The most interesting and useful piece of information in this story is buried towards the end: there is an app which implements a gamified version of ABMT therapy.
The BBC didn't even mention its name! From searching around it appears to be Personal Zen (iOS only): http://www.personalzen.com/
Don't know what kind of twisted priorities in the newsroom would focus a story like this on using anxiety to make a political point, versus putting the focus on a way people can treat their anxiety, but hey, that's probably just my anxiety speaking.
I just tried that app, but actually felt more stress because of the time pressure to find the one "good" guy vs the one "bad" guy (they only appear for a split second).
It would be more interesting to initially see one good guy surrounded by many bad guys. As you focus on the good guy, you are rewarded by producing more good guys and bad guys disappear. Instead of gamifying the experience, show the user that focusing on the good guys creates positive momentum.
For me it was the reverse: The first half of the article describing the warped perception is far more interesting to me than ABMT.
Having a mindfulness practice, I don't see ABMT as going to be anything more than a bandaid. That bandaid might have some temporary effects, but it doesn't address existential suffering at all.
Further: stuff like the Wim Hof (Iceman) breathing method has greater effect because it teaches your mind to gain awareness and control over your body's fight-or-flight response. It won't address the emotional and mental stuff (which therapy and mindfulness practice addresses), but it does teach your body not to spiral out with fight-or-flight responses, and gives you enough space to work with these emotions.
I was also thinking about it: what do I see when I see pictures of violence and threats? Maybe I am idiosyncratic, but when I look at it, I tend to feel a lot of pathos for the suffering involving both the aggressors and the victims rather than personalizing it as a threat to me. (That is, instead of thinking "OMG the world is not safe for me", it is "That's a lot of suffering we're inflicting on each other"). Having pleasant pictures is not enough. The deep mental programming also needs to be addressed.
I dont really see what this game can accomplish? Also the link to the scientific study, leads to a meanignless page. Perhaps its rather a placebo game.
Somewhat off topic, but if you are having anxiety issues, I strongly recommend the Headspace mobile app. While a lot of mindfulness apps have a lot of fluffy new-age tone to them, this one did not, and it also tends to introduce concepts at a very good pace (a little bit of things to try each day) which makes things memorable. By contrast, you may talk to someone and hear 100 things to do, and you'll explode trying to do them all.
Anyway, for me, it strikes the right balance. The trick here is more about learning to focus but also learning to completely percieve the feeling and know what it is, and then it's less strong than trying to always think about it - rather than identifying with it.
I would also recommend trying Calm - personally I preferred it to Headspace. Both teach a non-new agey version of Mindfulness Meditation, and there is plenty of science that shows it to have a lot of health benefits.
Intuitively, I would bet that radicals of all stripes are more prone to anxiety than the so-called moderates. In order to push for invasive solutions that are widely frowned upon by the rest of the populace (therefore treating your social standing and credibility), it helps if one experiences anxiousness about the status quo to the point where it ceases being an acceptable option.
This might be a good thing if your analysis and conclusions are right, or a very harmful thing if one gets any significant part wrong. Unfortunately, due to bell curves and human fallibility, some radicals will leave an outsized positive impact on society while the majority is either ineffective or counter-productive, occasionally causing harm in the process.
As often happens with humanity, people always think that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Anxiety and bias increase the chance that you're wrong. Radical approaches increase the chance that you will make a bigger impact. Be very careful when combining the two.
I would be curious to see a similar study oriented along a radical/moderate axis, rather than left-wing/right-wing. Of course, to be of real value, it'd need not to be n=20 psych undergrads, but I may as well wish for a pony while I'm at it.
>> "... know that you’re in good company. Actors like Jennifer Lawrence and Emma Stone, musicians such as The Beach Boys’ Brian Wilson and Taylor Swift ..."
