Everyday Junglist
Bio
About me. You know how everyone says to be a successful writer you should focus in one or two areas. I continue to prove them correct.
Stories (712)
Filter by community
Be Offended - Why You Should Attack
People are not nearly ready enough to attack. Today someone on twitter said she was inexplicably blocked by an acquaintance. I replied, “Well that’s odd. I’ve never spotted you being the least bit controversial, political, or anything that might rub anyone up the wrong way. And that is why you have zero name recognition, no followers, and no options in life to get ahead. "
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Motivation
Attitude Not Gratitude
I recently published an article on favors here in which I suggested one "rule" of favors is that rudeness on the part of the favor receiver is not an option. Simply put, in asking for help you automatically forfeit your right to complain about the nature of the help received (assuming an honest, good faith, attempt to deliver on the help, even if it is clumsy or stupid, or poorly through through, or whatever). No matter the form the requested help takes, the only appropriate response on the part of the favored is gratitude and humility.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Psyche
Nice Guys Finish Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh in Area Marathon
Each year since the inception of the area marathon local nice guys and brothers Tod and Ted Stephens, along with friend Jim Thorne, had finished last. Most had speculated that this year would be no different. Today, the Stephens brothers and Mr. Thorne proved the haters and doubters wrong finishing fifth, sixth, and seventh respectively. A visibly tired, heavily sweat pit stained, but still smiling Ted Stephens said the following about the nice guy trios historic result. "I am just so gosh darned pleased with my performance, and especially that of my beloved brother Tod and old college roomie Jim. With this finish under my belt maybe Cherry (Tims) will go on an actual date with me. She may finally agree to that candlelight dinner at (local trendy eatery) Chez Rouzeau I have been asking her about for years. If I am lucky I might be given the opportunity to patiently lay the groundwork for a long term relationship by listening intently and responding intelligently as she talks about the horrible day she had at the shoe factory where she works. This would be in contrast to our other "dates" which have mostly been us meeting at the local Denny's and splitting a Moons over My Hammy for breakfast as I listen intently and respond intelligently as she talks about the terrible day she had at the shoe factory. Those are really a waste of mine and her time. Although, she really does need a good shoulder to cry on, and, I am a really good listener. I guess it's not so bad. Eventually she will have to tire of empty passionate sex with various members of the high school football team. I can give her so much more than that. Except for the sex part, I can only handle so much of that until I get really tired and sleepy." Red faced and breathing heavily nice guy Mr. Thorne added "I am also just so super duper pumped at all of our results. We really rocked the house, right fellas? I mean we rocked it good? I can't wait to tell my mom and dad tonight as I help them prepare dinner and then bathe them before administering their medications and laying them down to bed at the old folks home where they currently live. Even though they have both gone totally senile and no longer remember me I still really enjoy my time with them. Except for when they tell me to get the hell out of their room, curse me using words I had no idea they even knew, scream that they don't know me and don't love me, then throw their meticulously prepared dinner plates at me from across the table. That part is not a lot of fun, but, parents, right, what are you gonna do?" Seventh place finisher Tod Stephens, who many say is the nicest of the three very nice guys, said the following as he lay gasping for breath on the sidewalk only steps from the finish line. "Can't breath, my heart, please, somebody help me. Or, if it's too much trouble, that's OK, I can help myself, really, it's not a big deal. Let me just stand up here and start walking toward the hospital. Which way is that again? Excuse me ma'am, sir, would you be so kind as to point me in the direction of the hospital? No? Oh, ok, I understand, that is a big ask, especially at this time of day. Oh well, guess I'll just start walking in this direction and hope for the best." With that Mr. Stephens slowly stood, fell again, scrambled back to his feet and began slowly walking in what appeared to be an easterly direction. As of the time of writing this article his current whereabouts remain unknown.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Motivation
On Favors
