If you like what you read, consider donating to help me support my family.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Why you shouldn't jump on the bandwagon to cancel the Duggars

So there's a petition going around to cancel 19 Kids and Counting. I've only watched the show a little bit, but my mom absolutely LOVES the show. I can totally see why because its a wholesome show that emphasizes treating people with kindness and respect.

So, in my opinion, if you have never seen the show, you should NOT be allowed to sign any petitions to get rid of it!

But here's the crux of the situation: Michelle expressed a very real concern, and then suddenly everyone lost their minds thinking she was anti LGBTQ when she's not.

Here's a whole conversation I had on it on Facebook:

A friend posted a petition to have the show cancelled. A couple of her friends liked the post.

Woman 1 posts: Good!
Woman 2 Posts: just change the channel. They believe in something and stand up for it just as we all do. I dont agree with it but they have the right to believe as they wish

I post: Thank you ******. I'm getting sick of people who don't even watch a show petition to have it taken off the air because they have an unpopular opinion. What are we, in high school? I have watched this show and they are a very loving and kind family. The people petitioning to take this show off the air will be committing a grave crime if they have their way.
I'm firmly pagan and into free love - and freedom of everything for that matter - and even I am saying that this show should not be cancelled!


Woman 1 posts: When they are breeding hate it's a whole different story. Shall we be subjected to a kkk show as well?

I post: They are not breeding hate. Watch the show, they are breeding love and kindness.

Then I decided to try and clarify the situation by posting: Let me put it this way: I am a nudist. Let say I had a ton of money and poured that into campaigning for laws to make it legal to tan naked in public parks. Let's say that I even manage to get popular support. Should I then petition to remove anyone on TV who thinks that being naked is a bad thing? Should I claim they are spreading hate because they want people to wear clothes in parks?
No, I have my opinion and they have theirs. Just because an opinion is popular, doesn't mean that the unpopular opinion should be punished. Just my two cents...
 


Woman 1 posts: Quote from the article:
It specifically calls out matriarch Michelle Duggar for her efforts to stop an LGBT-inclusive antidiscrimination ordinance in Fayetteville, Ark. Over the summer, she recorded a robocall warning that if transgender people are all
owed to use the restroom most appropriate to their gender identity, it will enable sexual predators to assault women and children. The ordinance passed nonetheless, but now, Wissick says, the Duggars are bankrolling an attempt to repeal it.
“The Duggars have thrown massive amounts of money to repeal this law so business owners and land lords can evict and fire people solely over gender idenity and sexual orientation!” Wissick wrote in an update. “They need to be taken off the air!”


Then to reply to me directly, she posts: Agreed but that situation is NOT discriminatory against ppl being who they are from birth genetically. Being a nudist is a lifestyle preference. Big difference!

I post: So you would rather judge the show based on bad PR than on the actual merit of the show? I can totally believe that Michelle Duggar might believe that transgender people could pose a threat to normal people, but she would not be rude or mean to them in person. She would treat them with kindness and respect.
And I would argue that being a nudist is something a person is born with every bit as much as being bisexual or transgender is. All I am really saying is watch the show a lot AND THEN judge it. Do not believe every article that says something is bad if you haven't seen it yourself.
Peace and have a happy day - night, whatever, lol!
 


Woman 1 posts: I have watched it and all that is for the sake of the camera and a paycheck. I mean do we really watch tv shows and believe what we see is true? Cmon!

I was in the middle of typing up a post when she posted that, so I didn't really respond to it. But here's what I posted: Last thing, laws are very multifaceted. In one single proposed law you could have:
1 - the right to know what you are eating
2- Money to pay homeless veterans rent

3- A law to make it legal to shoot convicted sex offenders while in jail
4- And a suggestion to take away the right to defend yourself on your property if the person assaulting you is a different ethnicity.

If a person opposed just one part of the law, they would then have to oppose ALL of the law. So maybe they are against part 4, but then the media gets a hold of it and says: SO and SO voted AGAINST knowing what's in your food AND giving homeless veterans a place to live!!!
Now I know I have listed some fairly outlandish examples, but if you actually read every proposed law - especially when it comes to defense spending, they try to slip a LOT of bad shit in there.
So according the to article, Michelle has only ever expressed concerns about transgender people being molesters, but the media then made it into a much bigger issue by claiming that she opposed the REST of the bill too. She never said that. Not even in the article you quoted.


