Royal Pains

Is anyone else as frustrated with the hype surrounding the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton?

I cannot believe the crazed levels the media has gone to. Here in Australia, they have shipped the  morning TV show hosts and some evening TV show hosts to London. Because obviously, reporting it from Australia would not do any good. No. One needs to have London in the background and be able to look at everything from where they couple met to where they do their business. [Yes, I do mean going to the toilet]. The other thing they are doing here is that all the free to air channels are ‘celebrating’ royal wedding week. Why I ask. Why?????

And if all that isn’t bad enough they are all going to be airing the wedding ‘live’. Really? The one program on the wedding I was looking forward to was The Chaser’s wedding spoof. But guess what? The royals apparently got BBC to tell ABC to can the show! Honestly! Killjoys are what they are. That was one decent thing about this whole wedding show and now even that’s gone. Who made the royals kings and queens of the whole world?

I am sick and tired of being told when psychics think they couple will have their first child; that unlike Charles and Diana, this marriage is here to stay; that they complete each others’ sentences; that Kate has gone from ‘commoner’ to chic; that the wedding costs so much, yada, yada, yada. What next? Peeking at their poo and telling us what they ate for breakfast, lunch and dinner??? [I have to give credit for this to R who is as frustrated as I am and thinks that's where the media will go next] I think it's even more irksome because it feels like a slap in the face to all those Brits that are doing it tough. As well as the people around the world doing it tough. It's one thing to have an expensive wedding but it's a whole other thing when it's telecast world wide. And when you think that the UK still hasn't recovered from the global financial crisis and people are still struggling to get work, this just seems highly insensitive. I'm not saying Will and Kate should not get married but still...it does seem a bit too much.

I am not one interested in the royals one bit. I do think we as a nation should become a republic and get rid of the monarch altogether. Why does any country need a king or queen in the day of prime ministers and presidents is beyond me!

Sigh...I'll be glad when all this pain is over. Royal pains, that is.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

First day of gymming

Yesterday was the first day of hitting the gym. I didn't do an extremely strenuous workout given that I've been a lazy arse for months now. Didn't want to die overdoing it on my first day! Worked out for an hour doing different cardio exercises and felt really good. It made me realise just how much I've missed the gym the last 4 years. I'm really excited now and keen on going tonight after work as well. And hoping to remain motivated especially once I start with the weights next week.

On the down side, I have a toothache. My top right wisdom tooth hurts and the area around it is sore. I fear I'm going to have to visit the dentist this weekend to get it out. Hopefully it will go smoothly like the last one. And here I was hoping it would wait till I visited India in June. Sigh.

Which reminds me. I haven't informed blogosphere that I am going to India for two and a half weeks in June. I'm already hyperventilating at the thought of flying. The difference this time is that I'll have an Aussie passport and an Indian visa (the OCI --- like a permanent visa to India). Looking forward to meeting my family and some friends. Not looking forward to flying. Looking forward to food. Not looking forward to the monsoons.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

The Messenger

'The Messenger' is a book by Markus Zusak starring Ed Kennedy, a 19 year old cab driver living in a suburban town in Australia. The book begins with Ed unintentionally becoming a hero after stopping a bank robbery. Ed narrates about his mundane and ordinary life that he spends playing cards with his friends Marv, Ritchie and Audrey (who he is hopelessly in love with but hasn't had the same reciprocated), driving his cab, and living with his dog, the Doorman (who drinks coffee). Then there's his Ma who while not living with Ed, thinks he's no good and doesn't hesitate in letting him know. In short, Ed reckons he has done jack-shit in all his nineteen years on earth. However, things begin to change after his heroic attempt in stopping the bank robbery, thereby giving meaning to his otherwise mundane life.