A reason is not required to say no to a favor I had occasion to ask someone for a favor recently. I will not indicate the relationship of this person to me, nor relay the nature of the request as in my view these things are irrelevant, or should be. The person said no and then proceeded to give a litany of reasons why they could not do this particular favor for me. While I could appreciate the impulse to try and soften the blow, or make me understand their position, or whatever I began to wonder why this person felt so compelled to provide such an exhaustive list.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Psyche
Sweeping Generalizations are Always Bad
Most people understand conceptually how sweeping generalizations about the behaviors, attitudes, appearances, or any other characteristics/traits of broad classes of people are a very bad thing. With apologies to all spermatophytes for appropriating your life cycle to illustrate a heinous point, sweeping generalizations function like seeds of fear and distrust. They eventually germinate to hatred and then grow to racism, and eventually, in the most extreme of cases, blossom into war and genocide. They either directly cause or actively amplify the worst tendencies in humanity. They should be ruthlessly and continuously questioned, criticized, and actively fought against, wherever they are found. Moreover, this stance should apply equally to all generalizations no matter if they are related to race, ethnicity, national identity, or socio-economic class. It seems reasonable to assume that a very large majority of persons on the planet would agree with everything I have just written. If that is the case, whey then, do people who would never, ever, tolerate a sweeping generalization about a race of people, just accept, give a pass, or laugh at such sweeping generalizations when they revolve around issues of gender? This holds true even when such generalizations verge on, or are actually clearly sexist. I would argue that in fact the majority of people on the planet (and it cuts across races, creeds, nationalities, etc.) accept sweeping generalizations about men and women without a second thought. Most cultures in one way or another actively embrace such sweeping generalizations in one form or another. After all, to give an example from our own Western culture, men are from Mars, women are from Venus, right?
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Humans
The False Dichotomy of Work/Life Balance
Those that regularly talk about work life balance are, I believe, doing so with the best of intentions and with worthy objectives in mind. However, using the term and concept in the way we do puts us in a box from which there is no possible escape. Work/life balance implies and requires that the two things be in opposition to each other. If they were not why would we need to balance them. By setting up the two things, ‘work’ and ‘life’, as opponents we immediately eliminate from consideration a huge number of potential options to improve the situation. Rather than finding solutions based on accommodation or compromise, setting up work and life as opponents, as enemies, pushes us toward confrontational and non-constructive solutions. It makes it appear as if solutions that are a net gain for the one thing must, by there very nature, be a net loss for the other, and in the end, everybody loses no matter which way the pendulum swings. It does not have to be this way, and it should not be this way. It is time to call a cease fire in the work/life war. Work and life are not disparate, separate things, or at least they should not be. The more one can integrate work into life and life into work the better it is for everyone. Eventually the word work disappears and it just becomes life. The life you live for free, and the one you get paid for. Neither is more valuable than the other, and they can and should ‘work’ together to bring each of us the things we are seeking from life, whether that be material pleasures, intellectual pursuits, families, or any and all of the above. If we want capitalism to survive and thrive, if we truly believe it is the right approach for optimizing all of our chances at economic and personal well being, we must end the war between work and life. There is no other way. Of course, this is a very easy thing to say, much harder to actually execute on a plan to accomplish.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Journal
The US Mexico Border is a Train Wreck
Author's preface: Early in the writing process for this article I realized that my friend and writing colleague, Samantha Drobac, who holds dual Mexican and US citizenship, could bring a perspective that one written only from the US point of view would lack. Initially, I thought I would publish the completed piece and then ask her to reply in a separate post, but as the story evolved it seemed more useful to ask her to respond directly to many of my points.. Fortunately, she kindly agreed to participate and her responses and her own interjections are included throughout the body of the story. Our commentary/discussion is indicated by our initials DD and SD and in italics while the main body of the text is not italicized and was solely authored by me.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Wander
Is Historical Ignorance Ever a Good Thing?
