percent of all the directors.

“Is most of commercial narrative filmmaking the product of mostly white men? Sadly, the answer is yes,” said Alexander Payne, the director of best picture nominee “The Descendants” who belongs to the director branch.

Frank Pierson, a former academy president who won an Oscar for original screenplay for “Dog Day Afternoon” in 1976, said merit is the primary criterion for membership.

“I don’t see any reason why the academy should represent the entire American population. That’s what the People’s Choice Awards are for,” said Pierson, who serves on the board of governors. “We represent the professional filmmakers, and if that doesn’t reflect the general population, so be it.”

Some academy members, though, believe the organization should do more to reflect the demographics of the nation. Denzel Washington, who won the lead actor award for 2001′s “Training Day,” said the academy needs to “open it up” and “balance” its membership.

“If the country is 12 percent black, make the academy 12 percent black,” Washington said. “If the nation is 15 percent Hispanic, make the academy 15 percent Hispanic. Why not?”

Questions about the academy’s diversity, or lack thereof, have persisted for years. In 1996, the Rev. Jesse Jackson organized nationwide protests over the absence of black and minority Oscar nominees, claiming it was evidence of “race exclusion” in Hollywood. The question arose again last year, when not a single minority was among the 45 nominees for actor, actress, supporting actor and actress, director and original and adapted screenplay.

In 83 years of Oscars, less than 4 percent of the acting awards have been won by African Americans. Only one woman – Kathryn Bigelow – has received an Oscar for directing.

After the 2011 ceremony was staged without a single black male presenter, actor Samuel L. Jackson complained in an email to the Times: “It’s obvious there’s not ONE Black male actor in Hollywood that’s able to read a teleprompter, or that’s ‘hip enuf,’ for the new academy demographic!”

Asked about the diversity of Oscar presenters, Sherak said he did not instruct this year’s show producers to include more minorities. “Producers produce the show, end of subject,” he said. Past hosts have included African Americans Chris Rock and Whoopi Goldberg, and Eddie Murphy was initially slated to host this year’s broadcast.

Age and gender have also prompted questions. Sony Pictures executives said last year that they believed their film “The Social Network” lost the best picture race to “The King’s Speech” because older Oscar voters didn’t relate to the Facebook story. This year, some believe the 9/11 drama “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close” made the best picture list because it appealed to middle-aged men.

“The film is about men trying to be good fathers, sons trying to be good sons,” said Terry Press, a public relations branch member who has helped mount many Oscar campaigns. “It’s about unfulfilled conversations with your father and that’s an extremely middle-aged man thing. It’s like ‘Field of Dreams.’”

Black actress and academy member Alfre Woodard, 59, cited the sexually explicit “Shame,” which got no nominations, as a film whose Oscar hopes may have been doomed by the academy’s demographics. “Maybe if the median age was 45 to 50, a film like ‘Shame’ might show up, which I thought was a brilliantly rendered piece but a subject matter that you don’t expect a certain older demographic would flock to see,” she said.

Woodard, who joined the academy in 1985 and has been active on committees, said she often encourages women to apply for membership, believing the best way to effect change is from within. “It’s like sitting out an election,” she said. “The country is only going toward its ideals when people participate.”

But others have lost patience. Academy member Bill Duke, a black director, said: “The black community sees the academy as an entity that ignores the needs, wants, desires and representation of black directors, producers, actors and writers. Whether it is true or not, that is how it’s perceived – as an elitist group with no concern or regard for the minority community and industry. And there doesn’t seem to be any desire to change that perception.”

Some academy critics believe the organization, through its membership and Oscar picks, reinforces a lack of diversity on screen and in studio decision-making.

“People of color are always peripheral,” said black character actor Bernie Casey, who said he recently quit the academy because he was disenchanted with its racial makeup. “Asians, Latinos, black people – you never see them. We are 320 million people in America and about 48 million black people and the same of Latin descent – but you would not believe that based on what you see in films.”

This year, several minorities landed nominations in the acting categories: Davis and her fellow cast member from “The Help,” Octavia Spencer, and Demian Bichir, a Mexican-born performer who starred in “A Better Life.” All of the year’s five nominated directors are white men, and none of the 21 producers of the nine best picture nominees is a person of color.

Were there more Latino academy members, Bichir said, opportunities for Latinos would improve. “That would mean there would be a lot more roles for Latin actors,” the actor said, “and a lot more movies for (Latin) cinematographers.”

The academy was founded in 1927 with two aims: to mediate labor disputes and improve the movie industry’s image. Louis B. Mayer, the legendary head of MGM, initiated the idea and invited an elite cadre of professionals, including actress and United Artists studio co-founder Mary Pickford, director Cecil B. DeMille and producer Irving Thalberg, to join.

The academy’s membership grew steadily over the years as the organization moved away from labor management issues to focus on film preservation, research and the Oscars, first presented in 1929 at the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel.

Today, the academy oversees more than $196 million in assets and dispenses more than $20 million in grants and scholarships a year, including to Streetlights, a job training and placement group that works to promote diversity in Hollywood. It donates $750,000 annually to film festivals and sponsors an annual screenwriting competition that rewards winners with $35,000 fellowships. According to its tax filing for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, the Oscars generated $81.3 million in revenue for the group.

The academy grew rapidly between 1990 and 2000, adding close to 800 members. Then-executive director Bruce Davis alerted the board to the steep increase and noted there had not been a commensurate growth in the film business. The organization attributed the membership surge to a relaxed attitude toward admission.

“The guilds are a democracy. If you have credits, nobody asks how good you were,” said Davis, executive director from 1989 to 2011. “But the academy has to be different.”

In response, the organization in 2004 began limiting membership growth to 30 per year, not including those admitted to fill vacancies created by deaths, resignations or retirement. It also clarified and stiffened its policies for admittance. The available slots are allocated among the 15 branches and the academy’s at-large division.

There are three ways to become a candidate for membership: land an Oscar nomination; apply and be recommended by two members of a branch; or earn an endorsement from the branch’s membership committee or the academy staff.

The membership committees then vote on the candidates; those who get a majority are asked to join. Almost everyone accepts.

Actors now must have three significant credits to be considered for membership, and producers need two solo producing credits or the equivalent. Such criteria benefit people with more experience. “The academy is always going to be slightly older – if just because you have to have about five years of credits before you’re even considered,” said Joe Letteri, a four-time Oscar winner for visual effects.

In practice, the bar for admittance varies widely from branch to branch. Last year, actress Rooney Mara and visual effects supervisor Tim Burke were among 178 invitees. Mara had had a small role in “The Social Network” and a bigger part in “A Nightmare on Elm Street” (she had yet to star in “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo,” for which she got an Oscar nomination). Burke, in contrast, had won an Academy Award a decade earlier for his work on “Gladiator.”

The academy in 2004 began publicizing its invitees’ names.

The more than 1,000 people invited to join since 2004 include black actors such as Jennifer Hudson, Mo’Nique and Jeffrey Wright. But overall, the group was only slightly more diverse than the academy it was joining – 89 percent white and 73 percent male. Sherak pointed out that in 2011, the invitees were 30 percent female and 10 percent nonwhite.

The academy’s overall composition before and after the 2004 policy shift remained close to 93 percent Caucasian and 76 percent male, and its median age dropped from 64 to 62.

As part of the rule changes, Davis urged that a wider circle of potential invitees be considered. In 2009, he suggested to the sound branch committee that it had overlooked India’s Resul Pookutty, who won an Oscar that year for sound mixing on “Slumdog Millionaire.” Davis admired his work and was moved by his emotional acceptance speech on Oscar night. (He was invited a year later.)