Ed begins receiving playing cards with instructions on them. These are in the form of Aces. The first set, the Ace of Diamonds, contains 3 addresses and times. Although Ed initially suspects it's a joke from one of his friends, he follows the instructions and arrives at the addresses only to realise that in some way, he has to help the individuals at the addresses with their different problems. Once he has completed these deeds, he receives other aces (clubs, spades and hearts) with different instructions, each harder than the previous one. Ed takes us through this roller-coaster journey of attempting to decipher what the cards are telling him and then what he does to help the people identified through the cards. It is a journey that at times puts his own life at risk. But Ed doesn't give up.

Who is sending him these cards?

Why are they sending him the cards?

What is Ed's purpose in life?

Why has he been chosen as The Messenger?

This is a brilliant book. It shows us what goes on behind closed doors and how we are oblivious to it or choose to be oblivious. But it also goes to show, through a character like Ed, that we can all do something small to help people. The book delivers a very powerful message in my opinion. Add to it the mystery and the unanswered questions, it is a thrilling ride. In typical Aussie fashion, it is laid back with dry humour inserted that can make the reader chuckle. The writing style is quite captivating with each chapter titled as a playing card from a suit of cards. It is simple and engrossing and I found that I couldn't put it down. I found that I liked the book even better than Zusak's 'The Book Thief' which I know has received a lot more accolades.

The take home message from the book for me is that an ordinary person can do extraordinary things to make small changes in this world we live in.

I would rate it a 5/5.

Check out Titaxy's review of the same book here on Bond with Books.

This review has been written as part of the 2011 Aussie Author Challenge

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

Nightmares and fears

Since I was a child I can remember my nightmares having a different flavour to them compared to what you hear most kids have. I didn't have monsters or ghosts or vampires or any such thing chasing me and eating me up. Rather, one recurring nightmare I remember was of me being kidnapped.

I still vividly remember it despite not having had it for more than 15 years. I am in my grandmother's house (where we lived when I attended kindergarten) and I'm leaving for school. As I walk down the stairs, I see this person dressed in green and for some reason I am freaked out. And then, when I get out on the street, the same person is there and bundles me up in a car and takes me away. Away from my parents. Away from my mum. I remember crying and wanting to see my mum. And feeling scared that I'd never see her again. Until I woke up and realised it was but a dream nightmare.

Fast forward to the present.

My nightmares now no longer involve me being kidnapped. [I'd be a bit worried if they did!] Rather, they involve people I'm close to dying (usually my parents, my sister or R). Not in a gruesome way or anything. Just dying. And me hearing the news. And me crying. And feeling all that you feel when a loved ones dies. Things I wish I'd said. Things I wish I'd done. Until I wake up gasping feeling this choked up feeling as though I was really crying. Only to realise it was all a dream nightmare.

Rewind back to me being a kid.

I didn't just have nightmares of being kidnapped. When I was awake, I had fears of something bad happening to my parents resulting in me never seeing them again or something happening to me (like being kidnapped and never seeing my parents again). I vividly remember one incident when I was around 7. My parents had left my sister and me in the car (door unlocked) and gone across the road to a shop. It seemed like hours and I started having intrusive thoughts about someone in the store shooting people [I have no idea where that came from!] and my parents dying and my sis and I being orphaned. You get the drift. Anyway, I started crying in the car and my 2 year old sister looked at me strangely. I prayed for a while saying all the prayers I knew. And then I started shouting for my parents [Yes, from across the busy road] until they did come out and get annoyed with me. Especially as I didn't share with them my reason for making such a spectacle.

I had several other times when I feared their death especially if one of them fell sick. It was almost as if my mind took me straight to the worst-case scenario. Mum has the flu equalled mum was going to die. Dad has been hit by a motorbike equalled dad was going to die. Mum having a heart problem took me to the worst-case scenario. Dad having high blood pressure also takes me to the worst-case scenario. Both of them and my sister undergoing immense stress thanks to the evil grandmother, makes me think of the worst. 

If anything, I wonder whether as a child I would have met the criteria for Separation Anxiety Disorder or even Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (with the intrusive thoughts about death and then the compulsive behaviour of praying or seeking reassurance from parents without them knowing what was actually going on in my head).

