Three Mistakes Women Make with Their Vulvas

January 20, 2009 in Blogs, Psychology Today by Psychology Today

Given the significance of today’s events in American history, I figured I better inaugurate something new here on the Psychology Today blogs. So I’ve decided to do a weekly feature called Girl-Crotch Tuesday. Every Tuesday I’ll be posting something interesting but hopefully not predictable about the female crotch. For today’s Girl-Crotch Tuesday, I tried not to get too Cosmo on you, even if the "Three Mistakes Women Make…" title does sound like I spent too long in front of the magazine racks at the check-out line at the supermarket. For the new 6th edition of my book, I decided to do a chapter titled Vulva Care–Keeping Your Kitty Happy. I was very fortunate to receive the advice of two highly experienced female gynecologists from two different parts of the country–so you might appreciate my surprise when they quite independently mentioned three of the same concerns about the way women treat their vulvas. However, nothing I say should be construed as medical advice. Check with your healthcare provider and local fire official before burning your thongs, panties or pads. #1. Thongs are bad. Perhaps you feel your crotch should be a slave to fashion, but thongs can irritate and abrade the skin of your vulva worse than a horny boyfriend with rough hands. Another concern is the way that bacteria from your bum might be using the butt-floss part of your thong to rappel into the opening of your vagina. We all know the evils that can befall a vagina when Mr. Sam Fecal meets Ms. Puss du Pink. #2. When possible, go commando (without panties) day and night–but especially at night. Contrary to what the manufacturers of women’s underwear want you to believe, your kitty needs air to breathe. This doesn’t happen too well when you are wearing underwear, even if your panties are made of 100% cotton. It especially doesn’t happen when you are wearing panties or pajama bottoms and have the covers on. (Why do so many American women sleep with their panties on? Surely the Sand Man doesn’t care if your crotch is bare.) 3. Pad problems… Wearing pads or pantiliners to "feel fresh" can be just another way to trap moisture and to irritate your vulva. If you tend to leak or get all drippy from hot sex fantasies, try using a clean cotton handkerchief to line your panties, or get yourself some 100% cotton pads. Possible sources include GladRags and LunaPads, or better yet, why not make your own? For a very cool website that shows you how to make your own period pads, click here.   © 2009 Psychology Today. This RSS Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact blogs@psychologytoday.com so we can take legal action immediately.

View original here: 
Three Mistakes Women Make with Their Vulvas

Does Reading About Serial Killers Make You Disturbed?