Woman 1 decides to add another article to prove her point: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5689840
She is spreading ignorance and fear lumping transgendered and pedophiles into the same category. Are women not able to violate young girls? Her argument is ridiculous

By her standards, nudists should be able to be fired or evicted because there's a chance they might reveal themselves in an inappropriate place or around minors like in the bathrooms.


Except that it actually proves MY point (I'll get to that in a bit). I post:  I totally agree that her argument is ridiculous! I know trans people and they are usually very sensitive and loving people. I think that Michelle is in the wrong by saying that they are likely to be pedophiles. I never argued with that. All I am saying is that she is entitled to her opinion and that just because it is unpopular, it is being blown way out of proportion. I myself will always vote FOR LGBTQ rights, but she shouldn't have to change her beliefs because people don't like it.

Woman 2 comes back into the conversation: They believe what the majority of Christians do. The only difference is they have a tv show so what they believe is openly out there. I don't agree with their stance on the LGBT community but again they have a right to their beliefs. My daughter is a lesbian so it does hit home for her and our family. If you throw the hate logic out there then most of the reality television shows should be canceled as they do spill hate on different topics. imo

Woman 1 posts a response to my last post: No she shouldn't but she is using tv money to push her agenda

So here's where I get around to explaining why the article she posted actually proves my point: Again, she never said anything about firing or evicting, here are her exact words: Hello, this is Michelle Duggar. I’m calling to inform you of some shocking news that would affect the safety of Northwest Arkansas women and children. The Fayetteville City Council is voting on an ordinance this Tuesday night that would allow men – yes, I said men – to use women's and girls' restrooms, locker rooms, showers, sleeping areas and other areas that are designated for females only. I don’t believe the citizens of Fayetteville would want males with past child predator convictions that claim they are female to have a legal right to enter private areas that are reserved for women and girls. I doubt that Fayetteville parents would stand for a law that would endanger their daughters or allow them to be traumatized by a man joining them in their private space. We should never place the preference of an adult over the safety and innocence of a child. Parents, who do you want undressing next to your daughter at the public swimming pool’s private changing area?

She is simply concerned that a convicted sex offender will use the excuse of being transgender to go into a women's bathroom or locker room and molest people. I can see that as being a valid concern no matter WHAT you believe about transgender. I believe trans to be beautiful people. Never the less, pedophiles will take advantage of this law if they can.

Once more, Michelle herself never said anything else. But because she is opposed to THIS part of the law, people are claiming that she WANTS people to get fired or evicted for being trans. She never said that!


Woman 1 understands me, but basically agrees to disagree: Until I see just as much effort on her part saying I have no problem with trans folks, I just worry about my kids safety from this MINOR possibly. ...I will continue to believe this to be a pr smoke screen because she can't just come out and say trans ppl and gays are bad

I liked her statement because I do actually agree with her in that I believe this whole thing to be a smoke screen to distract from the REAL issues.

Woman 2 ends the conversation with this: ******, i can understand your worries especially with the restroom issues  

So if you have made it to the end of the conversation, you'll realize that people have taken what Michelle Duggar actually said WAY OUT of context. I still firmly believe that the show is a great show and should not be cancelled. I also challenge YOU to actually watch the show for at least 10 episodes before you even consider signing a petition to have it cancelled based off of bad PR and political smoke screens. Base your decision off the actual merits of the show, NOT what every one says happened.

Good night all! 

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

What is erotica anyway?

So today I had a comment on my blog from what appeared to be a real person. This made me so happy at first because I don't get near enough comments on my blog. But then, I read the comment...

It was the first 3 sentences of a story with a link to read the rest. I deleted it within a second. WHY? Because it was pornographic.

Whoa whoa wait? What? I deleted something for being pornographic?!?! I know y'all are confused by this because - lets face it - I have plenty of things on my blog that contain, describe, or somehow feature sex. I'm probably the last person people would expect to be mildly offended by someone posting porn on my blog, but I am.

Why?

Well, here's the thing, I'm kind of a grammar snob. I am a writer in the true sense, meaning I devote a lot of time and effort into creating something that most people will enjoy. I add graphic sex scenes to some of my writing because I fully believe that sex is a big part of life and that no story talking about someone's life would be complete without a little - or a lot - of sex.

In short, I do write some erotica, and I'm pretty good at it, but it's not the only thing I write.

So wait, back up. What exactly IS erotica?

Let's take three types of stories and compare them. Romance, erotica, and pornography.