Somehow though, the older I've grown, the thoughts have become less intrusive. But they haven't completely disappear. As I said with my current nightmares, I still fear the death of loved ones. And sometimes, the intrusive images can be so vivid, they have the potential of reducing me to tears. The plus side of doing psychology though is that I understand these are just thoughts and images and don't always get sucked into them. But then, in addition to being a psychologist, I'm human too. I have my failings and my thoughts do get the better of me at other times. Especially given that I am anxious in more than just this area.

One thing I can say is that these thoughts are no longer debilitating. I get them, I worry but then I can carry on my day to day tasks. The nightmares scare the shit out of me but then I am okay after a few hours.

At the end of the day, I guess this is a fear everyone has. Most of my clients with an anxiety disorder definitely have these thoughts. And most people who are worriers and not necessarily diagnosable also have them. It's part and parcel of life and relationships.

I guess the only way to not have even a little bit of these worries and fears is to not have any close relationships. But if you are going to get close to people, you must be prepared that you will lose them.

Losing people is after all, a fact of life. Whether through death or otherwise.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

Speaking through tears...

Lately I have been having a lot of clients crying during session. And not just the teenagers. Several times, the parents break down too. The box of tissues that we have in all our therapy rooms at work have certainly been more than handy. It has made me think though --- here are people talking to strangers about their fears and worries and hopelessness --- how hard must that be?

Think about it --- when we meet people in social situations, we don't tell them our deepest and darkest secrets the very first time we meet, do we? We get to know them a bit more and then only if we trust them, do we share our secrets. 

And yet, pretty much in the first couple of sessions conducting the assessment, as a psychologist I expect my clients to disclose all.

Most individuals who are ready to seek help, do disclose. But of course, this brings along with it a lot of pain. In some cases, young people have not disclosed their thoughts to anyone prior to the session with the psychologist. And we happen to be the first. Just hearing their thoughts out loud opens the floodgates. Some of the parents have held negative beliefs about themselves as parents for years. And it doesn't come out until they speak about it individually in session. For the ones not ready to disclose, when they eventually do, there can be tears. It is overwhelming I suppose to finally come to terms that you may have a problem.

I still remember in my third year B.A. when I had chosen psychology as my major, one of my biggest concerns was dealing with clients who cry. Given that I can cry very easily myself, I wasn't sure how I would react to clients crying in session. Would I cry too? If so, I'd be an awful therapist! Unfortunately, there was no way of knowing because I wouldn't be seeing any clients until my second semester in Masters. Almost 2 years away.

I can happily say that I don't cry when my clients break down. I've probably come close only once [Transference-countertransference issues]. After all, the clients who cry in front of their therapist don't want their therapist to cry --- they'll probably end up feeling guilty! Of course, it doesn't mean I'm unemotional and their stories don't affect me. Some stories do. In fact, a large majority does. But that's why I get supervision. That's why all psychologists here get supervision.

The reason for this post though was mainly because I found myself thinking how privileged I am that teenagers, kids and their parents trust me enough to share their fears and their sorrows. It is a privilege I don't take lightly. It is an honour to be that person they choose to talk to [And yes, it is a choice because some people will choose to not talk if they don't feel comfortable].

And all this again reminds me that despite the difficult times and the difficult clients and sometimes feeling hopeless, I still love the job I do.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

If I could change the world...

If you were boss of the world, what is one thing you would change? Just one.

This is Challenge 72 put forth by BlogThis. And it is a hard one because there are so many things I would love to change! But given that there's only one thing I can, this is what it would be:

I propose to change the way information is presented via the media ---

• The media will no longer be allowed to sensationalise news and can only report facts.

• The media will focus on people doing good for society and not on trashy celebrities. In fact, people like Britney Spears or Lady Gaga or Lindsey Lohan will not be reported on at all. Rather, the media will focus on the common man doing something altruistic or the researcher developing a cure for AIDS and cancer.

• No one will get their 15 minutes of fame for acting like a wanker or uploading a stupid YouTube video or tweeting.

• The media will not be allowed to make judgements about anyone. Only report the facts. 

