is right twice a day (My link button is disabled. Maybe that’s old news)
Alternate title: Church of GFOFHAVV lost a member
is right twice a day (My link button is disabled. Maybe that’s old news)
Alternate title: Church of GFOFHAVV lost a member
It is not a universal affliction of those who knew their savior from a very young age, “saved as children”, choose your words for it. But so many are so incredibly naive as to be utterly ineffectual. In speaking, in writing, in weighing situations, in seeing cause in time to intervene in effect. Don’t get me wrong, being naive isn’t a bad thing in and of itself. But to call it a good thing necessarily means you need to further qualify that claim.
I didn’t settle on my faith until I was 32. In the preceding 17 years from losing virginity at 15 to a woman who was old enough to drive (16!) I must have lived a hundred years. I’m not naive enough. Far from it.
When I read things like this, therefore, I just cringe. The writer is celebrating women’s intuition about parenting, while offering an example that demonstrates anything but. A daughter, on the way to the moves, called her mother and said that because there were no movies they wanted to see, the girls were going to hang out at Dory’s. The girl rung off before mom could quibble.
Mom’s spidey sense started tingling. She used technology (This is the first hint that the story is made up or the mom in the example is thick) to reverse directory a caller ID number then a mapping site to find Dory’s house. She went there.
When she arrived at the door she saw a boy looking out the window and holding a beer. he was yelling, “Someone’s mom is here”.
Mom got someone to the door and asked her daughter to come out. Here is the part where the wrapping paper gets folded inward at the ends and the bows and ribbons get affixed:
After a minute, Kristin appeared, an ashen look on her face. Sharon feared they were in for a long ride home. But as they walked to the car, Kristin asked, “Mom, how did you know? How did you know I needed you?”
It turned out that some guys from a different school had arrived at the party, talking trash and getting aggressive. It looked like there might be a fight.
Even when your children are resisting your efforts at care and protection, they still need you more than ever. When they get stubborn, keep coming. When they become unlovable, keep loving
If mom didn’t know Dory, how did she use a “combination of caller ID and a mapping site? The girl texted her mother. It is clear that the text came from the girls own phone. The ministry peddling this is naive or plays loose with real truth, sacrificing it for a buttoned up anecdote. Sweet. The readers who have seen this since it was published, many of them must be naive as well or there would have been enough feedback to have it taken down or at least edited. It makes the readers, mostly Moms, feel good, so it is not really read.
Finally, if we ignore all of that, the mom in this story is the most naive of all if this is a true tale. And the girl has shown that she can think on her feet.
If this story really happened, with those pesky CSI type details fixed so that it was plausible, would you have fallen for that story? If somehow you were able to satisfy yourself that the story is 100% true, that the girls were just there playing Mystery Date, and some hooligans with unfiltered Camels and cans of Pabst showed up, would you repeat it without even considering that in this neo-post-snopes age people are skeptical?
Keep it up folks. With this level of focus, I feel a major culture shift coming. The wrong way.
What’s your initial reaction?
If you are like me, it was positive, followed quickly with the thought, “Hang on a minute, what’s the catch?”.
The catch is simple. There is an increase in single moms who are unemployed and in married moms who cannot find work. Move along, nothing to see here.
Analysis of time-use diaries finds that mothers at home spend more hours per week than working mothers on child care and housework, as well as more time on leisure and sleep. Time use also varies among different groups of mothers at home: Married stay-at-home mothers put more time into child care and less into leisure than their single counterparts. [my emphasis]
A mother’s work is never done.
My work (and most men’s work) is never done. I am expected to put in a minimum number of hours chipping away at it, and to produce output that meets the expectations of my employer. There is no movable line that divides my day between leisure and work, where I can choose to chill, so to speak.
A mother’s work is never done.
I disagree. That there will always be more dirty cloths and dishes, and spaces will be re-cluttered, and children’s appointments will have to be kept with Doctors, and the house will run out of milk and bread, and dust bunnies will proliferate like real bunnies….on a hypothetical day, today for instance, if I was a stay-at-home something or other, the work would be done. When more work appears, its not that the work is never done, its that it gets undone.