January 20, 2009 in Blogs, Psychology Today by Psychology Today

In an earlier post, Asperger’s Awareness for Assistance Professions , I touched on  the importance of professional awareness of certain behaviors in Asperger’s, and how they can be misunderstood.  Such misinterpretations, handled improperly, can cause a great deal of havoc in the lives of people with Asperger’s, and their families.  I recently saw yet another example of this depicted in the movie, " Billy The Kid ."  As I laid out in my last post, Billy The Kid is a documentary following a few days in the life of a 15 year old from Maine named Billy, who has Asperger’s.   Not too far into the film, Billy’s mother relates a call she received at home:  "I got a call at home that, you know…’Is Billy okay? Um, does he seem okay at home?’  And I’m like, ‘Yeah, he’s fine.  Why?’  And, well, he took this and this and this out of the library today…and we just want to make sure that everything was okay. One was about serial killers…serial killers through the ages or something like that. One was about spree killers like Bonnie and Clyde, that sort of thing. And I guess he took, you know, two or three out in one day…and somebody noticed and it sent up a red flag…because Billy has issues." This account greatly saddened me, because I could follow the school officials’ line of reasoning to its final conclusion – which could be potentially explosive and highly damaging to Billy and his family, if handled incorrectly.   And, I personally bore the brunt of these types of incidents throughout my childhood.   It was clear that I was not completely off track in this line of reasoning when I re-read the reviews of the movie. This account was frequently cited as evidence that Billy was "disturbed."   Take  John Anderson’s response in Variety : "The only responsible note in ‘Billy the Kid’ is that when Billy checks out multiple books on serial killers from his school library, someone has the sense to make an issue of it. You don’t want to wish that the same librarian had worked at Virginia Tech, but the thought certainly crosses your mind." Now, I’m not saying that caution is not warranted in cases such where a child or young adult shows an unusual interest in so dark a subject — however, I find myself wondering why this librarian didn’t ask Billy why he was interested in the subject.  I think that he or she would likely have found the answer surprising.   The fact that the immediate jump is to suspicion has its own dangers, which, unfortunately, have a disparate impact on those with Asperger’s.   Because of the limitations of how those with Asperger’s have in interpreting the social world, we can very easily, especially as children, miss cues about what might be appropriate in a given situation, what might upset another person, and what could be potentially misunderstood.   That, coupled with our tendency to become fixated on certain interests, may cause us to inadvertently trigger concerns about our state of mind, or make people think we are "dangerous," when in fact, we’re nothing of the kind.   As Tony Attwood writes in The Complete Guide to Asperger’s Syndrome , "The child or  adult may collect information on a topic that is causing emotional distress or confusion, as a means of understanding a feeling or situation.   This can include death and mortality.  An example is a child with Asperger’s syndrome who had a very close relationship with his grandfather.   The two would often walk around the family farm, deep in conversation about animals and farm machinery.   On one walk, the grandfather had a cardiac arrest and died.  The child did not appear to mourn the death of his grandfather in conventional ways but began a special interest in cardiac disease and read as many books as he could find on heart disorders.  He wanted to know exactly why and how his much-loved and admired grandfather died."   In Billy’s case, it seems clear to me, that he’s simply trying to understand the world he lives in.   When interviewed about the incident, he says, "Well, I’ve read about Son of Sam, and, of course, Henry Lee Lucas. I found out not all serial killers were born, you know, killers. Most of the time they way they were rai…the way they were abused leads to their insanity. Like Henry Lee Lucas was, you know…He was basically abused by his mother."   Reviewing my own childhood – I searched for answers in the very same way.  Being, as Temple Grandin so aptly put it, " An Anthropologist On Mars ,"  I was driven to fill the gaps in my innate understanding with a systematic study of humankind.  What makes people tick?   What are the rules for living successfully as a human being?  When studying a culture, you don’t just study the aspects you agree with.  To truly have a comprehensive understanding, you have to study all the aspects of the culture. If you were studying the Maya , you wouldn’t ignore the fact that they practiced human sacrifice, however repugnant you might feel it was.  In fact, that very repugnance might drive you to think more deeply about it – to wonder how in the world one human being could justify doing something like that to another…   It  seems to me that Billy was studying aberrations in human behavior, not because he wanted to emulate them, but because he wanted to understand why they occurred in the first place.   The fact that he references the concept of "sin" several times throughout the movie hints at some religious background.  If that is so, he most likely has been taught that one should not kill.  If murder is the ultimate taboo (as it should be), then people who not only do so, but do so without conscience, are an puzzle, a mystery — an ominous one.   We like to be able to understand the world.  The rules that govern the way the world works.  Uncertainty can be very stressful to a person with Asperger’s, especially when we’re young.  What are rules, if they’re not in effect always – suggestions??   If people aren’t supposed to kill, and are supposed to feel bad if they do, then how do you explain those that do, and don’t?  That’s frightening.  It just doesn’t fit with how the world is supposed to be. We’re all supposed to be good and kind to each other. If you can’t explain why they do it, can you identify the indications that would allow you to differentiate a dangerous murderer from a person who "plays by the rules"? If you can’t identify any differentiating factors, then how do you know that your next door neighbor isn’t a serial killer?   How can you be safe?  If you’re unable to make the pieces fit, the world is very scary. Lacking an instinctual understanding of people makes it even more so.   How do you predict human behavior?  What are the common threads that make people behave aberrantly? How can you guard yourself against people who behave this way, if you can’t identify them?    I imagine that these were the types of questions that were in Billy’s mind as he read these books.   As his mother states  – "… he’s not renting those books because…He’s not treating them like a how-to book.  He’s researching. He likes to know a lot of…He likes — He knows a lot of stuff about a lot of different things."  In the end,  noting that many of these people were badly abused in childhood, he concludes that, "…you must always be careful on how you raise a child. You know, be careful not to abuse them."  Is that disturbed?       He’s not planning to become a serial killer. He’s figuring out how we can make less of them.   Sounds pretty smart to me.    © 2009 Psychology Today. This RSS Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact blogs@psychologytoday.com so we can take legal action immediately.

