To many non-vegetarians the concept of what constitutes meat is a bit of a grey area. Many moons ago, not long after becoming a vegetarian I visited a friend’s house. His ever-hospitable mother offered me a ‘lovely chicken sandwich’ and I had to tell her that I no longer ate meat. Unperturbed, she offered corned beef on the assumption, I guess, that I could just focus on the corn. After I respectfully declined that I was offered wafer thin smoked turkey. Presumably the thinness and the smoking process eliminated the meatiness. We eventually settled on a cheese sandwich which she dressed with a little salad on the side and some crisps (potato chips). . . roast chicken flavour. Ironically, they are one of the flavours that actually don’t contain meat. However, I’m not sure that she knew that.
Ultimately I suppose the meat non-meat thing is a values clash. I remember watching a discussion on a chat show talking about vegetarians. A meat-eater stood up and said ‘How dare vegetarians force their values on their children’. It hadn’t occurred to him that meat-eaters do exactly this!
So what’s all of this got to do with celebrities. Well, as a psychologist I’m often called upon to offer some insight on media stories, whether news stories or general discussions on social issues. Over the past couple of weeks, surprise, surprise, I’ve had a lot of calls to discuss ‘infidelity’. When I ask, what’s inspired the story (as if I don’t know), of course, it’s the alleged extra marital affairs of a well-known sporting personality. . . okay you know it’s Tiger Woods so I may as well type it. Now I tell them that I don’t talk about celebrities lives as it’s unethical. I don’t know what’s going on in the minds of celebrities and neither do the two-bit hacks who cough up pithy insights for self-aggrandisement. My refusal comes as a shock, even for the producers I routinely work with. It’s become so normal to gossip about celebrities that it’s difficult to get the point across! Psychologists should not be gossiping and speculating on the inners workings of people’s minds! If they are clients then it’s confidential, and if they are not clients then they have no insight anyway. It’s a conversation I’ve had many times with fellow psychologistDr Petra Boynton who shares my view and endures the same nonsense. Basically it brings the name of psychology into disrepute and it’s against the British Psychological Society (BPS) guidelines. Programme producers will complain ‘Well Dr ‘Pops-up-a-lot’ discusses celebrities all the time. I reply ‘Yes I know ‘it’ does and being a member of the BPS ‘it’ should no know better’! What invariably follows are a series of ‘what ifs’ of the ‘wafer thin smoked turkey, corned beef’ variety. Each time I decline until they run out menu choices. If it’s got celebrity in it. . I’m not going to bite, get it? They only time I make an exception is when everyone jumps on the bandwagon and bullies a celebrity, as in the over-night fame of Susan Boyle and subsequent press intrusion and ‘expert’ (fakexpert) speculation. . . even then it’s only to counter the BS.
I’ve read of so-called reputable psychologists (read ‘gossipologists’) offering mental health diagnoses of celebrities. I’ve also seem them discussing the mental states of celebrities’ young children. Nothing they say is ever meaningful and it’s certainly unethical. It’s gossip, plain and simple! The fact that someone has a degree in psychology or a PhD in ‘the social impact of jogger’s nipple’ does not mean they have any valid insight into the mental state or deepest motivations of any celebrity.
Psychologists should abide by a common set of values that shouldn’t be prostituted for a one-liner in ‘Celebrity Life’ magazine. Surely these values should be higher than picking over the bones of skeletons in celebrities’ closets. Where juicy, meaty titbits of gossip are concerned, shouldn’t psychologists be ‘vegetarian’?
Making life changes just because it’s the 1st January may be the impetus to take the first step, but will it be enough to carry you through when the going gets tough, or when things don’t go exactly to plan, or when you meet obstacles or when you stumble or falter along the way. The answer of course is no! The main problem is. . .it just can’t be January 1st everyday of the year. Everyday can’t be brimming with symbolism and significance. It’s clear you’ll need more to go on!
The problem with New Year’s resolutions is that the ritual gets in the way of the reality. We assume the first day euphoria will last, and we assume that all we need ‘will power’ to carry on. It won’t last and will power wears down. It’s like a rechargeable battery that needs topping up, regularly. The question is: ‘With what?’ The answer lies in getting in tune with what motivates you.
Start by listing TEN reasons for making a life change or setting a goal. Now consider whether these are internal (intrinsic) motivations or external (extrinsic). External motivations are things like money, praise, chocolate, adoration and so on. The motivations come from outside of yourself. The big question is: ‘What happens when the external motivations dry up or run out?’
Internal motivations are all about your values and come from within. Job satisfaction is an internal motivator. You’re doing a good job from a inner value of ‘doing a good job’ not because someone is paying you or coercing you into to do it. Wanting to feel healthier and have more energy are better motivators that gaining praise from others. You really must be doing it for yourself.