“When I got the letter from them saying they would like to invite me into the academy, I was literally screaming in the studio,” said Pookutty, who flew from Mumbai to Los Angeles to attend the new member lunch. “It means a great deal. More than the pride of it, I feel that my whole fraternity in India has been recognized and honored.”

Sherak and other academy officials said they’re eager for more applications from women and minorities, and more involvement from those who are already members.

“I’m hoping your story runs and 7,000 phone calls break the lines here,” Sherak said. “We’ve been trying to reach out to the constituency and we’re looking for help. You want to be on a committee? Tell us what committee. If you are sitting waiting for us to find your name in our make-believe book and we are going to call you, we are not going to do that. Come to us, we’ll get you in. We want you in. That would help us a lot.”

Valentine’s Day 2012 has come and gone.

Did you find and/or keep love ?

Almost fifty years on this planet and I still don’t have a clue about the man/women dynamic.

But when I see the current divorce statistics, I understand that lots of other folks don’t seem to have a clue either.

I have never been married.  As I age, I truly wonder if I will ever be.

From the earliest days of man when the first caveman dragged the first cavewoman by her hair, showed her his cave paintings or protected her from the first dinosaur men and woman began the monumental challenge of mating (coupling up, not sex.)

Will I/we ever figure it out ?

Hope springs eternal ~Scott

Courtesy of Ariel Ford – The Soulmate Secret

According to a recent “Atlantic Monthly” article, not only are there more singles than ever in history, but (according to this article) dating and mating have never been tougher especially for women.

I asked my friend and relationship expert, Carol Allen, for her thoughts on this topic and to share with you a remarkable new series she has created on “what men want.” Here’s what she has to say and a preview to what she has discovered on this topic:

In terms of romantic opportunities, it’s more of a “man’s world” than ever.

You see, women are doing extremely well – more are graduating from college, medical school, and law school than men these days. And male-dominated fields, like construction, manufacturing, and finance, have been hit hardest by the economic woes, so women are now often making more money than the men they’re meeting, too.

But we still typically want a man who is “taller, richer, smarter.” So there are more great women all vying for the same (shrinking) pool of quality men.

Also, while the trend of internet dating has given both men and women unprecedented access to each other (no longer do you have to rely on introductions from friends, or chance encounters at the gym or grocery store with that hot stranger), it’s created a false sense of abundance, causing many singles to have ridiculous standards.

Matchmakers tell me they see this played out again and again everyone is so sure they can “have it all” in a mate, they quickly disqualify anyone for the smallest thing: one misstep (food in your teeth, off-color remark, seeming case of nerves) and that great guy or gal you met is G-O-N-E.

So you’d better know what you’re doing, to be sure you don’t scare off that special someone.

You see, soulmates don’t always recognize each other right away. While couples like Arielle and Brian knew instantly, that’s not always the case. I was just sure I wasn’t going to marry my husband of 14 years, until it hit me that he was the one seven years after I’d met him!

It can take time and shared experiences, to really GET how special someone is and how strongly you connect.

So be sure you know how to handle every step of the way, from the first meeting, to the first date, to the first time you get “up close and personal,” to negotiating how to join your lives.

Since women turn to me for answers, I decided to go straight to the source MEN. I’ve asked the 8 greatest male relationship experts in the world to reveal how to be the woman who stands out in a man’s mind, and just what to do and say at critical moments to tell him you’re the best woman he could possibly find.

It’s called “What Men Want” and it rocks because these men are geniuses who’ve worked with thousands of men for years, and don’t just share their opinions they share what they’ve learned from men of all walks of life, from all over the world.

You see, when you know how to give a man what he wants, you’ll get what you want.

And a soulmate relationship ensues.

Here is just a small sampling of the golden nuggets that come from these incredible men who are willing to reveal their innermost beliefs:

**The men said they were THRILLED when a woman made the first move, and that many men DO NOT love the chase as they’ve been hurt or rejected a lot!

**If you make men feel great about themselves, and that you truly care about them, they’ll WANT to commit. Being needy or clingy, bossy or pushy are the top reasons men withdraw.

**Thousands of men surveyed said what they want MOST from us in bed is an emotional connection!

**All of the experts insist that men want to fall in love as much as women do.

**Despite what you’ve heard, the men swear we SHOULDN’T be dating multiple guys if we really like one as many men find this a turn off, and become intimidated even if they’re strong and confident.

Courtesy of www.theatlantic.com

In Search of Mr. Right

Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, the author of Why There Are No Good Men Left, discusses the challenges facing today’s single women, and argues that the contemporary courtship system needs to be transformed

By SAGE STOSSEL

Odds are that the pulled-together young woman you encounter in the elevator, emerging from the gym, or riding the subway wearing sleek professional attire but no wedding ring is struggling to meet someone to spend her life with. The thirty-something woman of today is three times more likely to be single than her counterpart of the 1970s. Indeed, both women and men—particularly those with high levels of education—are staying single far longer into their adult years than in previous eras. For both groups this delayed search for a spouse is a deliberate choice, but the effect of that delay on the two sexes is dramatically different.

For men, the change in timing is merely an incidental matter with few repercussions. But for women, the delay makes the search more difficult, fraught with anxiety, and shadowed by the possibility of ultimate failure. It is this pervasive anxiety that explains the current popularity of such movies, television shows, and books as Bridget Jones’ Diary, Sex and the City, and Cowboys Are My Weakness, all of which feature thirty-something women struggling to find men.

In a new book, Why There Are No Good Men Left: The Romantic Plight of the New Single Woman, the social historian Barbara Dafoe Whitehead considers the challenges facing the contemporary single woman in her search for a mate, and argues that the prevailing courtship system must be transformed. Inspired in part by the fact that both of her own thirty-something daughters are single, Whitehead (who is the director of a scholarly organization called the National Marriage Project) undertook an informal study of the issue—poring over demographic studies, surveys, focus-group transcripts, self-help books, and popular fiction, and personally interviewing sixty single women in their late twenties and early thirties.

What she found was that at the time in their lives when they feel ready for a partner, young women are at a loss as to how to find one. Contemporary young women, she points out, have been raised to seek fulfilling careers rather than husbands. And upon college graduation they want to spend time on their own, making their mark on the world, rather than pairing off right away and exchanging their independence for family life.

The problem, she explains, is that when these women reach their late twenties or thirties and become interested in settling down, the large pool of eligible young men to which they had access in college—with backgrounds and ambitions similar to their own—has disappeared. A woman at this stage in her life is likely to be trapped in a somewhat narrow routine that includes work, working-out, and socializing with a close circle of friends. Her odds of encountering her future spouse in these limited spheres are low.

The difficulties of the woman no longer fresh out of college are compounded by the fact that, as time passes, she is increasingly faced with competition from younger women. And if her life goals include not just marriage but children as well, then she must keep in mind that her time-frame is limited. Many women in this situation begin to feel a growing sense of panic, as they fear that their chances for the life they envisioned are slipping away.

Though conservative commentators have argued that the obvious solution is for women to go back to looking for their spouses while still in college, Whitehead dismisses such views, pointing out that women who wait longer to marry are more mature, more financially secure, and have a better sense of who they could happily spend their lives with than those who marry earlier. Moreover, studies have shown that later marriages tend to be more stable and long-lasting.

What needs to change, then, she suggests, is not the contemporary woman’s postponement of the search for a spouse, but the courtship system itself. A well-functioning courtship system, she emphasizes, should succeed in bringing a society’s eligible young people into appropriate partnerships. But today’s courtship system fails on that count, leaving singles who have aged out of the college scene to fend for themselves.

