What We Owe Our Enemy: A Look at Justice and Bullying

Here’s to the last paper I wrote in my undergraduate career! This one is for my Classical Political Philosophy class and is on justice according the Plato’s Republic versus the Bible…

Justice and Bullying

Book One of Plato’s Republic addresses an important question: what is justice? And, specifically, it discusses what we owe the other—both our enemy and our friend. Though in theory much of what is discussed seems rational based on Just War Theory and the idea of ought and owing, these principles don’t line up with Biblical teachings. Jesus had a very different concept of justice and treatment of enemies than Polemarchus and Socrates did, and I think it is important for us as Christians to consider this when deciding what we ought to do.

The first thing I think of when I consider the idea of justice and what we owe our enemies is the topic of bullying.

Bullying is becoming a major problem in our society today: we see it in middle schools, high schools, friendships, relationships at work, and even within the context of unhealthy relationships. The reaction I witness the most towards the bullies in these stories (who we view as “enemies”) is one of hatred. After the Amanda Todd tragedy, the internet was swarming with people shouting out “justice”, which in this context took the form of lashing out at the bullies, pointing out what detestable human beings they are, and expressing the need for something to be done to them. Not about them, but to them—there is a difference.

The first definition we get in The Republic of justice comes from Cephalus. To him, justice is all about property and the rights surrounding it. To him, being “just” means possessing money, not cheating or lying, and paying back what you owe. Sure, doing these things is “just” and right (apart from the money part), but there is so much more to justice then just that. Paying back your debt and not being dishonest are, in my opinion, really just the results of living a just life and not the foundational elements of it. So I don’t have much else to say about little old Cephalus.

According to Polemarchus and his ideas of Just War Theory, we owe our friends goodness, and our enemies evil.

The standard responses to the Amanda Todd situation and bullying in general exemplify this perfectly. The bullied are our friends and the bullies are our enemies; therefore, the victims deserve goodness and the bullies deserve evil—plain and simple revenge.

Polemarchus was a war guy, and within the context of battle, this does make sense. You owe your fellow soldiers a commitment to do right by one another, to have each other’s backs, and to treat each other well. And those fighting against you? Well, you don’t exactly owe them peace or loyalty, you are at war with them—so technically you “owe” them evil. But outside of the context of war, this idea of justice doesn’t necessarily make for a peaceful society. And if you think of it, if we all spent time loving each other—friends and enemies alike—is it possible we wouldn’t need a separate principle for “just war” at all, because war would cease to exist?

Maybe I’m a bit idealistic in this regard…

Socrates doesn’t give much of a definition of justice because he’s Socrates, and he doesn’t really define anything—to do so would be to claim he has knowledge outside of his knowledge of his ignorance. However, Socrates does view justice as a compilation of oughts, shoulds, and shalls. He also speaks of the Noble Lie. The Noble Lie, according to Socrates, is a lie told to a friend to prevent him from carrying out injustice (so I suppose Socrates does define this). Socrates believes it is unjust to allow a friend to do injustice to another, and so you owe him what he calls a “noble lie” to prevent him from carrying out the injustice. The concept of the noble lie doesn’t apply directly to cases of bullying. However, Socrates would say we owe our friend a “noble lie” if it will prevent them from carrying out an injustice like bullying towards someone else. However, this doesn’t say what we owe the enemy, so is helpful only in understanding the treatment of friends.

The Biblical view is something else entirely.

To decide what we owe our friends and enemies, first we must look at who our friends and enemies are. In discussing the treatment of others, the Bible speaks of three main categories: friends, enemies, and “neighbours.” One could easily decide “neighbours” is meant to refer to = our friends; however, because the term “friend” is used elsewhere, I believe there is meant to be a distinction between the two. The treatment of others is not addressed from the standpoint of enemies versus friends/neighbours; instead, I believe the Bible tells us how to treat our enemies, how to treat are friends, and how to treat our neighbours.

Based on this, both our enemies and our friends fall under the category of “neighbours” because “neighbours” refers to those we coexist with—whether on good terms or bad.

It is important to realize this because when we read “You shall love your neighbour as yourself” (Mark 12:31 ESV), we know Jesus is not talking about only our friends; we are to love our neighbours—to love all people—as we love ourselves.

