Disqus - Latest Comments for dotlizard

Re: I Am A Savage- I wish the same people who loudly speak out...

dotlizard — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:07:51 -0000

i couldn't agree more without spraining something.

Re: I Am A Savage- Things I Have Not Said On Facebook

dotlizard — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:55:55 -0000

i literally LOL'd. all the things i wish i could say, but am too nice ...

Re: I Am A Savage- When I was in 5th grade the big thing to do to...

savagemike — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:42:14 -0000

I know what you mean. I've basically been "out" as an atheist/agnostic since I was a teenager, but the past couple of years have allowed me to become much more vocal about it. I think the internet probably does have a lot to do with it, as now I'm aware that there are so many other atheists out there. Keep your head up!

Re: I Am A Savage- When I was in 5th grade the big thing to do to...

dotlizard — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:24:42 -0000

I have so much respect for the courage it would take to be open about that at a young age. I spent my first 2-3 decades trying everything i could to let go of logic & find some of this intoxicating 'blind faith' stuff everyone seemed to have but me, then the next couple decades just feeling uncomfortable around "vocal christianity". I'm still literally physically nervous to have my FSM badge, my scarlet A, and most recently, my Atheist Nexus badge on my blog (the latter found thru you, and thanks for that.) It's important to me to display these things which I know will cause a significant percentage of people who see them to immediately judge me as described here, but it's more important to identify to others who might be afraid of being themselves.

I wonder how many are silent out of fear of this kind of hate.

I am thankful for the internet, for helping me to feel less isolated and to be less silent.

Re: So during the day we got to hang out, you, I go on... - When 140 Isn't Enough

dotlizard — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:00:56 -0000

that is truly a very random quote :)

Re: Google Wave crashes on beach of overhype

dotlizard — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:34:31 -0000

I wish this made me want it less. I really, really do. Sigh.

Re: Simple Blogging Faceoff: Tumblr vs. Posterous

dotlizard — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:41:01 -0000

Still use my Tumblr, but more and more the ability to auto-post to more sites (including Plurk!), and the whole email thing won me over to Posterous.

Re: Introducing the Swiftboat Network

dotlizard — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:18:18 -0000

It's all about ingenuity, resourcefulness, doing more with less. Working smarter, not with obscene amounts of money.

I know that sinking to their level (even if it's very frugal & clever & with the best intentions) is bad and wrong and all. But how many times in the past has that led to disaster, and is it maybe time to toss a little batshit right back at 'em?

As a wise man once said, "But we're never gonna survive unless, we get a little crazy." Just sayin; :)

Re: Introducing the Swiftboat Network

Karoli — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:34:28 -0000

Well, that's true. But in thinking about how the left funds its initiatives compared to the right, I imagine there will be far more possibilities for utilization by the right. Just sayin'. :)

Re: Introducing the Swiftboat Network

dotlizard — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:02:44 -0000

So, if "anyone" can play, does this mean I can start up a news portal and aggregate a bunch of shadowy left-wing propagandists, people who are fed up and wish to fight fire with a flamethrower? Sure, most of the big BIG money is on the other wing, but with shrewd management of resources, and someone with the ability to leverage existing technology on a budget to create a robust content delivery system ... what (other than the noble but perhaps ill-advised notion of taking the high road) would stand in the way?

Not saying I'm advocating such a thing. I'm just ... sayin'.

Re: lizard.be

dotlizard — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:09:48 -0000

it is. even though hello kitty scares the bejeepers out of me, i am happy it brings joy to the folks who have more hello-kitty based courage than i.

but ... those cold, dead eyes. they haunt me. in my nightmares.

Re: Health Care Reform: Change We Deserve or Believe In?

dotlizard — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 03:08:38 -0000

It does seem ridiculously premature in the grand scheme of things to be fussing about how the President hasn't accomplished every single thing he even alluded to during the campaign, and it's been all of 8 months - almost - since he took office.