A mothers work is never done
My BIL suddenly was a stay at home dad with seven kids after his prostate cancer surgery and recovery, now 15 years past, took him too long from the workforce and his wife admirably stepped up and has thrived in that role. (She also demonstrated that a woman can excel like this and yet maintain the frame she has when she was the folksy home-schooling rural wife who made things from scratch and deferred to her husband, kuddos to her for that example). he to excelled at the all things domestic. He home-schooled, did the tasks any stay at home parent must, cleaning, laundry, dishes, and continued doing the domestic chores typical for men…repairs, lawn, and bigger jobs around the place that he was qualified to do due to his prior vocation. He was also done Every. Single. Day. Unlike the women referred to in the pew study, his leisure time did not involve compromise or leveraging the fact that certain things left unfinished “until tomorrow” would not be noticed or felt.
A mother’s work is never done
The increase in stay-at-home-moms is only good news to the extent that, if it is not a dysfunctional home, the children are benefiting by her steady presence. Would that it be the case that stable married women with working husbands were eschewing work outside the home. That they were choosing to be domestic managers, even if openly claiming that technology has helped enable that, it would still be a good trend. But the details show that that is not where the increase is happening. Lets face it, from appliances long in existence to more trouble free textiles and home surfaces, the work that is never done should rarely not be done.
Elspeth is touting a book for ladies. I grabbed a free sample just to check it out. My impression is positive. I came across her rewrite of Philippians 4:8; worth sharing here:
Finally, my sisters, concerning your husband, if there is anything that is untrue or dishonorable, if you can find an action that is not right, a thought that is impure, if you see anything unlovely, if anything about his work or habits is not commendable, if you can think of one thing about him that is not excellent or praiseworthy, dwell on these things. Reflect on them, chew them over and meditate on them, stir the pot of negative thinking about your man, and the god of griping and discontent will be with you. 
I passed on the urge to parse a recent Barbara Rainey article because of how well plowed that ground is, but this satirical scripture rewrite begs that I go ahead and do it.
See what Barbara Rainy says about how a Christian woman should love her man, a glimpse at what it would be like to be married to a woman following her advice:
She offers three things:
1. Believe in your husband
2. Be willing to confront your husband
3. Pursue intimacy with him on every level.
Number two is clearly my focus. She expounds on the point as follows:
Too many wives mistakenly believe they are following the biblical pattern of submission by ignoring or denying deficits in their husband’s life. But being submissive does not mean being silent. It simply means being wise and loving in how you approach him, treating him with kindness and respect. Say to your husband, “Could I talk to you about something?” Asking permission to broach a difficult subject may make it easier to get your message across. He is far less threatened and insecure this way.
Her advice makes the evangelical feminist version of Philippians 4:8 a good thing. There is nothing in Rainey’s list that speaks to the dark side of women manipulating, micromanaging, judging, and controlling their husbands. In fact she recommends it, so long as its done by “being wise and loving in how you approach him, treating him with kindness and respect”. It is how you do it sister! But you gotta do it!
Notice also that the number 2 doesn’t just separate numbers 1 and 3 on a number line. Number 2 on her list opens a chasm between 1 and 3. And more, it makes 1 and 3, individually, far more difficult to accomplish.
Because of the proclivity women have to be critical of their husbands, which of the three things do you think resonates most with women who read the list? Right. And once number 2 is boldest and loudest, it is the filter through which numbers 1 and 3 must pass before they can be rightful wife imperatives. Because, the church frames marital obligations, for woman, as conditional.
“If he is loving her and servant leading, what woman would not support a man like that?”
I was thinking about what the preacher who married my wife and I said to me and my wife in a session we had prior to the wedding day. To me he said:
“To see her faults and weaknesses and yet to still believe in your wife’s God-given potential as a woman and steward of your home will do more for her spiritual growth than you can imagine”
Oh, uh, sorry, he never said that. Weaknesses coupled optimistically with God given potential are subjects no one dare broach with women. Rainey doesn’t make an effort to disguise this. She even makes a virtue out of it in her exposition of number 1. Rainey grows the wife’s expectations while simultaneously building in barriers to actually realizing them:
To see his faults and weaknesses and yet to believe in your husband’s God-given potential as a man and his leadership of your home does more than you can imagine for his spiritual growth.
I a separate article Rainey drills down into this issue in a more focused way. From the title, 5 Ways to Help Your Husband Step Up to Manhood, and throughout the piece, the spirit of the above rewrite of Phil 4:8 can be seen. Another five point program on how women can fashion Godly men. Numbers 3 and 4 are fitting in the context of this post.