She expresses confidence, however, that given the urgency of the need, new courtship mechanisms—tailored to fit the needs of busy professionals with limited time (both in the day and in their window for finding appropriate partners)—will spring up to fill the void. Already, she points out, such innovations as online introduction services and “SpeedDating” events have emerged and appear to be flourishing. It will take some creative ingenuity, she argues, and a good understanding of the aspirations of today’s single women, but with a concerted effort, society should be able to “revive [women's] flagging faith that it is possible to find lasting love and to integrate a loving marriage into a life of individual career achievement.”

Barbara Dafoe Whitehead holds a PhD. in American social history from the University of Chicago. She has written for a number of publications, including Slate, The Times Literary Supplement, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, and The Boston Globe. Her previous book, The Divorce Culture (1997), was an expansion of her controversial Atlantic Monthly article “Dan Quayle Was Right” (April 1993). She has three adult children and lives in Amherst, Massachusetts with her husband.

I spoke with her recently by telephone.

—Sage Stossel

Barbara Dafoe Whitehead

You mention in the acknowledgments that you have two single daughters in their thirties. What role did they play in the conception and writing of this book?

Their life experience certainly influenced my thinking. I have a big extended family, and in addition to my two daughters, I have four nieces, ranging in age from their mid-twenties to their mid-thirties, who are also single women, living and working in big cities. I couldn’t help but notice how different their early adult lives are from the early adult lives of women of my generation. So I guess in that way my daughters helped to draw me to the topic.

Your previous book is about divorce, and you’re a director of a scholarly organization called the National Marriage Project at Rutgers. How did your interest in family issues develop?

It really began with my interest in the social history of women and children back in my graduate school days. I realized back then that socially and culturally things were changing pretty fast in American family life. Gradually, as part of my work, I got interested in divorce and marriage and the whole question of how people choose their mates. The book looks at the contemporary mating system and why some of the most accomplished women of our day are finding it a struggle to find the right man at the right time in their lives.

Is it your sense that society as a whole suffers in some way if highly educated professional women must struggle to find mates—and that society should therefore (for its own good) take it upon itself to change the situation? Or is the problem more one of personal angst for the individual women directly affected?

The book isn’t about a social problem. It’s about an important set of social changes. The impact of divorce on children, which I wrote about in my previous book, is a social problem. But the reason I write about the romantic plight of the new single woman isn’t because society is going to be damaged if she doesn’t find the right man on the right time on the right terms. It’s because college-educated women have been the authors of social change. For example, college-educated Baby Boom women were the focus of huge social interest and concern in the past—particularly with respect to their progress in the work place. This was not because society was going to collapse if Baby Boom women didn’t get good careers but because they were creating social and cultural change. That’s what this book is about—it’s a look at a recent and important set of social changes and the women who are part of it.

What audience is the book intended for?

It’s written for three audiences. One obviously is the people I’m writing about: college-educated single women in their twenties and thirties who are experiencing some of the circumstances I’m describing. A second audience is the parents of the young women who are in this life stage. A third might be those with some scholarly interest in the changing patterns of dating, mating, and union formation.

You write that the dating and mating behavior of contemporary single women has been neglected by the scholarly world so far. What fields do you think could shed useful light on the subject?

I think a broad range of the human and social sciences—from anthropology to religion to economics to literature—could shed some light on today’s dating and mating practices.

You write that the new “chick lit&” genre of fiction about smart, well-educated women having trouble finding good men is analogous to genres that appeared in earlier eras when the courtship system was also in upheaval. You explain that in Medieval France the great chivalric poem the Roman de la Rose, for example, offered instructions for jobless young men on how to win a lady. Does the “chick lit” genre offer that same kind of instructive element? Or is it more just an expression of frustration with things as they are?

“Chick lit” in my definition—though maybe not in the orthodox definition—would include dating advice books. But chick lit fiction is really a cultural indicator of the absence of a common set of rules and rituals to guide women and men in their contemporary courtship practices. It is evidence of a watershed moment when we have mating systems in transition: an old one is receding and a new one has not yet fully formed.

How did you find the women you interviewed for the book?

I recruited them through ads in alumni magazines and public radio magazines. Some of the women who were referred to me took a little recruitment ad that I wrote and put it out on their e-mail networks. I just asked to interview women who fit a particular demographic profile.

The interviews themselves were all the same. They weren’t really about “guy talk” or “girl talk”—they were simply an effort to collect biographical, educational, and dating histories of the women who agreed to participate.

Did you also consider interviewing married women of the same age and educational background to compare how their views on courtship and women’s life patterns might be different?

Well, that would have been the best way to do a comparative scholarly investigation. But as I say in the introduction, this is just a journalistic first sketch of the subject. Given the limitations of resources and time, I focused exclusively on women who weren’t married. It would be very worthwhile to look at a similar sample of women who were married, because I do expect that there would be interesting differences.

You mention a 1999 book about women and career achievement called See Jane Win, which you describe as “a study of the girlhood paths followed by older successful women.” Have any analogous books or studies been published in which insight is gleaned from the paths taken by various older women in their family and romantic lives?

One book that looks at dating and mating practices in an earlier era is by Beth Bailey. It’s called From Front Porch to Back Seat. Her analysis covers the period from the 1920s to the 1960s. It’s in the spirit of what I’m trying to do, which is to look at the broad and deep changes in the social rules and practices of dating.

You talk about how in recent decades girls have been raised to be more competitive, strong, and assertive than they were in the past. Did the women you talked to feel that those qualities were somehow a detriment to them when it came to romance?

Not particularly. Several women mentioned that at times in their life they felt that their intelligence or intellectual achievement seemed to work against them in their romantic relationships with men, but most women felt that there were some men “out there” who would be attracted to smart women. The problem was finding them.

You talk about how success has been redefined for women—that it’s shifted from being more about marriage and children to individual accomplishment. But have you found that on a deep-seated level, many of the people you interviewed still consider marriage and children to be ultimately what makes a woman successful?

That’s an interesting question. I think the women I talked to want to have both. Their ultimate sense of what they want in life includes family and children, but they aren’t willing to contemplate the fact that they therefore will probably have to give up some of their own individual pursuits and career goals. I think the definition of success includes both love and work, and that the challenge is how to sequence that. There is always a certain amount of choice and compromise involved.

You mention that studies have shown that it’s the women who are better educated and wait longer to think about getting married who tend to have more stable, long-lasting marriages than women in other demographic groups. But that seems sort of counterintuitive; you’d think the fact that they’re spending their early adulthoods learning to become independent might make it more difficult for them to later subsume themselves into family life where the collective welfare of the family takes precedence over individual pursuits.

I think that people who are a little older and more mature and who have had a chance to do at least some of the things that people today feel they need to do in order to make a wise judgment about a partner are more likely to eventually end up in a stable kind of marriage. It’s also true, of course, that they’re likely to marry someone who is similar to them in education and earning power, which means that those marriages are likely to have more money in them. But there is also some contradictory evidence which suggests that if you have two people who are hyper-careerist and well set in their ways there can be conflict.

A recurring theme in your description of the cohort of women whose plight you’re addressing is their having been raised to win prizes, achieve, and generally go after the best of everything. Are these women to some extent seeking impressive husbands as trophies? Are there nice men who express romantic interest in them, but whom these women won’t have anything to do with because they’re not high enough up the ladder of achievement, or because it’s too early yet to tell how far they’ll go?

What the women I spoke with said was that they want a husband who is independent and dedicated to his career, but that he doesn’t have to make a lot of money. The emphasis was always on finding a best friend—a soul mate—someone you could tell all your troubles to and who would be supportive. So it doesn’t seem to be the case that these women were looking for super high-achieving men.

