So Gilt should probably swing some money my way for the sales pitch, but I'm so excited about it, I can't help but rave.
My boyfriend was recruiting at a career fair last week and saw a girl with shoes he knew I would love (stop and take a second to go: awwwww) so he asked her about them and that is how Gilt.com came into my life.
Gilt is an online start-up with a "flash sale" scheme, meaning certain designers are highlighted for a period of 36 hours, starting at noon every day. In other words, designer stuff on the serious side of cheap.
And I'm not talking about the ugly leftovers in impossible sizes that they can't sell and that are only marked 20% off and you can probably find for 40% off somewhere else.
Legit designers, with the latest stuff, and a huge range of selection for 50-70-pushing 80% percent off. There's women's, men's, kid's, and homegoods, and a link to Jetsetter with deals at luxury hotels around the globe.
For a girl bored with suburban malls, yearning for the shops and sample sales of SoHo, Gilt is a light in the darkness.
Another thing I like about them is that they showcase some designers I haven't heard of. Sure I know DVF, D&G, Missoni, Inhabit, Tart, etc. But I hadn't heard of, for example, Daryl K, Marais USA, or Magaschoni. It's been a great way to increase my designer knowledge beyond companies I baisedly self-select to learn about and hence I've gotten a better range of understanding and helped hone my fashion sense.
However, BE INFORMED:
As I got closer to actually purchasing from Gilt, I obviously figured I should do a little investigating about a company that seems a little too good to be true.
I'll let them first speak for themselves: http://www.gilt.com/company/about
Hopelessly economically oriented, I've wondered about Gilt in context of the recession and its implications on designers. Is it expanding the reach of designers, helping them to long term increase their business pool and exposure? Or is it cheapening the image they've worked to build by practically throwing their clothes at us? What are the ethics behind this, given they are obviously thriving off of companies struggling through the recession (my capitalistic answer: totally ethical and don't you dare think otherwise). How is the "cheapening" of these goods effecting the way that high fashion is perceived and consumer demands? (for example, are people feeling more entitled to these goods, decreasing their luxury status, and consequently decreasing their elasticity, which has effects on their pricing and purchasing patterns). What would Meryl Streep in the Devil Wears Prada do?
All these questions are rather obvious and thus it's not surprising that New York Magazine has a 6 page article asking precisely the same things I've been asking myself: http://nymag.com/fashion/10/spring/63807/
Overall, I'll let you make your own decision about Gilt, but it should be pretty clear how I feel about them.
[And if you want to be the nicest person ever, shoot me your email so I can refer you before you sign up so I can get store credits :)]
P.S. They're main competitor is Rue La La, but my evaluation of it is that they're don't have as good of brands or as much stock. And the styles are a little different, probably due to different buyer's tastes. The discounts might be a little deeper, but it Gilt makes it look like an outlet mall.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Monday, September 20, 2010
A lack of math
First off, let me just say, blogging on a iPad (checked out from the media center) from the column laden steps of the campus library overlooking the quad on an early fall morning is.......awesome.
I was just browsing through my international Econ book to read up a bit on offer curves. In my mind, offer curves, and the number of things they tell you, are pretty cool. The most simple way to describe them is that they represent the relationship between exports and imports of two goods in a basic two country model. This is derived from each countries relative factor prices of the two goods, which leads to the terms of trade, and consequently, they also tell you about the supply and demand for each good. I'm throwing around a lot of terms here so it's pretty clear that offer curves are pretty useful for a lot of things. Because they tie together supply and demand of exports and imports of the goods for each country, effects of things like changes in income, substitution, etc all also can be observed with the curves and the magnitude of these effects measured through the elasticity of demand for the good and the elasticity of the curve itself.
The math for all this is pretty intuitive (and pretty cool). The relationship between relative prices and their consequent effect on terms of trade is simple calculus, and understanding the effect of elasticity requires only the most basic of basic understandings of multivariate calc, really, it's just a couple simple partial derivatives. Rudimentary though it may be, the math going on here says a lot and gives you an intuitive sense of how and why everything comes together in offer curves. You can literally see the relationships when you have the equations linking all the variables together; you can feel each thing shifting and responding in graceful, seamless unison. It all ties together like a pretty bow on a present.
Given this, I was obviously surprised when I noticed that the chapter merely skimmed through their explanation, simply gave the bottom line of what needed to memorized, and relegated all the math behind it to to the appendix at the end of the chapter.