3. Praise your husband when he steps up to manhood. When he leads family devotions, when he prays with you, or when he makes decisions that are especially responsible, thank him. Just as you want to cheer your kids when they do something right, you need to cheer your husband. Your words to your husband are powerful. Ephesians 4:29 says, “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” Encouraging him and praising him when he does what’s right is one way you can help him be the man that God wants him to be.
4. Believe that your husband can grow to become a more godly man. If you believe in your husband … if you accept him as who he is … if you trust God and then allow God to work in his life … God might just surprise you. One of my favorite verses, Luke 1:37, says, “For nothing will be impossible with God.” Perhaps you’ve been married for more than 20 years, and you really think your husband can’t and won’t change. Remember that nothing is impossible with God. The King of Heaven is not finished with your husband, and you need to believe both in God and in your husband. Don’t underestimate what God can do!
Imagine the genders reversed. I cannot. Why is it that when evangelical feminist Christian leaders, male and female, speak or write about men they use comparisons to children and language indicative of the potential that men possess. More, why is that language not likewise used when addressing wives? The answer is clear. It is one of the fundamental observations amongst Christian men (and a few women, Elspeth) that the aura of female spiritual superiority be preserved and advanced. That the things of God be more likened to the things of woman. The same frame is taken by secular feminists, that any group, company, organization, situation, is less and incomplete if it lacks the guiding female hand. Likewise, marriage, the church, the family, Christianity itself is better served if the over arching guiding force is that of the female. Within that framework, somehow, men find their potential to be leaders, to be Godly men.
To illustrate how insidious and hidden this overarching hand is, imagine you and your friend go camping and fishing. You are gone a few days, cut off from mobile phones and cars and traffic and refrigerated food and from the interaction with other people, utterly. Just outside your immediate thoughts are your responsibilities back in civilization. Work, wife, kids, so forth. If you are lucky you keep those thoughts at bay. Its best when you manage to completely but temporarily purge them.
Go up a level, there is another layer, another system that you could think about and realize, though not there and then at the lakeside, how it has a measure of control over you.
Keep walking up this systematic file tree and eventually you could find a level where this things of the federal government are operative in your life. Now only are we unlikely to dwell on the federal government when we are away from it all, we are unlikely to dwell on it when we are not away from it all. (Political obsessions notwithstanding). It is in this way that the feminine hand over arches the full spectrum of gender relations, up to and including marital order. Whether we are actively under manipulation from the wife, at which point we are acutely aware of the hidden hand with the french manicure, or we are at church, or we are at work or we are lakeside with our buddies, actively or passively the hidden hand of female control is there vying for primacy. That one man is more able to resist than another doesn’t challenge the existence or efficacy of the overarching system affording this hidden female hand its influence.
 From What’s It Like To Be Married To Me?, page 47, by Linda Dillow
What I read in the sample of Dillow’s book was solid stuff. Sure to be rebuked with “what about men getting asked what its like to be married to them?” questions, hopefully she gets to the fact that men are constantly challenged on this.The hidden hand indeed.
Consider my theory, again. The proclivities of men and women are wrapped up in, respectively, physical lust and emotional primacy. Each, unchecked, leads to trouble. One layer deeper, however, and the two things diverge in terms of how they are perceived. They are far apart as, well, east is from west in terms of where they are assumed to reside on the good vs evil spectrum.
The relative moral valuation of these things is so disparate that when a woman wanders into male territory and gives in to physical lust outside of marriage, either when single or in an adulterous affair, her emotional weakness, her gender specific Achilles can serve to mitigate, no, to negate the immorality of her sexual dalliances. It acts as a catalyst for other women to vicariously experience the “hurt she must have been feeling” when she rutted with the pool boy. Its not just team woman. That would not do it in and of itself. They would not be buying this crap buy the pound if they didn’t get something they want in conjunction. What they get is some time in the “Awwwwwww” spotlight.
In order of preference, the empathy that is uncut and most potent is the empathy generated by the self at and to the self from others. The first step down is the empathy that one woman can feel when she engages one on one with the close friend who is at that moment the empathy black hole in their sphere. Sometimes no matter how many times they page the dude he just doesn’t respond, and eventually it is assumed he ain’t holdin’.
When that happens she has to go street. Metaphorically driving along slowly, looking into the eyes of those she passes by, looking for that eyelid quiver that says, slow down, I got you. They recognize one another, these empathetics.