Pornography is probably the easiest to describe. Here's an example:

He walked into the room and saw her in the middle of getting undressed, so he walked over to her, lifted her into his arms, tossed her on the bed, and proceeded to fuck her until the headboard banged into the wall. She was naturally delighted and moaned and gasped out her pleasure repeatedly. The fucking took all day, and then when he had finally gotten his rocks off, he left her in bed while he went home.

The entire story exists ONLY for sex and it is graphically described (maybe not so graphic in my example paragraph), but it has no real emotion to it. It's usually a product for men to read or watch so they can masturbate to it. From beginning to end, it has no story but sex, and if it does have a story, it's only to explain why this sex is new and different or enviable.

ROMANCE - on the other hand - is a story that talks about how the couple met, the things they did, and how everyone felt. The story revolves around them falling in love and very likely overcoming some obstacles to be together. It may contain sex, and heck! Very often contains graphic sex. But the sex is not the crux of the story. It's not the reason the story exists.

Erotica is fairly hard to categorize because it is a mixture of the other two genres. It usually has a story, but the story either revolves around sex or it relies heavily on sex to fill the gaps in the plot. It could go something like this:

A man and woman met for the first time because they were set up on a blind date. Both had fun on the date and found the other person funny, but they felt no beginning pangs of love. After a couple of hours, they ran out of things to do but didn't really want to go home and be alone, so they decided to go back to his place and have sex. The sex turned out to be epic, so they had more sex. Then, the next morning, they decided to exchange numbers and call each other if they ever wanted a booty call. For the rest of the story, they run into troubles finding love, so they hook up to have sex at least once a chapter. By the end of the story, they might actually be together, but their story was based on sex and love happened to be the product.

So, to recap: Pornography equals no real story for the sake of sex. Romance equals story for the sake of love, and erotica equals an actual story for the sake of sex, complete with plot that makes sense but isn't intended to have the characters fall in love.

A LOT of times - especially in my writing - romance and erotica end up being the same thing, lol! But the most important thing of all is that I as the author get to decide what category my story falls into, lol!

So anyway, the reason I am against pornography posted to my blog is this: I want a story. I want the characters to get to know each other and fall in love - or at the very least a very solid friendship. I want my readers to be happy and feel good after they read one of my stories (most of the time, lol). I also know that there are times when a reader wants to read something without sex, so I have separated my stories into sections for that very reason.

So yes, it did actually mildly offend me when a man posted pornography on my blog. Sigh... Anyway, rant over. Have a happy day :-D

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Another Sunday Night Photoshoot

Why do we always end up doing the naughty stuff on Sunday? Lol! 

Okay well someone asked me to post a couple more of the pics that I took on this past Sunday night, and while some of them are a bit TOO nude for me to want to post anywhere online, some of them I actually am comfortable with sharing... Just so long as you understand that there is nudity involved :-)

WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS NUDITY, DO NOT SCROLL DOWN IF YOU ARE OFFENDED BY NUDITY, DO NOT READ MY BLOG AT ALL IF YOU ARE OFFENDED BY NUDITY!!!

I'll start this post out with a pic of me fully clothed because I'm pretty with my clothes on too, lol!

This was a simple test shoot to check the lighting, but it turned out pretty good :-)
I'm going to work into the nudity slowly to give y'all time to prepare, lol! Remember, you will be seeing rolls of fat, lol

An unplanned shot of Blizzard the Snake :-)

He apparently liked my necklace, although my husband says he just wanted a better view of my ladies, lol!
Okay, I know at least a couple of you are protesting: Stop editing out the ladies, damnit! You tease!
So here's another shot of the same pic that shows quite clearly that I am not joking when I say that my breasts hang down to my knees, lol!


The next pic is of my and a different snake - also topless :-)

Rubix the Corn Snake :-)

Now that you've seen me topless, I have a couple others I like that don't have a snake to distract y'all, lol!

It's a FRANKENSWEATER! I was so damn excited!

I love the expression on my face :-)
And that's all for now. I do have a couple more pics that I might post later on, BUT they feature someone else in a state of undress, and I have to get permission from her first before I can even think about posting them. It's called consent, ya know?

Have a happy day!

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Warning: Unpopular Opinion Alert

So I read this article: http://nypost.com/2014/10/21/ex-gym-teacher-busted-for-having-sex-romps-with-student/

I resisted reading it at first because I just knew it was going to piss me off, and I was right. It did...