Not quite the 'company' I had in mind when thinking about anxiety. If the article started out with 'medical residents' or other jobs that are stressful and anxiety-inducing because your ability to do your job correctly and quickly might mean someone else dies, or the success of the company rests on your performance, perhaps I'd take the article seriously. But actors and musicians? Sure, messing up means failure, and failure might mean lost contracts, disappointed fans, and having to let go of the great team of people that got you to success. But anxiety driven by success is not the 'company' that most people can relate to. It's having to perform duties that are put upon you by your job, society, and family that are hardest to deal with. If you're good at these things, you will be successful. But the long road to success is the hard part which causes most people anxiety. Not already achieving it like musicians and actors have. That's a different type of anxiety that most people can't relate to.
I'm sure you don't intend this, but this reads like you misunderstand the anxiety of many of us fundamentally: it's not rational. The fundamental hardship of anxiety for many of us is that we know that it's not rational, and can reason out why it shouldn't be causing such an extreme reaction, yet that doesn't remove the feeling where everything is closing in on you.
> not the 'company' that most people can relate to.
Putting a face to someone else who is struggling with the same issue is very helpful to a lot of us. And while I understand the point you are raising, I can't begrudge the author for not knowing someone I personally know to name here. If this were a profile of someone specific being used to highlight anxiety, then you'd have a point, but this is just a single sentence intended to offer faces familiar to the maximum number of readers.
I find it productive. It's a reminder that anyone we know who seems to have a successful, perfect life might actually be suffering. It lets regular people know they are not alone as some loser who is the only one struggling.
I suffer from regular anxiety issues and that line certainly helped. It reminded me that I am not the only one who has this. In fact, it is kind of "normal" because even celebrities have it.
When I am having these anxiety issues, it always makes me feel like I am the only one feeling like this. Good to know I am not.
Your quote from the article about celebrities is presumably referring to anxiety disorders (i.e. pathologic anxiety - as opposed to the "normal", sometimes helpful variety), though the article doesn't really differentiate clearly between the two.
Is the anxiety imposed upon actors and musicians by their chosen profession different in effect or feeling than the anxieties imposed by other professions?
My son feels anxiety about trying new things. Does that differ from the anxiety I feel about what happens to my family if my job goes away, or that an actor feels about performing poorly? Do the effects on related things differ?
Anxiety is a form of fear, and that's pretty much universal.
Many people look up to celebrities to some degree or another - often in the context of "if my life weny a little differently, maybe that could have been me", and can find comfort in realizing that they have the same feelings in spite of how successful they are - more comfort than knowing that their neighbor feels the same anxiousness about the same things they do.
This is also why celebrity gossip is a thing - it shows that these people are human too, with the same weaknesses as the rest of us.
This article seems to be about a correlation between anxiety and right wing views, which is fine, but obviously not the whole story; generally speaking the opposite is more likely if we're talking anxiety disorders, not just general anxiety[0].
The single anecdote of 'conservatives look at offensive pictures more frequently' is extrapolated to mean that they are irrationally anxious about the future. This is not to mention that this entire line of reasoning is based on the premise that conservatives are looking at 'aversive images' out of fear/anxiety.
There is nothing wrong with rational fear of future possibilities, it is an important and integral aspect of how we make decisions about the future.
Yes. I've been reading/doing a workbook [1] to help improve my anxiety symptoms. In addition to depersonalization, it teaches cognitive reappraisal [2]. They are both helping me a great deal.
I know a guy who often talks about conspiracy. I would not be surprised to hear that he has acute anxiety issues.
There are mentally sane people who commit crimes because of their belief system, but anxiety could seem to explain why they would go so far with their belief.
For example I don't really like capitalism and i prefer socialism, but those are just ideas, i use them with caution.
I'd like to see more discussion about anxiety being fairly justified even in the modern world. Not necessarily useful, but also not unfounded.
The right wing lean surprises me. I guess it depends on where your anxiety is focused on. I'm much more anxious about systems, mobs, and the economy than terrorists.
Our lifestyles, particularly in major cities, seem to demand constant anxiety by their very nature. I could certainly envision building a city from the ground up that reduces anxiety.
While differentiating between "good" and "bad" images may seem like an idea that has potential to work, I think it may be pointless to device obvious ways to use placebo effects on the brain. I think training yourself to think critically reduces the chance of your brain falling for poorly-designed tricks.
