Showing posts with label teenager. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teenager. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

The science is in: God is the answer

A great article. It lays out the science, & scientists' & researchers' narratives for both sides of the argument that believing in a "higher power" is good for your health & believing in a "higher power" is all bonkers. So, the reader has to make up his/her own mind what they think is correct or take it merely as FYI.

What I found interesting is that believing in a "higher power" by an individual, from the heart & mind of that individual, helps that individual deal with life much more resolutely. It becomes a debate about religion vs ritual. People (as teenagers or adults) follow a religion blindly & never question it or reason with it. They don't build on that thinking of logic & reasoning with those hard questions of life. Belief in spirituality or religion has to come from within, & should not be imposed by an outsider (be it a very loving parent).

So, the parental advice from this long article is that, parents should not force their kids into believing a certain religion or spirituality movement or even atheism. Be there as a guide for your children, especially, in their troubled teen years. In those years, those teens will try to form their own identity & hence, will seek out religion / spirituality or even atheism, to deal with their problems & issues. Parents need to be with their teenage kids as their guide & help them along in the exploration of hard questions of believing in a "higher power". Do not be alarmed or desert them if they choose to believe in a religion or movement, which conflicts with your sense of believing in a higher power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



18 years ago, Lisa Miller, now the director of clinical psychology at Columbia University’s Teachers College, had an epiphany on a New York subway car. She had been poring over the mountains of data generated by a three-generation study of depressed women & their children & grandchildren. The biological trend was clear: Women with severe—& particularly with recurrent—depression had daughters at equally high risk for the psychological disorder. At puberty, the risk was 2 to 3 times greater than for other girls. But the data seemed to show that the onset &, even more so, the incidence of recurring bouts with depression, varied widely.
 
Miller couldn’t discern why. Raised in a close-knit Midwestern Jewish community, she had already looked for what she says psychologists rarely bothered to seek—religious belief & practice—& found some mild benefit for both mothers & children, but nothing that stood out among the other variants, such as socio-economic status. Then came the subway ride.
 
She was in a subway car crowded at one end & almost empty at the other, because that end was occupied by a “dirty, dishevelled man” brandishing a piece of chicken at everyone who boarded while yelling, “Hey, do you want to sit with me? You want some of this chicken?” The awkward scene continued for a few stops until an older woman & a girl of about 8—grandmother & granddaughter, Miller guessed—got on. The man bellowed his questions, & the pair nodded at one another & said, “Thank you,” in unison, & sat beside him. It astonished everyone in the car, including Miller & the man with the chicken, who grew quieter & more relaxed.
 
The child’s evident character traits—compassion, acceptance, fearlessness—at so young an age prompted Miller’s eureka moment. What struck her was the nod & all it implied: “It was clear as day that the grandchild fully understood how one lives out spiritual values in her family.” 20 minutes later, Miller was in her lab, running equations on the data that were, in effect, a search for “the statistical nod.” She was looking for mother-teen pairs who had reported a shared religion or non-religious spirituality. She calls the results “the most amazing science I had ever seen.” In the pairs Miller found in the data, shared spirituality (religious or otherwise)—if it reached back to the child’s formative years—was 80% protective in families that were otherwise at very high risk for depression.
 
It was the start of a long & sometimes rocky road for both Miller & the place of spirituality—however defined—in mainstream psychological thinking. ... But Miller & other researchers, including so-called “spiritual” neuroscientists like Montreal’s Mario Beauregard & the much-cited American psychologist Kenneth Kendler continued to explore the intersection of religiosity & mental health in studies published in major, peer-reviewed science journals. By the end of it, as Miller sets out in a provocative new book, The Spiritual Child ..., she was convinced not only of spirituality’s health benefits for people in general, but of its particular importance for young people during a stage of human development when we are most vulnerable to impulsive, risky or damaging behaviours.
 
In fact, Miller declares, spirituality, if properly fostered in children’s formative years, will pay off in spades in adolescence. An intensely felt, transcendental sense of a relationship with God, the universe, nature or whatever the individual identifies as his or her “higher power,” she found, is more protective than any other factor against the big 3 adolescent dangers. Spiritually connected teens are, remarkably, 60% less likely to suffer from depression than adolescents who are not spiritually oriented. They’re 40% less likely to abuse alcohol or other substances, and 80% less likely to engage in unprotected sex. Spiritually oriented children, raised to not shy from hard questions or difficult situations, Miller points out, also tend to excel academically.
 
And teenagers can use all the help they can get. Recent research has revealed their neurological development to be as rapid & overwhelming as their bodily change. The adolescent brain is simultaneously gaining in intellectual power & losing in emotional control; its neural connections—its basic wiring—is a work in progress, with connections between impulse & second (or even first) thought slower than in adults. There is a surge in unfamiliar hormones &, as it turns out, a surge in spiritual longing.
 