The end up drawn to each other, like the expression from college days, “a friend in weed is a friend indeed”, ideally they agglomerate into an ever reliable pool of shared empathy, like regulars at a crack house they take comfort in always knowing that one of them will show up with something they all need. They troll other relationships, they troll the news, they troll internet forums, always seeking a morsel that can collectively create a wellspring of empathy. They manage to productively clean the crack pipe over and again until finally, if all else fails, someone will come through and manufacture some circumstances in her own life because wow, after after existing on that residue redo for weeks, the euphoria from a powerful pure hit of empathy is something to behold.
Men sometimes give in to lust and have sex with a woman other than their wife or have sex while they are not married.
Three paragraphs about empathy, one sentence about lust. The built in obfuscation makes turning the tide like standing on the beach saying “no tsunami gonna ruin my vacation”.
A woman who is in full on sexual denial in her marriage, but who has managed to generate a semi-permanent state of receiving empathy from others is solid in her place of primacy. Not only does every woman the couple knows want a piece of her empathy action, most every person man or woman they know wouldn’t waste a fired neuron of sympathy for a man in a sexual drought if he stands in relief against a backdrop of his wife, the Cygnus X1 of empathy. Try shining light of truth and watch it bend and disappear. Try speaking truth directly and feel what its like to be crushed into singularity.
In a consumer culture supply reacts to demand. The manner in which supply reacts is not without its own moral contrast. There are products that are specifically designed for men and woman and their proclivities. Have a look at one product designed to alleviate women of consequences for emotional primacy:
Compare that to a product designed to help men alleviate consequences of lust:
I was in the car at lunch time and a caller said he was once a “typical blue pill liberal”. Rush asked what that means. The man gave a short explanation, insufficient to really press Limbaugh to think more deeply on it. Rush I’m sure suffers from the assumption that its the left feminists causing all the trouble.
I sent a short note to the program and recommended rush start with Dalrock and get informed. I said he is a low information person on this one issue.
For what its worth.
Ive never liked Apple stuff. I bought an Ipod in 2004. When I ran smack into the Itunes interface I rushed out to get an MP3 player that was user friendly. I enjoy listening to intelligent people explain to me that Itunes is simpler than dragging and dropping in a Windows environment.
I don’t like that Apple is insular. It doesn’t play at all, let alone well with others. Listening to Jobs say, as his long fingers splayed across a prototype Ipad, that there would never be something that could plug in, that there would be no replaceable parts, that these are complete, I was left with no desire. Looked like a cool extra toy.
Watching the masses queue up at a new Iphone release is a damning cultural testimony. Like its always been since societies formed, those who would be nonconformists are those most prone to conformity. Now, everyone looks like a hipster. All stores have clean lines and spartan shelves, like a Blade Runner era foreshadow of future retail. And the products that are really really great (Macbook Air) are over priced, while the accessible products are created for those who for whatever reason share Jobs’ vision, whether they do or not.
So, my employer, two years ago, gives me an Ipad. Yes, I liked having a FREE Ipad. Friends of mine, Apple enthusiasts mostly, deride me for complaining I cant plug in a mouse. Fine, like I said its a cool extra toy then. To be carried in addition to a phone and a PC because it cannot and will not do what I need for work.
Don’t talk jailbreak, that proves my point.
Worse, now it stopped accepting charge. Its alive, it sees and acknowledges the power source, but nada. No way to fully boot up.
Who knew you must make an appointment, signing up with an androgynous person whose race is just beyond identifiable because they look like a computer generated member of the new race….”Allrace” and returning a day later. I did. And they said sorry bub, battery bad the Ipad is a door stop.
“Can I get my data?”
“No sir, that’s anti privacy, you don’t want people flipping through your family photos do you, that’s why you should have used the Cloud.”.
Really, hmmmm. I disabled Cloud on my Ipad as well as my kids and wife’s Iphones because there are myriad ways for leakage of private things unless you read and memorize an Apple user manual and disable 15 different ways it defaults to “share” your crap. This problem is not just an Apple issue, its part of the endlessly linked Google options and Microsoft has “One Drive”.
Nevermind, the guy was full of it. One needn’t “flip through family photos” to transfer data. drag a folder, drop in in another device. Job’s didn’t like that. I do like that. And I’m out several hundred funny family photos and videos because I didn’t use The Cloud.
