Archive for May 30th, 2018

What has changed for me?


I am the one on the left in Black I think I believe I was 18 years old

10295567_10152078178582361_928581678692690645_o

 

Since discovering alot about myself and who I am now I believe I have changed or you could say I am changing within how I feel about alot of things.

I feel very delicate to the point of “those days of me standing up for myself”, I am tired of doing now, I really don’t want to argue or even hear someone shouting and that scares the shit out of me to be perfectly honest!

I have and cannot tell you how many years I have been around people who yell, scream, shout, tell others how disappointed they are in them, and how disappointed they are of you as a person.

I feel like I am walking on ice, it’s quite strange to be honest, and as I was in my own world when my husband came home tonight, I switched off, didn’t mean it I guess, it is because I am trying to search for my own place in this world.

Sounds morbid, sorry I really don’t mean to sound that way I am typing this as I am feeling it so don’t be surprised if you re-read it or not!  That it might change again! and stupid enough again!

I seem to type stuff and sometimes I think I have got it, then I find that I have lost it again, is this ever going to STOP?

That is my question .. can and when is my life going to mean something?  Am I ever going to feel like I mean something to someone?

I know my husband loves me however, why do I feel so like I never seem to come up to someones standards, which in fact is something I have come to understand that is what my life was and hopefully not will be continueing going forward..

It is like he will never allow me close to him, it is like he has his own scares that I had hoped he would share but, the more I grow the more he retracts  and denies himself of trusting me..

What do I have to do to help him know I am here for him.. just like he has been for me..

 

 

https://thecandiiclub.com/2018/05/30/what-has-changed-for-me/comment-page-1/

So, if anyone that wishes to comment or help me understand that I am not the only one out there that feels this way.. I would love to hear your comments… please

#MeToo Movement…


I personally think this is potentially a problem that we could have with our young generation going foward that they seem to lack how to communicate with each other.

 

https://metoomvmt.org/

In the wake of the #MeToo movement and a rash of sexual-harassment scandals, software companies are creating digital ways for people to give their consent to have sex.

Apps such as uConsent allow potential sexual partners to tell each other what level of physical intimacy they are comfortable with and record their eventual agreement so there is no misunderstanding.

The apps are aimed at young people, particularly college students, who are comfortable using technology to communicate, surrounded by an array of potential sexual partners (and often ­alcohol), and relatively new to the nuances of sex.

Sexual-assault ­allegations aren’t uncommon on campuses:

  • one in five women say they have been assaulted while in college, according to the Campus Sexual Assault Study, funded by the US Department of Justice.

One in 16 men say they have. Often, those who are accused of sexual assault claim the sex was consensual, while those who say they were assaulted said they never agreed to the encounter.

  • The problem has prompted at least four US states — California, New York, Connecticut and Illinois — to pass laws in the past four years that require schools to teach students about affirmative consent, stressing that the message should be “yes means yes”, rather than the old “no means no”, according to the Affirmative Consent Project, a non-profit based in Florida that works to stop sexual assault in colleges and high schools.

MORE ON THIS TOPIC – CLICK HERE

How to have a conversation about sexual consent

Decide what you want in advance. Be honest with yourself about what you are looking for;

  • it could be the type of sex or whether you want it to be casual or part of a continuing relationship.

It’s important to know what you want before you can tell someone else.

Make talking a priority. You probably shouldn’t be having sex with someone you can’t talk to openly about the experience. And you’re probably not going to have good sex, if you do. “If someone can’t talk to you about what they want or feel, they won’t be particularly subtle in expressing themselves physically,” says Paul Reynolds, a reader in sociology and social philosophy at Edge Hill University in England.

Start early. If you have a date but don’t want to have sex that night, tell the person beforehand. And give a reason. “I am eager to go out with you tonight but have to get home early.” This will make sure everyone is on the same page.

Be unambiguous. If you don’t want to have sex, don’t just say “no”. “Some men interpret ‘no’ as a play on modesty,” Reynolds says. He suggests saying: “I do not want to have sex with you tonight.” If you do want to have sex, talk about what you do and do not agree to do.