Um. What?
The math should be the building blocks, not an afterthought of "oh btw, in case your interested."
With a sigh, I filed this away as compounding evidence that there is a lack of math in the Econ dept at both my school and a couple others that I've encountered. Only one semester of calc is required to graduate, the "hardest class" of the major is the only one that is quantitatively based, and I've heard more heard one kid bemoan having to "do math" in more than one class.
For me, economics is a way of seeing the world. A lot of my fellow majors won't disagree with me there. But my reasoning behind this statement seems to be a little different than most. For me, seeing the world is observing relationships. Why people make the choices and decisions they do, what influences their behavior, and how that behavior in turn has effects on the world around them. The first thing you're taught on the first day of your first Econ class is that people are rational. Thinking that through: people are rational, their behavior can be patterned and predictable, patterns can be linked to it other patterns, relationships can be defined, MATH can be used to describe those relationships. Econ is logic. Math is logic. Econ is math.
So it's seems sad to me that math is so often cast to the way side in so many econ classes in universities today. It seems a bit like taking a french literature class and only reading English translations. You get the gist of it, the meaning and richness are gone.
I was just browsing through my international Econ book to read up a bit on offer curves. In my mind, offer curves, and the number of things they tell you, are pretty cool. The most simple way to describe them is that they represent the relationship between exports and imports of two goods in a basic two country model. This is derived from each countries relative factor prices of the two goods, which leads to the terms of trade, and consequently, they also tell you about the supply and demand for each good. I'm throwing around a lot of terms here so it's pretty clear that offer curves are pretty useful for a lot of things. Because they tie together supply and demand of exports and imports of the goods for each country, effects of things like changes in income, substitution, etc all also can be observed with the curves and the magnitude of these effects measured through the elasticity of demand for the good and the elasticity of the curve itself.
The math for all this is pretty intuitive (and pretty cool). The relationship between relative prices and their consequent effect on terms of trade is simple calculus, and understanding the effect of elasticity requires only the most basic of basic understandings of multivariate calc, really, it's just a couple simple partial derivatives. Rudimentary though it may be, the math going on here says a lot and gives you an intuitive sense of how and why everything comes together in offer curves. You can literally see the relationships when you have the equations linking all the variables together; you can feel each thing shifting and responding in graceful, seamless unison. It all ties together like a pretty bow on a present.
Given this, I was obviously surprised when I noticed that the chapter merely skimmed through their explanation, simply gave the bottom line of what needed to memorized, and relegated all the math behind it to to the appendix at the end of the chapter.
Um. What?
The math should be the building blocks, not an afterthought of "oh btw, in case your interested."
With a sigh, I filed this away as compounding evidence that there is a lack of math in the Econ dept at both my school and a couple others that I've encountered. Only one semester of calc is required to graduate, the "hardest class" of the major is the only one that is quantitatively based, and I've heard more heard one kid bemoan having to "do math" in more than one class.
For me, economics is a way of seeing the world. A lot of my fellow majors won't disagree with me there. But my reasoning behind this statement seems to be a little different than most. For me, seeing the world is observing relationships. Why people make the choices and decisions they do, what influences their behavior, and how that behavior in turn has effects on the world around them. The first thing you're taught on the first day of your first Econ class is that people are rational. Thinking that through: people are rational, their behavior can be patterned and predictable, patterns can be linked to it other patterns, relationships can be defined, MATH can be used to describe those relationships. Econ is logic. Math is logic. Econ is math.
So it's seems sad to me that math is so often cast to the way side in so many econ classes in universities today. It seems a bit like taking a french literature class and only reading English translations. You get the gist of it, the meaning and richness are gone.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
INTS 210
"Global Issues" is the required foundational course for my international studies major. Given that I transferred my Junior year, I wasn't exactly around to take it my freshman year and have found myself unable to waive the course, test out, swap credits, or any other means of avoidance.
Fully indulging my annoyance with this course is something I simply don't have the time or energy for, but I would like to share a few delightful tidbits of "knowledge" that have been imparted through the course so far:
-Globalization is a world wide evil that is a unstoppable, uncontrollable mystic external force that is controlling all of us against our will and destroying everyone's cultures.