My home is an Apple free zone starting today.
For the time being I have exhausted, beaten to death more likely, the topics that fall under evangelical feminism. Sharing more and more examples I come across has lost luster. Its like tolerance has built and I need my chin to fall to through the floor all the way to China to motivate a post about another.
In my last several posts, irrespective what the specifics where, I started to congeal back on the idea that empathy is a female dysfunction. Early days of this still newish blog I wrote a lot about that. I routinely run across articles on main media sites that I could potentially mine as support text for my theories on empathy, but rarely has there been hook enough in it to prompt me to write. And readers here know I do not toil over my writing based on the mistakes I leave uncorrected.
Yesterday the Headline “Happy Wife Happy Life?” on Fox News website got my attention. Where they skeptical? Were they amplifying that old saw? So I read it. Nah, barely enough there to parse and write about in and of itself.
This morning, because Id been so busy I had not been consuming media much, i decided to go voyeur and watch Ray Rice knock out his girlfriend. For some reason its video-clip-makes-big-news season again, from beheadings to allegations of racism unchecked in both directions and all the predictable hypocrisy. And there is an NFL player knocking out his girlfriend in an elevator.
I’m unsympathetic enough to men striking women that the video bothered me. Some. Its not a dull knife sawing a head off disturbing (which I have not watched) but it is incongruous. In terms of juxtaposition, it is useful for that because its of kilter, out of the ordinary, it stands out verses images of daily walking around.
As I watched it I was reminded, Happy Wife, Happy Life, the article and the cliche. I went back and read the article again.
The gist is that the wife’s opinion regarding the quality of the marriage is the tone setter,
wives’ assessments of the marriage are more important in some respects than their husbands’
The article begins by stating that older couples lives are more satisfactory when their marriage is better. That doesn’t seem like study result worthy information, but OK. Not relevant to this post, but I always wonder if the couples were asked questions in a format and forum that enabled the man to answer honestly and not be concerned that Medusa will be slithering on the pillow later.
The overarching conclusion of the study, that happily married people are happy people when they are older needs to be filed with the one where 100% of people getting out of the shower reported being wet. Nevertheless, this stuff makes news for a reason.
Buried within the happiness survey was a six point section about marriage. The article explains that a main metric was how often and to what magnitude does one spouse make the other spouse “feel tense”. Talk about begging more questions, studies even. We know, however, that “tense” is most likely skewed to “anxious” which is skewed to afraid which leads to “I just don’t feel safe with you” which dilutes the definition of “safe” to parts per gazilion. Had the metric been “nervous” the results would have been squirrely. A man alone, safely able to be honest, may ask “Can time be expressed in increments greater than 100%?” A women, sitting right next to her husband, would still respond as if it meant “safe”. I’m on a tangent.
A couple of things were most disconcerting. the study said that the wife’s assessment of the marriage is more important than the husbands in the aggregate of determining life satisfaction. Well blow me over, they mean happy wife happy life …don’t they. And they explain that by saying
wives’ assessments of the marriage are more important in some respects than their husbands’
Or, “no fecal matter Mr. Deer Slayer wearing Baker Street flat occupant”.
Then the pontificating study analyzers go all mentally wobbly.
“Women typically provide more emotional and practical support to husbands than vice-versa,” Carr said. “So even an unhappily married man may receive benefits from the marriage that enhance his overall well-being.”
Bullshit on a kebob. Women typically provide emotional and practical support to husbands that are flabbergasted and exhausted, physically and emotionally, or men who have handed their manhood over to be stored in the bottom drawer of the disheveled dust trap of a jewelry box. This is a corollary to the other myth that women care more about marriage as evidenced by their endless consumption of all things romantic and relationship oriented, and its real meaning that they procure the instruments they employ in the relationship Gitmo where they receive their snail mail. Up is down and the next big dietary fad is coprophagous. (Its very sustainable and saves money too!)
There is a sad statement of a knowing nature buried in the article that really brought me down then up.
Additionally, husbands rated their marriages slightly more positively than wives.
Makes me proud to be a man really. Nose to the mill, all that.
