rufuswhitman

I am not surprised to hear about that study. With each generation, our expectations rise. This is not (by itself) good or bad. A car with air conditioning used to be a luxury. A house with indoor plumbing used to be a luxury. Nowadays, such things are so commonplace as to be considered "standard", so then the next level of necessities come in. This has its perks and drawbacks, but I for one am happy to regularly have clean clothes, no serious illnesses, transportation, good food, etc., without having to spend the majority of the day providing them. RW

You don't think there would be any mothers anywhere in the world that would feel slighted if missionaries could call home only on Fathers' Day? I have doubts about that. Either way, just something to consider. To be absolutely fair and avoid even the impression of preferential treatment, the calls could simply be on a random day approximately six months away from Christmas. My original thought was motivated by a mild insensitivity in the Church towards men/fathers and an elevated sensitivity towards women/mothers. Example: want to be treated like a princess? Be pregnant in Provo. RW

At what point is a person evil vs. righteous? Each of us is imperfect, and therefore we have some good and some bad. We may be surprised to know how few righteous there are in the church and few evil there are in the world (and also how many). RW

Is there any difference between otoplasty for the ears, a tummy tuck, or getting braces on the teeth? Most people who get braces do so to improve their looks. Same with people dying their hair. The motivation behind them is the same. The only difference is one of degree. RW

... enough to lose a copyright dispute, that's for sure.

I appreciate what you are saying here. I would like to point out that when I was struggling, I experienced the exact same thing coming from fellow members. I, at that time, came away disappointed from the well-intentioned but ill-informed advice. RW

How much controversy do you think there would be if they had the calls take place only on Christmas and Fathers' Day? Just a thought... RW

To the OP: Skip the Herbal Magic Program or any other program that sells you anything. You can do everything you need for free. If you want to lose weight, you need to do the following: a) eat less. To make this easier, do this: b) keep track of everything you eat and record the calories c) improve the quality of your foods d) keep track of your weight e) realize your weight will fluctuate day to day f) over time, adjust what you eat for the desired rate of loss. g) be more active. This is recreation, which includes all aerobics, running, and sports. This is optional, but will speed up fat loss. h) exercise. This is just hard work intended to specifically make you stronger. This is optional also, but will speed up fat loss. You should be able to tell exactly how many calories you have eaten on a given day, or a weekly average, or a monthly average. Go as far down the list as you want to. You will lose simply from following "a" alone, but b-h will make it happen faster. The tips beyond h make only very minor differences. There are very many excellent books on this subject. Among the best are those that promote healthy eating of normal foods and contain a strength-oriented exercise component. Darden's books are a fine place to start. RW

Yes it can be said too often. Usually when it is said too often it is a sign of insecurity on the part of the speaker. Its use is a way of being needy. When said too often, its value gets watered down. It can become annoying as well, once the recipient realizes that the words are hollow wound licking for another person's instability. It is a symptom to a greater ill. Once the speaker is no longer saying it purely for the recipient's benefit is when the "too often" train starts. Unfortunately for them, most of the speakers who do it are not attempting to be self-aware enough to recognize their own motives. RW

I appreciate the point you are making here. I also want to point that marriage is often described as exactly that... the only way to be happy, and that if we are not married then we will never be happy, etc. The Provo Girls youtube video about how desperate Provo girls are to marry is a stereotype but is based on some truth. The reason for that feeling has to do with how marriage is described. To the OP, I wish I had any encouragement for you. You face a lifetime of people privately wondering what's the matter with you. I wish it were not so. Many will try to get to know you just well enough to decide what that flaw is, whether or not they are accurate. It is one of the least welcoming and least Christ-like behaviors I can think of, and yet it is everywhere. By recognizing you will face this, you can take steps to not letting their behavior affect you. RW

Simplest advice: Dump her. If the situation were reversed, where he decided immediately after marriage that he was never going to have a job, how long would she last? In such a case, we would all be disappointed that he would claim to care for her needs and then utterly neglect them. He is well within his rights to pursue a relationship that is uplifting and positive (just as she would be). If she does not want to be a part of that, then I would not encourage him to stay with her out of blind duty to a sinking ship. I don't know the situation well enough to say he ought to do this (or anything else)... only that it is an option, and why I think so. RW

Realize that he may seem like a baby because you don't feel what he does. Realize that when you are sick or emotional or upset, he may have to be a lot more tolerant than you have noticed, because at that moment he doesn't feel what you do. Pretty much universal truth is that one of the worst things for a marriage is when either spouse stops being on the other spouse's team... so remember that if he is sick you (as a couple) are sick. This could sound preachier than I intended it, which was just to be in the abstract. Be strong, patient, and tolerant, and you may find that he is all the more so next time you need it. RW