I know, you're thinking: "How dare that teacher take advantage of her student like that! She should be severely punished! She deserves what she gets!"

Yeah... that's NOT why I'm pissed. Let's take the whole teacher student thing out of the picture and think of it like this:

A woman meets and spends a lot of time with a man. Over time, their relationship develops into something more and they fall in love. Let's say she's purple and he's chartreuse, so people think that they don't belong together. People try to pull them apart and shame them for being together. People get mad that they are in love and happy.

Oh go eff yourselves people! It's nobody's business but theirs. They are in LOVE!!!

But he's 16 and she's 24! She should have known better!

Yeah and so? When was the last time your heart didn't fall in love with someone because you should have known better? May as well say that he's an alcoholic and she should have known better than to fall in love with him. It doesn't work like that.

At 16, he's old enough to consent to sex. He's old enough to want it, and he's old enough to brag about it to all his friends. He was in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM RAPED!! Poll all the 16 year old boys and ask them if they want to have sex with their prettiest teacher. What do you think the answer will be?

So basically, you are saying that it is illegal for Purple female to love Chartreuse male because it makes you uncomfortable. I say grow up! The only person that should have the right in this case to even consider pressing charges is the 16 year old boy. I am willing to bet that all he really wants is for the government to drop their charges and let his girlfriend go.

But there's 8 years difference in their age! The relationship could never last!

Well, you may be right about that but so what? Most relationships don't last until death do they part. At least give them a chance to try it. Maybe they'd be one of the lucky couples that lasts forever. I think it is really stupid and selfish on the part of the government to make them go through years of hell for being a horny couple experiencing the first rush of new love. Effin' prudes...

And then there's this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/10/teacher-may-be-pregnant-with-teen-baby/17030889/

Finally, let's not forget that in this famous case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Kay_Letourneau

The couple got married when she got out of jail. SOOOOO, instead of letting them be together and raise their children, the state had to be an asshole about it, tear them apart, and put them through hell for years before they could no longer interfere. It makes me so mad! Let me repeat, they were in LOVE!!! There's absolutely no rhyme or reason to love, and there should be no laws about it either.

Don't get me wrong. In cases where an adult really does sexually assault a child, they should be forcibly neutered (spayed) and tossed in jail to rot, but these were not cases of abuse, these were cases of love. By all accounts, Mary Kay and Villi are still married, and so do prove the point that sometimes people fall in love very young and stay in love despite all odds.
http://askville.amazon.com/Mary-Kay-Letourneau-Vili-Fualaau/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=18985540

Anyway, I just had to get that off my chest. NO, I am NOT advocating regular sex between adults and young teens, but I do however have the open mind necessary to be enraged that the law would rather ruin these people's lives than allow for the possibility that no crime has occurred.

Lastly, has anyone else noticed something strange that all these female teachers who sleep with their students have in common? They're all... Catholic... Just an observation.

Sunday, October 12, 2014

4 Ingredient, No Bake, No Crust Cheesecake (Or Wontons!)

This is my super simple cheesecake recipe. I shouldn't have carbs, so I do not use a crust, however, you could very easily use a premade or homemade crust if you wanted.

For the cheesecake, you'll need:
- Two 8 oz packages of cream cheese. I prefer to use organic, but definitely use what you like :-)
- Splash or two of lemon juice - depends on how tart you want it :-)
- Heavy Whipping Cream - 1 pint AKA 2 cups
- Sweetener to taste. I use 100% grade B dark amber Maple Syrup, and I also like to have mine on the not so sweet side, so I simply drizzle it and taste until it tastes right to me. I recommend doing this with any sweetener that you plan to use, because often, you don't need as much as recipes call for. :-)

Directions:
Allow cream cheese to soften and then unwrap and place it in a mixing bowl - at least medium size or larger. I like to mess up the blocks with a fork so they don't stick to the beaters and clump up quite as much. Add the splash or two (or three, lol) of lemon juice and beat until smooth. This is important if you don't want lumps in your cheesecake. Then add the cream and beat some more.

When it seems to have mixed but is still rather runny, add your sweetener and mix some more before tasting and adding more sweetener if necessary. When you think you have enough, continue to beat the mix until it is thick and well mixed. If you were too impatient to wait to put the cream in - like I usually am - you might have lumps in your batter, and that's okay.