Now, Ray Rice. The man did wrong and went big doing it. Not long on impulse control is he? Evangelical feminists and other feminists will be unable to read this because all comprehension of English is gone when the subject is abuse. that’s why the word ought to require a user license . 100% of respondents report zero percent doubt that he abused his girlfriend. See that? The fems see that sentence as if through a kaleidoscope with a lens fogged by nose breathing anger. I don’t care. I’ve explained that I am somewhat immune to instant outrage at the mention of the word abuse because of my personal experience with it that make Ray Rice’s actions look like he is giving a pedicure by comparison. I do not claim my insensitivity as virtue. I do claim to have better moral clarity because of it, ironically because my moral clarity should be all the more muddled.
If you watch the elevator lobby video before they get in, and you have the :advantage” of the gut honest perspective that I have, you realize that his outburst was likely set in stone as “gonna happen” long before they reached that lobby where she continued to provoke him, likely during overt and passive aggressive provocations for hours prior all done where it could be unknown to all but ray that she was even being anything but demure. Interesting is the fact that, whether he knocked her out or simply stayed silent and stewed a couple of days, in terms of relationship dynamics, she did nuthin’. Worse, conversationally and according the therapy conventional wisdom, silence and emotional withdrawal would be him abusing her as well. In other words she was, is, and ever shall be unrestrained by any social, religious, self sense of morality, or whatever sort of convention that has the effect of rendering judgement of actions and allowing that cause and effect exist regardless that the outcome is not justified by what precipitates it. We simply cannot have this talk. Ever.
So, consider the compressed view of a relationship seen in those two segments of video. Now, look at the sixty something men responding to the questions that made up the survey in Happy Wife Happy Life. In the juxtaposition, what can we observe.
1. Yes NAWALT
2. Impulse control
3. A trend towards capitulation and men preferring lives in hair shirts and calling it cozy.
4. The primacy of the conventional wisdom bias.
To end with some levity…last evening my wife was showing me some nursing school work. She is a senior, 4th year so in the clinical setting and doing patient write ups and the like. This thing was huge. Knowing that the right thing is to attentively read it I set about to do just that. Not every sentence nor every page as there were over 30. Think patient chart wildly expanded.
As I put my readers on and started I noticed her to my 4:30. And she was rocking foot to foot. Folks I wanted to flatly ask she walk away, but the moment deserved better. So, I lowered the paper and said, I said, “if you’d move away and stop quivering like a Minion I’d better be able to read this” (a Despicable Me reference for non-animated movie watchers) Maybe its a spouse thing but we laughed with tears.
Today I was again forced into the huge acronym dietary church. I stumbled upon an article that warns people about a food allergy that is growing more common among the gluten free set. Lupin is the culprit. Seems Lupin is a frequently substituted ingredient in gluten free food.
Ever hear of lupin? Me neither. That is, until last week, when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a warning about this legume, stating that it can cause allergic reactions ranging from a mild case of hives to full-blown anaphylaxis (yikes).
Every time I see “gluten free” on a menu I start getting full blown hives. If I was hooked up to an MRI to map the electrical activity in my brain, the regions that light up when I read anecdotes in the manosphere, where team woman follows a rationalized pattern of behavior regarding marriage and divorce, that same region lights up like a Christmas Tree when I read about gluten and other acronym church issues. I sensed a connection. But I have peeve chasing to waste my time. Or, do I?
Lupin got me motivated. I had not checked the male to female ratio on celiac diagnosis, or more importantly, on celiac claims. More fundamental, I’d not looked for collated gluten mania debunking information. I started there.
In the article Is your gluten intolerance real? Study says gluten sensitivity is fake, the findings seem compelling. I’m not one who googles, posts claim, crosses arms, nods and hmmph’s as if that’s that, but this sounds pretty straightforward. An Australian Dr. fed a carefully controlled diet to self reported gluten intolerant patients. You can read the control details in the article. About the lab controlled diet fed group, the Dr. reported:
participants reported stomach pain and sensitivity even when they weren’t eating gluten. Each diet had patients reporting pain, bloating, nausea, and gas after their baseline treatment, Real Clear Science reported.
The outlet suggests a “nocebo effect” is at play. Only eight per cent of the participants had “gluten-specific effects,” according to Gibson’s study published in the journal Gastroenterology.
Some supporters of the gluten-free diet may say that they feel healthier with better digestion since adopting the diet, but the latest findings suggest that if you aren’t suffering from celiac disease, your intolerance is likely in your head.