View post:
Does Reading About Serial Killers Make You Disturbed?

Evolutionary Psychology – why it is fundamentally wrong [A Blog Around The Clock]

December 25, 2008 in Blogs, Brain & Behaviour by BrainAndBehaviour

Larry , Amanda , John , Mike and others are comenting, quite positively, on the recent Scientific American article – Evolution of the Mind: 4 Fallacies of Psychology by David J. Buller. And I agree – this is an excellent, well-deserved and well-thought smack-down of Evolutionary Psychology and I am happy that it appears in a popular magazine and is spreading around the blogosphere. The Fallacy 1 – Analysis of Pleistocene Adaptive Problems Yields Clues to the Mind’s Design – is my favourite counter-argument when I hear someone offering an EvoPsych-style Just-So-Story, but the other three just as interesting and important: Of course, some speculations are worse than others. Those of Pop EP are deeply flawed. We are unlikely ever to learn much about our evolutionary past by slicing our Pleistocene history into discrete adaptive problems, supposing the mind to be partitioned into discrete solutions to those problems, and then supporting those suppositions with pencil-and-paper data. The field of evolutionary psychology will have to do better. Even its very best, however, may never provide us knowledge of why all our complex human psychological characteristics evolved. James Holland Jones wrote an interesting commentary on the article that in some details disagrees with Buller and, if anything, makes an even more potent criticism of EvoPsych: I happen to think that the whole sex-differences in sexual preferences thing is the most overplayed finding in all of evolutionary science. In class, I refer to this work as Men-Are-From-Mars Evolutionary Psychology. The basic idea is to take whatever tired sexual stereotype that you’d hear in a second rate stand-up comedian’s monologue, or read about in airport bookstore self-help tracts and dress it up as the scientifically proven patrimony of our evolutionary past. Ugh. Read both the Buller article and the Jones post in their entirety – they are excellent and provide a food for thought as well as ammunition for your next duel against one of the ‘true believers’ in EvoPsych. Read the comments on this post…

Continued here: 
Evolutionary Psychology – why it is fundamentally wrong [A Blog Around The Clock]

Avatar of Vaughan

by Vaughan

Seasonal wishes

December 24, 2008 in Blogs, Mind Hacks by Vaughan

I would just like to take this opportunity to wish Mind Hacks readers a happy seasonal festival and I hope you experience an appropriate positive emotion during your marking of the period. If you’re interested in a little seasonal psychology, Frontal Cortex has an excellent piece on the psychology of Hanukkah , the Jewish festival that involves 8 days of gift giving. Curiously, it involves the peak-end rule and research with colonoscopies and I’ll leave you to discover the rest. I’ll be having a very Paisa Christmas with everything kicking off today so Feliz Navidad y Próspero Año Nuevo from Colombia. Link to Frontal Cortex on Hanukkah and Colonoscopies.