Aside from the treatment of neighbours, the Bible distinctly discusses how we are meant to treat our enemies. Proverbs 24:17 states, “Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and let not your hearts be glad when he stumbles.” Rejoicing in your enemy’s misfortune is no different than inflicting injustice on him yourself. If you take pleasure in seeing someone else get mocked, is that much different than you mocking him yourself?

Yet time and time again we see people filled with pleasure and amusement when we see bullies come crumbling to their defeat. We want them to lose. We want them to suffer. We want them to be inflicted with the same torture they inflicted on others. But this is not love. And this is not just. Not according to the Bible, anyways.

Proverbs 25:21 says, “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat, and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.” I believe this goes beyond mere physiological needs. I think bread and water are used as an example because they are basics, but I believe what is being said is if your enemy is in need of something, you offer it to him, in the way you would offer the same to your friend. This is what you owe him. The passage continues on to say, “For you will heap burning coals on his head” (Proverbs 25:22) and although this sounds harsh, I believe this is what is meant by “turning the other cheek”—you are taking his hatred and repaying it with love, which points a mirror at him, showcasing his own faults. This is not meant as a way to harm or to mock him, but rather to help him see what he has done.

If you fight back a bully’s hate with more hate, are you showing him there is any other way to live? What kind of example are you setting by using the same methods he does?

However, when we respond to a bully with love, which is something often lacking in their lives, we show them an alternative. We lead by example.

Leading by example is an important theme throughout the Bible. In Matthew 5:43-47 Jesus speaks specifically about living a life “set apart” from the average in our relationships with others, especially our enemies:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others?

In addition, Jesus also says in Luke 6:27-31:

“But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To the one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak, do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.”

This is how we are called to live. This is what we owe the other—both our friend and, possibly even more so, our enemy.

When a seventeen year-old bullies a fellow classmate, it is our instinct to label him/her an enemy, and this is alright—we don’t have to view them as “friends”—but we do owe it to them, and to society as a whole, to treat them in a way that is just. And not a way that is “Just War Theory” just, but a way that is biblically just.

We need to respond with love, not anger. We need to extend mercy, grace, and forgiveness, not hate and retaliation. Jesus has extended these gifts to us, what gives us the right to decide someone else is undeserving of them?

We are not called to judge. We are not called to pay back in kind. We are called to be different, to assess a situation and fill in the gaps. In this bullying epidemic we are facing, what’s missing is forgiveness. What’s missing is love.

Yes, in these situations the victims need love, but the bullies need it just the same. We must remember people don’t often become bullies “just for kicks”; they become bullies because someone else bullied them—it’s a vicious cycle. And if we retaliate with anything other than love, we are merely allowing the cycle to continue.

The passing down of anger and violence needs to end; the hand-me-downs must stop with us, and it only will if we change the way we respond to it.

Movements such as Love is Louder, are working hard to bring about this very type of change. I only hope the church will follow in these footsteps.

Polemarchus would say bullies are the enemy, and we owe them harm, we owe them evil and revenge. It is a war: us versus them, and in fighting the battle using retaliation and harm, we will come out victorious and justice will be served. But this is not justice—not the type of justice that will bring about change, anyways.

Jesus brings forth a new form of justice; not “an eye for an eye” but rather “turning the other cheek” and paying back hate with kindness. With grace and forgiveness.

When we fight back with love we are saying that we are rising above the set standard, that we not only strive for something more but we believe in it—we believe in the power of good over evil, of love over hate.

That is the only hope in our battle against bullying (note: not against bullies, but against bullying). Responding with hate will not bring us any closer to peace; it will instead only take us further from it. Responding with love, however, changes the rules. It reverses the system.

To fight back hate with hate is hypocritical and gets us nowhere, but to fight back hate with love? Well that changes everything. And who knows, the world may even become a better place.

“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.” –Friedrich Nietzsche

__________

Twitter: @lauren_b_sag

Our Phones May Be Connected, but Are We?

For my Media + Cultural Criticism class we were asked to write on a piece of technology and the impacts it’s had on society (either positive or negative). I chose to write on smart phones because as somewhat of an iphone/social media addict this is something I’ve been thinking a lot about lately…

texting smartphoneJust a typical weeknight: my parents and I sitting in the living room spending “quality family time” as we watch a Pawn Stars marathon. I hear music, but it’s not coming from the TV. I follow the sound and see my dad, Stylus in hand, playing the keyboard. Well, it’s a keyboard app he just downloaded (do real keyboards even exist anymore?).