So what figures most highly on your list of motivations? Are there more internal than external or vice versa. The key to staying motivated is looking for more internal sources of motivation, as these are less likely to run out. So if you need to go back and rewrite your list, or add a few more internal motivators. You are far more likely to succeed in your goals if you are doing it for yourself. Keep adding to your list as you go along.
New Year’s resolutions often rely on one external motivation. . .it just happens to be the first day of the year in the Western world. Each day you continue with your life change is a day further away from January 1st. Of if it’s going to help give you the kick-start you need, than use it. However, remember that it’s only the spark that ignites the flame. To fuel the flame you need to focus on your internal motivations!
Every New Year our attention is drawn to personal change, which we translate, into intention in the form of resolutions. So why do they fizzle out? What’s the problem? Yes, we start with good intention and take action, but the problem is that, more often than not, we simply don’t have a well-thought out action plan. We need a well-defined target, not a fuzzy vague ‘over there somewhere’. New Year’s resolutions simply don’t work for a number of very good reasons. So, let’s begin by looking at six common problems with them, and how to put them right:
Negativity
‘Losing’, ‘giving up’, ‘cutting out’ and ‘cutting down’ all have negative connotations. However, we tend to respond better to positively stated goals, such as ‘aiming for a target weight’ or ‘increasing healthy foods‘ or ‘increasing variety in foods‘ and ‘boosting energy levels‘.
Vagueness
Classic New Year’s Resolutions are always rather vague and wishy washy. So, it’s difficult to reach a target that’s not clearly defined. So once, you’ve got your positively worded direction, it’s best to get specific. What exactly are you going to do to hit your target. What are the behaviours? Target specific actions, such as drinking seven glasses of water and going to the gym three times a week for 45 minutes each time.
Immeasurable In order to measure your progress you need to make your goalsmeasurable. Ask yourself lots of ‘how’ questions, such as ‘how much’, ‘how many’, and how often’. Just doing something ‘more often’ is vague and immeasurable. Also build up to your target so you don’t feel overwhelmed. Build steady progress into your routine, and where possible break larger goals down into smaller milestones.
Unachievable Each year we psych ourselves up for the new year. It feels so now or never. Of course we need goals that are going to stretch us or else we’d soon get bored. However, it’s pointless setting impossible goals. Our goals need to be achievable. Are your goals within your capabilities?
Unrealistic It’s common to tackle too many things at once or over-plan every minute of your day. Be realistic and pick one thing at a time to work on. That way you build your confidence.
Open-ended (never-ending) If you goal is your ‘preferred end state’ then you need a ‘preferred end date’. Putting a time scale on it helps with motivation. It provided a sense of ‘urgency’ about the goal.
The SMARTER approach to New Year’s Resolutions is to set SMARTER goals:
Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Time-bound
Enthusiastically (positively) worded
Regularly-reviewed
Goal-setting is not a one shot deal. It’s a process. If you find your progress is slower than expected or you find yourself not hitting those milestones when expected, then GO BACK AND REVIEW! It’s only failure if you fail to use the feedback. Have a look to see if your goals really are realistic and achievable for your person circumstances. If you need to, make changes are try again. Don’t wait until next New Year’s day. . . get right back to it straight away.
Saying ‘No’ to New Year’s resolutions and using SMARTER as well as other goal-setting tools and techniques (such as PAR and GO-FLOW) means that instead of vague statements of wishful thinking, you will have concrete, action plans to channel your resources. So make your final resolution to ditch resolutions and start setting goals. . . not just once a year when you’re caught up in the New Year fever. . .but any time you want to take charge and make changes. . . positive lasting change!
The first day of a brand new day brims with symbolism and significance as we ring out the old and ring in the new. What better day to make life changes? The whole ‘brand new year, brand new you’ philosophy certainly gets us started but is it enough to carry us through? And, if it’s the only thing driving you then could it be more of a millstone around your neck rather than a motivational milestone?
All too often we hit an obstacle on our ambitions resolutions and think ‘Ah f**k it, I’ll try again next year!’. The concept of a ‘resolution’ has become so tied up with ‘New Year’ that it’s difficult to think of making them at any other time but the new year. So let’s look at what the various meanings of ‘resolution’:
A resolution is a decree or a declaration. It’s a promise, an oath, a pledge, and a vow. Resolution means determination, steadfastness, tenacity and firmness. A resolution is the upshot, the solution, the answer. It’s the positive outcome. It’s the preferred end state.
Looking at these various definitions, there’s nothing about investing everything in one particular day. We can resolve to show resolve at any time. January 1st is an arbitrary day. In England before 1752 the ‘civil or legal year’ began on 25th March. So is that why the tenth month ‘October’ sounds as if it should be the eighth? Added to this we have the start of the tax year, Chinese New Year, Jewish New Year, Muslim New year, the new year that starts with your birthday. . .and so on. There are plenty of new year’s day’s to chose from. But why wait? Isn’t the first of the month a good enough place to start? What about any Monday? Any day with ‘day’ in its name? Come to think of it, any day that you chose to make a resolution becomes imbued with significance.