The biggest takeaway from the article for me was simply the fact that anxiety drastically changes your reality. That is both motivation to find ways to curtail the anxiety even if it hasn't scientifically proven to be "curable" and reason to believe that the anxious brain is not "defective" but has simply been made to focus on the wrong set of thoughts. Here are some ways I dealt with it:
1. I changed my area of research (I am a grad student).
2. I got out of a bad relationship.
I said the above to point out the fact that the anxiety may have such blatantly obvious causes for some people. It really helps to sit down and identify each scenario that makes you anxious and try to understand what you can change about your life (no matter how overwhelmingly drastic the change is) to react more calmly in each of these situations.
For example, I had terrible (and still have but more mildly)
anxiety in moving vehicles and my heart races and ugly panic grips me, when the vehicle accelerates. I never stopped to think what was causing it because my hypersensitive brain refused to think
deeply during travel time and even after because simulating
travel was enough to trigger it.
I made myself believe that making said dramatic changes in my life would reduce the impact of the motion-stimulated anxiety. I figured that when panic struck me on the bus, I would tell myself that if I could transform my life or at least try my hardest to, I could get over this meaningless panic.
That's how I manage each situation that causes anxiety: by rationalizing as best as I can, by identifying the root causes of my panic and by attacking those root causes with logic. I think this requires strength and unfortunately, I could find no easier way to make myself feel better. For example, talking to a therapist or transferring the anxiety to/hoping for support from people I loved turned out to be much less effective.
Then again, anxiety is very common so panicking at the panic is the first such scenario that must be rationalized away. We do a lot of hard things in everyday life for the purposes of leading a fuller life. Until such a time as a reliable map of the brain is drawn and effective, scientific, non-intrusive ways to change our perception
emerge (which may not happen in our lifetimes), establishing a camaraderie with the stubborn brain, through patient rationalization, may be all we have.
This is just my opinion and I really hope it helps someone like me.
Try this right now: Pick an emotion. Fear, anger, etc. Now, using logic, make yourself feel that emotion. How did it go? I picked fear. I reasoned myself into feeling a little bit worried, but I sure didn't experience actual fear. So why do we think we can reason ourselves out of emotions?
Something that has been helpful for me is the idea of the 'Wise' mind. How individuals deal with experience like anxiety (or anything else) falls on a spectrum. On one end is the 'logical' mind, much like you described. On the other is the 'emotional' mind. In the middle is the Wise mind. I spent most of my life far into the logical side of the spectrum, and the most useful thing I've ever done for my anxiety is shifting more into the center.
Most of your post focuses on training yourself to think critically and using logic to treat anxiety. I've spent many years working on my anxiety with various techniques and therapists. The common factor among all the things that did help was that you can't just use logical thinking to fix anxiety! We may use logic all day at work to fix problems, but you simply cannot reason yourself out of experiencing anxiety.
Emotions play a huge role in anxiety and really cannot be ignored or just reasoned away. They need to be experienced. They need to be felt and expressed. And once they are, logic is a useful tool, as you said, to dive into them and think more about why you are feeling that way.
This is also my opinion, and I'm glad you have the logical portion figured out. But please don't ignore the illogical, emotional aspect. It's trickier and messier, but it can be figured out.
This is an article essentially about how anxiety affects political views, so here's my experience on that matter.
I'm an independent that leans conservative especially on fiscal but also somewhat on social issues, and I know that my worry plays a part in it.
I've voted for independents, Libertarians, Republicans, and Democrats in past presidential elections, and plan to vote Democrat this year, and I will do so because of my worry about the Republican candidate. This candidate is unpredictable, and is focused on the wrong side of issues that I care about. I'm a compassionate person, and the candidate is not. I'm also a Christian, and the candidate is the antithesis of the behavior and goals I would hope to have in my country's leader. And of course, I think that a woman should have a chance at leading our country, even if she's not the one that I'd chose typically. So, my anxiety will play a part in the election, but not in the way this article would suggest.