I flash him an “I love you but that’s really annoying” look, which of course he doesn’t notice. Thanks to the beautiful symphony of notes coming from the couch next to me, I’d missed the dreaded iPhone Autocorrect fail, and tweeted “I love Porn Stars!!!” instead of “Pawn Stars”. Great. “Mom, make him stop!” “What’s that?” She looks up from her Blackberry, “oh sorry, I was writing an email.”

Yes, family bonding time—there’s nothing quite like it. With smartphones bursting their way into nearly every home (and hand) across North America, we are always connected, but are we connected with each other? Having the World Wide Web literally at our fingertips may come in handy when we can’t remember the name of that song or Marilyn Monroe’s third husband, but something is missing. Our phones are sucking us into their world, not the other way around, and we are constantly connected, yes, but we are connected with everyone (and everything) besides those who are directly in front of us. This disconnectedness leads to a weaker sense of community, and, in turn, an increased sense of loneliness, and, ultimately, depression.

In an excellent TED Talk entitled “Connected, but alone?” Sherry Turkle (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) discusses the connection between technology and feelings of isolation. See, when you’re sitting in a room full of people, but instead of being part of the conversation, you’re fully immersed in “liking” whatever a friend just posted on Facebook or, more likely, replying to what Neil Patrick Harris just tweeted, you’re not actually connecting with anyone (no, not even Neil). You are disengaging yourself, and in turn you feel disengaged. You are, essentially, setting yourself up for feelings of isolation because you are isolating yourself within a tiny touchscreen.

But the effect is not only on you; it also affects those around you who feel disconnected from you, and, in turn may pick up their own phones, which leads you to feel isolated from them, and the cycle continues. As Turkle says,

“The feeling that ‘no one is listening to me’ makes us want to spend time with machines that seem to care about us.” She adds, “We expect more from technology and less from each other.”

And as our expectations in real, in-the-flesh connections decrease, so do the efforts we put into these connections, resulting in weaker bonds between each other, and, inevitably, feelings of loneliness.

Everyone knows what it means to feel alone in a crowded place. Unfortunately, this is becoming the norm. Walk by a group of high school students and see how many of them are standing in what seems like a social circle, but each with their heads down, immersed in their phones. And of course we’ve all seen the classic coffee date, in which one (or both) parties are busy texting, absently nodding while the other attempts to carry on the conversation. Does this really fulfill our need for community and connectedness—spending thirty minutes or an hour at the same table, but only half-present? And then we get in our cars to drive home and wonder why we feel so empty, so alone.

Eventually, this loneliness leads to depression. We were made for community, we were made for intimacy, and so when we find ourselves without it, we feel as though something is missing deep inside of us; we feel as if we aren’t whole. Yet we don’t know what to do about it, because we don’t actually see the problem. We’ve become so immersed in our smart phone society, that we don’t notice there’s anything wrong with it. On the contrary, sometimes we actually think it’s the solution. I’m lonely? I’ll text someone. I’m feeling sad? I’ll distract myself on Facebook. So we are alone, we are depressed, and we are mistaking the problem for the cure.

In the end, Smart Phone culture is weakening our relationships, which leads us to feelings of isolation, loneliness, and depression, and the problem is we don’t even realize it. First we need to make the connection, and then the only solution is to put down our phones and engage with the people in front of us. Until we do that, we will remain, as Turkle says, “Connected but alone.”

__________

Twitter: @lauren_b_sag

Orthorexia: When healthy becomes obsession

I recently got the opportunity to write an article on Orthorexia (a non-clinical eating disorder defined by an obsession with eating only “good” and “healthy” foods). For this article, I was able to interview three of my fellow writers from Libero Network, as well: Scott, Tayla, and Katy. Orthorexia is one of the less-known eating disorders, and because of this and my personal experience with it, I felt it was something I wanted to bring more light to.

Orthorexia: when “healthy” becomes obsession


Eggs, non-fat milk, wholegrain bread, all-natural peanut butter, lettuce, cashew nuts, health cereal and fat free organic yoghurt – these seem like normal, healthy items for a grocery list, but what if they were the only things on your list?

“It was not about food at all. It was all about control,” says Katy Boorman, a 22-year-old university student from Wellington, New Zealand.

It was during a relapse into anorexia when Katy’s desire to eat healthy crossed the line into something more serious. “I realized that I couldn’t starve, so I ate really healthy foods and exercised every single day,” says Katy. “It was different from my anorexia because my routine was so rigid. I ate three square meals a day at the same time every day and exercised twice a day.”