You talk about how there really isn’t a courtship crisis for high-achieving young men. But I would have thought they would experience some of the same difficulties as high-achieving women with respect to figuring out where and how to meet suitable mates. After all, they tend to be on the same track as high-achieving women in terms of waiting until they’re far beyond their college years to get married.

It’s true that you do hear some talk about these problems from men as well, but one reason it doesn’t come up as much as a cultural theme is that the male biological clock ticks more slowly and men have more years to devote to their search. They’re also able to choose among younger women. Of course, that pattern seems to be changing slightly—there’s now more navigation up and down the age scale as opposed to the past when men married women who were about two years younger. However, I think that for men, as well as for women, the standard for someone who you’d want to spend your life with hinges much more today on emotional intimacy. It takes some trial and error and a pretty prolonged and dedicated search to identify the kind of person who is emotionally in sync with you and who is able to communicate and listen to trouble talk.

At the National Marriage Project, we’ve been interviewing men for the past three years, so I have some sense of the men’s side of this, though it’s not central to the book.

And these men you talked to didn’t express the feeling that they were sometimes being spurned because they weren’t impressive enough?

Well some men did, yes, but they tended not to be four-year college graduates. They were guys who were not quite so well-educated and felt that many women looked down on them.

You argue that a new courtship system reflecting contemporary realities needs to be developed so that high-achieving women will have some societal assistance when it comes to finding mates. You point to the emergence of online dating and the proliferation of commercial introduction services as an auspicious beginning. How optimistic are you about the prospects for a mating system that will one day make finding a desirable partner straightforward and relatively easy for the new single woman?

Well, it’s never been easy, but it can be a lot easier than it is now. I do think it is likely that a common set of practices, rules, and rituals will evolve to make finding a mate less of a do-it-yourself project than it is today. As for the Internet, it obviously won’t provide the whole answer, but I think it will play an important role. In the past, technological innovations have had a huge impact on dating and mating. No one would dismiss the influence on dating of the automobile or the birth-control pill. What’s more, the Internet is a technology that helps us to save time and manage information, and both of these things are important to the way the new single woman conducts her mating search.

Is this something you plan to continue to study for a while?

Yes, I do think I’ll continue to keep tabs on what’s going on in the dating world. The topic offers lots of possibilities and is continuing to evolve … Although I suppose it’s a rather strange occupation for someone who’s pushing sixty!

As anyone reading this probably knows by now, Whitney Houston, the singer and actress, has passed away on Saturday, February 11, 2012.

As of this writing, the specifics of her death are unknown.

When someone, especially someone as familiar to the public spotlight as Ms. Houston, passes on before she reaches “old age,” they are said to have “gone to soon” as if any of us are guaranteed any amount of days, weeks, months, or years of life regardless of our “status” in this world.

At the time of her death Ms. Houston was 48 years old.

I am currently 47 years old (48 in April 2012.)

Her first album (they called them albums back in the day) “Whitney Houston” was released in 1985.  I was a junior at Clarion University of Pennsylvania at the time.

The impression that she made on me was that she was pretty, had a powerful singing voice, and could sing the heck out of a pop, dance, and/or gospel song.

During her career Ms. Houston went on to amass millions of dollars in earnings while selling millions of records, earning millions in box office dollars, acquiring hundreds of awards, world-wide accolades, and fans throughout the continents.

Later in her career for whatever reason drugs became a large part of her story and her life.

I, and I certainly understand that many more like me, are deeply puzzled when someone who “seemingly has it all” (money, talent, fame, a loving family, etc.) embraces a lifestyle that seems destine to end it all “too soon.”

Obviously, I nor anyone else will ever know ultimately why Ms. Houston decided to travel down the tragic road she did or others that proceeded her with a similar story (Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley and many, many famous entertainers) did.

99.999% of us will never know the level of “success” that was achieved by Whitney Houston.

Why wasn’t that enough to make her “happy” ?

Why wasn’t that enough to insure that she didn’t end up “gone to soon” ?

And perhaps, more importantly, what can the rest of us learn from this ?  If, in fact, there is anything to learn from it. ~Scott

Courtesy of www.ew.com

Whitney Houston, superstar of records, films, dies

by Associated Press

Whitney Houston, who ruled as pop music’s queen until her majestic voice was ravaged by drug use and her regal image was ruined by erratic behavior and a tumultuous marriage to singer Bobby Brown, died Saturday. She was 48.

Beverly Hills police Lt. Mark Rosen told reporters outside the Beverly Hilton that Houston was pronounced dead at 3:55 p.m. in her room on the fourth floor of the hotel. Her body remained there and Beverly Hills detectives were investigating.

“There were no obvious signs of any criminal intent,” Rosen said.

Houston’s publicist, Kristen Foster, said the cause of death was unknown.

Rosen said police received a 911 call from hotel security about Houston at 3:43 p.m. Saturday. Paramedics who were already at the hotel because of a Grammy party unsuccessfully tried to resuscitate the singer, he said.

Houston’s end came on the eve of music’s biggest night – the Grammy Awards. It’s a showcase where she once reigned, and her death was sure to cast a heavy pall on Sunday’s ceremony.

Her longtime mentor Clive Davis was to hold his annual concert and dinner Saturday at the same hotel where her body was found, and a representative of the show said it would proceed.

Producer Jimmy Jam, who had worked with Houston, said he anticipated the evening would become a tribute to her, and he expected there to be one at the Grammys as well.

Houston was supposed to appear at the gala, and Davis had told The Associated Press that she would perhaps perform: “It’s her favorite night of the year … (so) who knows by the end of the evening,” he said.

Houston had been at rehearsals for the show Thursday, coaching singers Brandy and Monica, according to a person who was at the event but was not authorized to speak publicly about it. The person said Houston looked disheveled, was sweating profusely and liquor and cigarettes could be smelled on her breath.

Two days ago, she performed at a pre-Grammy party with singer Kelly Price. Singer Kenny Lattimore hosted the event, and said Houston sang the gospel classic “Jesus Loves Me” with Price, her voice registering softly, not with the same power it had at its height.

Lattimore said Houston was gregarious and was in a good mood, surrounded by friends and family, including daughter Bobbi Kristina.

“She just seemed like she was having a great night that night,” said Lattimore, who said he was in shock over her death.

Aretha Franklin, her godmother, also said she was stunned.

“I just can’t talk about it now,” Franklin said in a short statement. “It’s so stunning and unbelievable. I couldn’t believe what I was reading coming across the TV screen.”

The Rev. Al Sharpton said he would call for a national prayer Sunday morning during a service at Second Baptist Church in Los Angeles.

“The morning of the Grammys, the world should pause and pray for the memory of a gifted songbird,” Sharpton said in a statement.

In a statement, Recording Academy President and CEO Neil Portnow said Houston “was one of the world’s greatest pop singers of all time who leaves behind a robust musical soundtrack spanning the past three decades.”

“Her powerful voice graced many memorable and award-winning songs,” Portnow said. “A light has been dimmed in our music community today, and we extend our deepest condolences to her family, friends, fans and all who have been touched by her beautiful voice.”

At her peak, Houston was the golden girl of the music industry. From the middle 1980s to the late 1990s, she was one of the world’s best-selling artists. She wowed audiences with effortless, powerful, and peerless vocals that were rooted in the black church but made palatable to the masses with a pop sheen.

Her success carried her beyond music to movies, where she starred in hits like The Bodyguard and Waiting to Exhale.

She had the perfect voice and the perfect image: a gorgeous singer who had sex appeal but was never overtly sexual, who maintained perfect poise.

She influenced a generation of younger singers, from Christina Aguilera to Mariah Carey, who when she first came out sounded so much like Houston that many thought it was Houston.

