Slogan Is as Slogan Does

I attend a couple of 12-step groups fairly regularly and of late I find I'm leaning on the slogans, an often-overlooked program tool. In tough times, these pithy pearls can shift my perspective just enough to see me through. I'd like to share a few now in hopes that they'll help you, too.

One Day at a Time: For me, the crux of this slogan is its radical reorientation to the present moment. I need only get through today, and in fact, that's all I can do. I can't get through tomorrow, next week or next year today. But whatever it is, be it a turbulent emotion or trying external circumstance, I can grit through the pain just for today.

Let Go, Let God: What am I letting go of? My problems, worries and fears. What am I letting God do? Solve them. Handle them. Render them impotent. And God will if you let God. It's a moment-to-moment decision to live in faith, not fear.

Our Operators Are Standing By: This, my own self-penned slogan, could alternatively be titled "Reach Out (I'll Be There)." You can't work a program alone, but fortunately, help is always at hand between the meetings. Taped to my phone are the numbers of four crisis lines and a prayer line. Close by is the phone list for my meeting. Self-sufficiency dies hard, and it still takes utter desperation to prompt me to pick up the phone. I'm working on that, but if I can fight through my stubbornness I know that 24 hours a day someone is out there, willing to listen and wanting to help.

Ontario to "Relax" Liquor Laws

From cbc.ca:

"There's 'overwhelming' public support for Ontario to relax its liquor laws—something the provincial government will deliver this summer, said Attorney General Chris Bentley. Adults will soon have more freedom to wander around at festivals with a drink in hand under new provincial regulations, he said in an interview with The Canadian Press. No date has yet been set for their release, but the new rules should take effect in time for the summer, Bentley added. The public's chance to comment on the proposed changes ended May 1. While a few people disagreed with the idea, most supported it, he said. 'The overwhelming majority were for more flexibility,' Bentley said."

Guess who was one of the six nutters to disagree? Uh-huh. Sadly, society's attitudes toward drinking are where they were vis-à-vis smoking circa 1955: it's harmless, it's relaxing, it's stylish and everybody else is doing it, so what's your problem?

Interestingly, the article goes on to say that law enforcement officials—notably the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police—expressed concerns, "saying it could encourage underage drinking, create unsafe environments for families and logistical headaches for officers trying to enforce the law." This apparently led to the province to make some changes to their original proposal.

Read the full article here, and for the record, below is my letter to the minister.

-------------------------------------------------------

Dear Minister Bentley,

I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposed "modernization" of Ontario's liquor laws. As a non-drinker, I believe the province's liquor laws are already far too lax. Every day I am deluged by alcohol advertisements and the ubiquitous presence of liquor in Ontarian society. Government outlets such as the LCBO and Beer Store sell liquor and lifestyle part and parcel, their stylish veneer a cloak of denial obscuring the truth about the world's most dangerous drug.

The preceding statement is not mere opinion; science backs me up. A recent study by the World Health Organization found alcohol to be the world's leading killer, accounting for over 4% of all deaths annually. Several months ago, a study in The Lancet found alcohol to be far and away the most dangerous drug, both in terms of harm to individuals and to society as a whole. Based on The Lancet's figures, alcohol is in fact four times more harmful than tobacco, the McGuinty government's favourite whipping boy.

I can also speak of the devastating effects of alcohol from personal experience. As an adult child of alcoholics, liquor has wreaked havoc on my life—and I am a lifelong teetotaller. I invite you to read The Problem, a summary of  liquor's impact on those who grew up in families where alcohol abuse was rampant. Needless to say, these effects persist well into adulthood.

In summary, the laws you are seeking to change are not "outdated restrictions"; they are necessary measures to prevent drinkers from further encroaching upon the well-being of those who choose not to imbibe. If you refuse to tighten Ontario's liquor laws, I urge you to at the very least leave them alone.

My First Cuddle Party

“I’m Vern, and I’ve realized for quite some time that I have a serious touch deficit in my life. And I’m really nervous.” By way of introduction, those were my opening lines at my first Cuddle Party.

Picture fifteen pyjama-clad strangers at a yoga centre enfolded in pillows and blankets with a snack table in the far corner—those were our cuddle party environs. It’s kind of like a pyjama party for adults. Some of us, me included, wore T-shirts and track pants.

During the opening (“welcome circle”), among other things we were asked to pair off and answer the following questions: What’s your favourite sort of touch? What’s your least favourite? What are your boundaries around touch? If the questions took me aback, my answers flummoxed me even more—don’t know, don’t know, and don’t know. This was akin to asking me to rank my top five Yiddish phrases. I don’t speak Yiddish, and I don’t speak touch.

One of the CP rules states that your touch requests should be specific and you cannot proceed unless you receive a verbal yes. Corollary: if you mean yes, say yes. If you mean no, say no. If you’re not sure, say no. Straight away I couldn’t picture myself asking for anything that carried with it the slightest chance of inviting a no … which, it followed, meant anything at all. It quickly became clear that I wouldn’t be asking anyone to touch me or let me touch them, full stop. And for the next three hours, I didn’t.