Humans have an innate tendency to ascribe random & natural events to conscious agents & a hunger to belong to something larger than ourselves—both militant atheists & fervent believers can agree on this. The urge is never sharper than in adolescence, when, in the fraught process of individuation, teens develop their own sense of the world & their place in it. A teen looks out at what’s been handed to him or her, from family or community,” Miller says, “& asks, ‘What about these values, what about this way of life is me, & what is not me?’ And this ‘me/not-me’ work is the most important work a teen does.”

In Miller’s view, & that of many traditional cultures, individuation—the way children become their own individuals rather than unconscious copies of their parents—is an essentially spiritual process. When that process runs into difficulties, says Miller, the health effects can be severe, especially in terms of depression, to which adolescents are suddenly vulnerable. In fact, half of all adults who have suffered depression had their first experience in adolescence; teens are considered the demographic most at risk for it. Research shows that up to 20% of adolescents have a major depression episode at some point, with an additional 40% or more exhibiting what are known as “sub-threshold” levels that leave them distressed enough to seek treatment at the same rates as kids with major depression—& as much at risk for depression in their adult years.
 
And numbers approaching two-thirds in a single age bracket, Miller argues, are far too high to ascribe to illness alone. Her argument is that brushes with depression are intrinsic to developmental & spiritual awakening. Teens in this often excruciating situation sometimes will turn to substance use, risky sex, physical danger—all of which are shortcuts to transcendence that ultimately have their roots in the same universal drive. On the other hand, adolescents who have supported spiritual lives, especially dating back to childhood, & “practice in asking & living through hard questions, are more prepared to face them,” Miller says.
 
The evidence for a personal religious advantage is overwhelming, Miller claims, drawn from literally “hundreds” of epidemiological & longitudinal studies. In a 2002 article published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, data taken from a 1995 survey of 3,300 teen girls in North Carolina showed that higher frequency of prayer or meditation correlated with decreased risk of depression. It’s worth noting that the advantage was conferred by individual devotion rather than the degree to which the girls believed sacred writings were the literal word of God—spirituality, then, rather than religion.
 
(Other studies have identified this distinction, which was first laid out in Kendler’s landmark twin study in 1997. Examining 1,900 female pairs, identical & fraternal, in the Virginia Twin Registry, he concluded people’s religious practices were broadly determined by environment, but that individual devotion was almost 50% due to a twin’s “unique personal environment.”)

A 2005 study found that a teen with this sort of spiritual connection—as manifested by statements like “I turn to God for guidance in times of difficulty”—was at least 70% less likely to move from substance dabbling to substance abuse. Again, the key was personal engagement; there was no protective factor at all from going to church or taking part in family prayer when those acts came from obligation rather than conviction.
 
And a massive 2012 study from the department of child & family services at the University of Tennessee looked at 9,300 teens from half a dozen countries & regions, from China & India to Palestine & the US. Its authors cited an earlier American study that showed that religion had an inverse correlation with anti-social behaviour, including substance abuse, carrying weapons & drinking & driving, & a positive correlation with what the researchers called “pro-social behaviour,” which included everything from volunteerism to school engagement. Across the world, the Tennessee study found, adolescents who were more religious than their peer groups had lower rates of depression & higher self-esteem. Those teens who reported experiencing such internal states as “relational spirituality” & “meaningfulness of religion” also reported lower levels of depression. “Overall, there is much support for the relationship between religiosity & youth psychological well-being,” the authors wrote.
 
Similar correlations have been seen by neuroscientists who work primarily with adults. Researchers who have used neuroscans to examine people at high familial risk for depression have noted brain abnormalities. One 2004 study pinpointed cortical thinning across the lateral surface of the right cerebral hemisphere, which the authors suspected would produce disturbances in sensory arousal, attention & memory for social cues, a situation they suggested might explain the increased chances of developing depression.

In our lab, we looked at the brains, through MRIs, of people who had a strong sense of relationship in a transcendental dialogue with their higher power,” recalls Miller. That two-way sacred relationship is central to Judeo-Christian spirituality ... & those people showed a thickening of the cortex in the same region. “They essentially had stronger wiring, through a sustained personal spirituality,” Millar explains. The exact implications of the neurological findings remain tentative, but stronger, thicker wiring is considered beneficial.
 
In his now iconic brain-scan studies of Franciscan nuns praying & Buddhist monks meditating, Andrew Newberg—perhaps the leading American expert on the neurological aspects of religion—saw the same neural pathways being used (& strengthened) whether his subject was seeking God or attempting to become one with the cosmos. So Miller was delighted to learn that her lab’s work with devout Christians was, “in an entirely different lab, in an entirely different sample,” replicated with subjects who were meditating. “This is no longer prayer in the Judeo-Christian tradition, this is experienced meditators,” says Miller. “And they too showed cortical thickening in the same regions.”