Listen for yes. “Anything other than yes is a no,” says Alison Morano, founder of the Affirmative Consent Project, a non-profit based in Florida.

Send clear signals. Men don’t always read sexual signals well, says Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist who studies the brains of people in love. “They aren’t good at reading posture, gesture or tone of voice,” she says. “You have to be much clearer than you realise.” If you don’t want to have sex, she says, be mindful of all the signals you are sending.

Remember that you can say no at any time — even after sex has begun.

Consent is ongoing.

You can say yes one moment and no the next.

You don’t need an app for that.

Be nice.

Saying no to sex doesn’t mean you have to hurt someone’s feelings.

If the person is someone you might be interested in down the road, say so.

If you like that person I suggests saying: “I like you, but I am not doing it tonight.”

 

A trip into the unknown LSD….


LSD and magic mushrooms can help with mental health — and may have profound things to teach us about how the mind works.

To anyone who lived through the 1960s, the proposition that psychedelic drugs might have a positive contribution to make to our mental health must sound absurd. Along with hallucinogens such as mescaline and psilocybin (that is, magic mushrooms), LSD was often blamed for bad trips that sent people to the psych ward.

These drugs could make you crazy, REALLY, WHAT MORE CRAZY THAN DOING NOTHING AT ALL!!!

 

  • So how is it possible, 50 years later, that researchers working at institutions such as New York University, Johns Hopkins, University of California at Los Angeles and Imperial College in London are discovering that psychedelics, when administered in a supportive therapeutic setting, can make you sane?
  • Or that they may have profound things to teach us about how the mind works and why it sometimes fails to work?

Recent trials of psilocybin, a pharmacological cousin to LSD, have demonstrated that a single guided psychedelic session can alleviate depression when drugs such as Prozac have failed; can help alcoholics and smokers to break a lifelong habit; and can help cancer patients deal with their “existential distress” at the prospect of dying. At the same time, studies im­aging the brains of people on psychedelics have opened a window on to the study of consciousness, as well as the nature of the self and spiritual experience. The 60s platitude that psychedelics would help unlock the secrets of consciousness may turn out to be not so preposterous after all.

The value of psychedelic therapy was first recognised nearly 70 years ago, only to be forgotten when what had been a promising era of research ran headlong into a nationwide moral panic in the US about LSD, beginning around 1965. With a powerful assist from Timothy Leary, the flamboyant Harvard psychology professor, psychedelics had escaped the laboratory, falling into the eager arms of the counterculture.

Timothy Leary, LSD guru who encouraged the '60s generation to "turn on, tune in, drop out”. Picture: AP
Timothy Leary, LSD guru who encouraged the ’60s generation to “turn on, tune in, drop out”. Picture: AP

Yet in the decade before that there had been 1000 published studies of LSD, involving 40,000 experimental subjects, and no fewer than six international conferences devoted to what many in the psychiatric community regarded as a wonder drug.

Compared with other psychoactive compounds, these powerful and mysterious molecules were regarded as safe — it’s virtually impossible to overdose on a psychedelic — and non-addictive. Rats in a cage presented with a lever to administer drugs such as cocaine and heroin will press it repeatedly, unto death. LSD?

That lever they press only once.

This is not to say that “bad trips” don’t happen;

  • they do, especially when the drugs are used carelessly. People at risk for schizophrenia sometimes have psychotic breaks on psychedelics, and people surely do stupid things under the influence that can get them killed. But the more extreme claims about LSD — that it scrambled users’ chromosomes or induced them to stare at the sun until blind — were debunked long ago.

It wasn’t until the 90s that a small band of researchers began to unearth what an NYU psychiatrist describes as “a buried body of knowledge” about the therapeutic potential of psychedelics. Perhaps the most promising application of the new drugs was in the treatment of alcoholism.

Few people in Alcoholics Anonymous realise that founder Bill Wilson first got sober after a mystical experience he had on a psychedelic administered to him in 1934, or that in the 50s he sought unsuccessfully to introduce LSD therapy to AA.

Moral panic in the US about LSD began around 1965. Picture: Adam Voorhes
Moral panic in the US about LSD began around 1965. Picture: Adam Voorhes

In parts of Canada during the 50s, psychedelic therapy became a standard treatment for alcoholism, and a 2012 meta-analysis of the six best-controlled trials of LSD therapy for alcohol addiction during that period found a “significant beneficial effect on alcohol misuse”.

