I gave up on envy years ago when I realized the amount of work the person had to do to get there or what they had to sacrifice to get something.

There is always the brief "Damn, why did (s)he get the jackpot in the lottery," but I never say they didn't deserve it. My life is good enough as it is.

The Goddess writes: Or, let's say they seem happier. You can figure out what about your psychology or looks isn't getting you a great person and try to change that.

That's extremely interesting, Amy. You seem to think that happiness depends upon the right person. And that if a person isn't as happy as they could be, it's because they don't have the right person.

Sorry, can't agree.

There are several problems here. Let's start with the obvious: almost no one is going to put up pictures of them eating canned pork'n'beans when the money runs low. Instead, they'll put up another couple of that lovely Italian vacation they scrounged for 5 years ago.

Second, note "urban creative professionals". I understand "creative professionals" to mean authors, actors, musicians and the like. Fact is, most people in these professions are barely scraping by. There's a reason that the saying "starving artist" exists. A few do well, but they are the exceptions - and the ones everyone on Instagram is probably drooling over.

Lastly, too many "creative professionals" are certain that their "big break" is just around the corner - just like it has been for the past 5, 10, 15 years. In many cases, their lives would be better if they were to change to a different career and enjoy their art as a hobby.

Sometimes I want to want things-like kids, marriage, a new car etc.

But I just don't.

I have found that to be the source of my unhappiness. I just keep reminding myself, I dont want them what I desire is to want to want them.

Gosh it sounds so confusing.

I saved a quote posted on Reddit:

"The reason we struggle with insecurity is because we compare our behind the scenes with everyone else's highlight reel."

Yes, exactly Amy. I feel I *should* want those things because everyone else wants them so intensely.

I think it's one of the reasons I like hanging out with gay people, they also differ in what they *should* want.

Envy - one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Too bad that calling it such has sort of become an "old fashioned" value.

And it isn't just online - it has helped the Democrats get elected over and over again.

Obama is a good case in point; De Blasio, New York's mayor elect is another - "share the wealth" or "make the rich pay their fair share" are just different versions of that old tune "you rich have too damn much; gimme dat!" used by the Democrats to much success in the voting booth.

That's extremely interesting, Amy. You seem to think that happiness depends upon the right person. And that if a person isn't as happy as they could be, it's because they don't have the right person.

Sorry, can't agree.

Posted by: Patrick at December 15, 2013 10:10 AM
_____________________________

Exactly. As Planned Parenthood executive-turned-novelist Sheri S. Tepper wrote in a 1978 pamphlet for women ("So You Don't Want to Be a Sex Object"), the first rule for getting people to take you seriously is: "Don't Expect Anyone to MAKE You Happy."

Rule #5, BTW, was "Don't try to play it both ways." This was subdivided into seven parts. Excerpt:

"Letting yourself go with that high, squealing giggle that sounds like a pig being killed - piling on the false eyelashes until your eyes lost in the underbrush - wearing sweaters cut to the nipple to work or in class - living in with someone old enough to be your father - doing that and then complaining that men treat you as a sex object - what else? Men don't take fluff seriously. Some fluff can discuss current trends in English literature dance or theater. Some fluff can play a mean game of tennis. It's still fluff. If most of the people who know you think of you as 'The girl who lives with Henry,' or 'The one with the boobs,' or 'The girl with the giggle' - well."

(Tepper is now in her 80s.)

That's extremely interesting, Amy. You seem to think that happiness depends upon the right person. And that if a person isn't as happy as they could be, it's because they don't have the right person.

Um, I'm talking about this in the context of a person envying what another person has.

In that context, I wrote this -- about changing what isn't working for you in achieving your romantic (and other goals):

Or, let's say they seem happier. You can figure out what about your psychology or looks isn't getting you a great person and try to change that. And the same goes for other areas of your life.

Have either of you -- Lenona or Patrick -- ever read my column? I think you have, so maybe you have amnesia.

In my own life, for example, I'm happy without Gregg. Every day is just better with him in it, which is the reason we just celebrated our 11th anniversary. Before meeting him, I never thought anybody could hold my attention for this long.

"In my own life, for example, I'm happy without Gregg. Every day is just better with him in it, which is the reason we just celebrated our 11th anniversary."

I find this an interesting comment. How do you know you are happy without him? It's been 11 years since you had to face this and your relationship has probably gotten deeper and more meaningful every one of those years. I'm not saying you need his presence every moment to be happy or that you wouldn't continue on if something happened but would you rally be "happy", at least in the short term?

> It's irrational to envy people -- you
> can't have the life they have; you
> can only have yours.

Amy, I think you are really, really on to something with this.

Near the start of this video, Evers suggests that envy is at the bottom of a lot of bad liberal thinking. (He recommended two books about envy, and I've got 'em but haven't read them yet.)

It's what I've heard in most conversations with liberals (and what's remembered from my own liberal youth): It's based on resentment, and they want to cast that resentment into the thinking of others (as I did).

We've talked about this on the blog before: Liberal humor is always tinged with some element of moral superiority. Consider Al Gore's book title, with its teenaged sarcasm and condescension: "An Inconvenient Truth."

Liberal humor is like that even when the joke comes from a posture of weakness... Liberals can't have a public emotion that doesn't also flatter them. 'I may be meek and feckless, but I'm nicer than people on Fox!'

But consider the funniest men in the world, like Pryor and Louis: Their deepest humor is often humility towards their own weaknesses.

In liberal hearts, unhappiness always comes from outside. They can't acknowledge taking any part in a bad outcome… Or acknowledge that others could go through life without the punishing envy that liberals have selected for the center of their own outlook.

In liberal hearts, unhappiness always comes from outside. They can't acknowledge taking any part in a bad outcome… Or acknowledge that others could go through life without the punishing envy that liberals have selected for the center of their own outlook.

Posted by: Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at December 15, 2013 5:12 PM

I read an article several years, and about three computers ago, on the liberal world view. The author focused on why the liberal world view is so prevelent in academia.

His thesis was that it was indeed based in envy. The ivory tower intellectuals, especially in the liberal arts, with their modest teacher's salary, most of them government employees, couldnt stand the fact that there were engineers and businessmen, who made twenty times the money that they did, when academically at least, the professors had been more successful in school, than these ultra wealthy business owners had been. (Think Bill Gates, college drop out)

If they were truly appreciated, the financial rewards for teaching gender studies for instance should be at least as good as being CEO of Home Depot. The fact that it isnt rewarded the same way, makes capitalism an inherently unjust system, which needs to be corrected to reflect the true value of intellectuals.

So whats the explanation on why conservatives are such cunts?

> the explanation on why conservatives
> are such cunts?

Many, even the less thoughtful ones, aren't. They're happy to make their way by their own effort and live with their consequences.

Listen, life is dark, and it's not a policy problem. The people who'll pull you out of darkness aren't faraway policy figures, or even faraway taxpayers. The people who'll pull you out of darkness are intimates. When government tries to do intimacy, it's Thedala poking around in your underpants.


> intellectuals, especially in the liberal arts,
> with their modest teacher's salary, most of
> them government employees, couldnt stand the
> fact that there were engineers and businessmen,
> who made twenty times the money

Favorite, oft-linked essay about this #1:

Schools became the major institution outside of the family to shape the attitudes of young people, and almost all those who later became intellectuals went through schools. There they were successful. They were judged against others and deemed superior. They were praised and rewarded, the teacher's favorites. How could they fail to see themselves as superior?

It is not surprising, therefore, that distribution of goods and rewards via a centrally organized distributional mechanism later strikes intellectuals as more appropriate than the anarchy and chaos" of the marketplace.

Favorite, oft-linked essay about this #2:

Orwell may not have been a genius in the sense of having a prodigious memory, “lightening-fast analytical capabilities, a taste for theory, or bold new ideas.” But he was able to see what was plainly before him and describe it in “unforgettably vivid prose.” “These are not,” Posner dryly adds, “typical academic gifts.” Rather than being captivated by big ideas, Orwell was skeptical of them, especially when there were purported solutions to problems in the public realm. Typical academics, on the other hand, are not oriented toward political reality: "They tend to be unworldly. They are, most of them anyway, the people who have never left school. Their milieu is postadolescent." *

*Emphasis by Uncle Cridmo, who upon reading this
passage for the first time years ago recognized
that his childhood on a university campus had been
directed by a series of meeting-minded technocrats,
effete and wordy 'authorities' who'd never broken
a sweat for a dollar in their entire lives.

Crid - text formatting/ justification issues? From my view, the text of the last paragraph is cut off on the edges.

The longest line is 49 characters. (1) Try Ctrl and the big "+" key on the right edge of your keyboard, or (2) try Ctrl and the big "-" key on the right edge of your keyboard. Or (3) try "disable styles" if your browser has that function. Worst case, copy and paste to word processor. (If you're reading on your phone, all is lost.)

When you can't read them, it's easiest just to assume my sentiments are perfectly formed and spotlessly correct in all respects... You'll never go wrong that way.

iPhone. But thank you for the tech tip.

So whats the explanation on why conservatives are such cunts?- Posted by: Ppen

Lack of sex

I'm not on istagram, but whenever someone has nothing but constant fun and glamour posted on their facebook feed, I tend to think they're full of shit. Of course, I actually KNOW (or knew at one point) people I'm "friends" with, so that helps.