And your point about whatever we get being more than before is perfect - even if it turns out to be just (just!) strict new regulations on pre-existings, lifetime limits, out-of-pocket expenses, etc -- whatever it is, it'll still be 100% more than any other administration has managed to deliver.

Re: Health Care Reform: Change We Deserve or Believe In?

Karoli — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 01:34:06 -0000

I see no reason that we shouldn't keep pushing for the whole thing,
but wisely. I see so many on the left just digging in, crossing their
arms and saying "Well, if I don't get it my way then I'll dump him,
won't support him anymore." Hey, I wanted 18 months of COBRA
subsidies. I got nine. It's still nine I didn't have before. Now is
our time to act. My real point was that all those "Obama shoulda
woulda coulda" folks are missing the point. It's our voices that
matter at this point, not his.

K

Re: Health Care Reform: Change We Deserve or Believe In?

dotlizard — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 01:15:57 -0000

I'm with you, ready to settle for getting our collective feet in whatever door is made available to us, knowing that if we reject what we can get, anything else will be a long time coming. If we choose to focus on flaws, which are subjective, consensus (among the Pro Reformers) would be impossible.

But deep down, I'm also with @lelawilley, hoping for the whole ball of wax - protections, mandates, and no-age-limit paid Medicare - I would feel awfully selfish rejoicing over just over-50 option, since I'm 15 months away and have very fortunate current insurance / employment circumstances, but all those young families out there with dire situations ...

I do know I feel far more hopeful now, after President Obama's great speech Monday, he seems to have found his footing in all this and that is a damn good sign.

Re: Edythe [furryrabbits]

dotlizard — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 06:25:03 -0000

i for one welcome our new, all-knowing google overlords & whatever other overlords are applicable in this instance.

it's a cookbook! to serve man!

Re: kath.A.rine

katharinec — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:06:17 -0000

I've heard arguments about AA being bad for women before. I'm sure it is bad for some women. And I'm sure it's also bad for some men for reasons you've described if the men were in abusive relationships and/or survivors of sexual trauma themselves. I've seen AA hurt people. I've seen AA help people. And I dunno... AA does have the whole "powerless" language but you also have stuff like the serentiy prayer... which is about figuring out the difference between something you have power over and something you don't... I think AA undoubtedly has helped many people actually find empowerment... and admitting in what areas we are powerless is important... and empowering... because if you keep trying to gain power over that which you will never have any... you're just shooting yourself in the foot.

And for some people - not all the people in AA, and certainly not all the people with substance abuse issues or who seek help from AA - but for some people for sure, I'm sure saying "i'm powerless over my addiction" is accurate... We don't have the science to back that up yet... addiction science is too young, but I'm sure some addicts really, on a biological level, can't tolerate even one drink. Ever. And are powerless over the substance in a way that others struggling with substance abuse aren't.

I'm powerless over certain things... I don't think that makes me powerless in my totality. If I wanted to completely eradicate from myself neurotic symptoms, if I wanted to change things about childhood... I can't. I am powerless over certain realities. And accepting my powerlessness is empowering to me because it allows me to focus on the areas of my life where I do have power and exerting that power.

And I think it's also important to point out that you got the article from your sponsor.... which goes against the idea that there is no internal criticism, etc.

As for the God thing... I've seen atheists use AA just fine and adjust the definition of God for themselves. To me, "God" in the context of AA is just that which is beyond my control and understanding. It's not a being. Is AA religious? It certainly has religious influences... and for some people it is, but for some people it really isn't... and I believe that.

So much of one's experience with AA (or any other 12 step program, I'm using AA in place of writing 12 step program each time I say it) has to do with the meetings in your area, the individual people you come into contact with...

I remember a bunch of my peers in residential getting pissed off that the local AA meeting was full of people telling them to get off their psychiatric meds. So they stopped going to that meeting and went to a local NA meeting instead and made that their 12 step homebase... and the people at that meeting had no problem with the psychiatric med thing.