Early studies of psychedelics for the treatment of several other indications, notably including depression and anxiety in cancer patients, also showed promise.

These first-wave studies were, by contemporary standards, poorly controlled.

That’s why many of the early experiments are being reprised using more rigorous modern methods.

The early results are preliminary but encouraging: A pilot study of psilocybin for alcohol dependence conducted at the University of New Mexico found a strong enough effect to warrant a much larger phase 2 trial now under way at NYU.

Another recent pilot study, at Johns Hopkins, looked at the potential of psilocybin to help people quit smoking, one of the hardest addictions to break.

The study was tiny and not randomised — all 15 volunteers received two or three doses of psilocybin and knew it. Following what has become the standard protocol in psychedelic therapy, volunteers stretch out on a couch in a room decorated to look like a cosy den, with spiritual knick-knacks lining the bookshelves.

They wear eyeshades and headphones (playlists typically include classical and modern instrumental works) to encourage an inward journey.

Two therapists, a man and a woman, are present for the duration.

Typically these “guides” say very little, allowing the journey to take its course, but if the experience turns frightening they will offer a comforting hand or bit of advice (“trust and let go” is a common refrain).

‘The cancer is something completely out of my control, but the fear, I realised, is not’.

  • Participant in phase 2 trials of cancer patients

The results of the pilot study were eye-popping: six months after their psychedelic session, 80 per cent of the volunteers were confirmed to have quit smoking. At the one-year mark, that figure had fallen to 67 per cent, which is still a better rate of success than the best treatment now available.

A much larger study at Hopkins is under way.

When I asked volunteers how a psilocybin trip had given them the wherewithal to quit smoking, several described an experience that pulled back the camera on the scene of their lives further than ever, giving them a new, more encompassing perspective on their behaviour.

“The universe was so great, and there were so many things you could do and see in it, that killing yourself seemed like a dumb idea,” a woman in her 60s told me. During her journey she grew feathers and flew back in time to witness various scenes in European history;

  • she also died three times, watched her soul rise from her body on a funeral pyre on the Ganges, and found herself “standing on the edge of the universe, witnessing the dawn of creation”.

“It put smoking in a whole new context,” she said. It “seemed very unimportant; it seemed kind of stupid, to be honest”.

Matthew Johnson, the psychologist who directed the study at Hopkins, says these sorts of “duh moments” are common among his volunteers.

Smokers know perfectly well that their habit is unhealthy, disgusting, expensive and unnecessary, but under the influence of psilocybin that knowledge becomes an unshakeable conviction — “something they feel in the gut and the heart”.

As Johnson puts it, “These sessions deprive people of the luxury of mindlessness” — our default state and one in which addictions flourish.

Perhaps the most significant new evidence for the therapeutic value of psychedelics arrived in a pair of phase 2 trials (conducted at Johns Hopkins and NYU and published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology in 2016) in which a single high dose of psilocybin was administered to cancer patients struggling with depression, anxiety and the fear of death or recurrence.

In these rigorous placebo-controlled trials, 80 volunteers embarked on a psychic journey that, in many cases, brought them face-to-face with their cancer, their fear and their death.

“I saw my fear … located under my rib cage,” a woman with ovarian cancer told me. “It wasn’t my tumour, it was this black mass. ‘Get the f..k out,’” she screamed aloud. “And you know what? It was gone!” Years later, her fear hasn’t returned. “The cancer is something completely out of my control, but the fear, I realised, is not.”

Eighty per cent of the Hopkins cancer patients who received psilocybin showed clinically significant reductions in standard measures of anxiety and depression, an effect that endured for at least six months after their session. Results at NYU were similar.

Curiously, the degree to which symptoms decreased in both trials correlated with the intensity of the “mystical experience” that volunteers reported, a common occurrence during a high-dose psyche­delic session.

Typically described as the dissolution of one’s ego followed by a merging of the self with nature or the universe, a mystical experience can permanently shift a person’s perspective and priorities.