Patrick McNamara, whose neurological lab at Boston University studies what happens to the brain in religious practice, says, “There are studies that show that religiosity is associated with better executive function & self-control. Those things are moderating factors on a whole host of health-related behaviours.” Although he is more cautious than Miller & thinks religion’s protective features need more study, McNamara agrees that “in the long run we think that religiosity will confer a protective effect against all kinds of disorders.” McNamara has studied the role of the frontal lobes—the part of the brain that exerts executive control over other regions & which teens, incidentally, find hard to access—in religious experience. “The right prefrontal region is especially important for supporting maintenance of the self,” he says. “People who’ve had strokes in that region have problems with self-concept, & people who have dysfunction in that region show lower scores on religiosity tests—that’s what we found.” A strong self-concept, which tends to be enhanced by religion, he notes, is associated with better health outcomes.
 
In the 2 decades since she began her career, Miller’s field has moved from the fringe to respectability. Universities such as Duke & Baylor have research centres that focus on the intersection of religion & health & publish studies looking at everything from integrating spirituality into nursing care, to private religious activities & cardiovascular risk, to the interconnections of religious involvement, inflammatory markers & stress hormones in chronic illness. In 2012, Columbia’s teachers college, the oldest & largest graduate school of education in the US, began to offer the Ivy League’s first master’s concentration in spiritual psychology.
 
Miller’s ideas may also resonate more with many Canadians than the conventional wisdom about religion’s decline would suggest. University of Lethbridge sociologist Reginald Bibby pioneered the study of religious trends in Canada. His newest data, gathered in partnership with the not-for-profit Angus Reid Institute, sees more than a quarter of Canadians reject religion, compared with the 30% who embrace it. But there is a vast middle ground, 44%, who file themselves between those two poles. Most of them presumably overlap with the 40% of Canadians who call themselves “spiritual but not religious.” Some of the antagonism to, & hesitation about, religion comes from a reaction to organized religion’s institutional hypocrisies—shunting pedophile priests from one diocese to another, for example—and from what modern Westerners increasingly see as intolerable restrictions on their personal autonomy. But Miller says she frequently encounters mothers who worry the spirituality baby has been tossed out with the religious bathwater. The dogma-free spirituality she recommends (& practises herself), which can be “cultivated in nature, in service, in human relationships,” has appeal for adults, & not just for the benefits it promises their children.
 
But while the public may be open to Miller’s ideas ..., not everyone is sold on her conclusions. Many materially minded social scientists are skeptical of the neurological view & argue that the health benefits conveyed by religion result from the community support it offers. In her 2014 book The Village Effect: How Face-to-Face Contact Can Make Us Healthier & Happier, Montreal-based developmental psychologist Susan Pinker cites a 7-year study of 90,000 women from across the US that found that those who attended religious services at least once a week were 20% more likely to have longer lifespans than those who did not. As much as the attendance itself, Pinker points to the ritualistic physical synchrony of religious services, the way “praying, chanting, singing, swaying & rocking all together” is “brain-soothing.”

The social benefit of community is behind the sporadic attempts, mostly in the US & Britain, to establish “atheist churches,” though this “if you can’t beat ’em” thinking ... is repellent to more militant atheists. The human tendency toward religious belief should be resisted in the cause of evidence-based science, not accommodated, even in health care.
 
Their cause is bolstered by religion’s dark side. Tight-knit religious communities can also be over-controlling & outright abusive. “Look at Bountiful,” says Pinker, in reference to the polygamy & child-trafficking charges laid against members of a fundamentalist Mormon community in the small B.C. town. And fundamentalist teens often exhibit high levels of risk-taking because, Pinker says, they have no space for mild rebellion. “They are from families where it is easier to get pregnant at 15 than confess to your parents you don’t believe in God.”

In fact, depression can strike those adolescents harder than teens outside organized religion. A paper by Rachel Dew, a prominent religion & health researcher at Duke University, examined 117 teen psychiatric patients, most from religious families, & found depression in them linked strongly to feeling abandoned by God or unsupported by their faith communities.
 
Dew, one of the most cited researchers in her field, agrees in an interview that there is “overwhelming evidence that teens involved in religion are less likely to fall into drug or alcohol abuse,” particularly teens who “self-identified” with their faith. Still, Dew continues, studying depression rates so far provides less certain evidence of the health benefits of spirituality or religion. Part of the reason for caution, she says, is that researchers are still uncertain how to define religion & are wrestling with questions of correlation & causation. “We know from twin studies that there is a genetic predilection for religion,” she says. When that’s accompanied by a lower risk of depression, is the cause “in the religion or in the same genetic predisposition?” Moreover, many survey tools remain unsophisticated, seeking religious internalization through religious affiliation questions like “Do you go to church?” “Here in the South,” says Dew, “people see no difference between spirituality & religion.”