However, if you are one of those people who likes to go with ‘tradition’ and plan to make your New Year’s resolutions, why not get a bit of practice in beforehand? The success of resolutions hinge on the degree to which you are prepared. So before you get carried away by taking on too much, why not give your resolutions a test run to see how realistic they are? Also ask yourself this question: ‘What contingency plan do you have in place, should you meet an obstacle or stumble?’ Do you give up and wait until next year, or do you make adjustments and get right back to it, irrespective of the date? Do you resolve or resign?
Phone rings. Number withheld. It’s a journalist who wants some expert insight into why it is that men get all ‘letchy’ (lecherous) after a drink. It’s for a magazine article aimed at young women. Of course what she doesn’t want to hear is that women get ‘lairy’ (loud) after a drink. Why is that? I say ‘tomarto’ she says ‘tomayta’. . she says ‘letchy’. . I say ‘lairy’. . . oh let’s call the whole thing off. . . and move on to some hack who doesn’t quibble about gender differences. . .and has not expertise in anything except saying what journalists want to hear.
So why could it be that men get more ‘letchy’ or ‘flirty’ after a few drinks in a sexualised commercial environment such as a night club? Er. . . perhaps that would be the effects of getting drunk, exactly the same as for women. I know that ‘letchy’ and ‘lairy’ are exactly analogous . . but the point is that alcoholic lowers inhibitions irrespective of the contents of our undergarments. It can also make us more aggressive. Check out the police statistics. . .it’s not just the blokes who are kicking the living daylights out of each other on a Saturday night. . . no mere spectators. . . ‘Sisters are doing it for themselves’.
During the brief exchange, I was asked about body language in the context of ‘men getting letchy’ after a drink’. Well what’s the body language of anyone who has drunk so much that they have lost control of their cognitive and motor faculties. . . a quick lunge for anything they can get hold of before falling to the ground and rolling around in their own vomit!
Now I like the occasional tipple as much as the next ‘lairy letch’ (well maybe not that much). . . and I know that these gender stories may seem like a harmless bit of fun. . but such excursions in gender psycho-babble serve to over-emphasise the differences between men and women or create new differences that only really exist in the world of magazine sales. The fact is: when we get drunk we all make arses of ourselves! Binge drinking is a massive problem with both men and women, especially with alcoholic drinks designed to taste like soft drinks.
These one-sided gender-based stories are there just to raise a smile and fill up a bit of space, but in the process they fuel gender stereotypes. They create a ‘gender filter’ whereby we look for differences where there aren’t any. Of course the additional of a bit of ‘body twaddle’ (sorry I mean ‘body language’ ) always makes things look a bit more scientific. It’s interesting the most of the ‘leading lights’ in body language have no qualifications. Many of them offer conjecture and home spun, common-sense, back-porch, pseudo-Freudian waffle presented as ‘evidence’. Many of them confuse ‘biological sex’ with ’social gender’ and over-emphasize sex and gender differences and seem oblivious to the fact that Western gender roles have changed dramatically over the past 50 years. Whereas the evidence shows that predominantly, men and women have more things in common than things on which we differ. And surprise, surprise. . .Hoo hoos, minkies, willies or winkies. . . alcohol doesn’t discriminate!
Click here to visit PsyStore for recommendations of books (and other resources) with a psycholohgical and personal development emphasis
For book recommendations with a psychological and personal development emphasis, click on this linkPsyStore (or link in the sidebar). Overall the store focuses on evidence based books and resources. So many self-help books tread, re-tread and veritably trample outdated research, so the aim of the recommendations in PsyStore, is hopefully to raise the self-help bar!
Items in the store are grouped according to category for ease of browsing. New recommendations will be added as and when including brief reviews of each item. AsPsyStore is an Amazon-based store, it will also show ’similar items’ and ‘listmania’. However, these are not necessarily recommended items.
Any recommendations for items to be included in PsyStore are welcome, so please feel free to comment.
ITV’s ‘I’m a Celebrity. . .Get Me Out Of Here’ is, mercilessly, the shortest of the reality TV formats, being over in three-weeks. However it’s showing all the signs of its wearied sibling (Big Brother). At first it was all about ‘the jungle’ but with each season, the so-called bush-tucker trials become increasingly further removed from ‘the real world’. What started off as fun show has now become grotesquely masochistic. . .with contestants willing to do almost anything ‘for the team’. Of course, they are all paid handsomely to brave all and resurrect their careers. Much has been written about bullying on reality TV but what of the people the other side of the camera. – the viewers? In Great British tradition we rejoice in celebrity denigration. We put them on their pedestals and when we decide that they are getting ‘too big for their boots’ we delight in bringing them back to earth. However the bush tucker trials have become nothing more than ritual humiliation. And the public are happy to pay to vote in the hope that their least favourite celebrity is covered in slime, fish guts, locked in a coffin, shat on by rats and nosh down on raw animal genitals. This year the ‘honour’ falls on Katie Price (a.k.a Jordan) for four trials in a row. The Great British public has voted.