Pour your batter into whatever pan you like. You can even leave it in the bowl if you want, lol! I like a medium sized (probably 8"X5") rectangular pan, but I have also used smaller circular dessert pans and also 8" round pie pans. (All made out of glass, so pan sounds like a misnomer, shrugs.)

Once smoothed out nicely, place the cheesecake pan into the fridge to chill for a while before eating or adding a topping. If you wanted to, after it's chilled until firm, you could cut it into bites and freeze in the freezer for a bit before tossing in a ziplock bag and eating frozen :-D

As I have mentioned in the past, I am diabetic, so I tend to avoid grains and carbs. That's why my cheesecake is crustless. It's also why it's fairly plain as described so far. However, if I am going to have it as a special treat, I like to add toppings. The easiest and simplest topping is to spread organic jam such as strawberry or blueberry over it. If you are like me, you can find a jam - such as St. Dalfour - that has no added sugar in it :-) I have found that an 8 oz jar is just about perfect, but it can be a bit thin, have more on hand in case you want it thicker.

Other topping suggestions are:

- Freshly sliced or pureed frozen strawberries (I suggest allowing the strawberries to drain just a little before putting them on the cheesecake, and if you do not need to worry about sugar content, you could always sprinkle a little sugar on them as they sit :-)
- Fresh or frozen blueberries
- Apple compote or Apple Butter
- Raspberries crushed with pretzel sticks (Again, if you don't need to worry about grain. This is really tasty! The salt in the pretzel sticks makes it worth adding to any cheesecake. You could even crush up a bunch and press it to the bottom of the pan with melted butter to form a crust if you wanted.)
- A cinnamon flavored sugar crumble (Softened butter whipped with cinnamon and sugar until it forms crumbles. You could also add oatmeal :-) )
- Lime gelatin with pears
- Anything your heart desires! Cheesecake pairs well with damn near anything :-)

Or - if you are in the mood for something truly special and happen to have an ice cream maker - try cutting the cheesecake into tiny chunks and then adding them to a strawberry or blueberry ice cream mix just before pouring into the maker. Sheer heaven!

Lastly, this base mix is absolutely PERFECT for making Wontons. All you need is 2-3 packages of wonton wraps, then scoop a spoonful or so of this cheesecake mix (before it has set) into each wrap, seal shut with a dab of water, and then fry in a deep fat frier. I recommend using lard or tallow to fry it in, but sunflower or peanut oil works well too :-)

Good luck and have a happy day :-)

Friday, October 10, 2014

I am Jesus Reborn!

If you knew me, you'd be laughing your ass off at that statement! I am a pagan; my chosen pantheon of Gods are mostly Greek. If anything, I'd like to think that I was Zeus in a past life, lol!

So why then did I say that I am Jesus reborn? Well, it's like this:

I do believe Jesus was a real person. I also believe that he was a VERY good man. I believe that he believed in the way of love, and that he walked his talk. He didn't just say "Love thy neighbor" while treating his like shit. He - like Gandhi or Mother Teresa - actually treated others with love and compassion.

So now, I might be making myself sound like some paragon of virtue, when I am so not. However, I DO try to practice the golden rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

In pagan speak, that's: And it harm none, do what ye will. I suppose, if you wanted to, you could argue that those two mantras are very different, but to me, they are one and the same. In other words, if I don't want people harming me, I don't harm them, right?

There's a meme going around that has Jesus talking to a bunch of followers, and he says basically: Love thy neighbor. His followers all start protesting: But what if they are gay or ___ or ___ or ___! And Jesus responds with: "What? Did I fucking stutter???" In other words, what he is saying is that you should love your neighbors, NO MATTER WHAT!!!

In my life, I have often been accused of being too nice. I've been perceived as weak because it takes a lot to truly get me angry or upset. I can usually rationalize a person's bad behavior and give them the benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't say that I actually LOVE my literal next door neighbors (mostly because I haven't had a chance to get to know them), but I don't have anything against them either.

Just so you know, my neighbors are a mixed couple. The wife is a white american woman, the husband is a black man literally from africa, and their son is half and half. My boys love playing with their son, and I think it's beautiful that the husband and wife found love despite being born on opposite sides of the world. I'm a sucker for love! It could be between a human and a little green alien, and I would STILL find it awesome and romantic, lol!

Anyway, so when I say that I have nothing against them, I mean that some people would have a problem with them (especially historically) but that I don't. I don't think Jesus would have had a problem with them either. He would have accepted them as they are and wished them happiness.