It's an article that tries, not very subtly, to associate conservative political views with anxiety disorders. Pathologizing opinions is a tactic with a long and unlovely history (cf. "sluggish schizophrenia" under the Soviet regime) and one which I find considerably more concerning than the current electoral cycle. The republic is stronger than a corrupt apparatchik and a real estate swindler. But treating dissent as disease can get ugly fast.
And of course, I think that a woman should have a chance at leading our country, even if she's not the one that I'd chose typically.
This I find the worst argument for her presidency imaginable. "I am so virtuous and anti-sexist that I prefer the female candidate for being female" It's pure sexism. You stop being sexist when you leave the gender out of the equation. Completely.
I'm with you, with the exception, of, 'I think a women should have a chance a leading our country-'
I used to think that way. Give them a chance. After Margret Thatcher, I changed my mind. Women are just as ruthless, egotistical, quick to war, as men. That lady ruined the "A women wouldn't act like a man." argument.
I too suffer form anxiety. It really affected the quality of my life.
As a moderately anxious person I have a completely different internal experience on an American subway vs. one in Tokyo. I have almost no anxiety in Tokyo. Why? it is one of the safest big cities in the world. Theft, terrorism, assault, and general creepiness are almost non-existent and everyone knows it and behaves accordingly.
In contrast, you have to be much more aware on American mass transit to avoid problems. American mass transit is far more dangerous than in Tokyo and it is almost instantly apparent to anyone paying attention. You'd be a fool not have situational awareness on an American subway because there is a higher probability of personal harm.
> In contrast, you have to be much more aware on American mass transit to avoid problems.
Okay, but does that have to translate into anxiousness? Paying attention to things, even looking out for potential risks, doesn't have to feel negative IMHO.
Consider the difference between "hmm, that guy seems to be on drugs and could be armed, I wonder if I'll only get wounded, or if he'll actually kill me" and thinking, as you slightly shift position to something more useful while pretending to not notice the person you're bracing yourself for: "okay, so when this guy thinks he's attacking me from behind, as I watch his reflection in the window, and just before I ram my heel into his nutsack with the force of a thousand subway trains: which one of these people, who will all no doubt fawn over my heroic move and rush over to see if I'm okay, will I grin at, look deeply in the eye and ask out for dinner?".
It's the same situation, just day dreaming near an unarmed guy who won't do anything; but one actually gives you energy, the other drains it, for no purpose. Of course the example is exaggerated, but still, being scared doesn't help you at all, some might even say that's exactly what would attract an evildoer, like blood in the water attracts piranhas. They want victims, not challenges.
IMHO anxiety isn't a defense mechanism, it's a leak, an inefficiency. I don't know if the word comes from "angst", but fear and angst are two very different things. That is, one is a thing, the other is just a black hole which can swallow up all sorts of things. I don't mean this in a finger waggling kind of way, but more in a "you deserve even better" sort of way. I have sympathy for anxious people, but not for anxiety, I think it's a poison.
All the best for you and all, if nothing else, take it in that spirit. (I'm correct though :P)
I've been in subway systems all over the world, including tokyo and new york, and I never felt particularly anxious on a NYC subway, at least during the day.
This sounds like a specific anxiety related to your feelings of personal safety. This is absolutely something that triggers anxiety, but there are many, many other forms. For example, if you suffered from claustrophobia-related anxiety, Tokyo would not solve your issues at all.
[+] [-] apatters|9 years ago|reply
The BBC didn't even mention its name! From searching around it appears to be Personal Zen (iOS only): http://www.personalzen.com/
Don't know what kind of twisted priorities in the newsroom would focus a story like this on using anxiety to make a political point, versus putting the focus on a way people can treat their anxiety, but hey, that's probably just my anxiety speaking.
[+] [-] jontayesp|9 years ago|reply
It would be more interesting to initially see one good guy surrounded by many bad guys. As you focus on the good guy, you are rewarded by producing more good guys and bad guys disappear. Instead of gamifying the experience, show the user that focusing on the good guys creates positive momentum.