12 steppers preaching that taking psychiatric meds violates abstinence falls into the category of my original entry of 12 steppers not getting all hubrisy themselves...

Anyone imposing their views on anyone else about stuff where there isn't enough science to sort it all out doesn't make sense. (And for the record, I don't think you are imposing your views... in fact you've made repeatedly clear that you don't want to be the opinion that turns someone away from recovery... so my statement is general and not directed toward you!)

And yay, glad you're enjoying the convo:-) Me too.

Re: kath.A.rine

dotlizard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 04:23:40 -0000

You're completely right about the hyperbole of those articles, which I did overlook in favor of doing that thing where you look at something and see things you fiercely agree with, saying yes! yes! i recognize that! so -- yes, that was wrong-headed of me.

I think this traces back to my first aha! moment with regard to the whole thing - I was camping out at my sponsor's house, and she showed me an article in a women's health magazine that outlined how the psychological tactics in the 12 steps could be particularly harmful to women, as they were designed to break down the ego and force the individual to give up a sense of self & strength in favor of a controlling outside interest. While this might have been appropriate for men back in the 30's (read the book, it's fraught with male privilege and female subservience), to apply this same technique to a woman (especially refugees from an abusive situations, which I was) can be disastrous. I can't speak for all domestic-violence survivors, but I know that when I read that article a light went on, and I realized that one of the reasons I dove into the program with such fervor was that it gave me what I lacked after escaping a violent relationship -- mainly, it allowed me to abdicate responsibility for my self, to be powerless, to "give it up to a higher power". While the program is generally a benevolent force, it is still a force, full of absolutes and "don't question, just follow" directives. If your sponsor told you to kill someone, you probably wouldn't. But if your sponsor told you to quit your job, forsake your relationship, stop taking psychiatric medication ... and if this advice was presented in the context of universally accepted program rhetoric ... you might. And if these things had a negative impact on your life, whose responsibility would that be? Not yours! The subjugation of one's own will, I think, is the most harmful aspect of the whole philosophy. The techniques used to accomplish this now offend me, starting with step one "admit we were powerless".

Powerless? I assure you, I am most assuredly not powerless, and there are no areas of my life now which would benefit from being "turned over" to a god of my understanding (be it a doorknob, a toaster -- or any of those odd things that were recommended to me as a solution for my nascent atheism). Didn't matter what it was, just find something outside yourself, and turn your self over to it. This sort of behavior was a big part of my problem, and from that perspective, any situation in which the will of the individual is vehemently discouraged is probably somewhat unhealthy. So in my very personal and very biased view, I did overlook the anger and the unreasonably strident views of the "AA is a cult" folks.

This is another very good reason why I don't run around advocating everyone abdicate their "Anonymous" programs in favor of the very challenging task of finding alternative support systems, you see :) I'm too irrational about the whole thing, that that lack of logic and reason leads me to my own sort of hyperbole.

I'm sure there are some objective truths out there, but I'm probably the last person to ask about them.

And may I say I love this discussion very, very much? Because I do.

Re: kath.A.rine

katharinec — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:49:55 -0000

I'll check him out when I get a chance. I won't pass judgment on him just by simply reading a review... I'll try to get a hold of the actual book. Thanks for the tip.

Re: kath.A.rine

katharinec — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:31:18 -0000

Especially those first two links, don't take this personally, but I can't take them seriously. The guy in the orange papers, for example, shows a lack of subtle thinking by calling Bill "insane" (which is a legal, not a medical or scientific term)... his proof? That some guy he never met (oh how I loathe armchair psychology...) fits the criteria for a personality disorder in the DSM... wait a minute... pretty much anyone who seeks the help of AA probably has some sort of substance related disorder as defined by the DSM anyway... so they're all insane by his definition... is that to disqualify their points of view? Uhm, I'm not in the being diagnosable makes you "insane" and not worth listening to camp.... Not exactly a critical thinking heavy weight is what I think of whoever wrote that...