See the original post here: 
Seasonal wishes

Avatar of PsyBlog

by PsyBlog

12 Laws of the Emotions

December 3, 2008 in Blogs, PsyBlog by PsyBlog

Explore your feelings, and how they affect your behaviour, with this new series on the psychology of the emotions. We tend to think of our emotions as having laws unto themselves, but one psychological researcher has suggested that our emotions do follow certain general rules. This post begins a new series on the psychology of emotions with Professor Nico Frijda’s twelve laws of the emotions ( Fridja, 2006 ). As for most laws there are exceptions, but these have been synthesised from years of psychological research and hold true much of the time. 1. The Law of Situational Meaning The first law is simply that emotions derive from situations. Generally the same types of situation will elicit the same types of emotional response. Loss makes us grieve, gains make us happy and scary things make us fearful (mostly anyway – see all the other laws). 2. The Law of Concern We feel because we care about something, when we have some interest in what happens, whether it’s to an object, ourselves, or another person. Emotions arise from these particular goals, motivations or concerns. When we are unconcerned we don’t feel anything. 3. The Law of Apparent Reality Whatever seems real to us, can elicit an emotional response. In other words how we appraise or interpret a situation governs the emotion we feel (compare with laws 11 & 12). The reason poor movies, plays or books don’t engage us emotionally is because, in some sense, we fail to detect truth. Similarly it’s difficult to get emotional about things that aren’t obvious, right in front of us. For example grief may not strike when we are told about the death of loved one, but only once it becomes real to us in some way – say when we pick up the phone to call them, forgetting they are gone. 4, 5 & 6. The Laws of Change, Habituation and Comparative Feeling The law of habituation means that in life we get used to our circumstances whatever they are (mostly true, but see laws 7 & 8). The emotions, therefore, respond most readily to change. This means that we are always comparing what is happening to a relatively steady frame of reference (what we are used to). As a result our emotions tend to respond most readily to changes that are relative to this frame of reference. 7. The Law of Hedonic Asymmetry There are certain awful circumstances to which we can never become accustomed. If things are bad enough, it is impossible to escape negative feelings like fear or anxiety. On the other hand positive emotions always fade over time. No matter how much we are in love, how big the lottery win, or how copious the quantities of drugs consumed, positive emotions like pleasure always slip away. 8. The Law of Conservation of Emotional Momentum Time doesn’t heal all wounds – or if it does, it only does so indirectly. Events can retain their emotional power over the years unless we re-experience and re-evaluate them. It’s this re-experiencing and consequent re-definition that reduces the emotional charge of an event. This is why events that haven’t been re-evaluated – say, failing an exam or being rejected by a potential lover – retain their emotional power across the decades. 9. The Law of Closure The way we respond to our emotions tends to be absolute. They often lead immediately to actions of one kind or another, and they will brook no discussion (but see laws 10, 11 & 12). In other words emotional responses are closed to goals other than their own or judgements that can mitigate the response. An emotion seizes us and send us resolutely down one path, until later that is, when a different emotion sends us down the opposite path. 10. The Law of Care for Consequences People naturally consider the consequences of their emotions and modify them accordingly. For example anger may provoke violent feelings towards another, but generally people refrain from stabbing each other willy-nilly. Instead they will shout, hit their head on the wall or just silently fume. Emotions may absolutely dictate a type of response, but people do modulate the size of that response (usually!). 11 & 12. Laws of the Lightest Load and the Greatest Gain The emotional impact of an event or situation depends on its interpretation. Putting a different ‘spin’ on a situation can change the feeling. The law of the lightest load means people are particularly motivated to use re-interpretations to reduce negative emotions. For example we might reduce the fear of the credit crunch by generating the illusion we won’t be affected. The exact reverse is also true: whenever a situation can be reinterpreted for a positive emotional gain, it will be. For example anger can be used to make others back down, grief attracts help and fear may stop us rashly attempting difficult or dangerous tasks. Exploring the emotions You may not agree with all of these ‘laws’, for example this is quite an individually based account of emotion, and tends to downplay the social aspects of emotion. Nevertheless it is an excellent starting point which provides a very useful way of thinking about emotions, and helps pave the way for examining individual emotions. [Image credit: Victor Bezrukov ]