Miller thinks it all actually proves her case. In a very real sense, she says, debates over social versus natural, or about neural correlates, miss the point. When she talks about spirituality, she says, it’s with the pragmatism derived from clinical experiences, itself born from patients’ experiences. “No one’s laying any theology or implicit theology on the child; it’s his or her emerging natural spirituality,” she says. Look at the narratives of those who come out of addiction, Miller urges. “They say, ‘It was a hunger to feel a sense of connection that got me in, & it was when I found my relationship with my higher power that I came out.’

Parents don’t need “big answers” for adolescents working through this, Miller says, & certainly not dogmatic answers. “We just need to show up & take an interest, & let them know the work is real, that this is the set-up, the foundation on which they’ll build their house in life.” However defined ... an inclusive spirituality plainly works for human health & well-being, “& that’s why we do this work, to help kids not suffer.”

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Inside Your Teenager's Scary Brain

Teen years always the most troubling & scary part of our years. Although, this article is a good one, every parent has a different way & experience of bringing up their teen through those difficult years. Some pass with flying colours, while others crash & burn. Every parent has their own story & wisdom to pass on to other parents. What actually works is different for everyone. But then, it never hurts to learn from others, either, or at least keep these thoughts in the back of one's mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conventional wisdom has long held that our brains are largely developed by puberty. However, research in the past 10-15 years has shown that our brains continue to develop in fundamental ways through the teen years & even into the late 20s & 30s. In fact, Jensen argues in her new book, The Teenage Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Survival Guide to Raising Adolescents & Young Adults, the teenage years comprise one of the brain’s most critical periods for development—likely every bit as crucial as early childhood. “That 7 years in their life is, in a way, as important as their first 7 years of life,” Jensen says. “It is probably one of the most important 7-year [periods] in their entire life.


Among the most popular misconceptions about brain development is the idea that the most important changes happen in the first 3 years of life. This “myth of three,” has been the source of intense parental anxiety over the fear that “adults are in a race against time to provide stimulation to their infants before their synapses are lost,” writes Paul Howard-Jones, a professor of neuroscience & education at the University of Bristol in the journal Nature. ... Behind the seemingly invincible teenage boy with the booming voice & adult body is a brain that is still incredibly vulnerable to everything from sports-related concussions to mental illness & addiction. New research is uncovering ways in which the activities that so often typify teenage years, such as experimenting with cigarettes & marijuana & alcohol, can lower a teen’s IQ or increase susceptibility to mental illness later on. Chronic stress stemming from family violence, poverty or bullying has also been linked to changes in the teen brain that can raise the risk of mood disorders or learning disabilities.
 
At the heart of our understanding of brain development are 2 basic concepts: grey matter & white matter. Grey matter consists of neurons, the brain cells that form the building blocks of the brain. White matter, axons, are the connections that form between grey matter, helping to move information from one area of the brain to the next.
 
While grey-matter growth is indeed almost completely finished by the age of 6, white matter—the wiring between brain cells—continues to develop well into the 20s. In fact, says Jensen, that wiring is only about 80% complete by the age of 18.
 
Along with new wiring, the brains of teens & young adults are also undergoing a process called myelination, in which those white-matter connections are being coated in a protective fatty material. Myelin acts as a form of insulation, allowing signals to move faster between brain cells, helping to speed the flow of information in the brain. Since both the wiring to the prefrontal cortex, & the insulation, is incomplete, teens often take longer to access their prefrontal cortexes, meaning they have a harder time making accurate judgments & controlling their impulses. The process of myelination continues into the 30s, giving rise to questions about how old someone must be to be considered to have a fully developed “adult” brain.
 
At the same time that teens’ brains are laying down connections & insulation, puberty has triggered pituitary glands to release hormones that are acting on the limbic system, the brain’s emotional centre. The combination of heightened emotions & an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex explains why teens are often prone to emotional outbursts, says Jensen, & also why they seek out more emotionally charged situations, from sad movies to dangerous driving.
 
Hormones also appear to have a different effect in teens than they do in adults. The hormone THP, which is released by the body in response to stress, has a calming effect in adults, but actually seems to have the opposite effect in teens, increasing stress. It’s one reason why teens are prone to anxiety & post-traumatic stress disorder. It’s also a good reason, Jensen says, why parents & schools should be sensitive to the problem of bullying.
 