[+] [-] brynedwards|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hosh|9 years ago|reply
Having a mindfulness practice, I don't see ABMT as going to be anything more than a bandaid. That bandaid might have some temporary effects, but it doesn't address existential suffering at all.
Further: stuff like the Wim Hof (Iceman) breathing method has greater effect because it teaches your mind to gain awareness and control over your body's fight-or-flight response. It won't address the emotional and mental stuff (which therapy and mindfulness practice addresses), but it does teach your body not to spiral out with fight-or-flight responses, and gives you enough space to work with these emotions.
I was also thinking about it: what do I see when I see pictures of violence and threats? Maybe I am idiosyncratic, but when I look at it, I tend to feel a lot of pathos for the suffering involving both the aggressors and the victims rather than personalizing it as a threat to me. (That is, instead of thinking "OMG the world is not safe for me", it is "That's a lot of suffering we're inflicting on each other"). Having pleasant pictures is not enough. The deep mental programming also needs to be addressed.
[+] [-] crazydoggers|9 years ago|reply
http://www.biasmodification.com/
[+] [-] wineisfine|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] etiene|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ghgfhgfhn|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] mpdehaan2|9 years ago|reply
Anyway, for me, it strikes the right balance. The trick here is more about learning to focus but also learning to completely percieve the feeling and know what it is, and then it's less strong than trying to always think about it - rather than identifying with it.
[+] [-] andreyk|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 300bps|9 years ago|reply
It gives you some good methods but as the program says over and over it is not a panacea and requires a lot of work.
I think I've benefited from it but not as much as I'd hoped.
[+] [-] etiene|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jpetso|9 years ago|reply
This might be a good thing if your analysis and conclusions are right, or a very harmful thing if one gets any significant part wrong. Unfortunately, due to bell curves and human fallibility, some radicals will leave an outsized positive impact on society while the majority is either ineffective or counter-productive, occasionally causing harm in the process.
As often happens with humanity, people always think that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Anxiety and bias increase the chance that you're wrong. Radical approaches increase the chance that you will make a bigger impact. Be very careful when combining the two.
[+] [-] throwanem|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gaius|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] degenerate|9 years ago|reply
Not quite the 'company' I had in mind when thinking about anxiety. If the article started out with 'medical residents' or other jobs that are stressful and anxiety-inducing because your ability to do your job correctly and quickly might mean someone else dies, or the success of the company rests on your performance, perhaps I'd take the article seriously. But actors and musicians? Sure, messing up means failure, and failure might mean lost contracts, disappointed fans, and having to let go of the great team of people that got you to success. But anxiety driven by success is not the 'company' that most people can relate to. It's having to perform duties that are put upon you by your job, society, and family that are hardest to deal with. If you're good at these things, you will be successful. But the long road to success is the hard part which causes most people anxiety. Not already achieving it like musicians and actors have. That's a different type of anxiety that most people can't relate to.
[+] [-] the_watcher|9 years ago|reply
> not the 'company' that most people can relate to.
Putting a face to someone else who is struggling with the same issue is very helpful to a lot of us. And while I understand the point you are raising, I can't begrudge the author for not knowing someone I personally know to name here. If this were a profile of someone specific being used to highlight anxiety, then you'd have a point, but this is just a single sentence intended to offer faces familiar to the maximum number of readers.
[+] [-] WhitneyLand|9 years ago|reply
One example is Elizabeth Vargas. She looks perfectly professional and in control on TV, when actually decades of anxiety have cost her dearly: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/abc-news-anchor-elizabeth-varga...
[+] [-] chrisper|9 years ago|reply
When I am having these anxiety issues, it always makes me feel like I am the only one feeling like this. Good to know I am not.
[+] [-] eivarv|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] GrinningFool|9 years ago|reply
My son feels anxiety about trying new things. Does that differ from the anxiety I feel about what happens to my family if my job goes away, or that an actor feels about performing poorly? Do the effects on related things differ?
Anxiety is a form of fear, and that's pretty much universal.
Many people look up to celebrities to some degree or another - often in the context of "if my life weny a little differently, maybe that could have been me", and can find comfort in realizing that they have the same feelings in spite of how successful they are - more comfort than knowing that their neighbor feels the same anxiousness about the same things they do.