But by the end of her career, Houston became a stunning cautionary tale of the toll of drug use. Her album sales plummeted and the hits stopped coming; her once serene image was shattered by a wild demeanor and bizarre public appearances. She confessed to abusing cocaine, marijuana and pills, and her once pristine voice became raspy and hoarse, unable to hit the high notes as she had during her prime.

“The biggest devil is me. I’m either my best friend or my worst enemy,” Houston told ABC’s Diane Sawyer in an infamous 2002 interview with then-husband Brown by her side.

It was a tragic fall for a superstar who was one of the top-selling artists in pop music history, with more than 55 million records sold in the United States alone.

She seemed to be born into greatness. In addition to being Franklin’s goddaughter, she was the daughter of gospel singer Cissy Houston and the cousin of 1960s pop diva Dionne Warwick.

Houston first started singing in the church as a child. In her teens, she sang backup for Chaka Khan, Jermaine Jackson and others, in addition to modeling. It was around that time when music mogul Clive Davis first heard Houston perform.

“The time that I first saw her singing in her mother’s act in a club … it was such a stunning impact,” Davis told “Good Morning America.”

“To hear this young girl breathe such fire into this song. I mean, it really sent the proverbial tingles up my spine,” he added.

Before long, the rest of the country would feel it, too. Houston made her album debut in 1985 with “Whitney Houston,” which sold millions and spawned hit after hit. “Saving All My Love for You” brought her her first Grammy, for best female pop vocal. “How Will I Know,” “You Give Good Love” and “The Greatest Love of All” also became hit singles.

Another multiplatinum album, “Whitney,” came out in 1987 and included hits like “Where Do Broken Hearts Go” and “I Wanna Dance With Somebody.”

The New York Times wrote that Houston “possesses one of her generation’s most powerful gospel-trained voices, but she eschews many of the churchier mannerisms of her forerunners. She uses ornamental gospel phrasing only sparingly, and instead of projecting an earthy, tearful vulnerability, communicates cool self-assurance and strength, building pop ballads to majestic, sustained peaks of intensity.”

Her decision not to follow the more soulful inflections of singers like Franklin drew criticism by some who saw her as playing down her black roots to go pop and reach white audiences. The criticism would become a constant refrain through much of her career. She was even booed during the “Soul Train Awards” in 1989.

“Sometimes it gets down to that, you know?” she told Katie Couric in 1996. “You’re not black enough for them. I don’t know. You’re not R&B enough. You’re very pop. The white audience has taken you away from them.”

Some saw her 1992 marriage to former New Edition member and soul crooner Bobby Brown as an attempt to refute those critics. It seemed to be an odd union; she was seen as pop’s pure princess while he had a bad-boy image and already had children of his own. (The couple only had one daughter, Bobbi Kristina, born in 1993.) Over the years, he would be arrested several times, on charges ranging from DUI to failure to pay child support.

But Houston said their true personalities were not as far apart as people may have believed.

“When you love, you love. I mean, do you stop loving somebody because you have different images? You know, Bobby and I basically come from the same place,” she told Rolling Stone in 1993. “You see somebody, and you deal with their image, that’s their image. It’s part of them, it’s not the whole picture. I am not always in a sequined gown. I am nobody’s angel. I can get down and dirty. I can get raunchy.”

Brown was getting ready to perform at a New Edition reunion tour in Southaven, Miss., as news spread about Houston’s death. The group went ahead with its performance, though Brown appeared overcome with emotion when his voice cracked at the beginning of a ballad and he left the stage.

Before his departure, he told the sell-out crowd: “First of all, I want to tell you that I love you all. Second, I would like to say, I love you Whitney. The hardest thing for me to do is to come on this stage.”

Brown said he decided to perform because fans had shown their loyalty to the group for more than 25 years. During an intermission, one of Houston’s early hits, “You Give Good Love,” played over the speakers. Fans stood up and began singing along.

It would take several years for the public to see the “down and dirty” side of Houston. Her moving 1991 rendition of “The Star Spangled Banner” at the Super Bowl, amid the first Gulf War, set a new standard and once again reaffirmed her as America’s sweetheart.

In 1992, she became a star in the acting world with The Bodyguard. Despite mixed reviews, the story of a singer (Houston) guarded by a former Secret Service agent (Kevin Costner) was an international success.

It also gave her perhaps her most memorable hit: a searing, stunning rendition of Dolly Parton’s “I Will Always Love You,” which sat atop the charts for weeks. It was Grammy’s record of the year and best female pop vocal, and the Bodyguard soundtrack was named album of the year.

She returned to the big screen in 1995-96 with Waiting to Exhale and The Preacher’s Wife. Both spawned soundtrack albums, and another hit studio album, “My Love Is Your Love,” in 1998, brought her a Grammy for best female R&B vocal for the cut “It’s Not Right But It’s Okay.”

But during these career and personal highs, Houston was using drugs. In an interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2009, she said by the time “The Preacher’s Wife” was released, “(doing drugs) was an everyday thing. … I would do my work, but after I did my work, for a whole year or two, it was every day. … I wasn’t happy by that point in time. I was losing myself.”

In the interview, Houston blamed her rocky marriage to Brown, which included a charge of domestic abuse against Brown in 1993. They divorced in 2007.

Houston would go to rehab twice before she would declare herself drug-free to Winfrey in 2009. But in the interim, there were missed concert dates, a stop at an airport due to drugs, and public meltdowns.

She was so startlingly thin during a 2001 Michael Jackson tribute concert that rumors spread she had died the next day. Her crude behavior and jittery appearance on Brown’s reality show, “Being Bobby Brown,” was an example of her sad decline. Her Sawyer interview, where she declared “crack is whack,” was often parodied. She dropped out of the spotlight for a few years.

Houston staged what seemed to be a successful comeback with the 2009 album “I Look To You.” The album debuted on the top of the charts, and would eventually go platinum.

Things soon fell apart. A concert to promote the album on Good Morning America went awry as Houston’s voice sounded ragged and off-key. She blamed an interview with Winfrey for straining her voice.

A world tour launched overseas, however, only confirmed suspicions that Houston had lost her treasured gift, as she failed to hit notes and left many fans unimpressed; some walked out. Canceled concert dates raised speculation that she may have been abusing drugs, but she denied those claims and said she was in great shape, blaming illness for cancellations.

Houston was to make her return to film in the remake of the classic movie Sparkle. Filming on the movie, which stars former American Idol winner Jordin Sparks, recently wrapped.

Good Sunday, February 5 everyone.

I hope that your Super Bowl Sunday is treating you kindly.

Recently, I/we have been receiving an overwhelming amount of positive feedback on the blog postings at www.planetimprov.com

In the blogging world often bloggers assume a “Field of Dreams” mentality concerning their blog posts, “If I compose/post it, they will come.”

I understand that the vastness of the world wide web and the millions/billions of human beings that hitch a ride on it regularly have lots and lots of choices of what they will read/digest/enjoy.

When I started composing/posting this blog a few months ago, I did so with the mindset that I would attempt to add content to the world wide web that would be: positive, informative, instructive, and entertaining.

Have I succeeded ?  That is a subjective question that only the readers of the blog can answer.  I am hopeful that is the case.

Since the feedback that I have been receiving concerning the blog has been increasing rather substantially over the weeks and months since its inception, I wanted to expand upon that readership and loyalty.

(Obviously,) a corporation, and perhaps especially a non-profit an independent non-profit arts corporation (that has never received a penny contribution beyond those in exchange for shows and workshops) can not exist forever on goodwill and positivity.

As much as it stands in direct opposition of the artist’s way of thinking, a corporation (non-profit or for profit, with artistic goals or otherwise) needs money to survive.