Along with new wiring, insulation & hormones, teen brains are highly sensitive to the release of dopamine, which plays on the areas of the brain that govern pleasure & helps explain why teens seem to take so many risks.
 
It’s not that they don’t know any better. In fact, reasoning abilities are largely developed by the age of 15 & studies have shown that teens are as accurate as adults when it comes to understanding if an activity is dangerous. Their brains are just more motivated by the rewards of taking a risk than deterred by its dangers. So even if they know something might be bad—speeding, drinking too much, trying new drugs—they get more pleasure from taking the risks anyway.
 
Central to our understanding of how teens learn is “pruning”—a period when the brain begins to shed some of the grey-matter cells built up in childhood to make room for the growth of white matter. A long period of grey-matter growth in childhood, followed by vigorous pruning in adolescence, has been linked to higher intelligence, Jensen says.
 
It’s for this reason that Jay Giedd, an expert in child & adolescent brain imaging at the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health, describes the teen years as a special period of “use it or lose it” for the brain. Brain cells grown in childhood that continue to get used in adolescence form new connections, while those that go unused wither away. It’s also another reason why parents should be anxious about what happens during the teen years—adolescence now appears to be a period that can make or break a child’s intelligence.
 
A significant consequence of pruning is that IQ, once thought to be fixed for life after childhood, can in fact change dramatically during the teen years.
 
Learning is a process of repeatedly exposing the brain to something that stimulates the production of dopamine, which strengthens connections in the brain’s reward centre & helps form new memories. Addiction, therefore, is simply a form of “overlearning” by the brain, Jensen says. That process can be controlled by the prefrontal cortex, but since teens are so primed for learning & have less of an ability to access the prefrontal cortex, they’re also more susceptible to addictions.
 
In an era marked by the ideological tug-of-war over how best to raise our teenagers, what’s a parent to do with this new science of the teenage brain? More rules—an approach exemplified by Yale professor Amy Chua’s 2011 Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother? Or in intervening too much, do parents risk raising teens whose brains never learn how to become an adult—an approach typified by the backlash against “helicopter parenting” & movements like “slow parenting” & “free-range kids.”

In Teenage Brain, Jensen puts herself squarely in the camp of the highly involved parent. She encourages parents to proof-read their teen’s homework, help them make lists to prioritize their assignments, watch them as they do schoolwork to see if they’re getting distracted & to not be afraid to “sound like a broken record” in reminding teens over & over again about the dangers that could befall them.
 
She encourages parents to “be your teen’s frontal lobes” & to “try to think for your teenage sons & daughters until their own brains are ready to take over the job.”

Jensen argues that it’s a parent’s job to protect their teens from their own often short-sighted behaviour, while allowing them enough room for “safe failures.”

In the quagmire of parental advice, it’s no surprise that the counterargument to the neuroscience approach to parenting is robust, & passionate. Psychologist Robert Epstein, author of The Case Against Adolescence: Rediscovering the Adult in Every Teen, believes that adolescent rebellion has little to do with brain development & lots to do with how society treats teenagers. He argues scientists have it backward: teens don’t act out because they have immature brains struggling to navigate an adult world, but because they have adult brains railing against a society that treats them like children.
 
Other research is challenging the notion that teens have a less mature & less connected prefrontal cortex & are therefore inherently more impulsive than adults.
 
At Temple University, Steinberg has used a car-racing video game to show that when teens are alone they perform as well as adults on tasks involving a tradeoff of risk & reward. But when other teens are in the room watching, adolescents tend to make far riskier decisions. Adults show no difference if other adults watch them, suggesting that teen risk-taking is likely social.
 
BJ Casey, director of the Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiology at Cornell University, found that teens could be less impulsive if they were offered rewards. The greater the reward, the longer teens took to make a decision, suggesting that parents trying to control a hot-headed teen might want to offer rewards for good decisions rather than punishing bad ones.

You look at the high school dropout rates & the people that fall off the curve not because of academic reasons, but because of peer pressure or drugs,” Jensen says. “It’s so sad because this is a time where you can actually make up for your innate weaknesses. We could get so much more out of our teenagers—& who they become later in life, in many cases—if we took a different approach to this window of time.”

Thursday, March 5, 2015

NOT Practicing Islam in short shorts

This is becoming a very common scenario in our Muslim societies or even among individual Muslims. Excuse: I am a Muslim in my heart. I don't need to dress in a certain way to show that I'm a Muslim.
 
Let's forget about religion for a minute at all. Let's look at this trend (& this article) from 2 real-world examples.
 