So maybe now you can understand just a little the title of my post, but it's more than that. So much more!

When I was a teen - actually, my whole life, really - I always knew when people were lying to or using me. Friends would very often call me up and claim they wanted to spend time with me when what they really wanted was a ride somewhere and I was one of the only teens with my own car. I knew they were using me, but I didn't mind because as I was driving them around, I really did get to spend time with my friends. I got to talk to them, mostly alone, about a wide variety of topics. We laughed and joked, and they'd ask me for advice on this or that. I'd get to meet their other friends, and sometimes, those friends became my friends too. I felt a part of the world like I hadn't felt before.

More recently, a friend of mine was talking about how used and abused she was feeling because she is a very giving person, and it seemed like she was always giving a part of her soul to people who didn't care about her at all. I tilted my head to the side in confusion, because giving is selfless, and the ACT of giving is much like divine love. You do it, NOT because you want or expect something in return, but because it fulfills your soul and makes you a better person.

For example, let's say that you took in a foster child. Most people think that foster parents are actually selfish, motivated only by the money they can get from the government. That may be true for some, but I still think that it is a fairly selfless thing to do. But for argument's sake, there is no government compensation. You take the child in because you feel that it is the RIGHT thing to do. You care for this child and spare no expense to raise this child and try to make him or her happy.

Do you then expect that this child should work for you? Be loyal to you? Somehow pay you back one day?

NO! If you have taken in a foster child and given part of your soul to them, you CANNOT expect anything in return!!! Why? Because expecting a return is not only selfish, but it will lead to your own heartache long before the child had found the maturity to realize that they owe you a debt of gratitude. This type of maturity often is not found until after your death. Only then does the foster child realize just how important you were to them. In the meantime, you'll have spent a large portion of your life resenting them if you were expecting something in return.

So, what if a loved one makes a decision that you feel is terrible and only going to hurt them in the long run? Should you take that decision personally and hold a grudge?

NO! Why? Because their decision had nothing to do with you. They made it based on what they felt was best for them, and holding a grudge not only poisons you, but it doesn't change their mind nor effect their peace and happiness. This leaves you suffering for no reason.

Lastly, just yesterday, a different friend was lamenting that she no longer felt welcome by her family. Most of her other friends were advising her to shove herself in the middle of them and fight for her right to be included. I read through all of their comments and scratched my head. So... in their opinion, creating drama and insisting on being the center of attention is the only way to handle the situation??? It really didn't make sense to me.

So, I advised spending some time in quiet reflection. Rather than create drama, I felt her spirit needed some time to rest and heal. Only then will she truly feel ready to take on the world if she has too.

Those are just a few examples that have made me wonder recently if I might just be the reincarnation of Jesus. Well, that and I would love to be able to heal people and I do have a habit of turning water into wine (using the magic of fermentation), lol!

Jesus is not a deity that I worship, so I am not about to convert. I just simply wonder why it is that so many people who do believe in him have such a hard time walking his talk. It seems fairly easy to me, shrugs.

So, to answer "What would Jesus do?" I say:

1- He would love you and respect you, no matter who you are or what you do. (Or how poor you are.)
2- He would try to heal your body/mind if you needed him to.
3- He would try to help you if it was at all possible for him to do so.
4- He wouldn't expect anything in return.
5- He would encourage you to love and help others as much as you can without expecting anything in return.
6- He would remind you that you are not the center of the universe, and that creating drama does not make you a better person.
And lastly, 7- I do believe that he would also try to explain that your soul has signed up for lessons that you must learn in order to grow as a person and have spiritual health. Whenever you keep running into the same type of problem, it is a lesson that you must learn in order to grow.

Anyway, love you and have a happy day :-)

Monday, October 6, 2014

Purple Hearts and the Sandman

Did you ever do anything when you were you at a sleepover that was mildly paranormal? An example that comes to my mind is "Light as a feather, stiff as a board." If you ever watched the Movie "The Craft," you know what I am talking about, otherwise, google it :-)

Anyway, when I was younger, I have NO IDEA where I heard about these, but I heard about and then played two games at birthday parties and or sleepovers. (As in I suggested and initiated the games. I don't think I learned about them at a party.) Both involve a form of hypnosis, and both are frickin' cool IMO.