Actor’s Crib, Inc. is no different.

Not to force religion or spiritually upon those of you who do not believe in such things, I look to the Bible…

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

~Matthew 7:7

You have my promise that those of you who enjoy the blog on www.planetimprov.com will never have to pay to read it.

However, for those of you who enjoy the website/blog and wish to concretely express your positive feelings toward it I am (within the next couple of weeks) going to allow you to express those feelings monetarily.

In the upcoming weeks I will be adding a couple of methods so that those of you how find valuable in the content of the blog, and the website in general, to contribute to my/our non-profit corporation, Actor’s Crib, Inc.

1.  I will be offering my recently completed book, “A Year of Valuable Lesson” via email for only $5.

2.  I will create a button that website/blog readers can click on to make a contribution to Actor’s Crib, Inc.  This/these contributions are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS.)  I will happily forward any contributors a receipt to forward to the IRS for tax year purposes.

From the bottom of my/our heart(s) I/we thank you for enjoying the website/the blog and continuing to share your comments (both positive and constructive criticism.)

In advance I also thank you for your generosity (both of positive thoughts and words and should you feel the need and have the means to do so through monetary donations.)

Have a wonderful life until we communicate again.

~Scott

Probably only one or two people know the things that I am about to share with you.

*I have suffered multiple bouts of severe depression within my lifetime.

*I have been taking anti-depressants for quite a few years and continue to do so.

*I have contemplated suicide at times within my lifetime.

There would be those who debate the reality of depression.

“You’re just having a bad day.”  “Snap out if it.”  “Don’t be such a baby.”  “You are weak.”  “Cheer up.” “Turn that frown upside down.”   “You’re crazy.”

Some might (and do) say the statements above when the topic of being depressed (and suffering from it) is brought to light or someone dare mention the topic in public (or even amongst closest friends and/or loved ones.)

Alcoholism, drug addition, and a multitude of other chemical and/or mental afflictions/addiction have been brought out of the darkness over the decades and (for the most part) the stigma has been removed from them.

Depression, however, in my humble opinion still is a topic that is too often whispered by some and kept as a dirty little secret by many, many others.

(Obviously) I am neither a doctor nor a mental health professional, but in my humble opinion depression is all too real.

I know, because I have experienced it myself multiple times within my lifetime.

I don’t say/admit that as a request for pity.

I say/admit that so that anyone who is currently suffering from depression can understand that as dark or helpless a feeling/emotion as it can be, you can get past it temporarily, and control it, permanently.

Whether that is through counseling, medication, talking to a friend, family member, peer, professional associate, etc., or a combination of multiple of these, I highly suggest that you do so (or encourage some one you know and/or love to do so) as soon as possible if you/they are suffering from depression before it’s too late.

Along with anti-depressants and professional counseling the thing that has been most beneficial in keeping me depression-free for quite a while is just changing my way of thinking.

When I was having a challenging time (professionally and/or personally) I would also make the faulty assumption that the way I was currently feeling would be the way that I was feeling forever.  There was no hope to ever feel “happy” again.  And once my depressive state took over all I wanted was for the overwhelming mental pain to go away.

When I/someone is in the middle of a depressive state, it can seem that life is not worth living and that ceasing one’s life will make the pain go away.

But no matter how bad the mental pain gets or how challenging life gets, it is always worth living because ultimately we always have the potential to make a difference in someone/multiple/many people’s life just as others always have the potential to make a difference in ours.

Depression is nothing of which to be ashamed. it is often times just the lack of certain levels of chemicals within the brain.

When depression threatens to make us most selfish is just when we need to be at our most caring/sharing. I recently wrote as part of my daily “valuable lessons” that I share as part of my Twitter account (@improvscott) a though in which I would have hoped that someone would have shared with me when I was in my most deeply depressive state,  “Yesterday is not today.  Today is not tomorrow.  Now is not forever.”

I don’t know that I would have believed it then, but I whole-heartedly believe it now.  And if you (or someone you know/like/love) is/are currently experiencing depression, allow yourself or help them believe it too. ~Scott

Courtesy of www.psychologytoday.com

Eight Ways to Actively Fight Depression

An innovative approach to treating your depression

Published on October 6, 2011 by Lisa Firestone, Ph.D. inCompassion Matters

When you’re depressed, it often feels like nothing in the world can make you feel better. Depression is a devious disorder, because the symptoms it creates can discourage you from completing the very actions or seeking the help that would begin your recovery. Lack of energy, low self-esteem and dwindling excitement are some of the symptoms that make it hard to get out of a depressed state. For anyone experiencing this stuckness, it’s important to remember that depression is a very common and highly treatable disorder. By treating it like any other physical disease and taking the actions that will destroy the parasites infecting your mental state, you can conquer your depression. Here are eight steps to doing just that.

Recognize and Conquer Your Critical Self Attacks

Depression is often accompanied by a critical, self-destructive mentality that interferes with and distracts us from our daily lives. When depressed, people tend to accept this negative identity as a true representation of who they are. Many people fail to recognize that this sadistic point of view is actually the voice of a well-hidden enemy within, what my father, psychologist Dr. Robert Firestone refers to as the critical inner voice. Internalized early in life, this inner voice functions like an over-disciplinary parent holding us back and keeping us in our place. On October 11, I am presenting a CE Webinar to professionals on an Innovative Approach to Treating Depression.  The presentation will illustrate how this destructive thought process fuels depression and educate mental health professionals on how they can help clients identify and conquer their critical inner voice.

To begin this process, it is helpful to think of these destructive thoughts as being like the parasites that keep you in bed when you’re sick with the flu. Don’t listen to these attacks when they tell you not to pursue your goals, to isolate yourself, or to forego an activity you enjoy. This gives the voice even more power over you. Instead, when you notice these thoughts and attitudes starting to intensify and take precedence over your more realistic, positive ways of thinking, it is essential to identify them as an alien point of view. Ask yourself, would you think such cruel thoughts about a friend or family member who was experiencing the same struggles. By having compassion for yourself and recognizing this inner voice as a destructive enemy, you can begin to see who you are more clearly and realistically.

Think About What You Could Be Angry At

While some experience depression as a continual state of sadness or increased painful emotions, some depression can come in the form of a state of numbness – a lack of feeling that weakens all excitement and smothers your potential to feel joy. Suppressing or cutting off emotions could be a defense against something you aren’t comfortable feeling. Many people who suffer from depression are actually masking a feeling of anger, turning theirrage toward someone else on themselves. Anger can be a hard feeling to accept, as from a very young age we are often told it is bad to be angry, that we need to behave, and not to throw tantrums or get in fights. While acting abusive is never acceptable, feeling anger is a natural part of our everyday lives. By acknowledging and accepting or discussing your angry feelings, you are much less likely to turn these feelings against yourself or allow them to lead you into a depressed state.

Be Active

When you’re depressed your energy levels can drop drastically, but the last thing you want to do when feeling down is to keep yourself from getting up. It’s a physiological fact that activity fights depression. Get your heart rate up 20 minutes a day, five days a week, and it has been scientifically proven that you will feel better emotionally. Exercising increases the neuro-plasticity of your brainand releases neurochemicals called endorphins, which help to elevate your mood. Even just getting out of the house for a walk, a game of catch with your kids, or a trip to the gym is a medically proven method of improving the way you feel.