This is also why celebrity gossip is a thing - it shows that these people are human too, with the same weaknesses as the rest of us.
[+] [-] ZoF|9 years ago|reply
The single anecdote of 'conservatives look at offensive pictures more frequently' is extrapolated to mean that they are irrationally anxious about the future. This is not to mention that this entire line of reasoning is based on the premise that conservatives are looking at 'aversive images' out of fear/anxiety.
There is nothing wrong with rational fear of future possibilities, it is an important and integral aspect of how we make decisions about the future.
[0]-http://neuropolitics.org/Anxiety-Depression-and-Goal-Seeking...
[+] [-] dwaltrip|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] amelius|9 years ago|reply
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depersonalization
[+] [-] heimatau|9 years ago|reply
[1] - https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/160623918X/ref=oh_aui_sear...
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_reappraisal
[+] [-] don_draper|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jokoon|9 years ago|reply
There are mentally sane people who commit crimes because of their belief system, but anxiety could seem to explain why they would go so far with their belief.
For example I don't really like capitalism and i prefer socialism, but those are just ideas, i use them with caution.
[+] [-] projektir|9 years ago|reply
The right wing lean surprises me. I guess it depends on where your anxiety is focused on. I'm much more anxious about systems, mobs, and the economy than terrorists.
[+] [-] cylinder|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hosh|9 years ago|reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12606829
That is the HN posting of an article about how the poverty mindset still persists.
[+] [-] nishac|9 years ago|reply
The biggest takeaway from the article for me was simply the fact that anxiety drastically changes your reality. That is both motivation to find ways to curtail the anxiety even if it hasn't scientifically proven to be "curable" and reason to believe that the anxious brain is not "defective" but has simply been made to focus on the wrong set of thoughts. Here are some ways I dealt with it:
1. I changed my area of research (I am a grad student). 2. I got out of a bad relationship.
I said the above to point out the fact that the anxiety may have such blatantly obvious causes for some people. It really helps to sit down and identify each scenario that makes you anxious and try to understand what you can change about your life (no matter how overwhelmingly drastic the change is) to react more calmly in each of these situations. For example, I had terrible (and still have but more mildly) anxiety in moving vehicles and my heart races and ugly panic grips me, when the vehicle accelerates. I never stopped to think what was causing it because my hypersensitive brain refused to think deeply during travel time and even after because simulating travel was enough to trigger it.
I made myself believe that making said dramatic changes in my life would reduce the impact of the motion-stimulated anxiety. I figured that when panic struck me on the bus, I would tell myself that if I could transform my life or at least try my hardest to, I could get over this meaningless panic.
That's how I manage each situation that causes anxiety: by rationalizing as best as I can, by identifying the root causes of my panic and by attacking those root causes with logic. I think this requires strength and unfortunately, I could find no easier way to make myself feel better. For example, talking to a therapist or transferring the anxiety to/hoping for support from people I loved turned out to be much less effective.
Then again, anxiety is very common so panicking at the panic is the first such scenario that must be rationalized away. We do a lot of hard things in everyday life for the purposes of leading a fuller life. Until such a time as a reliable map of the brain is drawn and effective, scientific, non-intrusive ways to change our perception emerge (which may not happen in our lifetimes), establishing a camaraderie with the stubborn brain, through patient rationalization, may be all we have.
This is just my opinion and I really hope it helps someone like me.
[+] [-] devilsavocado|9 years ago|reply
Something that has been helpful for me is the idea of the 'Wise' mind. How individuals deal with experience like anxiety (or anything else) falls on a spectrum. On one end is the 'logical' mind, much like you described. On the other is the 'emotional' mind. In the middle is the Wise mind. I spent most of my life far into the logical side of the spectrum, and the most useful thing I've ever done for my anxiety is shifting more into the center.
Most of your post focuses on training yourself to think critically and using logic to treat anxiety. I've spent many years working on my anxiety with various techniques and therapists. The common factor among all the things that did help was that you can't just use logical thinking to fix anxiety! We may use logic all day at work to fix problems, but you simply cannot reason yourself out of experiencing anxiety.