As for the next link, right there at the very beginning: "we believe strongly that AA is a primary cause of mass addiction in America" WHAT!? That's flat out ridiculous, so ridiculous that I'm not going to even spend time explaining how ridiculous it is unless someone asks me to.

The third link doesn't reek as much of conspiracy theoryness... it's more measured, but it's still simplistic.

Look, is 12 step culty? Yah. Was Bill perfect? No. Most people at the meetings I've been to are actually very open about Bill's faults... and most people look down upon 13th steppers...

I would compare AA more to a religion than a cult... and I think there's a difference. If your sponsor told you to kill someone, most people probably wouldn't. If your cult leader did, most probably would.

However, my distaste for the hyperbole that I found in those links aside, I actually totally agree with a lot of the rest of your comment... so much so I'm considering reblogging it. I might still.

You are SO RIGHT that one of the tragedies of AA is that it only provides one prescription... to whoever comes to it... and there aren't many other options... and it's often forced down people's throats, often by the law... and if you're unlucky enough to need help but not AA help, then you're really, really screwed... and that sucks.... a lot. Pursuing alternatives is often very much not an option... I've witnessed that, I've seen people relapse because of it. And I don't mean into casual, healthy, manageable use, I mean full fledged shit that people need help from. You are so right about all of that... and it's a problem, and we need to change sensibilities around AA. It is not the be all and end all, it applies a broad stroke, it is not science based, it does not provide thorough diagnosis, and it fails a lot of people. And it shouldn't be the de facto standard. And it shouldn't be so integrated into the law.

But to jump to calling a cult I think is hyperbolic...

Here's what I think, and this is what I was trying to get at with my original post: 12 steppers and anyone enamored with the 12 step... stop telling everyone your way is the be all and end all, because it isn't. Spouters of hyperbole, stop spouting hyperbole and telling people that something that's helping them is "wrong." Both of those statements, in equal strength, with the ultimate message of "everyone chill."

Re: kath.A.rine

dotlizard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 01:21:26 -0000

oh, and this guy: http://www.peele.net/lib/bufe.html he totally rocks.

Re: kath.A.rine

dotlizard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 01:16:57 -0000

I, too, have seen people succeed working a program, and certainly the effectiveness of any type of therapy is very different from individual to individual. And again, I never want to be the opinion someone listened to before quitting recovery and suffering tragic consequences.

But. But.
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_a0.html
http://www.positiveatheism.org/rw/ofcourse.htm
http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/aacultbk01.htm

Some repetitive stuff there, but taken as a whole, extremely persuasive. To me, what it comes down to is this: there are some individuals who have a combination of physical predisposition towards substance abuse and other aggravating socio-economic factors, who may only be able to beat that addiction through a program that uses classic mind-control/brainwashing techniques. Similarly, there are some forms of cancer which only respond to invasive and dangerous surgery and toxic chemotherapy. Extreme measures have their place. However, 12 step programs are the equivalent of going to a doctor who only ever prescribes one course of treatment for every patient they see. The worst-case scenario on either of these "one-way" methodologies, of course, is the individual who has specific vulnerabilities and needs other, less radical options to consider.

The worst part of this is that 12-step programs are by far and away the most common approach used by treatment facilities, and I believe these are the only programs that get any government funding. And for offenders, if the judge orders them to get treatment, it will be 12-step treatment or else. If a person wants to pursue alternative treatment modalities, they need to be free of court/probation requirements and be able to pay for the treatment themselves. This fact alone is more than alarming - "the system" has accepted AA/NA as the de facto standard, and ... well, read those articles.

But for most people, that's all there is, and it is there. I'm glad it's there and, well, I hope it doesn't do too much damage? Sigh.