Not a stranger to the media spotlight, Price is on record as saying she is returning to the jungle to get away from it all. . .in front of ten cameras, 24 hours a day. The public have now voted for her to undertake four bush tucker trials in succession and her fear of water induced a panic attack on one trial that seemed genuine enough. And yet the next night, she’s the celebrity in a bottle and the night after voted to dip her face in worms , get bitten by ants and retch after taking a sip of some loathsome cocktail of insects. There’s no doubt that Katie Price is an expert media player. It’s possible that she’s re-entered the jungle (after six years) as a PR exercise and in response to the handsome fee that the producers are paying her to rescue this sorry programme from its death throes. But what of the mob mentality these shows instil? Is it not just a kind of remote-controlled bullying? You pay your money and you watch you celebrity squirm, from the comfort of your own home.
What is reality TV really saying about real life? What does it say about us? TV schedules are swamped with this kind of ‘bedlam’ TV. They are the most popular programmes on TV. Is it just harmless fun or aren’t we just over-dosing on Schadenfreude? Is our pleasure in the misfortune of others becoming our greatest pleasure in life?
I was amused at one of the vox pops following one of Derren Brown’s shows (on TV) this week. One woman says ‘I’m an NLP practitioner and I don’t know how he does it’. Well that’s not saying much is it? After one to three weeks training and given that there is actually no objective evidence to substantiate the wild claims made by the more zealous, almost cultish, NLP enthusiasts. Despite NLP being hailed as a wonderful ‘communication technology’, it’s quite telling that it’s alleged that its originators only speak to each other through their solicitors. I doubt that Derren Brown was sh*tting himself knowing there were a few NLPers in the audience, as he’s hardly complimentary about its practice.
The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has, today, issued a statement on the petition to get an apology for treatment of Alan Turing. It is worth noting that many acknowledge that history would be very different for everyone if the Enigma codes had not been broken during World War Two. Sadly for Turing, his own fate was not substantially different than if the Nazis had triumphed. Here’s what Mr Brown has to say:
Prime Minister: 2009 has been a year of deep reflection – a chance for Britain, as a nation, to commemorate the profound debts we owe to those who came before. A unique combination of anniversaries and events have stirred in us that sense of pride and gratitude which characterise the British experience. Earlier this year I stood with Presidents Sarkozy and Obama to honour the service and the sacrifice of the heroes who stormed the beaches of Normandy 65 years ago. And just last week, we marked the 70 years which have passed since the British government declared its willingness to take up arms against Fascism and declared the outbreak of World War Two. So I am both pleased and proud that, thanks to a coalition of computer scientists, historians and LGBT activists, we have this year a chance to mark and celebrate another contribution to Britain’s fight against the darkness of dictatorship; that of code-breaker Alan Turing.
Turing was a quite brilliant mathematician, most famous for his work on breaking the German Enigma codes. It is no exaggeration to say that, without his outstanding contribution, the history of World War Two could well have been very different. He truly was one of those individuals we can
point to whose unique contribution helped to turn the tide of war. The debt of gratitude he is owed makes it all the more horrifying, therefore, that he was treated so inhumanely. In 1952, he was convicted of ‘gross indecency’ – in effect, tried for being gay. His sentence – and he was faced with the miserable choice of this or prison – was chemical castration by a series of injections of female hormones. He took his own
life just two years later.
Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt with under the law of the time and we can’t put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him. Alan and the many thousands of other gay men who were convicted as he was convicted under homophobic laws were treated terribly. Over the years millions more lived in fear of conviction. I am proud that those days are gone and that in the last 12 years this government has done so much to make life fairer and more equal for our LGBT community. This recognition of Alan’s status as one of Britain’s most famous victims of homophobia is another step towards equality and long overdue.
But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for his contribution to humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united, democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once the theatre of mankind’s darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in living memory, people could become so consumed by hate – by anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices – that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls which had marked out the European civilisation for hundreds of years. It is thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism, people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war are part of Europe’s history and not Europe’s present.
So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan’s work I am very proud to say: we’re sorry, you deserved so much better.
Gordon Brown
If you would like to help preserve Alan Turing’s memory for future generations, please donate here: http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk/
Welcome to the PsyCentral Blog with Psychologist, Coach, Author & Broadcaster Dr Gary Wood - offering a psychological perspective on human social life including current affairs; sex, gender & relationships plus learning, development and coaching insights and tips. . . the odd acerbic comment and the occasional rant.