Go here to see the original: 
12 Laws of the Emotions

Avatar of Vaughan

by Vaughan

Making Sense of Bastards

November 23, 2008 in Blogs, Mind Hacks by Vaughan

A 2005 article from business psychology journal Organization Studies discusses the psychology of being a bastard. It has a serious point, but is just hilarious for the contrast between the academic language and the subject matter. The serious point behind the article, written by psychologist David Sims , is to look at how people in business organisations make narratives or stories about someone being a ‘bastard’ to demonize them and persuade others of the fact. This can be to discount someone else opinion, undermine their status, or to create a dragon against which they can valiantly fight for their own glory. However, because of the subject matter, it’s frequently funny as it analyses the varied types of company bastards as they’re constructed within organisations. Just some of the section headings are pure genius: Narrative 1: Clever Bastard Narrative 2: Bastard ex Machina Narrative 3: Devious Bastard A Narrative Understanding of Bastards Making Sense of Bastards Link to ‘You Bastard: A Narrative Exploration of the Experience of Indignation within Organizations’ (thanks Olwyn!). Link to DOI entry for same.

View original post here:
Making Sense of Bastards

Avatar of PsyBlog

by PsyBlog

7 Reasons Leaders Fail

November 19, 2008 in Blogs, PsyBlog by PsyBlog

Around two-thirds of workers say the most stressful aspect of their jobs is their immediate boss, their line manager ( Hogan, 2006 ). While this will come as no surprise to most, this statistic suggests a massive number of unhappy working relationships. So, does this mean that leadership is failing on a massive scale? Well, not exactly… A recent article published in American Psychologist beautifully explains why so many people experience their managers as piping hot geysers of stress ( Vugt, Hogan & Kaiser, 2008 ). What emerges is that bosses aren’t inherently bad people (mostly), but that the modern culture of work sets them up to fail. Here are the seven main reasons I’ve picked out from this article for why leaders fail: 1. Strict hierarchies. For Mark Van Vugt of the University of Kent and colleagues a large part of the problem with many modern organisations is their hierarchies. Leaders are at the top of the chain and are assumed to have all the answers, so they make most of the decisions. In reality knowledge and expertise is spread across people in organisations. But it’s the leaders who must be seen to lead and so followers get frustrated because their superior knowledge and expertise is frequently ignored. This leads to: 2. Poor decision-making. Leaders often don’t make any better decisions than followers, and frequently make worse ones. This is another consequence of strict hierarchies. Rather than setting up leaders to fail, Van Vugt et al. (2008) argue it’s better to agree that leaders are not always the best people to make the decisions. Spreading the responsibility around, or using more participatory strategies for decision-making is often more effective. But this isn’t the way things generally work, part of the problem is: 3. Huge pay differentials. Followers often hate their leaders because of the huge difference in their salaries. It’s hard to feel any sympathy for someone whose pay is stratospheric (average CEO pay is 179 times that of average workers). And, because more pay means more status, leaders can quickly come to believe they really deserve the God-like status their pay suggests, resulting in their thinking they have all the answers and that they have the right to treat their employees less than fairly. In the bosses’ defence, though, there are: 4. Impossible standards for leaders. Perhaps because of the huge pay and incredible demands, followers expect their leaders to be almost superhuman. The leadership literature identifies a whole range of personal qualities thought important for a good leader. These include integrity, persistence, humility, competence, decisiveness and being able to inspire the troops. While a leader may be high on one or two of these, they are unlikely to have the full set. Followers are almost bound to be disappointed by what is, after all, another fallible human who is just trying to: 5. Climb the greasy pole. If the boss is nice to you, it’s a bonus, because it’s not required for them to get on in the organisation. Leaders are promoted by those higher than them, not those below them – so it’s only necessary for bosses to impress their bosses. This is a recipe for disaffection amongst the followers. Talking of which, forget the psychology of leadership, what do we know about the: 6. Psychology of followership? One of the best points Van Vugt et al. make is that although it’s leadership that has been most extensively studied and discussed, most of us end up as followers. So really the psychology of followership is more important than leadership. What is it that makes us follow someone else? And, more subversively: do we need leaders? For example, some research shows that when people know what they’re doing, they resent having leadership imposed on them. Generally, though, there’s little known about followership, and how to avoid: 7. Alienation. As a result of the strict hierarchies, huge pay differentials, poor decision-making, greasy-pole climbing and feeling powerless to change huge bureaucracies, followers naturally develop feelings of alienation, and alienation kills motivation and productivity, along with any hope of job satisfaction. Talk is cheap By implication the way to rectify these perceived problems is to do the reverse. Don’t instigate rigid hierarchies, discourage huge pay differentials, democratise decision-making and don’t set impossible standards for leaders. Some organisations are already managing this – presumably those in which followers don’t find their bosses the biggest sources of stress – but most are not. Of course talk is cheap and recognising the problem is quite different to knowing what to do about it, or having the courage to do it. Anyone wanting to make these types of changes across an organisation would have to be a really great leader – and there are truly few of those around. What do you think? Do you recognise these problems in your organisation? Has anyone tried to do anything about it? Are there other major reasons leaders fail?