Katy’s behaviours are known now as “orthorexia” – a term coined by holistic physician, Steven Bratman, M.D., which is constructed from the word “ortho”, meaning straight, correct, and true. According to Bratman, Orthorexia nervosa refers to a “pathological fixation on eating proper food.”

“Many of the most unbalanced people I have ever met are those who have devoted themselves to healthy eating,” says Bratman in his article for Yoga Journal entitled “Health Food Junkie.” Bratman says, “In fact, I believe some of them have actually contracted a novel eating disorder.”

“The orthorexic’s inner life becomes dominated by efforts to resist temptation,” Bratman says in the article. “Self-condemnation for lapses, self-praise for success at complying with the chosen regime, and feelings of superiority over others less pure in their dietary habits.”

“It stole my entire personality,” says Katy, “and made me an incredibly bitchy person.”

Katy avoided all foods that were fried, high in sugar, or processed. “I ate as ‘clean’ as possible,” she says, “I could eat oatmeal, fruit, sandwiches, vegetables, and meat. I basically had chicken, salad, and potatoes every day for dinner.”

And she measured every portion.

“It was very much a form of addiction,” she adds, “and a way of managing my anxiety while numbing my feelings.”

As with any addiction, it impacted Katy’s life on multiple levels. “I rarely ever saw my friends or went to parties, and if I did, it had to be organized well in advance.”

In addition, Katy and her boyfriend broke up and her relationship with her family was filled with fighting because of her irritability.

“Eating only healthy foods gave me a way to feel powerful over others and feel in control of my situations,” says Tayla James, a 19-year-old college student from Bangor, Maine.

Tayla’s orthorexia developed during her anorexia. “It basically added to my eating disorder,” she says, “Because it was another behaviour I had and couldn’t let go of.”

She used this behaviour as a way to ease her anxiety, obsessing over the avoidance of eating anything labelled in her mind as “unhealthy” such as sugary foods, most meat, and pizza. Her rules included eating only organic foods and nothing artificial, and she would only use all-natural body products. Her diet consisted mainly of vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds, yoghurt, sprouted grain breads, and chicken.

As the quality of Tayla’s diet increased, the quality of her life decreased.

“Socially, I felt like an oddball, and often left out,” she says. “People would judge me on my food and ask me why I was so healthy.”

Tayla’s own rules contributed to her feelings of isolation. Eating out at restaurants was out of the question as well as any family gatherings where she didn’t know what was being served. In addition, she would cook her own dinners, never eating with her family.

Scott Gramke, a 19-year-old college student from Phoenix, Arizona, developed orthorexia during his struggle with anorexia and it continued when his anorexic behaviours stopped. “I consider [my anorexia and my orthorexia] to be very interrelated,” he says.

Like with his anorexia, Scott believes although the restricting of “unhealthy” foods and the obsession with eating “right” were focused around food, the problem itself was actually rooted in much deeper issues.

Unlike Katy, Scott found his orthorexia caused him moreanxiety, because he constantly spent his time trying to avoid situations where he couldn’t stick to his rigid eating habits, as well as trying to justify his eating behaviours.

When his family was preparing dinner, he always made his way into the kitchen to modify his own food – omitting the butter, using less oil, serving up less food for himself. Eventually Scott’s family banned him from the kitchen entirely. “Even after I was banned I tried to find out what was being put into what I was eating,” he says.

On Scott’s list of foods to avoid were: anything containing dairy fat or high levels of carbs, and any bread products that were not whole grain. He didn’t eat pizza or any dishes with cream and his salads were eaten without dressing.

“It was hard for me to focus on enjoying myself [at social events],” he says, “Because I was too busy worrying about the food I was going to have to eat. Whenever I ate out,” Scott recalls, “I was in a very bad mood because I was anxious and agitated. This is still a struggle for me today.”

Katy, Tayla, and Scott are not alone. According to the National Eating Disorder Information Centre of Canada, 1 in 2 girls and 1 in 3 boys engage in unhealthy methods to control appetite and weight. The big question is: Where is the line drawn? When does “healthy” become “obsessed”? And can good intentions lead to behaviours that cause more harm than good?

For me, I realized I’d crossed the line when I discovered that my commitment to healthy eating was really an addiction – and rather than being in control, I realized I was completely out of control.