Scenario 1:
She becomes a consultant at IBM. Now, the IBM "dress code" is to look professional in front of a client. It's not different or unusual from any other professional firm's attire; Deloitte, KPMG, Grant Thornton, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Accenture etc. Now, when we think of a female consultant's professional dress, we think of proper attire in a nice colour, covering her from neck to knee, at least, coupled with a nice pair of heels (arms can be bared ... for those people who may start to split hairs).

 
Now, imagine if she wears the dress what this girl describes, into a client meeting, as a representative of IBM, as an IBM consultant. Would her manager give her a warning? Would she be disciplined more severely if she keeps ignoring those warnings? Would she be fired ultimately if she keeps coming to office in sandals, short shorts, showing her navel ring, & heck even drunk, to the office & at the client's premises?
 
Would IBM be considered a very harsh, controlling, "patriarch" of an employer? Can she say about IBM that IBM is a very "patriarchial" employer (you are not my father to tell me what can I wear to office or not)?
 
Why all of us in this world when sign on the dotted line of an employment contract are then beholden to the rules & regulations of that company or employer? We all have had to sign papers about our internet usage, attire, behaviour in office etc. If we don't abide by those rules, what does the company warn us about?
 
If we don't abide by the company rules, we will be let go. There is not even partial acceptance of the company rules. You have to accept either all or none of the company rules. Company is like, if you don't like our rules & want to do whatever you want to do, you are free to go anywhere else. Heck, you don't even need to give a 2-week notice.
 
Scenario 2:
It's Friday night in June. Very nice weather outside. You are a parent of a 16-year-old girl. As we all know, teens are usually rebellious. She has just started dating this guy with a hot rod & tattoos & definitely looks like much more older than her, perhaps 24-year-old.

 
It's 8 pm. You are at home preparing dinner with your spouse in the kitchen. You suddenly hear a motorcycle horn from outside. You instinctively know who that is. Your hear your sweet daughter bouncing down the stairs from her room upstairs. You step out in the foyer / vestibule to wish her goodbye & to tell her to take care.
 
But, wait a minute. You are shocked with what she is wearing. She is wearing a skimpy shirt, covering her neck to breasts area, a short denim short, & a pair of platform heels (tummy & legs are all bare). Of course, she has lots of makeup on her too.
 
Would you allow her to go like that on her date? She is a free person & living in a free country. If you will, then you are a dream of a parent to any teen. BUT, most concerned / good parents won't.
 
They will scream at her to go back upstairs & change into something more appropriate. She shouts back into your face, "why?" & "you are a horrible mom/dad," & "she hates you."
 
Your response: "as long as you are living under my roof & eating my food, you will follow my orders, otherwise, you are most welcome to leave this house & live anywhere else & do whatever you want to do."
 
Aren't you a very harsh or "patriarcial" parent? Would you be awarded a Parent of the Year award? You seem to be a horrible person since you are ordering around a free person in a free country.
 
However, other concerned parents will congratulate you for what you did & said. You said that as long as she is living under your roof, she needs to follow your orders / house rules / customs etc. She is always welcome to leave the house & not follow your orders. Doors are not locked on her.
 
Let's link these 2 real world analogies with religion now:
 
It's the same rule with religion. No religion is forcibly holding anyone in it. You don't want to believe in it or believe in it partially, you are always free to pack up & leave. BUT, when you sign on that "dotted line" (by entering in it whichever way a person enters in that religion, whatever that religion might be), then either you accept all of it or none of it.
 
It is clearly stated in chapter 33, verse 33 of the Quran that wives of the Prophet, stay in your houses & do not display your finery to everyone outside. Muslim women are supposed to follow the wives of the Prophet, so that's an order to all Muslim women to cover up & stay in your house. It is not anyone's interpretation or hadith; it is stated right in the Quran.
 
Problem is we are afraid of our employers & even our parents to do what they tell us to do. But when it comes to religion, we are not only oblivious to what the Quran & Hadiths say but we will believe anyone saying anything about it. How many people have actually read the Quran with translation in their own language? They've read Quran in Arabic when it's not even their language, which is like reading that French novel without knowing a word of French ... I don't think you will understand a word of it.
 
Quran is a book of message or even Hadiths & you are supposed to read it & understand it. People are not even curious enough to know about the religion they are following. But they don't want to leave Islam. Do you become an accountant without reading an accounting book? or become a medical doctor without reading a medical book? or become an engineer without reading an engineering book? etc but when it comes to Islam, that person has never opened the Quran or even a book of Hadiths but have become a master in religion to comment on women's dresses, & prayers, & women's rights etc.
 
Can you do you an audit of a company & issue an opinion without an accounting certificate (CPA)? You won't be allowed to do it. If you want to audit a company's F/S, & issue opinions, then you are required to go through the professional accounting body's whole exam & become a proper accountant.