But I stayed, and as if in reward for my tenacity one woman—I’ll call her Renata; svelte, long blonde hair in braids, to these eyes the most attractive of the five women in the room—asked if she and I could sit back to back. Without hesitation I said yes, and we had a nice conversation about places to live. I shared with her my London dreams; she said she’s content in Belleville for now. And I’d like to thank you, Renata, for sharing your back with mine for a few moments. As you said, “I could feel your vocal vibrations in my spine.”

Victories arising from the experience:

• Signing up for a Cuddle Party.
• Walking in the door.
• Staying for the whole thing, all three and a half hours, through a lot of discomfort.
• Staying present and just sitting with whatever came up, which mostly entailed noticing how blocked I am in the tactile department.

Work to do:

• Go to another Cuddle Party.
• Determine my personal hierarchy of touching, from safest to scariest. (This won’t be easy—another of today’s insights is the realization that my psyche considers “safe” and “touch” oxymorons, though the asking is scarier than the touch.)
• Ask at least one person to give me whatever is at the safe end of my list.
• Eventually—maybe at my third or fourth party—work my way up: either by asking more people to touch me in the way I feel safest or asking the same person for the next rung up.

Boundaries

What are boundaries? Boundaries delineate where we end and others begin, and are essential tools in the development of a healthy, recovered self. The following definitions, which are spot-on in my estimation, appear on a Gaia Community discussion board:

• The physical boundary has to do with our right to determine how close someone gets to us physically and how they interact with us physically. That can range from how close someone stands or sits to us, to whether we choose to allow a boss to touch our shoulder, to whom we choose to make love with and how.



• The emotional boundary is about our right to our feelings—without justifying them, without needing to make sense of them. Our feelings belong to us and we have a right to them.



• The mental boundary has to do with our right to think what we think, and to have our own beliefs and opinions, regardless of whether they're rational, in agreement with the latest statistics, or considered wrong or crazy by an outsider.



• The spiritual boundary is about our right to our own spiritual beliefs, regardless of how we were raised or what anyone else believes.

I raise this issue because recently, a well-meaning (and dear) friend expressed "concern" over my spiritual beliefs and practices. I gently but firmly pointed out that my relationship with my Higher Power—like that between any individual and the God/Goddess of his or her understanding—is private, personal, and sacred. My choosing to share certain aspects of my spirituality is not to be construed as a veiled invitation to critique.

Quotable

It is better to be hated for what you are

than to be loved for what you are not.

- André Gide (1869-1951)

When writer Sebastian Horsley uttered this gem on my radio today, I had to uncover its source. I've been thinking along these lines for some time (evidence of recovery, Cap'n!), but hearing it put so succinctly just floored me.

People-pleasers, rise up and claim thy true selves!

Freedom From Fear

I've had a rough patch over the holidays, with fear coming up over a variety of issues. Once I came through the worst of it and felt more centred, I wondered how to confront it. (It's slowly dawning on me that avoidance, my standard strategy, only makes things worse.) The initial response was to set myself a goal of taking one risk per day—large or small, doesn't matter. So far, so good: two days, two (smallish) risks.

I figured more research couldn't hurt, so I went to the library and borrowed Susan Jeffers' Feel the Fear ... and Do It Anyway. This is perhaps a quirk of mine, but when I read self-help books I always do three things:

1. Avoid all the exercises. They drive me nuts, slow me down, and hamper my learning. I'm a verbal learner, not a doer. I need to grasp the underlying concepts and integrate them with prior knowledge.
2. Distill the message to its essence. The simpler and more direct, the better.
3. Put the message in my own words.

Here are the results. I hope they're useful, both to myself and whoever might be reading:

FREEDOM FROM FEAR: TWELVE AXIOMS
(Adapted from Susan Jeffers, Feel the Fear ... and Do It Anyway)

1. Fear never goes away by itself.
   
2. Uncovering the root of my fear may lend insight, but it won’t remove the fear.


3. Paradox: avoiding fear creates more fear.


4. The only way to overcome fear of X is to go out and do X. (This can be a gradual process.)


5. Facing fear builds confidence. The more I do it, the more confident I’ll become.
   
6. Everyone feels fear. Some overcome it; some let it paralyze them. Which do I want to be?


7. Pushing through fear is never as scary as the paralysis that comes from giving in to fear. A risk-free life is death. Obsessive quests for security create insecurity.


8. Obvious dangers aside, fear generally does not signify retreat; it invites growth.


9. Underlying fear is a lack of faith. All fears boil down to "If I do this, I won’t be able to cope with what might happen." But I can; I always have. Therefore, there are no wrong decisions—only different sets of experiences, any of which I can handle.


10. In the big picture, it really doesn’t matter what I decide. Each choice simply creates a different experience. Experiences are neither good nor bad—they are what they are.


11. The correct answer to "What if?" is always "I'll handle it."
    
12. I can live in faith or in fear. When I am afraid, I have no faith. When I have faith, I have no fear.