Emotions play a huge role in anxiety and really cannot be ignored or just reasoned away. They need to be experienced. They need to be felt and expressed. And once they are, logic is a useful tool, as you said, to dive into them and think more about why you are feeling that way.
This is also my opinion, and I'm glad you have the logical portion figured out. But please don't ignore the illogical, emotional aspect. It's trickier and messier, but it can be figured out.
[+] [-] known|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sundvor|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] watermoose|9 years ago|reply
I'm an independent that leans conservative especially on fiscal but also somewhat on social issues, and I know that my worry plays a part in it.
I've voted for independents, Libertarians, Republicans, and Democrats in past presidential elections, and plan to vote Democrat this year, and I will do so because of my worry about the Republican candidate. This candidate is unpredictable, and is focused on the wrong side of issues that I care about. I'm a compassionate person, and the candidate is not. I'm also a Christian, and the candidate is the antithesis of the behavior and goals I would hope to have in my country's leader. And of course, I think that a woman should have a chance at leading our country, even if she's not the one that I'd chose typically. So, my anxiety will play a part in the election, but not in the way this article would suggest.
[+] [-] throwanem|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FreeFull|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kenji|9 years ago|reply
This I find the worst argument for her presidency imaginable. "I am so virtuous and anti-sexist that I prefer the female candidate for being female" It's pure sexism. You stop being sexist when you leave the gender out of the equation. Completely.
[+] [-] icantdrive55|9 years ago|reply
I used to think that way. Give them a chance. After Margret Thatcher, I changed my mind. Women are just as ruthless, egotistical, quick to war, as men. That lady ruined the "A women wouldn't act like a man." argument.
I too suffer form anxiety. It really affected the quality of my life.
[+] [-] solson|9 years ago|reply
As a moderately anxious person I have a completely different internal experience on an American subway vs. one in Tokyo. I have almost no anxiety in Tokyo. Why? it is one of the safest big cities in the world. Theft, terrorism, assault, and general creepiness are almost non-existent and everyone knows it and behaves accordingly.
In contrast, you have to be much more aware on American mass transit to avoid problems. American mass transit is far more dangerous than in Tokyo and it is almost instantly apparent to anyone paying attention. You'd be a fool not have situational awareness on an American subway because there is a higher probability of personal harm.
[+] [-] sotojuan|9 years ago|reply
If you're a guy, maybe.
[+] [-] PavlovsCat|9 years ago|reply
Okay, but does that have to translate into anxiousness? Paying attention to things, even looking out for potential risks, doesn't have to feel negative IMHO.
Consider the difference between "hmm, that guy seems to be on drugs and could be armed, I wonder if I'll only get wounded, or if he'll actually kill me" and thinking, as you slightly shift position to something more useful while pretending to not notice the person you're bracing yourself for: "okay, so when this guy thinks he's attacking me from behind, as I watch his reflection in the window, and just before I ram my heel into his nutsack with the force of a thousand subway trains: which one of these people, who will all no doubt fawn over my heroic move and rush over to see if I'm okay, will I grin at, look deeply in the eye and ask out for dinner?".
It's the same situation, just day dreaming near an unarmed guy who won't do anything; but one actually gives you energy, the other drains it, for no purpose. Of course the example is exaggerated, but still, being scared doesn't help you at all, some might even say that's exactly what would attract an evildoer, like blood in the water attracts piranhas. They want victims, not challenges.
IMHO anxiety isn't a defense mechanism, it's a leak, an inefficiency. I don't know if the word comes from "angst", but fear and angst are two very different things. That is, one is a thing, the other is just a black hole which can swallow up all sorts of things. I don't mean this in a finger waggling kind of way, but more in a "you deserve even better" sort of way. I have sympathy for anxious people, but not for anxiety, I think it's a poison.
All the best for you and all, if nothing else, take it in that spirit. (I'm correct though :P)
[+] [-] empath75|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the_watcher|9 years ago|reply