My orthorexia began when I, like Katy, found it too difficult to keep my anorexia a secret. In my mind I was being healthy, but in reality, I had simply replaced one unhealthy obsession with another.

I had a strict list of guidelines and rules when it came to eating and, rather than enjoying the experience of simply feeding myself, I enjoyed the rigidity of my obsessive diet.

Some of my restrictions included: no red meat, no cheese, only non-fat milk and dairy products, no white flour, no (or minimal) oil, absolutely nothing fried, and only brown rice. I wouldn’t use salad dressing; instead I used either lemon juice or flavoured vinegar. In addition I convinced myself I was allergic to sugar and avoided all foods that had sugar in them.

I had a set of rules regarding what I hadto consume in a day, as well. This included one non-fat, sugar-free, all natural, probiotic yoghurt a day; two tablespoons of apple cider vinegar with every meal; and five egg whites with one yolk.

I became a master calculator —not only of calories, but protein, carbohydrate, and fat content as well. I measured all of my portions with precision. Grocery shopping took hours as I read each and every label to figure out if it fit into my rigid diet.

Needless to say, eating out at restaurants was hardly an option for me, the thought of which brought high levels of anxiety and stress. Family holidays were filled with turmoil as I argued with my parents about where, when, and what we were going to eat each day and how I was going to fit in my daily exercise to compensate for my “bad” eating.

When I fell off track after being on holiday for a few days or eating out at restaurants too often, I would cleanse. I went on intense detoxes that lasted as long as a week. These cleanses consisted of nothing but blended raw fruits and vegetables. I somehow thought this would make me “good” again.

Ironically, people praised me for it. “Good for you for having such self-control. Good for you for being so healthy,” they said. Little did they know.

Orthorexia is so easy to hide. Because it is one of the least common forms of eating disorders, even if people see the signs, they don’t know how to label it.

In a 2011 study done by the Department of Psychology at the Catholic University of Leuven in Tienen, Belgium, professionals in the eating disorder field were polled to gather their views on orthorexia and lesser-known eating disorders. Nearly 67% of the professionals observed cases of orthorexia in their own practices – the highest result of any of the eating disorders discussed – with 68% stating that orthorexia deserves more attention and research.

There is a lot of controversy over whether or not orthorexia should make it into a future edition of the DSM-V (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Without labelling orthorexia as a clinical eating disorder, it will be more difficult for patients to receive appropriate care and insurance coverage for their recovery. However, it is premature to add it to the DSM-V. Sufficient research about recovery from this disorder is required, or it could do more harm than good.

Clearly – as can be seen by the reflections of those who have experienced orthorexia – recovery from this disorder needs to focus on more than just food. One must deal with both the symptoms (restricting, bingeing, purging) and the root problems (low self-esteem, guilt, shame).

One must ask themself whythey feel the need to eat “perfectly,” because it’s not just about the food. And so one must address the inner issues behind his/her obsessive eating behaviours in order to fully recover – I, along with the others, sought professional counselling.

The food can’t be forgotten, though. Part of recovery involves learning to feed yourself again. Healthy eating is not determined by what you eat as much as why you are eating it. For some people eating a salad for lunch could be a healthy thing. During the stage of my life when I struggled with orthorexia, however, eating a salad was the least healthy thing I could do.  I needed to let go of my obsessions and pick up a piece of pizza instead.

There is no “one size fits all” when it comes to healthy eating. Bratman says he’s given up the belief that one day a universal theory of eating will exist that will match up people with the perfect diet for them.

In recovery, however, I learned about Intuitive Eating – an approach originated by dietitian and eating disorder counsellor Evelyn Tribole, MS, RD, and nutritionist Elyse Resch, MS, RD, FADA. In their book Intuitive Eating, Tribole and Resch explain that this approach to diet revolves around a simple theory of feeding yourself: eat when you are hungry, eat what your body craves, and stop when you are full. It proves time and again to be successful, not just for those recovering from an eating disorder, but for anyone wishing to develop a healthy relationship with food and their body.

Katy, Tayla, and Scott follow Intuitive Eating as part of their recovery from orthorexia, as do I. Intuitive Eating successfully reverses eating behaviours because it strips eating of any guilt, shame, and regulations. Most importantly, it brings us back to our true selves and allows us to begin trusting ourselves again. We must give up our need for control, and instead give into a willingness to become one with our bodies, and to simply feed ourselves. No guilt. No shame. No rules.