The longest lasting way to have a positive relationship with her: stop expecting her to measure up to anything. Always be on her team, never on anyone else's team against her. Accept her as-is. Be supportive of her finding peace in her own way and in her own time. I don't know which of these would be changes for you, as I don't know your behavior. However, the principles still apply. More so-called mixed marriages fall apart because of one spouse claiming right over the other spouse's feelings or actions than of mixed marriages where they will always be a team, no matter what. RW

To the OP, I would recommend changing your perspective on one point. You said "we just allowed Satan to tempt us." Your situation will likely be improved if you think of it as "he and I made a decision that we later regretted." It's much harder to block metaphorical temptation from an invisible enemy than it is to take responsibility for your own physical, tangible, real behavior. I believe it will benefit you to think of it this way instead. Nothing that you have said had is relevant to whether or not he or you should continue dating. Reread that sentence if necessary. Hope this helps RW

Not supposed to pair off ever? What authority is that claim based on? In addition, what sense does it make?

Okay, now there is something that we can work with. Some suggestions for the mother-in-law would include: a) listing what it was she wanted out of a son-in-law b) listing how the real son-in-law compares c) listing how many of those are based on her own preferences, not his flaws So far, it sounds like he is an innocent party that is being treated as guilty of violating some expectations that he didn't sign up for. The problem is in the expectations. It is unfair to have them, just like it would be unfair for him to have an expectation of a mother-in-law that showers them with money or that buys them drugs. You will note an increase in love for him when you accept him as a person, as-is. Then, on a clean sheet of paper, list: a) the son's talents, virtues, and interests, i.e. what the mother likes about him b) which of those talents, virtues, and interests she has genuine interest in c) keeping their conversations safely in those arenas where there is maximum agreement If this is non-hypothetical, then I understand it's difficult. Don't get me wrong. You don't have to like everything about him to like some of him and to care about his well-being. I have friends and family that I can care for and spend time with and enjoy our time together even though they behave in ways that, ahem, don't benefit anyone. I have siblings that I love, but I don't like very much, and yet we can get along well in our time together because we stay in those areas we have in common. Hope this helps. RW

If you want to change, do this: a) identify where you are now by measuring it b) keep track over time c) review what you have measured to see trends d) adjust as needed. e) don't beat yourself for temporary setbacks if you are making progress over time There are many people who "want to lose weight", for example. Most of them weigh the same amount 5 years later. There is a far higher success rate among people who weigh themselves regularly and keep a record. Many of them don't even have a "diet." If you want to quit smoking, keep track of how many you smoke per day, what times, and what types of circumstances lead you to want to smoke more or less. The same goes with profanity, or any other habit. What gets measured gets managed. RW

Whether she has spoiled her children or whether she "overdoes it" are both opinions. Neither is a valid complaint. What is not an opinion is that she talks on the phone during the day to her famil, and the talking affects your work. Their content may distract your focus from work, or their content may appeal to your humanity for the suffering she has. Either way, the conversations affect your work, and you would like to be able to focus on your work. This is a valid complaint. Whether or not you like her, support her, or anything else is irrelevant to the point. If you want to be Christ-like and can do so genuinely, then you may offer your support for outside of work. Whatever you do, do not tell her you really like her and care for her and are worried for her unless you have lost sleep worried about HER welfare, not yours nor her kids'. Most of the time, such comments are for the speaker's benefit, not the recipient's. Sample: "Jill, can I talk to you in private for a minute? ... When I am at work, I can often hear you on the phone talking with your family. This happens often enough that I find it harder to focus on my work. I do not want to make a fuss about it with supervisors, so I wanted to tell you directly. What do you suggest?"

... as a reminder, though, this does not mean the statement is inherently any more or less true... perhaps more likely true, but not inherently more true.

There are not many vehicles that can compete with Subaru's package, for what you need. It is possible that a smaller SUV like the Ford Escape may suit you, as they are available with full-time 4WD and still yield 23 mpg in steady highway driving (i.e. 55, not 75). The Subaru should yield 28 mpg in steady highway driving. The Ford Explorer is available with AWD, but will yield about 21 mpg steady highway. The Jeep Grand Cherokee will yield about 19 mpg steady highway. The Jeep Liberty is fairly popular and its short-lived diesel version yielded 25 mpg highway. However, there were far fewer of those made, so either of these diesels is likely to have more quirks than the Subaru. Toyota and Honda both have small SUV's as well, which may compare to the Subaru wagon. The RAV4 and CR-V, respectively, get good reviews. They may be comparable in price to the Forester, however. Most of the other AWD vehicles on the market will have decided disadvantages for you. The Audi is expensive to repair. The Volvo AWD system is AWD in name only, as it only has up to 5% transfer to the rear wheels, which is often inadequate. The Mercedes M-class has a fine AWD system and great technology, but are pricey to buy and own. If you move away from Subaru you move away from Subaru's AWD. There are only three symmetrical all-wheel drive systems I can think off in the market: 1) Subaru, which you have 2) Audi, which is pricey to buy and own (though people love them, don't get me wrong) 3) Hummer H1 (not as pump-friendly as the Subaru). If the Forester is prohibitively expensive, you may want to consider either buying an older one than you planned on, or running the numbers on owning two vehicles: a FWD sedan for typical running around, and a huge but cheap SUV that is a gas hog, used only when needed. It will depend on your needs and preferences. RW