Elsewhere I read something from a geneticist who spoke to the fact that celiac or celiac reports have a gender imbalance. It ranges from 2.3/1 to 3/1 female to male. As an inherited condition this makes no sense. It would make more sense is the skew was closer to 1/1 or to 100/1. Here is one study about gender and gluten. All we need is for one of these doctors to become ensconced in manosphere type thinking and we would have a full expose on our hands about what is really at work here.
Bringing it all down to my level, I found one of those articles that had me doing mental fist pumps. No, its not really peer reviewed, and I know, I know, some may agree that this condition is over reported but your own gluten intolerance is a real as toe nail fungus, but it was fun to read these quips.
How do you know if you are gluten intolerant? Elaborate assays? DNA? At least a blood sample? Nope, you just have to give up wheat and say you feel better and you are allowed to claim you have it. And proponents have even scarier numbers – they claim 97 percent of the people who have Celiac disease don’t know they have it, so their ranks are really much bigger.
Brilliant in its creation of a circular reasoning trap. Not quite Kafka, but It’ll do.
Maybe fashion disease people grew up in the 1990s when teachers wanted all kids to be labeled ADD, or they are the types who go to parties today and determine 80% of other party-goers have Asperger’s. They are used to having something. They need it. (My emphasis)
The author tackles ancillary benefit claims of gluten free dieting like weight loss with sarcasm that has me looking for where I can sign up to read more:
there being no scientific evidence that going gluten-free causes weight loss, other than any sudden shock to your system causes weight loss – if Lady Gaga went on an all Meat Dress diet she would also lose weight. Heck, some studies even show that if you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight. Modern dietary science is downright revolutionary like that.
He also links ideology and in group thinking and lays out a fantastically wry illustration of the irrationality of herd behavior.
So it would seem, at least according to trends about other beliefs. Along with believing more in UFOs, psychics and astrology than right-wing people, left-wing people also believe they are hyper-sensitive to food. That could be genetic and may lend credence to often-dismissed kooky claims that they can taste GMOs or are allergic to them. Same with vaccines. Anti-vaccine people are overwhelmingly left-wing; while a right-wing state such as Mississippi is almost at 100% vaccination, left-wing Washington State is sinking below herd immunity levels and kindergartens in Seattle report 25% non-vaccinated children. Maybe they don’t need vaccines the way genetically inferior right-wing people do. It could be that left-wing people have co-evolved a much stronger immune system to go along with their super-smart brains. Well, except for celiac disease, they have a super-strong immune system.
Here, in Eyeing a gluten free revolution another writer may not realize it, most do not because they are themselves caught in the wild eyed trends they report on, but he offers a glimpse at reality.
“There are a lot of people on a gluten-free diet, and it’s not clear what the medical need for that is,” said Dr. Joseph Murray of the Mayo Clinic and co-author of the study and a member of NFCA’s Scientific/Medical Advisory Council. “It is important if someone thinks they might have celiac disease that they be tested first before they go on the diet.”
There are simple reasons behind the over the top claims of gluten intolerance. People get fuzzy feelings, there is EMPATHY
“I get hugs, and every time I’m reduced to tears,” she said. “I’m certain that will continue.”
And there is profit
As for Moreland, her work is ongoing, noting college campuses and senior living centers as target areas for gluten-free education.
“We’re at the tipping point in this gluten-free culinary revolution,” she said.
Gotta wrap it up. Wife came out ready for church wearing all beige. I asked her if she could go change into something “less Mao, more now”. Pray for me today.
…like this dog every day. This guy runs headlong through some abrasive obstacles to get to to something that, once he reaches it and is enveloped in it makes any craggy things he may have scuffed up against, rocks, thorns, briars, shrubs, cactus,…..it makes it worth it.
Since I read the following well known doggy metaphor some years back I’ve been keenly tuned in to The Ministry of Dogs
A sick man
turned to his doctor as he was preparing to
examination room and said,
I am afraid to die.
me what lies on the other side.’
quietly, the doctor said, ‘I don’t know..’
don’t know? You’re, a Christian man,
know what’s on the other side?’
was holding the handle of the door;
other side came a sound of scratching and whining,
he opened the door, a dog sprang into the room
leaped on him with an eager show of gladness.
to the patient, the doctor said,
you notice my dog?
never been in this room before.
didn’t know what was inside.
nothing except that his master was here,
when the door opened, he sprang in without fear.
little of what is on the other side of death,
do know one thing…
I know my
Master is there and that is enough.’