• TV shows like A Current Affair or Today Tonight will be banned unless they focus on the goodness of people. No more shows on bludgers or weight loss and miracle diets and clothes. 

• Sportspersons being idiots by urinating in public or getting into fights will not get any air-time. Instead the ones doing good can be praised. 

• Morning show presenters will not be permitted to go to disaster zones and report as though the end of the world is nearing. And they will be penalised for looking disappointed if there are no casualties as a result of a natural disaster. 

So I repeat, if I could change the world, I'll change the manner in which the media presents information. I hope to make it more ethical and humane and useful than the bunch of crap it currently is.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

I have bitten the bullet...

...and joined a gym!

Yes, finally after all these years I decided to take the plunge and found a decent one near my place. It fits with my budget provided I cut back on some other unwanted stuff. I decided to go ahead with it because there is nothing else that motivates me to work out and lose weight as well as something that helps with my mood. Especially given that it's winter now and the urge to step out of the house is next to zilch unless I'm paying for something.

So yes, starting next week [after the long weekend] I hit the gym! From Wednesday.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

CSAAM April 2011 - Mythbusting

The people over at Child Sexual Abuse Awareness Month have started a wonderful initiative by encouraging posts about the topic and thereby spreading awareness.  My post here is part of that initiative. And I am choosing to bust some of those myths we commonly hear about child sexual abuse.

Myth No. 1: If I teach my child about stranger-danger, that is enough to prevent them from getting sexually abused. After all, strangers are most likely to abuse our kids.

Fact: About 85% of child sexual abuse occurs by someone known to the victim. So rather than merely teaching your child to be vigilant of strangers, it is more helpful to educate them about what sexual abuse involves whether it is by someone known or unknown. Contrary to other forms of abuse and what we have recently heard in the media,  only 13.5% of victims under the age of 15 identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour and 15.3% by other known person [Source 1, Source 2, Source 3]

Myth No. 2: All child sexual abusers were sexually abused themselves as kids.

Fact: The evidence for this is actually mixed. In a US study comparing the developmental experiences of child sexual abusers and adult sexual abusers, 73% of the child sexual abusers in the sample had experienced child sexual abuse themselves (Simons, Wurtele, & Durham, 2008). However, in a longitudinal study in the United Kingdom, only 11.6% of a sample of 224 former male victims of child sexual abuse had subsequently committed a sexual offence toward a child (Salter et al., 2003). [Source]

Myth No. 3: Boys don't have to worry about being sexually abused.

Fact: While 1 in 3 girls is a victim of child sexual abuse, 1 in 5 boys under the age of 18 is also a victim. [Source 1, Source 2]

Myth No. 4: It is better for the victim to not talk about child sexual abuse; it makes it easier for them to forget.

Fact: Research on post-traumatic stress disorder shows that avoidance of the traumatic incident is in fact detrimental and treatment for PTSD involves talking about the incident in detail. Exposure is the key to therapy. [Source] The same applies to a traumatic incident like sexual abuse. Keeping it hushed up makes it worse for the victim.

Myth No. 5: Because a child's body reacts to the sexual abuse, it means they are enjoying it and it is therefore not abuse.

Fact: This is a common myth associated even with rape of adults (male or female) and victims feel a sense of shame thinking they enjoyed it as well.  However, the truth is an erection or ejaculation for males and an orgasm for females are physiological responses by the body. One that a child doesn't necessarily have control over. [Source 1, Source 2, Source 3]

Myth No. 6: My child and I have great communication; they will definitely tell me if they were abused.

Fact: The fact is that most children do not disclose being sexually abused. The reasons are plenty and include being threatened by the perpetrator, being bribed by the perpetrator, a fear that they will be taken away from the family, worrying about getting into trouble, blaming themselves and therefore thinking they are bad, or feeling ashamed. [Source]

Myth No. 7: All perpetrators of child sexual abuse are male.