Don’t Isolate Yourself

When depressed, you may hear thoughts telling you to be alone, keep quiet and not to bother people with your problems. Again, these thoughts should be treated like parasites that try to keep your body from getting healthy. Do not listen to them. When you feel bad, even if you feel embarrassed, confiding in a friend or voicing your struggles can lighten your burden and begin a process of ending your unhappiness. Talking about your problems or worries is not a self-centered or self-pitying endeavor. Friends and family, especially those who care about you, will appreciate knowing what’s going on. Even the simple act of putting yourself in a social atmosphere can lift your spirits. Go to a place where there are people who may have similar interests as you, or even to a public spot like a museum, park, or mall, where you could enjoy being amongst people. Never allow yourself to indulge in the thought that you are different from or less than anyone else. Everyone struggles at times, and your depression does not define who you are or single you out from others.

Do Things You Once Liked to Do … even if you don’t feel like it

Depression is one of the hardest emotional states to endure, because the symptoms themselves can destroy your will and energy to engage in activities you once loved. Giving in to this lethargic state can give your depression even more power, whereas staying active in your life, pursuing anything and everything you may find of interest will re-ignite your spark and keep you on your own side. Though easier said than done, the times you feel most like slumping on the couch are the moments you should force yourself to take a walk, cook a meal, or call a friend. If you’ve ever been depressed before, do whatever it was that helped you feel better before. Coping strategies that have worked for you in the past are a great place to start. Activities that help you calm down and that raise your spirits are important, even simple things like baking brownies, taking a bath, or listening to upbeat music. Act against the critical inner voice that tells you nothing will help. Remember its only purpose is to keep you from feeling better.

Watch a Funny TV Show or Movie

It may seem silly or all too simple, but anything that makes you laugh or smile can actually help convince your brain you are happy. If you look at depression as your critical inner voice having tricked you into feeling bad, then you can have your own tricks ready to fight depression. Play your favorite sitcom, watch a funny movie or read a comical writer. Don’t think of this exercise as merely a distraction, but as an effective tool in reminding your brain that you can feel good again.

Don’t Punish Yourself for Feeling Bad

Feeling embarrassed or self-hating over your depression will only increase your symptoms and discourage you from seeking help. Your critical thoughts toward yourself will try to keep you down any way they can, including by attacking you for feeling down. It’s important to take your side and have compassion for yourself at those difficult times. You can be curious, open, accepting, and loving toward yourself, a much more appropriate attitude. Take your mental health seriously. Remember, depression is a very common and highly treatable disease. It is just a matter of recognizing you’re feeling bad and finding the treatment that works for you.

See a Therapist

Talking is a powerful way of combating your depression. If you feel bad, don’t let anyone tell you it’s no big deal or that you’ll just get over it. There is nothing shameful about recognizing you have a problem you alone cannot seem to resolve and to seek the help of a therapist. Asking for help is a brave act and speaking to a therapist is a healthy, productive endeavor from which every individual would benefit. Learning about the source of your pain can truly help alleviate its impact on your life by helping you to recognize and combat your critical inner voice.

If your spirit’s broken and you can’t bear the pain

I will help you put the pieces back

A little more each day

And if your heart is locked and you can’t find the key

Lay your head upon my shoulder

I’ll set you free

I’ll be your security

~Joss Stone “Security”

What is Security ?  And More Importantly, Does It Really Exist ???

I was talking to my seventy-something year old father recently explaining some of my recent professional achievements to him.  After he told me that he was proud of me, he said, “The thing that I worry about is that you will never have a life full of security.”

I didn’t challenge or debate him on that subject at the time, but upon further rumination days later I though to myself, “What exactly is security ?  Does it really exist in this day and age ?  And does it really exist at all ?”

This is probably one of those “impossible questions” that I so love to place in my brain so it can rattle around in there and drive me crazy.

To make a long discussion short I don’t believe in security (in my personal and/or professional life or for anyone else.)

That doesn’t mean that I am living a “glass half-empty life” or employing a “glass half-empty mindset.”

I just understand with the benefit of a lot of miles on my life odometer that no matter how “secure” we humans feel at any given time that life can always yank the rug from under us and throw our life into chaos.

I understand the longing and need for security that possesses human beings, but I think that when we chase it exclusively, we chase a mirage that we will never get our arms around. ~Scott

Courtesy of  http://www.rexano.org/SecuritySuperstition.pdf

“Security is mostly superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.”

Helen Keller

The woman who wrote this quote was certainly remarkable. She had so many excuses and reasons to resign her fate, but she was willing to venture into unchartered waters and take the reigns of the only life she would be granted. I agree wholeheartedly with this quote. Security is really an illusion and does not exist. I don’t want to imply that one should take unreasonable risks, but the only way to grow as person is to venture out of your comfort zone, as another quote on this site implores you to do. An animal in nature that attempts to meet its needs and grow and become what it can be is going to take risks. There is no other way. A squirrel looking for a nut or a piece of fruit is one day going to miss a branch and possibly fall to its death. Because you will fail and fall time and again in your life does not mean that those actions were wrong or misguided. One thing I have learned in life is that a positive characteristic or action will not always be positively reinforced. One day you will speak up about what you think and someone will not like it or tell you to be quite. That result does not mean speaking up is a bad thing, it’s just that positive actions are not always rewarded.

The bottom line is that the only person you really have control over is you. What is important is that you are positive, happy, and kind – not that others are the same way, although that would be nice, you will never have true control over them. The first rule of life revolves around self-management. If you have self-management, you will easily manage the rest of the world. You cannot control what happens in the world, you can only control your interpretation or internal representation of it. If you learn nothing else from this quote, remember that the key in life is how you manage your own mind, body, and emotional health, not how others react to you. It’s true that a security blanket is often comforting, but blankets can also be suffocating.

A correspondent from my local newspaper (the Charlotte Observer) was kind enough to do a telephone interview with me recently.

Below is a link to the online version.  I don’t know how long it will remain in cyberspace.

I hope that you enjoy it. ~Scott

Regrets, I’ve had a few;

But then again, too few to mention.

~Frank Sinatra “My Way”

When I started by own first improv group eight years ago (after being unceremoniously booted from the group I was with at the time,) the main reason I did it was that I had fallen in love with improv, didn’t want to stop doing it, and, especially, didn’t want someone to tell me that I couldn’t do it anymore.

But the #1 reason I started my own improv group was that I didn’t want to be an old man at the end of my life wondering “what if ?”

I didn’t want to regret giving up something for which I had a passion.

During the last few years since I have been attempting to “reboot” my brain I have really attempted to (as my improv training has taught me) place more emphasis on “making decisions” and less on “attempting to make the perfect decision.”

Just because I make a decision it doesn’t mean that I can not reconsider that decision at a later time or IMPROVISE if need be at a future date.

I personally think that regrets are the mindset of someone giving the away their personal responsibility and having a “powerless” mindset.

I never want to give anyone, anything, or any situation that much power over me or the decisions I made.

I will not be a person at the end of my life with regrets.    That is a promise I make to myself ~Scott

Courtesy of http://thenextweb.com

The top 5 regrets people have on their deathbed

By Courtney Boyd Myers

When Ms. Bronnie Ware, a woman who worked for years with the dying, wrote a list of the top 5 regrets people say aloud on their deathbed, we teared up a little bit here at TNW.

She posted the top 5 regrets along with her commentary on her website, and we’ve recopied them for you here below. But instead of just the grandmotherly bits of advice about dreams having gone unfulfilled, we’ve supplemented each regret with some rockstar advice on how to not have these regrets in the digital age.

1. I wish I’d had the courage to live a life true to myself, not the life others expected of me.

This was the most common regret of all. When people realise that their life is almost over and look back clearly on it, it is easy to see how many dreams have gone unfulfilled. Most people have had not honoured even a half of their dreams and had to die knowing that it was due to choices they had made, or not made.

It is very important to try and honour at least some of your dreams along the way. From the moment that you lose your health, it is too late. Health brings a freedom very few realise, until they no longer have it.