The pivotal role of the mystical experience points to something novel about psychedelic therapy: it depends for its success not strictly on the action of a chemical but on the powerful psychological experience the chemical can occasion.

Few if any psychiatric interventions for anxiety and depression have demonstrated such dramatic and sustained results.

The trials were small and will have to be repeated on a larger scale before the government will consider approving the treatment. But when the researchers brought their data to the US Food and Drug Administration last year, regulators reportedly were sufficiently im­pressed to ask them to conduct a large phase 3 trial of psilocybin for depression, not only in cancer patients but also in the general population.

So how does psychedelic therapy work?

And why should the same treatment work for disorders as seemingly different as depression, addiction and anxiety?

When scientists at Imperial College began imaging the brains of people on psilocybin, they were surprised to find that the chemical, which they assumed would boost brain activity, actually reduced it, but in a specific area: the default mode network.

This is a brain network involved in “metacognitive” processes, including self-reflection, mental time travel, theory of mind (the ability to imagine mental states in others) and the generation of narratives about ourselves that help to create the sense of having a stable self over time.

The default mode network is most active when our minds are least engaged in a task — hence “default mode”.

It is where our minds go when they wander or ruminate.

The Imperial scientists found that when volunteers reported an experience of ego dissolution, magnetic resonance imag­ing scans of their brains showed a precipitous drop in activity in the default mode network, suggesting that this network may be the seat of the ego.

One way to think about the ego is as a mental construct that performs certain functions on our behalf. Chief among these are main­taining the boundary between the conscious and unconscious realms of the mind as well as the boundary between self and other.

So what happens when these boundaries fade or disappear under the influence of psychedelics?

  • Our ego defences relax, allowing unconscious material and emotions to enter our awareness and also for us to feel less separate and more connected — to other people, to nature or to the universe.
  • And in fact a renewed sense of connection is precisely what volunteers in the various trials for addiction, depression and cancer anxiety trials have all reported.

This points to what may be the most exciting reason to pursue the new science of psychedelics:

  • the possibility that it may yield a grand unified theory of mental illnesses, or at least of those common disorders that psychedelics show promise in alleviating: depression, ad­dic­tion, anxiety and obsession.

All these disorders involve uncontrollable and endlessly repeating loops of rumination that gradually shade out reality and fray our connections to other people and the natural world.

The ego becomes hyperactive, even tyrannical, enforcing rigid habits of thought and behaviour; habits that the psychedelic experience, by loosening the ego’s grip, could help us to break.

That power to disrupt mental habits and “lubricate cognition” is what Robin Carhart-Harris, the neuroscientist at Imperial College who scanned the brains of volunteers on psychedelics, sees as the key therapeutic value of the drugs.

The brain is a hierarchical system, with the default mode network at the top, serving as what he variously calls “the orchestra conductor” or “corporate executive” or “capital city”.

But as important as it is to keep order in such complex system, a brain can suffer from an excess of order too.

Depression, anxiety, obsession and the cravings of addiction could be how it feels to have a brain that has become excessively rigid or fixed in its pathways and linkages — a brain with more order than is good for it.

Carhart-Harris suggests that, by taking the default mode network offline for a time, psychedelics can, in effect, “reboot” the brain, jog it out of its accustomed grooves and open a space for new pathways to arise.

Who doesn’t sometimes feel stuck in destructive habits of thought? Or couldn’t benefit from the mental reboot that a powerful experience of awe can deliver?

images

“MAN CAVES” or “MENS SHEDS”??


“Mens Sheds”, I prefer “Man Caves”

They have suddenly emerged from dusty, weed-choked, cobweb-covered obscurity, home of rusting tools, greasy engine blocks and the occasional redback spider, into avatars of the kinder, gentler face of the men’s movement, such as it is — a new bastion for the former Iron Johns who once beat their bared, hairy chests around campfires and hugged it out while tearing the tops off baked beans cans with their teeth.  GRRRRRR, sounds so like sexy right? Actually, not really (keep reading)

What is so special about the humble shed?