Similar to prescribing drugs (medical doctor) or performing surgeries (surgeon) or selling a house (realtor) or building a house (engineer) or designing a house (architect). Then why all of us become such masters in Islamic theology that we issue our opinions like this girl so easily that I will wear short shorts & drink whisky & party it up in a club but still be a Muslim & even worse, other so-called Muslims wholeheartedly support her. Idk who to call a moron here; that (& other) girls like her or other Muslims who support her in doing this.
 
Nobody stopping you from getting out of Islam. But when you want to be called a Muslim, then you do have some rights & obligations. As my real-world examples above show that what Quran is asking Muslim women to do is no different than a country, or a state, or an employer, or a teacher / principal or a good parent ask people under their care to do; follow my laws, rules, & regulations. There is no partial acceptance of the rules. You can't pick & choose & interpret rules yourself as you like. If you want to be an American, then you must follow American laws; no ifs & buts. Otherwise, you are always welcome to get out of America & give up your American citizenship. Similar to Canadian, or French, or Turkish, or Saudi Arabian, or South African, or Brazilian laws.
 
But why is it when it comes to religion, we like to follow our own interpretations of beliefs, or pick & choose or distort the rules as per to our liking? Why don't we do this same thing in the secular, non-religious, real-world? Why do we have double standards? Why do we not call that cop or Judge that I am as much as an American / Canadian / British as that other person; you can't judge me since my intentions were not to harm other Americans / Canadians etc (like this girl says that Islam is looking at her intentions & not how she dresses).
 
One more thing I want to add here is that what Dalai Lama said that our "best religion is our heart." You know this PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), which is becoming very much prevalent in NATO soldiers, esp. American soldiers. They go through therapy but PTSD is still on the rise. What's the essential problem here? PTSD is essentially their hearts & minds being in conflict; heart says what you did in the war is wrong (whatever that may be) & the soldier tries to rationalize it through his/her mind that what he/she did was correct. Similar problem is here. In most cases, other Muslims are not judging these Muslim women who like to dress in such way as this woman described in her blog. I've been told this excuse even in conservative countries like Pakistan. It's not anyone's judging them but it's their own heart is telling them that what they are doing is wrong, so they try to rationalize it by deflecting what their heart is saying to them to what other people are thinking or "judging" them.
 
I can say a lot more on this topic but then the classic, nonsense reply would be, "you don't know me & what I've gone through in my life so keep your opinion to yourself."

 
 

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Sex Education, Then & NOT Now

As all Canadians may know already by now that new sex-ed curriculum of Ontario has been revealed & come September 2015, 7-year-olds (Grade 3) will come to know the meaning of same-sex relationships & gradually, within 5 years (age 12), will know what oral sex is.

I deliberately chose this article / opinion because that's the general attitude of people who are supportive of this curriculum. However, what it shows to me:

1. Disregard of people in a "democratic" govt: is this we called "democracy"? Is this the democracy Western leaders incessantly harping about in their speeches all over the world? It may as well be an absolute monarchy because at the end of the day, gov't is acting like, "I am going to throat-gag you with this, & you not only going to love it but will ask more for it."

2. What happened to diversity, Canadian multiculturalism & assimilation of new immigrants? As soon as something bad happens by a few deranged individuals, in the name of a specific religion, the whole group associated with that religion is blamed for not assimilating in the population & living in their own little bubbles (I'm deliberately not putting in any infamous labels here).

Who should be blamed for French ban on burqa in public or as Mr. Harper itching to bring burqa ban in Canada (it's a slippery slope, starting with niqab ban in citizenship oath ceremonies) or Mrs. Kathleen Wynne ignoring all immigrants, a sizable majority of which hails from South Asia, in bringing this curriculum?

Who is considering whom a "second-class" citizen & doing every bit that can be done to help push immigrants away, instead of helping them assimilate, to the point, that that immigrant / "second-class" citizen packs up & leaves Canada for good?

Will a majority of Muslims (I can't talk about other religious groups, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs etc but I do believe they are in the similar situation as Muslims) happily embrace this curriculum & gladly assimilate in the multicultural fabric of Canadian society? I firmly don't think so. This will only alienate those immigrants further, & next thing you know, someone is again pointing fingers at this group for not assimilating.

Assimilation is a two-way street & how can the majority of a group identify with their new country or society when a majority of the residents of that country are always coming up with laws & regulations to encourage those immigrants to disavow their whole belief systems? Is this called "freedom of religion" as such enshrined in the Charter? In fact, it seems more like, "be like me or you are my enemy" or that famous Mr. Bush's quote, "either you are with us or against us."