TNW Advice: We interview so many entrepreneurs here at The Next Web, some of whom will succeed, most of whom will fail. But it’s about going out and creating a reality out of what was once just an idea in your head. Today, due to the Internet’s accessibility, smart people are discovering that instead of getting the next big paying cog-in-a-machine job that they are able to start their own company and they’re receiving a lot of satisfaction from doing so.

“Yesterday, I had an epiphany that for the first time in my life, who I am and who I want to be are virtually one in the same. It’s so much more effective to be yourself than to pretend to be something your not because doing the latter is so emotionally taxing, you’ll never be someone that is fully committed. Being yourself pays dividends.”

-Brett Martin, the CEO and Founder of Sonar, a hot new social, location-based mobile application.

2. I wish I didn’t work so hard.

This came from every male patient that I nursed. They missed their children’s youth and their partner’s companionship. Women also spoke of this regret. But as most were from an older generation, many of the female patients had not been breadwinners. All of the men I nursed deeply regretted spending so much of their lives on the treadmill of a work existence.

By simplifying your lifestyle and making conscious choices along the way, it is possible to not need the income that you think you do. And by creating more space in your life, you become happier and more open to new opportunities, ones more suited to your new lifestyle.

TNW Advice: We are really hard workers here at The Next Web, in fact, I am pretty sure that @Zee hasn’t slept in the past 36 hours. But being a Dutch-based company, our roots are in relaxation. We know how to unwind after hard days.

4. I wish I had stayed in touch with my friends.

Often they would not truly realise the full benefits of old friends until their dying weeks and it was not always possible to track them down. Many had become so caught up in their own lives that they had let golden friendships slip by over the years. There were many deep regrets about not giving friendships the time and effort that they deserved. Everyone misses their friends when they are dying.

It is common for anyone in a busy lifestyle to let friendships slip. But when you are faced with your approaching death, the physical details of life fall away. People do want to get their financial affairs in order if possible. But it is not money or status that holds the true importance for them. They want to get things in order more for the benefit of those they love. Usually though, they are too ill and weary to ever manage this task. It is all comes down to love and relationships in the end. That is all that remains in the final weeks, love and relationships.

TNW Advice: At first glance, this is a relatively easy problem to tackle as social networks, namely Facebook, have allowed us to keep up with too many friends and social connections. My best friends always say, “Thank god for Facebook, because I know you’re alive.” And this is slightly concerning. My best friends have to follow me on Facebook to know I’m alive? Use Facebook to keep in quick contact with friends, but defer to real life for those that matter. Pokes, Likes and Comments are not the same as ladies’ lunches, beach trips and dinner parties. Make the time.

5. I wish that I had let myself be happier.

This is a surprisingly common one. Many did not realise until the end that happiness is a choice. They had stayed stuck in old patterns and habits. The so-called ‘comfort’ of familiarity overflowed into their emotions, as well as their physical lives. Fear of change had them pretending to others, and to their selves, that they were content. When deep within, they longed to laugh properly and have sillyness in their life again.

When you are on your deathbed, what others think of you is a long way from your mind. How wonderful to be able to let go and smile again, long before you are dying.

TNW Advice: If you’re reading this, chances are you have a long way to go before you die. So, please, allow yourself to be happy. Smile in the sunshine, kick the ball around with your son, have a glass of wine with your wife in the afternoon, move to Argentina, buy yourself a Kindle for the love of reading; whatever it is, be good to yourself.

Being an unmarried man with no children living alone and the majority of my family 500 miles away I spend a lot of time by myself.

My professional and theatrical pursuits give me plenty of opportunities to be in the company of others, but at the end of the day it is just me.

I have been “unattached” for so long that I have gotten used to the situation.

I don’t really feel lonely very often, and do really enjoy the solitude of being alone for the most part.

I visited with a former business associate recently who is in the midst of a marital separation (probably leading to divorce.)  He indicated how hard he is finding it to be alone.

I definitely need to work harder on being more social and finding someone to share my life with.

I have the whole “solo” thing down pat.  Who knew this was a skill set that others needed to master ? ~Scott

Courtesy of www.psychologytoday.com

Why Am I So Afraid of Being Alone?

Aloneness can be a rare and exquisite gift

Published on September 3, 2011 by Karyl McBride, Ph.D. in The Legacy of Distorted Love

Learning to be alone with oneself is surely an art. We are socially and culturally encouraged to be “with”… not alone. Having many friends, being social, connecting with community, and being part of the village are common promotions. Splendid advice, but what about that special, sacred, unfettered time you need to just be with you? Why is that such a scary landscape? In psychotherapy, therapists hear the words repeated, “I don’t want to be alone, I am afraid.”

“We are meant to be in relationships with other people, but, just as surely, we are meant to partake of aloneness. To deny this part of our existence is a little like trying to walk the earth on one foot instead of two.” Florence Falk

So how can aloneness be a rare gift and a cushy benefit to you? It can be your time to reflect on you and embrace self-understanding, self-expression, and personal growth. 
In such a fast paced society we’re on the go! There’s never enough time to get things done and someone always needs something from you. How rare it is when you actually have that time for you. Some have the time, but run from it by numbing it with drugs or alcohol, watching television, reading fiction, watching movies, shopping till dropping, staying on phones, computers, ipads and the like.

But, what if you used your time creatively to find and fuel the real you? What are your interests, passions, talents, wishes, desires, dreams and feelings? What if you made those things very, very important and listened to the deep inner being of you? The amazing you that was created for your own unique and special path, wants to talk to you. There is much to harvest in our own resources contained within. If only we listen.

Adult children of narcissistic parents often struggle with aloneness caused by mistrust of others. If you grew up with parents who continually betrayed your trust, a part of your healing is learning to trust yourself so you can trust others again. A significant part of the recovery model is to learn to be alone to work grief and acceptance and to rely on your own internal parent who will always be there for you. Growing a strong sense of self requires that time alone. It does not have to be a fearful time. It may be short spurts or longer extensions depending on the seasons of your life. Sometimes it takes practice and structuring this special interlude to overcome the fear.

People often worry about what others will think. Pouring from our pitchers of self-doubt we ask worrisome questions. If I am alone for a while, will I be viewed as a loner? If I don’t date, will people think I am weird or anti-social? If I take time out from my family to work on me, will I be viewed as selfish or uncaring? Is there some stigma about being alone that keeps you from doing it? Thinking about the messages you give yourself while you are alone is a worthwhile project. Are you calling yourself a loser or are you telling yourself this is a special gift of love for you? How we view it, is what makes us feel good or bad about ourselves.

Because we live in a social society many can relate to the stigma of aloneness. Introverts struggle with their need for time alone to accomplish inner reflection as they sort and integrate new information and experience. Artists, writers, creators, are those who need time by themselves to find inspiration. What if your passion is piano or something similar that requires time alone to practice, create, express? I know people who just want to sit with their animals or ride their horses in complete solitude. Some love to hike… alone. The journey back to self in these quiet times can be our best therapy.

There’s heightened focus today on relationships: how to have healthy ones, how to date, celebrity break-ups and hookups, contentious divorces and parenting conflicts. There’s massive professional advice flowing on how to do it all better. Does relationship with self therefore get the short shrift? There is a flaw if intimate connection with self does not get the same richness or urgent attention. The inner portrait of each person and their own creative spark and aliveness is often found in solitude. It can then can be energetically focused outward in important and loving relationships. It may even clear your thoughts about what is healthy for you. “Sometimes it takes darkness and the sweet confinement of your aloneness to learn that anything or anyone that does not bring you alive is too small for you.” David Whyte