Fact: While majority of child sexual abuse perpetrators are male, a review of evidence suggests that females do abuse in a small proportion of cases. Data from the US has shown that males were the perpetrators in 90% of reported cases while 3.9% were females and about 6% were an 'unknown gender'. In a Canadian data on CSA incidents reported in the late nineties, 10.7% of perpetrators were females. New research in Australia has shown that 6% of perpetrators in child sexual assault cases that were reported were female. [Source 1, Source 2]

Myth No. 8: Only gay men abuse boys.

Fact: Homosexual men are no more likely than heterosexual men to be perpetrators of child sexual abuse. [Source] Research since the 70s with convicted offenders of child sexual abuse indicated that majority of the offenders identified themselves as heterosexual. [Source]

Myth No. 9: It is only child sexual abuse if it involves penetration.

Fact: Forms of child sexual abuse include forcing a child into engaging in sexual activity, indecent exposure of one's genitals to the child, displaying child pornography to the child, using the child to make pornographic material, as well as sexual contact including penetration. [Source]

Myth No. 10: Children lie about child sexual abuse.

Fact: Young children do not have the cognitive capacity or sexual understanding to create explicit lies about being abused. If anything, they will lie to deny its occurrence. [Source] However, it is important that children are interviewed by people skilled at the job as it is possible to implant memories and fabricate memories through wrongful questioning [Source].

So before you jump to conclusions with the myths surrounding child sexual abuse, stop. Take a step back. And look at the facts. We need to stop blaming the victim and not believing them. Instead, take time. Listen. And report it to the relevant authorities.

Check out other stories and posts through the CSA Awareness blog.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

Burqa Ban

Most people probably know by now that France banned women from wearing the burqa and this was officially enforced yesterday.

Basically, it is now illegal for any woman to wear the fully covered veil in France and if they do, they risk getting fined and being asked to attend re-education classes. People who force women to wear the full-faced burqa risk being fined a higher amount and a year in gaol. The reason behind the law coming into force was that the full-faced burqa is a symbol of servitude and not one prescribed by the religion or the Koran. However, there are groups that believe this is targetting the Muslim minority in the country and is anti-Islamist.

Where do  I stand on this?

To be honest, I don't know.

I am a feminist. I do not believe in women having to serve men and there are certain cultures that treat women as secondary citizens and it annoys me no end. To that extent, I agree with one part of the law: if anyone forces a woman to wear a full-faced buqa, they should be fined and/or gaoled. But, if that were the case, I think it should extend to anyone that forces a woman to wear anything and not let her make up her own mind. That's only fair. Because I'm pretty sure there are women who are forced to wear only skirts (and not pants) or saris or salwar kameezes.    

Now, I have also read that the Koran does not in fact say Muslim women have to wear the burqa. All it says apparently is that Muslim men and women must dress modestly. Not having read the Koran myself, I cannot comment on the authenticity of this.

At the end of the day though, my personal feeling is that a woman should be allowed to wear what she wants and what she is comfortable in. No one needs to tell her what to wear or what not to wear. Not religion. Not her husband or boyfriend. Not her parents. Not the government. Making a law banning the burqa is the same as having a law that says women can't wear a bikini at the beach (and I'm sure this exists in at least one of the fundamentalist countries!!) Either way, it impinges on the woman's rights.

I know people are going to tell me that Muslim women choose to wear the burqa because they are brainwashed or that they are pressured. I won't know. All I can say is that I have seen some young girls battle with wanting to wear the headscarf and trying to figure out their identities...and in one or two cases, the mother doesn't even wear a headscarf.

What do you think?

Do you support France's action and do you think other countries should follow suit?

Do share your thoughts...I'd really like to know!

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

Room

'Room' is a book by Emma Donoghue. It features Jack, a little five year old who lives with his Ma in Room. Room is where Jack has lived since birth; a soundproof space measuring 11 feet by 11 feet. He spends his days with his Ma watching TV, exercising, having a bath in Bath, playing games, having meals at set times, and sleeping in Wardrobe. He also waits eagerly for Sundaytreats. Which are brought by Old Nick. Old Nick who visits Ma at night while Jack is in Wardrobe and brings them groceries.