Typically it is supposed that a solid working knowledge of history is a very good thing. It seems obvious to say that those who do not know/understand/appreciate history are doomed to repeat it. I absolutely agree, after all, it is much easier (though still not always easy) to avoid a mistake one has already made, than to avoid one you do not even see coming and, with which, you have no previous experience. Almost everyone I believe would agree that historical knowledge is a very good thing to have. However, is this obvious, and much agreed upon statement, always true? Are there situations where ignorance of historical events would be advantageous versus having such knowledge? The transgenerational trauma hypothesis posits that for historically traumatic events it is not only the generation that lives through them that suffers, but also subsequent generations. The trauma is "passed down" to future generations and the suffering associated with that event continues to traumatize those that were never directly impacted by the originally triggering traumatic event. Slavery and the holocaust are two oft cited examples. I do not dispute that transgenerational trauma is real, and continues to effect those that are descendants of the original peoples involved in those historical tragedies. But, what about, less well remembered events? Events that were very much traumatic and historically impactful, but about which much less is known or remembered today.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in The Swamp
Depravation as Justification
It is still very common to read or hear arguments attempting to justify criminal behavior by appealing to poverty on the part of the criminals. These often takes the form of statements like "they were just trying to feed their family" or "they had no other choice", etc. While I have some sympathy for this view, and in some cases it may even be accurate, it is a very poor justification for criminal behavior and a major turn off to readers/listeners, especially if they are Americans. The reason is quite simple, Many of these readers and listeners are very poor themselves and/or they have friends or relatives that are. They do not commit crimes and neither do their poor friends and family, so why is author/media person X saying that the reason these people are criminals is because they are poor. The argument is so weak, and so offensive to many, that it virtually guarantees a loss of 90% plus of your audience, including many of whom probably agree with everything else you are trying to say.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Criminal
The "Trap" Escape Problem
If we are fortunate and introspective we can often identify intellectual/character flaws in our ways of thinking/moving about in the world that repeatedly lead us astray. Not too surprisingly for a research scientist like myself, in my case, one of these flaws is the tendency toward over analysis. I don't believe in black and white and I have never seen a binary choice I can't make trinary. On top of that I am extremely skeptical of just about everything and anything. Not only does this make me a a good researcher, it also makes me a very annoying person to be around at times. Moreover, it can lead to a sort of intellectual blockage where action grinds to a halt because the number/variety of choices available are just too high and making a selection among them becomes well nigh impossible. The dreaded and cliched 'paralysis by (over)analysis.'
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Psyche
7 Signs That Showed Me I’m On The Path To Douchebaggery
Author's preface: Given the title and content I give this piece only about a 10% chance of making it through the Vocal censor mill. It is almost certain to be rejected for publication for failing to meet Vocal's "community standards" or to be more precise, Vocal's censorship rules. If I had to hazard a guess I would say they will probably cite their ban on works that "slander" or "defame" as the justification for rejection. In my defense I would argue, as I have previously, that slander and/or defamation requires a specific individual or specific group of human target(s) to meet the definitions of the terms. It also must be an attack on an other not on oneself. It is not possible to slander or defame an idea, and one cannot slander or defame oneself. This piece does attack the idea of douchebaggery, not the individual douchebag or even the entire, large and growing population of douchebags living on this planet. It also posits the author (my fictional self) as the main target. As such it should be published without modification. If you do choose to publish this work Vocal please do not delete this author's preface first and then publish it as you have done on one other occasion with one of my works. Your rules may allow this, but it stinks even worse than your censorship rules. It either stands or falls in total as written. Incidentally this post is a satirical take on an article published on another platform entitled '7 Signs That Showed Me I'm on the Path to Success.' by author Tim Denning. Unlike myself, Tim happens to be a very, very successful writer and blogger. Moreover, he kindly did not raise any sort of stink when I parodied his original post. To the best of my knowledge he is not a douchebag.
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Confessions
Could Life Be Sustainable (On a Planet) Without Evolution?
I was thinking a bit about this for some reason (way back in 2017) and started wondering what other people had to say on the topic so I did a quick google search of the question. As often happens when you google a question one of the results was a Quora entry. Scanning through the various responses I came across one that caught my attention and I want to address it here. First I repost the answer from Quora in its entirety (italics mine).
By Everyday Junglist4 years ago in Futurism