According to the modern Men’s Sheds (Man Caves)  movement, if you look inside you might see several men making furniture, perhaps restoring bicycles for a local school, making myna bird traps, fixing lawnmowers or making a cubby house for Camp Quality to raffle. (see below click to read more, if not read my comments)

Click here if you wish to read more of this dribble

According to Candii which is ME……

This is what my husbands Man Cave sounds like and see that picture red one that is me dreaming of what it should look like!!

Well if you do you wont see it in my husbands Man Cave, he has a TV, a few tools including himself I might add (love you honey) a Table on wheels of course yes, I said wheels!!!

He has two fridges, yes 2 fridges one for the beer (really?) And one for his Steak, sausages, and of course that gourmet evening dinners, he also has the normal messy stuff that has a place in each pile of crap, tools, wheel barrow, rake, dogs, beds and a picture of 2 naked ladies (mind you it looks like his study) mess untidy and darn right, close that door when people come to visit!!!

Now I personally think my husbands Barbarian Man Cave should look like this… Beautiful right, with a touch of RED velvet .. you know “Game of Thrones”, rip off clothers and tie me to that 4 poster bed!!! (sigh, nice, just dreaming about me tied to a bed ……..)

Screen_Shot_2015-06-23_at_3.02.43_PM.png

So, men what do you think MENS SHEDS should look like?

Harvey Weinstein’s ???


 There are not many voices speaking up in Harvey Weinstein’s defence.

I personally, think he is a really Ugly Dick!

 

Yet one of Britain’s leading novelists has voiced concern about the dangers of “mob” justice.

Ian McEwan said that he intended to maintain a “degree of scepticism” about the charges against the disgraced Hollywood producer until the evidence was set out at trial.

The Atonement author said that Weinstein appeared to be a “moral monster” but added that he was cautious about any accusations that emerge when a “whole mob is in full cry”.

A what did they say he appeared to be??? Nothing Moral about the MORON!!

Sorry I will be taking out a bit of rubbish the NEWS said today, about this asshole, so instead of me deleting I have created a new way of removing crap!!

A line through the typing – btw that is me    

McEwan’s comments were condemned as disturbing by equality campaigners, who pointed out that dozens of actors had gone on the record with allegations against the film mogul despite the risk to their careers. However, his views touch on a question that will be central to the criminal case against Weinstein: whether it is possible for the man who gave rise to the #MeToo movement to get a fair trial.

The producer has been charged with two rapes and a criminal sexual act for alleged incidents involving two separate women. Mr Weinstein, 66, handed himself in to police in New York on Friday. He has repeatedly denied non-consensual sex and intends to plead not guilty.

Asked about the case on BBC Radio 4’s Today program, McEwan, 69, said: “It seems a kind of circus to me. There is the media stuff, which we have to penetrate. We don’t know what actually happened; it seems he is a moral monster who has had his comeuppance but I always like to encourage in myself just a degree of scepticism once the whole mob is in full cry, so I am going to withhold judgments until I have heard the arguments in court.”

The novelist’s defence of due process drew criticism on social media as activists accused him of marginalising the experiences of women. Catherine Mayer, author and co-founder of the Women’s Equality Party (WEP), said that men such as McEwan “cry rough justice” about the treatment of alleged offenders while querying the testimony of their young victims.

“He’s seeing multiple women speaking about these things as a mob, when it is actually evidence of the crime at scale,” she told The Times. “I’m so sick of these supposedly great men of literature who are posited as great public thinkers but are not nearly as interesting as they think they are.”

The author Stella Duffy, also a founding member of the WEP, said that it was “seriously disturbing” for “comfortable white privileged men” to dismiss the #MeToo movement as a mob.

In New York yesterday, Mr Weinstein’s lawyer said that he had serious doubts about whether his client could obtain a fair trial. “One of my concerns is that by virtue of some of the publicity that has occurred … the ability for people to keep an open mind is of concern to me,” Ben Brafman said after a private hearing with a judge and prosecutors.

“I also think that the pressure that is being brought to bear on the district attorney’s office demanding that an indictment or prosecution of Mr Weinstein proceed is inappropriate.”

Mr Weinstein posted a $1 million cash bail and will wear an electronic monitor that tracks his movements.

What’s your thoughts on this Character??

Why did it take so long?

 

 

%d bloggers like this: