Local News & Commentary Since 1890.

Archive for the ‘psychology’ Category

Aurora, Colorado: It Was About Madness, Not Guns

In Media, National News, Opinion, Politics, psychology, sociology, State News, Uncategorized on July 22, 2012 at 11:12 am

When tragedy struck an Aurora, Colorado movie theatre last week, a life and death drama unfolded before the very eyes of a horrified nation. A fun, midnight premier of the latest Batman film instead became a traumatic experience never to be forgotten by those who lived through it.

Covered head-to-toe in protective body armor, the gunman opened fire in the theater using multiple weapons from handguns to assault rifles. The Aurora chief of police reported that the man had colored his hair red and claimed he was Batman’s comic book nemesis, the Joker.

Accounts so far describe the alleged shooter, 24-year-old James Holmes, as a clean-cut, doctoral student with no background in criminal activity or predilection for violence. Nevertheless, he painstakingly planned the attack on the theater in every detail, from his booby-trapped apartment, to the careful selection of explosives and firearms.

In the end, more than a dozen people died and many more were injured as people desperately search for a motive. Some people are blaming the Batman films, particularly Heath Ledger’s version of the arch villain, the Joker, for inspiring Holmes’ behavior. Others are pointing fingers at the media in general for sensationalizing this kind of random violence.

As usual, it didn’t take long for the anti-gun lobby and the liberal left (generally one and the same) to politicize the horrific event in favor of their agenda. Arguing that further gun restrictions are needed because the shooter obtained the firearms legally is without basis.

Logically, someone who is capable of this kind of cold, calculated murder would have found a way to obtain what he needed regardless of the legality. Conversely, the pro-gun conservative assertion that the suspect could have been stopped sooner if more people carried firearms is just ridiculous.

If a bunch of gun-toting amateurs with over-active hero complexes had suddenly opened fire on the attacker the only result would have been even more bloodshed. It’s unimaginable why anyone needs an assault rifle for personal protection, but guns are not the issue in this case.

In the coming months, armchair experts will dilute and dissect the facts and anecdotes from the tragedy, each offering their own empty opinion of why and how someone could commit such a horrible act. But no amount of speculation will break through the facts in this case because they reside only in the distorted mind of the suspect, Holmes.

Short of post 9-11 level security measures placed at every public venue, there is little else that could have prevented this tragedy. The Aurora shooting was the act of a disturbed mind who, if not identified by some level of professional evaluation, would have eventually found some way to act out his violent tendencies.

In the movies, even a genius superhero like Batman is portrayed in his alter ego, Bruce Wayne, as emotionally troubled and bordering madness. But the end result of his violent, albeit not lethal, tendencies allows people to accept his methods to justify the outcome. Justice is served, and the bad guy either lands in jail or somehow causes his own deadly demise.

Unfortunately, the real world doesn’t work like that. Disturbed individuals do bad things. It is rarely predictable and often ends in tragedy. Pushing for further anti-gun legislation simply gets more weapons into the hands of criminals and limits defensive capabilities of law-abiding citizens, and even the police.

Instead, perhaps experts, not politicians, should focus on the more difficult task – dealing with the people who might eventually create havoc and death through such violent acts, regardless of what kind of weapon they use.

 

A Little Girl’s Fight To Survive Reminds Us How Fragile Life Can Be

In Children and Family, Health, Local News, National News, Opinion, psychology, Religion, Science, Technology, Uncategorized on July 17, 2012 at 10:36 pm

Aubrey Jones

By Gery L. Deer

Deer In Headlines

 

My three-year-old cousin Aubrey is a bright, inquisitive and sensitive little girl who loves to play and laugh and be a kid. Every time I see her she is full of energy and doing all the things that little girls do.

Aubrey’s mother, Lindsey, is a cheerleading coach with four different teams ages 3 to 18, including teams in Fairborn and TippCity. Over the weekend of July 14, Lindsey, her husband Jon, Aubrey, and her baby sister, 4-month-old Kennedy, left their home in Fairborn, Ohio to attend a cheerleading tournament in Indianapolis, Indiana. But soon after they arrived, cheerleading was the last thing on their minds.

On Saturday, Aubrey began to spike a fever and was soon taken to the emergency room at a hospital near the IndianapolisConvention Center. What was originally thought to be a simple viral bug turned out to be a very serious bacterial infection. With almost no warning, little Aubrey was suddenly very ill, and her family was frightened.

Soon she was moved to RileyHospital for Children at IndianaUniversity where she was quickly placed in intensive care. Her tiny body was succumbing to what doctors called a super strain – a severe and aggressive strep-related bacterial infection that is resistant to most individual antibiotic treatment measures.

Since she was admitted, her body has shut down twice, being overcome by infection and high fever. After the first incident, doctors performed surgery to remove some of the infected fluid from her lungs and chest. Early Tuesday morning her condition worsened yet again as destroyed bacteria began to release dangerous toxins into her bloodstream and she crashed once more.

Battling septic shock her organs keep trying to shut down, but little Aubrey clings to life. We nearly lost her a couple of times since this ordeal began, but she is hanging on, swollen and with machines maintaining her functions to give her body a chance to rest.

Aubrey cannot be stabilized enough at this point to be moved to a hospital closer to home so her family is taking turns at her bedside. The stress, exhaustion and expenses are all increasing with each passing day.

I spent Tuesday afternoon and early evening at RonaHillsPark in Fairborn to help Lindsey’s cheerleading students and their parents mobilize door-to-door to collect donations. Aubrey’s seven-year-old sister, Kaydynce is staying with relatives nearby and was on hand to help along with her grandmother and great grandmother.

As I write this, little Aubrey is still in intensive care, kept sedated and in a coma-like state. Her family still waits hopes and prays for all to turn out well. Stranded two-hundred miles from home, they are fighting fatigue, fear and the worry of mounting expenses.

Family and friends, like the cheerleading squads, have pulled together to raise money and there are bank accounts and websites. The incredible outpouring of support is overwhelming and wonderful to see in an age of cynicism and self-absorption.

It’s hard to comprehend how a microscopic creature can swarm and multiply in the blood of a tiny, innocent child, altering the life path of everyone who is close to her. Her world, and that of her family and friends, has been irrevocably altered. Little Aubrey’s plight has brought people together for a common good. Hopefully we never forget and are forever mindful of the fragility of life because in a moment, everything can change.

If you would like to help little Aubrey’s family, donations are being accepted online at http://www.indiegogo.com/aubreyssick and at area Fifth-Third Bank branches. Just make a donation deposit in the name of Aubrey’s mother, Lindsey Warner (Jones).

 

Has America Become A Babysitting State?

In Children and Family, Economy, Education, Entertainment, Health, Local News, Opinion, Politics, psychology, Religion, sociology, State News, television, Uncategorized on June 12, 2012 at 8:17 am

By Gery L. Deer

Deer In Headlines

 

Did you ever wonder (thanks Andy Rooney) why we have so many laws designed to, “protect us from ourselves?” You know what I am referring to. Think about the laws requiring us to wear seat belts, no public drinking or smoking, fines for public profanity, mandatory motorcycle helmets, and so on.

With obvious exceptions, like distracted or drunken driving, very little of what we do affects anyone else. If I choose to risk my own death by not wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle on the highway, who does that affect other than me? It may be incredibly inconsiderate to my family or the poor guy who has to clean my brains off the pavement after an accident, but other than that, who does it really injure?

Of course, I’m exaggerating here. You’d have to be a complete idiot to ride without a helmet – sorry bikers, it’s just plain stupid – but it’s still your own choice and it shouldn’t be up to the government to decide. It can be argued that it costs the taxpayers more money to cover the medical charges of a rider who’s had a head injury without a helmet, but that point of view can be hard to quantify. Applying the same logic, however, tobacco should be made illegal for the same reasons.

Some laws don’t protect us from ourselves but are actually in place to pacify the moral majority. For example, no alcohol sales on Sunday, no cursing in public, television censors and so on. Decency laws require that every television network maintain a department of standards and practices whose sole duty is to ensure that no one says or does anything over broadcast TV or radio prior to 10 PM that might offend the religious right.

Many anti-drug laws, like those against the use of marijuana, are in place, not because of health risks but to satisfy the moral right. Tobacco use has immediate and long-term detrimental effects but is a regulated, taxable commodity. Marijuana, on the other hand, is said by experts to be no more dangerous than tobacco but is still classified as an illegal, Schedule I hallucinogen. Why? There are at least two possible explanations.

First, the obvious reason – hallucinogenic drugs are just bad. There’s no other way to say it. Long-term use of any substance like this is going to eventually be a health hazard. But the other reason is more sinister. The tobacco industry is huge, powerful, and wants complete control over your toxic addiction without competition from Mary Jane.

A great deal of money goes into congress from the tobacco big-wigs. They will always argue against legalized marijuana because it would eat into their profits, and therefore less cash would be available with which to line the pockets of public officials fighting their battle on Capitol Hill.

Understand clearly that I am in no way endorsing or advocating drug use. I think it’s idiotic and makes one stupid and unemployable. I’m simply pointing out that we are living amidst a realm of hopeless double-standards, of which alcohol and drug use is only a small example.

I don’t know whether these pointless and expensive regulations come from genuinely well-meaning people trying to help keep others from making dangerous mistakes or if they are the result of controlling, politically-motivated individuals. Either way, it really seems like we’re moving further into a babysitting state where the government controls everything down to what size soft drink I can buy at 7 Eleven.

There’s nothing wrong with regulating public issues – second-hand smoke is a health hazard to those around the smoker and the dangers of drunken driving are a no-brainer, but what these individuals do in their own home should be their own business – as with the pot smoker, the junk food junkie, or the watcher of reality television.

Personally, I think Americans spend far too much time worrying about what our neighbors doing and not enough time minding our own business. If they really want to regulate something to benefit the public, they should start by outlawing and reality television. Clearly the Kardashians are detrimental to society as a whole.

 

 

Does Everyone Suffer From Freud’s Alleged Death Wish?

In Entertainment, Health, Media, Opinion, psychology, Science, television, Uncategorized on April 30, 2012 at 10:52 pm

Sigmund Freud, by Max Halberstadt, 1921

By Gery L. Deer

Deer In Headlines

Sigmund Freud said that most people have a death wish, a desire, often deeply repressed, for self-destruction, often accompanied by feelings of depression, hopelessness, and self-reproach. Arguably, Freud’s theories have been the subject of considerable controversy and debate over the years but his impact on psychology, therapy, and culture is undeniable.

Debunked or not, psychology’s most famous figure may have hit this proverbial nail right on the head. At least that’s how it seems taking into account how many things people do while fully aware of potentially lethal consequences; for example, smoking, alcohol, recreational drug use, skydiving, auto racing, base jumping and other high-risk behavior.

It could be argued that some of these activities are no more dangerous than getting in the car in the morning and driving to work. Considering the safety measures involved in the case of something like skydiving, a quick spin in a Chevy would most likely be far more dangerous.

Of course, once someone starts taking drugs or abusing alcohol, a chemical addiction takes over and impedes their ability to stop. But they’re not the only ones.

Some experts suggest that so-called adrenaline junkies are not all that different from their AA-going counterparts. Similar addictive reactions occur in the bloodstreams of extreme athletes and even serial criminals, not for drugs but adrenaline. The high brought on by the endorphin rush can be overwhelming and highly addictive.

If the experts are right, treatment may be in order to help quell the desire for such extreme behavior. But, that doesn’t answer the main question – how do they start in the first place?

Could there actually be an inborn drive that blinds some people to the relative, even inescapable dangers, associated with risky behavior? Is it possible that some people are genuinely motivated by an involuntary drive akin to Freud’s death wish?

Blaming television and other entertainment media for romanticizing risky behavior is always an option, but only to a point. While these influences do affect modern society, they can hardly be blamed for anything prior to about 75 years ago.

Before the mass media evolved into what it is today, habitually addictive activities like smoking and alcohol use were predominantly passed on through families or influenced by social circles. Plus, the detrimental effects of these substances was not yet widely known or accepted.

It could be that people are just examining these issues far too closely. Maybe, to use another Freudian colloquialism, a cigar is just a cigar. Isn’t it at least possible that people simply do dumb things sometimes without deep, psychological forces at work? Of course it’s possible.

Psychoanalyzing risky behavior may rack up tons of cash for shrinks, but it’s entirely possible that some people just enjoy these activities for their own sake. Unfortunately, some of them become addicted to the rush, the drug, the adrenaline, or whatever it is that hooks them, and some even die as a result.

Life is dangerous – even if it’s unintentional. No matter the lifestyle, no one escapes Freud’s alleged death wish. Whether it’s a compulsion for that first cup of morning coffee or an obsession with shoe shopping, extreme behavior hits everyone in one way or another.

Sometimes the things a person appears to enjoy in life the most are exactly what may be killing them, or may eventually. Lifestyle changes or even therapy may be necessary, but the individual is the only one who can change the behavior.

 

 

 

 

Don’t Believe Everything You Read. Seriously, don’t.

In Entertainment, Local News, Media, Opinion, Politics, psychology, television, Uncategorized on April 3, 2012 at 12:29 pm

By Gery L. Deer

Deer In Headlines

 

For reasons I still can’t totally understand, many people insist on believing whatever they read on a printed (or digital) page, regardless of how inane or baseless the material may seem. Generally the topic or tone falls in line with the reader’s interests or personal opinions and if it strikes them just the right way they fall for it, bait, hook and headline.

For example, while I appreciate the loyalty of my readers, I always encourage them to explore for themselves whatever topics I present and not simply take my word for it. An op-ed (opinion-editorial) column like mine offers one or two viewpoints about a particular topic but always has a ‘slant’ to it. For the author, the column can serve several purposes.

Some op-ed columnists are simply trying to put a voice to a particular viewpoint and provide food for thought to the reader. Others are doing everything they can to sway public opinion, by whatever means available to them, even by misrepresenting the facts.

Talk radio personalities and television news commentators offer the broadcast version of a written editorial column, usually with a much wider reach and, thus, a larger audience. Broadcast celebrity opinionists (my word for them) have one goal which is to please the advertisers by increasing ratings.

Banging on the desk and yelling, playing sound bites out of context and using as much spin as possible, these over paid blowhards ply the mushy brains of audiences with a lot of self-appointed authority. That authority is false but accepted by the masses, leaving them unable to tell the difference between fact and sensationalism.

Eventually, the Internet provided yet another outlet as audiences took to the computer screen for their news and information. So much pseudo-journalism has flooded the web that many now question the legitimacy and accuracy, not to mention the political slant, of modern news agencies. Take blogs for example.

The word blog is a shortened form of web log. Blogging started out simply enough as the ramblings of disgruntled workers or bored housewives who found an audience for their personal diatribes in the vast wasteland of the information superhighway. Over time, the number of blog followers has begun to surpass broadcast news and print journalism.

Depending on the content, a blog can attract millions of readers worldwide. According to the website InitialTraffic.com, the official blog of The Huffington Post was the most visited blog website of 2011 citing millions of hits for the publication. Other blogs have become mainstream resources, having transformed from op-ed material to news and video content.

Competition for subscribers and high-volume audiences is fierce between media outlets and some will do whatever it takes to keep advertising and subscription revenue coming in. It’s important that readers know the difference between opinion, editorial, news and sensationalist content. But how do you tell the difference?

An article or broadcast story that can be considered ‘news’ will provide the reader with the who, what, why, when and how of a topic, giving you the information without commentary or speculation. An opinion or editorial piece will include conjecture or literally offer the writer’s views in an attempt to slant the story or alter public perception of the topic.

In my columns, I generally cite the facts of a current event, a quote by a politician (in its entirety, so the context is clear), express the concerns of fellow citizens or I will base the work on a historical reference of some kind. The idea is to provide the solid, factual basis for whatever argument I wish to make.

For all of the chatter online, on television and on the radio, your local newspaper, in my opinion, is still your best bet for accurate news coverage regarding events immediately affecting you and your family. Online or in print, it offers a ground-level look at the day-to-day happenings without the ‘noise.’ Whatever your choice for news and commentary, be an informed reader.

 

DEER IN HEADLINES SPONSORED BY:

GLD Enterprises Commercial Writing

Here On Gilligan’s Island: TV’s Sociological Snapshot

In Entertainment, Opinion, Politics, psychology, Religion, Science, sociology, television, Uncategorized on March 27, 2012 at 9:02 am

Gilligan's Island served as a humorous microcosm of American society.

By Gery L. Deer

Deer In Headlines

In 1963 television writer, producer Sherwood Schwartz created a short-lived situation comedy that, unbeknownst to audiences, provided a peak through a unique magnifying glass into the human condition. Panned by critics and adored by viewers, Gilligan’s Island became one of the most re-run shows of all time and earned a unique place in the annals of American pop culture.

Between 1964 and 1967, 98 original episodes of the show aired when it was suddenly cancelled before a fourth season could be filmed. Surprisingly, the show ran aground, not because of faltering ratings (it was always in the top 20) but instead because the president of CBS wanted to revive his wife’s favorite program, Gunsmoke, which had already drifted into the sunset.

Often taken too seriously by critics and sometimes misunderstood even by its fans, the premise of Gilligan’s was simple. Seven people set out on a scenic, three-hour cruise around theHawaiian Islands aboard the S.S. Minnow when an unexpected storm tossed their tiny ship and left it wrecked on the shore of an uncharted island.

Marooned more than 300 miles from their original course and left with only a transistor radio, a tool chest, four blankets and the clothes on their backs (which never seemed to wear out) the castaways had little hope of rescue. As if that wasn’t enough, each opportunity for escape from their tropical island nest was agonizingly thwarted – usually thanks to the ineptitude of the boat’s lovable, yet bungling first mate, (Willie) Gilligan.

Regardless of what people thought of the show, however, even today, the durability of Gilligan’s Island still leaves entertainment experts scratching their heads. It’s possible, though, that most people simply missed the point.

Gilligan’s offered us more than just 23 minutes of slapstick escapism. Along with campy, cartoon-like comedy, the program granted viewers a humorous and remarkably detailed glimpse of themselves.

Seven people, each of whom represented different social positions, were required to work together in order to survive in their shared predicament. The Skipper and Gilligan, for example, represented average, working class guys; a small business owner and his employee, if you will.

The Professor was a school teacher; the pragmatic scientist focused on getting everyone safely off the island. He also found ways to help make them all more comfortable while maintaining a discrete distance from the obvious distractions – Mary Ann and Ginger.

Sweet, kind, Mary Ann was a wholesome farm girl fromMiddle America. Television psychologists (yes, there are such people) often refer to her as the ‘linchpin’ of the story. Noticeably absent for a good part of an episode, Mary Ann would walk in at just the right moment bringing with her at least part of the solution to an impending problem, though sometimes inadvertently.

Movie starlet, Ginger, was Mary Ann’s voluptuous, big city opposite. Her Marilyn Monroe-esque sensuality was continually implied but never fully executed. Even though she was a film star, on the island she was relegated to a traditional ‘female’ role of the 1960’s, cooking and doing laundry.

Lastly, the millionaire Thurston Howell III and his socialite wife, aptly named, Lovey are obvious stand-ins for the high-brow elite. Carrying enough cash to support a small nation, the lazy yet likable couple solved problems back home with money – something that has no value on the island. Still, Howell’s business savvy and ruthless determination to return to civilization offers both foil and ally to the others.

And there you have it, seven snapshots of modern society dropped into a difficult situation where they are forced to get along for the common good. Of course a sitcom isn’t real life, but it shows us that we all have the same basic needs no matter where we are in the pecking order of society. In the end, we all require food, clothing, shelter, some level of happiness and a margin of personal satisfaction.

No one ever really finds everything they’re looking for in life, but peel away our political, religious and social trappings and we’re all the same. Just people trying to get along, regardless of whether we live on the streets of anywhere U.S.A., or here on Gilligan’s Island.

There Is Life After Bullying

In Children and Family, Education, Health, National News, Opinion, psychology, sociology, Uncategorized on October 19, 2010 at 10:12 am

dih-logo-SEA recent survey indicated that 77 percent of elementary and middle school students reported that they had been the victims of a bully at some time. The information also revealed that more than half of bullying incidents go unreported.

The recent suicides of several teens that had been tortured by bullies because of their sexuality have prompted a flood of media attention to the problem. I am concerned, however, that the public and the media are forgetting about other groups who have always been the targets of bullying including those with physical and mental disabilities, the impoverished and various ethnicities. I can relate to these issues – I know how they feel.

I was born with a serious congenital birth defect that had me in and out of the hospital for the first 20 years of my life. A multitude of medical issues combined with just being physically smaller than other kids my age made me the perfect target for bullies.

Rustin-Kluge-Anti-Bullying

Rustin-Kluge-Anti-Bullying

Oddly, none of my health problems were openly visible to anyone around me. Virtually everything people knew about me was total conjecture and inaccurate rumors with no factual basis. Unfortunately, facts and reason rarely work with people who are terrified of anyone who is different – whether the differences are obvious or not.

As if I didn’t have enough to contend with at the hospital, at school I was pushed, called names, kicked, hit, had my book bags ransacked, my lockers vandalized and my musical instruments thrown around on the school bus – all to the complete oblivion of school officials. In fact, some stood right there while it all happened, literally choosing to ignore it.

While the majority of the adults around me were supportive and helpful, there were a few who were downright cruel. Teachers, coaches and bus drivers are in a unique position to bully under the guise of maintaining order and discipline. *Despite what the party line might be, each teacher or administrator has his or her favorites – athletes, star students, and so on – who will always get preferential treatment. After all, these adults want (and desperately need due to a horribly low level of self esteem) to be liked by the students as much as the other kids.

A perfect example of this kind of ignorance came in my sixth grade year. I was out of school with a simple case of chicken pox. Noting my absence during roll call, the teacher told the rest of the class they shouldn’t get too attached to me because I had a serious disease and wouldn’t live to see my 15th birthday. With that thoroughly incorrect announcement, the rumors went viral.

So why don’t parents get more involved? Most of the time, parents have no idea what is going on. I never talked about it much. I doubt my parents ever knew how bad it really was.

In the end, I won. Eventually, I realized that it wasn’t my fault that people couldn’t deal with me. At the ripe old age of 43, my health is good, I’m a successful writer and entrepreneur and, despite my sixth grade teacher’s prediction, I am still here.

I carry no anger or malice towards the kids who spent so much of their time trying to better themselves by humiliating me. Oddly enough, a couple of them have already preceded me in death. As for those who are still with us, I actually feel sorry for them and genuinely hope they grew up to succeed in life. The adults, on the other hand, were the true villains.

It was nearly impossible to keep my personal issues private in a tiny farm town where everyone gossiped about things they didn’t even understand. I can’t imagine what kids today are going through as every detail of their lives are posted online for all to see – especially those struggling with personal identity issues.

Sadly, bullies are not just in school and, as I pointed out, adults can be just as bad as kids. A bully can be someone who abuses or oversteps her authority as a supervisor at work, a civic official or a teacher who ignores the academic struggles of a student in class because he or she is not one of the star athletes. Bullies are everywhere but you don’t have to take their abuse.

If you have been the victim of a bully, try to forgive them. They are small, sad and hopeless people who have nothing but pain inside. Forget trying to reason with them, it never works.

Whatever you do, don’t lower yourself to their level. Walk away. Turn off the computer. Seek out help and surround yourself with people who care and who will support you. None of these pathetically insecure people is worth your dignity … or your life.