Go here to read the rest:
7 Reasons Leaders Fail

Let’s find the world’s best player of this game

November 12, 2008 in Blogs, Psychology Today by Psychology Today

Do you have brainy friends in your social network? We’re trying to find the best players in the world at a game of skill and luck.  About half a year ago, I posted here a game of skill and luck . Many people played, and it was interesting to see the variation in scores. Some people got it, and some just didn’t. Then I had an idea: let’s try to find some of the best players in the world at this. But how? While the world’s a big place, through social networks, it can get much smaller. As my host (I’m currently a visiting researcher at Yahoo! Research ) Duncan Watts , and others have shown, a short number of email forwards can connect two people living on opposite sides of the world: the "six degrees of separation" idea. The landmark experiment Watts was reviving was carried about by Stanley Milgram and published right here in Psychology Today (Stanley Milgram, "The Small World Problem", Psychology Today, 1967, Vol. 2, 60-67)! The same idea should work for finding smart people as well. If each person who plays the game then forwards it on to some people they know who are even better at the game, eventually we may come across a person who really gets it and achieves a fantastically long winning streak. So, let’s give it a try. Play the game for yourself . Then, following the instructions in the game, send it on to some friends who will score better. (Don’t pass on a link to this blog page, it’s important you pass on the link you see when you play the game, this way we can see how far it’s spreading). Good luck! Click here to play and then pass it on to some smart, persistent friends!

Original post: 
Let’s find the world’s best player of this game

Does Mozart make you smarter?

November 12, 2008 in Blogs, Psychology Today by Psychology Today

Mozart’s Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major (KV 448) is one of the most used compositions in music psychology research. Since the publication of the study Music and Spatial Task Performance in Nature in 1993, numerous researchers have tried to replicate the so-called "Mozart effect" using this composition. And often with little success. The idea is of course compelling: to become smarter by simply listening to Mozart’s music. It could be a helpful fact in the much needed support for a more prominent place of music in the curricula. However, the effect has been shown to appear not only with the music of Mozart, but also that of Beethoven, Sibelius, and even a ‘Blur effect’ was shown (based on a study by Glenn Schellenberg from the University of Toronto using 8,000 teenagers). Currently, the most likely interpretation of the effect is that music listening can have a positive effect on our cognitive abilities when the music is enjoyed by the listener. Apparently (and in a way unfortunately), it is not so much the structure of the music that causes the effect, but a change in the mood of the listener. While this indirectness might be disappointing for admirers of Mozart’s music, it is important to note that, at the same time, it leaves uncovered an important aspect of music appreciation. What makes certain music so effective in changing or intensifying our mood? It seems that while we are all experienced and active users of music as a kind of mood regulator (widely ranging from energizer to consoler of grief), music research has only just begun to explore the how and why of the relation between music and emotion.  

Excerpt from:
Does Mozart make you smarter?