Unlike his Ma, this is the only world known to Jack. Some time after his fifth birthday, Ma reveals to Jack that Room isn't the world. There is a whole world outside. As he tries to digest this information, Ma tells Jack about her history --- how she was kidnapped by Old Nick and how she has made attempts to escape. All in vain. As Ma comes up with another plan to escape, she entrusts Jack to help her carry it out.

Will a 5 year old be capable of doing something she herself couldn't?

Will Jack want to go Outside?

Will they escape?

And if they do, what lies in store for them? How will a boy who has grown up for 5 years with only his mother for company cope with the social demands Outside?


Will Ma cope with the Outside after herself being locked away for so long?

Will Old Nick get caught? Or will he catch them trying to escape?

To know this and much more, you have to read the book.

It's a delightful book narrated from the point of view of 5 year old Jack. It makes you smile and feel fear at the same time. The world from Jack's point of view is a funny weird and confusing place. At times, he is like any other five year old --- he loves Dora, loves being read to and loves cuddling up with Ma. And yet, at other times, he is a boy who has an expansive vocabulary and is good with numbers and writing, thanks to Ma. The bond between Jack and Ma is extremely moving for the reader. The love he has for his Ma and the confusion when he gets angry with her. The way he deals with things when she is Gone in Room. The way in which she has protected him from Old Nick.

Emma Donoghue has done complete justice to this book. It's amazing to read a book from a five year old child's point of view. And so utterly believeable. Given that such horrors that Jack and Ma went through still continue to exist also makes it all the more heart-wrenching. It's no wonder that this book was nominated for the Booker Prize last year. And it's unfortunate it didn't win. I think it is one of those books that's different to the rest. After all, how many books do you read from such a young kid's point of view? The world through his eyes is quite different from what we are all used to. And oh-so-captivating.

I give it 4.5 stars out of 5. 

To read another review on the book, check out Titaxy's review on Bond with Books.

Until next time,

Cheers!!!

When I was your age...

I am sure almost every one of you would have heard this line from your parents. I know I did. And I was wondering today, would I ever use this line with my kid(s) in the distant future? Something tells me I'm bound to use it. And here's some of the things I guess I would say to my kid(s) at different phases of their lives.

When I was your age...

...I used a pencil and pen for writing.

...my homework, my school assignments and my college assignments were all handwritten. 

...I looked up a dictionary (i.e. an actual book) if I didn't know the meaning of a word.

..."Just Google it" didn't exist.

...I walked to the corner shop.

...we had a corner shop that sold bread, milk, and other goodies.

...the people working at the corner shop knew us.

...I played football and cricket. Out in the open. With an actual bat and ball.

...I had a big desktop computer that must have weighed a tonne and had several wires attached.

...we had to actually use our fingers to type on the computer's key board if we wanted it to do something.

...I didn't have a mobile phone. Let alone one with a camera and radio and mp3 and a touch screen.

...blue tooth meant someone with a tooth that was coloured blue. [Why? I don't know]

...social networking meant going and meeting people face-to-face and engaging with them in person.

...chat meant calling someone over the phone or meeting up with them for drinks or dinner and talking about everything and anything.

...we had landline phones. Phones that were in the house and stayed in the house.

...my parents were allowed to hit me if I did something wrong.

...our teachers were allowed to hit us if we did something wrong. 

...you couldn't get anywhere without studying and getting good marks.

...I read books. Not e-books.

...I read books that were a credit to the English language. They were spelt properly and helped you expand your own language abilities.

...I rode a bicycle. That moved from its spot.

...we only used the microwave oven for reheating food. Not actually cooking it.

...songs had a melody to them and lyrics that made sense.

...people became famous for things far more worthwhile than uploading a video of themselves on the web.

...a friend was someone you trusted and shared your joys and sorrows with. Not just someone you added on a social networking website but have never met.

I'm sure when the time comes, we will all have a lot more to add to this list. Can you think of any others in the mean time?

Until next time,

Cheers!!!