First, I'm going to talk about The Sandman. This one can get freaky, so I don't do it anywhere near as much as Purple Hearts. Basically, to play the Sandman, you get a volunteer to lay down. Once they are laying down, you talk in a soft but clear voice, tell them a story about how they are at a beach and you are slowly filling their body with sand. You tell them you are filling this arm then that one, then this leg and that, then the chest, etc, (do the head last) and as you do so, you also pretend to fill each part of the body with sand. More and more and more, telling them that they are getting heavier and heavier until they cannot move their body.

Once you have filled their entire body with as much sand as you can, you ask them to try to move. Usually, the volunteer cannot move, not even to twitch their fingers! I played this on my mom once, and she freaked out, so I never really played it on anyone after that, but I do remember being fascinated by the game, wondering why it worked.

Just in case you were thinking: "So wait, you fill them with sand, tell them they can't move, and just leave them like that?!?!" No... Fortunately, you can undo the paralysis fairly easily by simply moving their arms and legs and telling them that they can move again.

Which brings me to the other game. This is actually one of my favorite games to play whenever I manage to get a person willing to play it. However, unlike the first game  - which can be played with just you and a volunteer - this game works better with an extra friend or two. The more the merrier!

To play, you sit comfortably with your volunteer laying with their head in your lap or close enough to you that you can easily reach out and rub their temples. The volunteer will start the game when they are ready by counting backwards from 100. You and all your other friends will softly and steadily chant: "Purple Hearts" over and over as the volunteer counts backwards.

When the game has worked for me, it's pretty obvious, because the volunteer will start to screw up as they count and then usually fall silent at some point. I've had one person barely get to 90 before they were out, and another got all the way to 1. We thought she was unable to be hypnotized, but when I ask her a couple of questions, it turns out that she was well and truly under.

Okay, so after getting your volunteer to go under, you ask her (or him) where she is and to describe everything she sees. Have her walk you through whatever happens - and this is often an elaborate dream like setting - as long as the trance lasts or until you get bored/tired and want to stop. At some point, the volunteer will describe seeing purple hearts, and for whatever reason, this is usually the signal that they are ready to stop, and simply telling them to grab the heart and wake up, or maybe opening a door and walking through it to wake up will do exactly that; wake them up. 

If you want to laugh your ass off, tape the whole session, and then tell the volunteer to forget everything as they are waking up. Then, once awake, they will insist that it didn't work. You and your friends will tell her all about the things that happened, and she will vehemently deny it... until you play the recording and amaze her!

It wasn't until I was an adult and had a psychologist hypnotize me that I realized that you could tell a hypnotized person that they could remember everything. I think this is why I could never be hypnotized at parties, I think I was too afraid of not being able to remember what happened that it simply wouldn't work on me. It was only after the therapist assured me that I would remember that I was able to be put under. 

To this day, I wish I had someone who was willing to work with me whenever I wanted - much like I read Tarot cards. I really wish I could work through some issues, access my guides more easily, and maybe even explore my past lives a bit. Sadly, I haven't found a person willing to do this :-(

Anyway, I had some thoughts on telling the person to forget VS telling them to remember. I think both have their time and place. For example, working on memory regression and past lives would be a good time to remember everything, BUT if you want a post hypnotic suggestion, that's actually better to forget. Here's why:

If you want to do something - such as lose weight - a post hypnotic suggestion can help you by telling your brain that you don't want to eat when you are not actually hungry. If you remember this suggestion, then it will come to the front of your mind every time you are looking in the fridge for food when you are bored or emotional. You'll hear the suggestion not to eat when you're not hungry, decide that this is an exception because fill in the blank, and then give yourself permission to eat anyway. However, if you don't remember the post hypnotic suggestion, you'll look into the fridge, get an urge not to eat anything, close the fridge, and come back later.

I've never really given post hypnotic suggestions during a game of Purple Hearts, but I would love to do so. I think it would be a great time to guide someone to their past life, and then give them the suggestion that they will continue to slowly remember other things - maybe in their dreams. OR - if they had a traumatic past life - tell them to overcome the trauma and allow for spiritual healing. 

I have thought a great deal about taking actual Hypnosis classes and getting certified as a therapist, but I've had so much else going on in my life that made that pretty much impossible. Also, as much as I would like to help others, I REALLY want to help myself work through some issues, so taking a class might not be the best idea after all.

So, tell me... Have any of you ever played these games? If so, how did it work out? If not, what other but similar games did you play? I look forwards to hearing about them :-)

Charts and Readings

Choose