Re: kath.A.rine

katharinec — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:38:49 -0000

I think a lot of the criticisms of 12 step programs are legitimate. I think a lot of the dangers you mentioned are real. I may not be an addict, but I've been to a lot of meetings. Less than a hundred probably, but still... a lot. NA, AA and Al-Anon. The first two in support of friends... the last one for myself because I have so many friends who are addicts I decided it was time to take some time out to support myself. I even went to one NA meeting regularly as a support (open meetings only of course) so I'm pretty familiar with the culture. And I've seen 13th steppers... I've seen people told a lot of crap but non trained professionals.. but I've also seen a lot of people get their lives together, and I've often left very inspired. I've seen a group of dysfunctional people somehow run a functional mini organization and support each other when nothing else was working... so that's why I take a very well, okay, if you (the general you) feel it's too cultish or whatever, that's fine... don't go there, and by all means speak up against the cultish aspects of it, counsel friends who are in 12 step to be wary of the cultish elements of it... but to categorically reject it is to pretty harshly reject something that has undeniably saved a lot of people.. and that is pretty incredible just by nature of the fact that it's a functioning organization run exclusively by a bunch of highly dysfunctional people... I think that says something about how functional and dysfunctional can go hand in hand.. it's stigma busting and inspiring. And it's always there.

And you can tailor it... I have friends who don't do the 100% abstinence thing, but go there for moral support, but choose not to follow the program 100%... obviously, if they're not doing the abstinence thing. And that works for some of my friends.

I just think I dunno.. like ECT. I know people who have loved it... I know people who have hated it... I know there is a lot of misuse of ECT.. does that mean we should completely do away with ECT and discourage everyone categorically for taking advantage of it just because it has hurt some people and is abused by some people? Well, it's been a god send for others... Or like psychiatric medication... or CBT... or any school of psychotherapy... or even freaking placebos.. when the science is so young on so many of these mental health things... my take is if it works, use it, and judge not lest ye be judged so just don't judge for the most part...

Sorry if that was really rambly. It probably was, lol.

Thank you for your openness and your comment... your perspective is greatly appreciated.

Re: kath.A.rine

dotlizard — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:21:25 -0000

This is always a sticky one for me. I was actually in NA for approximately 2.5 years in the early 90's, and while I did need to slow the hell down at the time, I can tell you without hesitation that yes, it is a cult. The entire structure of the program, including blind faith in flawed 'leader' figures, reciting archaic texts, chanting, and the steps themselves which can do some serious damage to a person's psyche when supervised by an unlicensed, untrained "sponsor". There are numerous sites out there who have done the research, and the horror stories are ... well, horrific.

And let's not get into the thirteenth step or the kind of harm that can be done when a senior member takes physical and emotional advantage of shattered new recruits. Let's just not.

I know they "help people", I know there are people who were killing themselves (and others) with their addictions, who by all appearances have turned their lives around and give all glory to the program. I also know that the instant you sit down at one of those tables, you're told repeatedly by everyone that you have an incurable disease and are destined to die in a gutter if you leave, so anyone who doesn't die and sticks with it is, without fail, going to tell you they'd be dead without it, etc.

I have not followed a program of abstinence for approximately the last 17 years. I am more successful now than I've ever been in my life, and much of this is due to my ADD medicine.

Sorry to ramble so, I just have a lot to say about this that I'm not comfortable blogging about in my own space, for one thing, and ... well, even after all these years, I fear being the voice that convinces some raw newcomer to go out and drink or use. After all these years, I'm still a little brainwashed, maybe?

Re: lizard.be

dotlizard — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:12:38 -0000

living in fear sucks, but, living without fear is illogical, humans being what they are ...

so, i tend to favor using regular old caution as a rape-and-robbery deterrent, however i do see the strength in pointing out that walking alone is not the problem, having to worry about being attacked is the problem.

Re: Joffi's Stuff - Little Kittens by The Outside Joke | Amie Street I...

dotlizard — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 01:33:35 -0000

awwwwww...