My orthorexia was about enslavement. It was about a set of laws I had to abide by to be okay, to be enough. Since embracing intuitive eating I’ve learned that I amenough just the way I am. I’ve gained a sense of freedom I never felt possible.

I don’t eat brownies every day, although in the first two weeks of my Intuitive Eating journey my body wanted nothing but Nanaimo bars – I suppose it was making up for lost time. Instead, my diet is balanced and healthy, not only from a nutritional standpoint, but from an emotional, psychological, and spiritual one as well.

Gone are the days of obsessing over protein content and caloric intake; of missing out on dinners with friends and stressing over family holidays; of controlling my diet as a way to distract myself from feelings of being out-of-control. Most importantly, gone are the days of not showing up for life. I am present, I am happy, I am healthy, and, yes, I am even eating a cookie.

_______________

Twitter: @lauren_b_sag

Kim, Kourtney, and Khloe: Meet the ‘Joneses’

Here is a paper I wrote for my Television & Culture class – I’m not sure if it’s what my professor was looking for, but it makes for a good blog! (and that is, after all, what really matters lol) 

Kim, kourtney, and khloe kardashian

Kim, Kourtney, and Khloe: Meet the ‘Joneses’ of the 21st Century


The phrase ‘keeping up with the Joneses’ refers to one’s need to stay ‘on top’ of what the neighbours are doing – where they are taking their holidays, what kind of car they drive, what type of school they send their kids to – and engage in an often futile attempt to ‘keep up’ with that lifestyle, which always seems just out of reach. With reality shows invading our television Networks and our fascination (or obsession?) with the rich and famous, there are new ‘Joneses’ in town, and they go by the name “Kardashian”. And it is through watching these shows and applying the same need to ‘keep up’ that once applied only to our white-picket-fence neighbours that we find ourselves perpetually wanting more, which leads to feelings of discontentment, anxiety, and depression.

The Kardashians aren’t the only ones offering us a glimpse into their over-the-top lifestyle, there’s also Kimora, Giuliana & Bill, the cast of Jersey Shore, and the oh-so-enduring women of The Real Housewives – to name a few. And because there are so many people showcasing their extravagant lifestyles, us ‘commoners’ begin to think that lifestyle is not only normal, but that it is attainable and even deserved, so we set out on our journey to ‘get what is rightfully ours: fame and fortune. And so the shopping begins: new shoes, new clothes, new car, new house – the purchases get bigger and bigger. Then onto cosmetics: fake hair, fake nails, fake tan, fake body.

And as the bills get larger, what do we do? We work harder. This results in several possibilities. First, if parents are expected to provide these things for their children, then they have no other choice but to work harder, which means less time at home, and a weaker family unit. Second, as children become teenagers and then move into young adulthood, the price tags are now their problem, and so they have two choices: get multiple credit cards and max them out, hoping mommy and daddy will come to the rescue, or follow their parent’s example and just work really hard.

The outcome is a culture in which people are overworked and unfulfilled, never reaching the ‘goal’ because the goal is constantly moving further and further away. As the rich get richer and acquire better toys, faster cars, and bigger houses, we fall further and further behind. And the more we work to try and keep up, the more unfulfilled, anxious, and depressed we become. However, despite what we commonly believe, these feelings are not the result of “not having enough”; they are the result of sacrificing everything of substance in order to chase after ‘enough’ in a context where enough doesn’t even exist. We think if we could just save up and get that car/do those renovations/go on that holiday, then we won’t be so stressed, tired, and depressed; but, in reality, we are simply fueling the flame, because there is no ‘enough’, there is no finish line, there is no maximum.

It is not the lack of things that fuels our anxiety and depression, it is the sacrifices we make in order to acquire those things. Fulfillment doesn’t come from fulfilling our desires (though on the surface it seems like it should); fulfillment comes from accepting what we have and appreciating it. Having Louboutins on your feet won’t make you happy – at least not in any lasting way – but achieving a sense of gratefulness and contentment with what you have will. We’ve lost our sense of contentment to our desire to ‘keep up with the Joneses’, and this is nothing unique to our generation, but what is new is that the modern Joneses are no longer our clean-cut neighbours in their white capris and argyle sweaters; the Joneses are Kim, Khloe, and Kourtney, and a game that could never be won in the first place has now become that much harder.    

_______________

Twitter: @lauren_b_sag
and I’m Instagram-ing it up HERE