3. Do I really want my future kid to learn about same-sex relationships at the age of 7? Yes, as a Muslim, I am against homosexuality, & no I don't want my kid to learn about homosexuality. I don't care what people do in the hallowed halls of their bedrooms. People who support it in this country ... well, put it bluntly, are the same people who naively believe that Western countries are the beacon of peace in the world, & religion is the source of all evils in this world & women are only liberated when they take all their clothes off ... what's the point of wearing a bikini in the public, anyway (thanks to this curriculum, even little kids will know what breasts, nipples & female genitalia look like) ... might as well be completely free ... take everything off !!! (this will be explored more in my next blog with the help of Irina Shayk's fabulous choice of dress in the Vanity Fair's after-Oscars party).

Even as a very involved parent (once in the future), how will I be able to "un-teach" homosexuality at home when my kid is learning all about the wonderful world of same-sex relationships from those teachers in the school? As the article suggests, it's better that schools are teaching this than parents. Really? That kid will be even more confused then. Do I believe the story of Lot in the Quran, as told by my parents or do I believe what my teacher told me that my budding love for another human of the same sex is because of my genes? (everything nowadays is genetic; obesity, homosexuality & next will be racism, drug addiction, hatred ... all happen because of our genes ... eventually, we won't need to have a debate on "nature v nurture" because it's all nature's fault).

To further compound the confusion of a little kid, if he/she is enrolled in an Islamic school & he/she is learning about same-sex relationship in Grade 3, but then he/she can't find any of his/her friends / classmates having 2 daddies or mommies (since, homosexuality is strictly forbidden in Islam), then learns about story of Lot from the Quran; that kid is completely confused by now. What is right & what is wrong? Is homosexuality right or natural or is it right what the Quran says & what punishment those people in the Quran got? Do we want this confusion for tender minds of our kids?

4. Another argument is put forward in support of this curriculum that today's kids are learning all about sex through social media & they are learning this at a very young age. My problem with that is why are parents enthusiastically buying smartphones for their kids with such expensive data plans to go along with them. They won't able to sext, at least from their own phones, when they have those dumb phones (yes, they are still available in the market) with parental locks on it.

Furthermore, what happened to parents getting involved with their kids & teaching them about sex & relationships when they themselves see fit, according to their own religion, customs, & beliefs. I will explain the story of Lot & dangers of homosexuality to my kid when I see fit, as per my religion, & not when Mrs. Kathleen Wynne likes to think.

5. Some may say now, well, why don't you move out of Ontario, since this is only being instituted in Ontario. My belief is that this curriculum will spread, if not already, all over Canada like wildfire. Take my word for it. Some of it is already in other provinces' sex-ed curriculum & other provinces who doesn't have this invasive curriculum will enthusiastically adopt it.

Regardless of what the Charter or Constitution espouse, the North American gov'ts enthusiastically adopt anything & everything which remotely sounds Liberal, as long as it helps their agenda; homosexuality is all market-driven (money from marriage licenses, weddings etc), so why not promote it even more, line up govt's pockets behind the clever charade of equality & in the process, look good too in the eyes of voters.

 

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Multiple Choice, Multiple Students

A great idea to improve learning in students & works more like how decision-making takes place in today's workplace ... as a team. Plus it may sow the seed of curiosity & learning in students than students just preparing for a test without understanding or remembering any of the material as soon as the final exam is over.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediately after each student completes a 30-question, multiple-choice exam, Gilley makes all his students take the exact same test again, only, this time, in groups of four. ... But does it help prepare students for life after university? “Nobody goes into a room & writes a multiple-choice test for their job,” Gilley says. “People sit down in groups & discuss things to get points across.”

 
A recent study co-authored by Gilley showed higher retention of course material when students have collaborative group tests immediately after the individual test. “It’s not just that I know the answers better,” says Danny Congleton, a first-year bachelor of arts student at UBC. “I understand the reasoning behind why certain answers are correct.”
 
Faculty over the years have seen the benefits of the two-stage exam, to the extent that more than 50 classes at UBC have implemented them today, across courses in physics, chemistry, biology, math, statistics & computer science.
 
One drawback to the test, however, is that consensus doesn’t necessarily translate into the correct answer. As well, for some difficult questions, a group may leave without any certainty over which answer was correct.
 
“The longer you delay the feedback, the less useful it becomes,” says Jim Sibley, a staff member at UBC’s Centre for Instructional Support & co-author of a book on team-based learning. “Can you imagine you hit a golf ball & I tell you in a week in which direction it went, & then you try to adjust your shot?”
 
And, to make sure no slacker shows up unprepared, the two-stage exam system can be weighted such that the individual test accounts for 85% of the exam mark, whereas the remaining 15% comes from the group test. In that case, everyone knows the right answer by the end of the exam, everyone has individual accountability, & the students learn from each other. “You’re not the teacher anymore,” says Sibley. “You’re the architect of a learning experience.”