Ignoring someone who is trying to incite you is a defensive tactic. If you are not threatened, then there is no need for defense. I can, and have, walked among protesters, asked questions, answered their questions, etc., and why would it ruffle my feathers? If someone wants to be rude to me, I end the conversation. If they want to talk, I'll listen. Please remember that many people who protest do believe what they are saying. If the lines of communication are closed, what are the chance of their having a positive experiences to replace their negative feelings? RW

To OP (I skipped a few pages of replies) Be kind to them as people and ignore their disagreements with you. To the degree they are open to considering your point of view, share it with them. To the degree their points have some truth, agree with the true part. You will never shove others into agreeing with you, and if they do... it won't last. RW

It is difficult to give a blanket answer to these questions without having a specific example, but here are some thoughts to consider: If something that is happening is not in your control: a) realize it is not in your control b) you do not have to like it, nor accept it, nor be happy with it c) nor should you feel guilty or responsible for it You change your perception in various ways, among them: a) learning more about what is happening outside of you (often found by reading what others have to say) b) learning more about what is happening inside of you (often found by writing them out) c) realizing that, as you learn, your conclusions will change How do you make what you think ought to happen fit with what is happening so you can be happy with what you have? a) you can control those things that are within your right to control b) relationships work better if you do not try to control those things that are not in your rights to control c) who says being happy with what you have is always desirable? More on this later. Can you simply choose to want something you don't? a) You can choose to want it. b) You won't want it, though, until you do. c) You may not ever want it. I do not know of anything that says there is anything the matter with preferring or liking one thing vs another. Society works better if people have things they like and dislike, and make them known. As to "being happy with what you have", this is an impossible question to answer as-is. Not liking what you have can motivate you to change what is rightfully within your influence to do so. For example, a woman may dislike that her daughter has chosen to marry a boy that the mother does not consider "good enough" for her daughter. There are all sorts of ways that she can try to exert influence--beg, plead, intervene, interfere, manipulate, scold, lecture, threaten. An important question the mother needs to answer is whether any part of her motivation has to do with herself. Will she feel like a bad mother if...? One principle to keep in mind is that you are responsible for the initiation and consequences of your own feelings and actions. Others are responsible or the initiation and consequences of their own feelings and actions. All manipulation, and most guilt, shame, and fear, are the result of people overlapping the above two responsibilities. What is it that you are not happy with? Before you figure out how to become happy with something, you need to figure out why you want to be. RW

Part of the issue may not be whether or not the LDS leaders are perfect, but whether they are treated as such by themselves and the members. If one leader says something that directly contradicts something said by another leader, the two ideas don't live together very well. On the one hand, there are very definitive pronouncements of doctrine. On the other hand, there are pronouncements of non-doctrine that become adopted as doctrine. On a third hand are pronouncements of non-doctrine that are never officially adopted as doctrine and yet treated as such. Unfortunately, there is no definitive way to know which is which, within the LDS framework. I'll use an example I don't care about, but which may illustrate the point. A young woman faces the choice of wanting to wear two pairs of earrings, but having been told to wear one set. Does she have an authoritative source to determine whether this is appropriate? Should she follow the leaders without answering the question herself? Should she pray about it and, if she reaches a different conclusion, repent? Should she pray about it and, if she feels it is appropriate for her to wear two pairs of earrings, trust that no one in the Church will second guess her personal inspiration? Should she question why one pair of earrings is even allowed? Is this a Celestial principle or a PR move? Is it doctrine or one leader's opinion? Should she ignore answering the question and do what she likes? Within the Church, she has no answer. She could spend years studying this question alone and not have answers. It seems the most LDS-accepted response to her (in practice if not officially) is "go ahead and study and pray about it until you reach the same conclusion and follow it, even though we may later look back and decide that it was probably one leader's opinion." This answer will likely be unpopular, but there is much evidence to support it. I have heard that Church leaders would not be permitted to let the Church stray so far as to keep us from the Celestial Kingdom. In other words, we could safely follow whatever the leaders say, even if it is wrong. The ramifications of that are beyond the scope of easy discourse.