-Liberalization (and I honestly don't think half the kids in the class actually know what this term means, let alone ANY significant facts, or theories, or studies, or anything scholarly about it) is BAD and we should all buy local and shop at farmer's markets and whole foods to encourage local cultural and cease to be mindless economic consumers void of social values.
-And today we learned that the Marshall Plan was basically a US conspiracy to control Europe and us imperialist Americans with superiority complexes cruelly forced American values and standards on European culture and therefore it was actually a horrible idea.
I think you should now have some idea of how I feel about the course. My patience is wearing thin on the number of uninformed ideas being fed to these freshman who don't know any better than to nod and say yes, who aren't being given the facts or even remotely informed about the current scholarly discussion on the topics. Don't get me wrong, critique is fine, great, healthy, and all that good stuff, but this is so subjectively one-sided it's absolutely ridiculous.
Fully indulging my annoyance with this course is something I simply don't have the time or energy for, but I would like to share a few delightful tidbits of "knowledge" that have been imparted through the course so far:
-Globalization is a world wide evil that is a unstoppable, uncontrollable mystic external force that is controlling all of us against our will and destroying everyone's cultures.
-Liberalization (and I honestly don't think half the kids in the class actually know what this term means, let alone ANY significant facts, or theories, or studies, or anything scholarly about it) is BAD and we should all buy local and shop at farmer's markets and whole foods to encourage local cultural and cease to be mindless economic consumers void of social values.
-And today we learned that the Marshall Plan was basically a US conspiracy to control Europe and us imperialist Americans with superiority complexes cruelly forced American values and standards on European culture and therefore it was actually a horrible idea.
I think you should now have some idea of how I feel about the course. My patience is wearing thin on the number of uninformed ideas being fed to these freshman who don't know any better than to nod and say yes, who aren't being given the facts or even remotely informed about the current scholarly discussion on the topics. Don't get me wrong, critique is fine, great, healthy, and all that good stuff, but this is so subjectively one-sided it's absolutely ridiculous.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Book
I just wrote the introduction to my book.
And yes, I know you're supposed to write that last, but the words for it came, so I wrote them down. And that was that. Quite suddenly, I've commenced.
I'm not entirely ready to give the verbal trailer for it yet (maybe I never will be). Suffice it to say that it is about my life.
I know, INCREDIBLY self-indulgent. I know, I know, I know. It seems arrogant, egotistical, self-absorbed, overly dramatic, to even THINK that my life is a story worth writing about.
I finally had enough people tell me that IT IS WORTH WRITING ABOUT to stop trying to suppress the urge and force humility. Better to get it all out and down now before I forget the details that give it color and it all runs together.
It's rather unlikely that I'll ever finish, and even less likely that I'll publish it. But it is noteworthy that I've put energy into it given that I seem to have a rather high threshold for interest and purpose before I invest in a project.
So.......here I go!
And yes, I know you're supposed to write that last, but the words for it came, so I wrote them down. And that was that. Quite suddenly, I've commenced.
I'm not entirely ready to give the verbal trailer for it yet (maybe I never will be). Suffice it to say that it is about my life.
I know, INCREDIBLY self-indulgent. I know, I know, I know. It seems arrogant, egotistical, self-absorbed, overly dramatic, to even THINK that my life is a story worth writing about.
I finally had enough people tell me that IT IS WORTH WRITING ABOUT to stop trying to suppress the urge and force humility. Better to get it all out and down now before I forget the details that give it color and it all runs together.
It's rather unlikely that I'll ever finish, and even less likely that I'll publish it. But it is noteworthy that I've put energy into it given that I seem to have a rather high threshold for interest and purpose before I invest in a project.
So.......here I go!
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Don't try this at home. Or school. Or anywhere.
Under no circumstances should one EVER, EVER put a coffee mug in one's bag.
Even if it only has (sigh, RED) juice in it and is "basically empty."
And especially NOT if one also happens to have $$$$ textbooks in said bag that they were going to return.
Furthermore, one should probably not enlist the help of every swear word they know in front of a group of housing administrators whilst reacting to the unforeseen, yet imminent, disaster produced by this situation.
:(
Even if it only has (sigh, RED) juice in it and is "basically empty."
And especially NOT if one also happens to have $$$$ textbooks in said bag that they were going to return.
Furthermore, one should probably not enlist the help of every swear word they know in front of a group of housing administrators whilst reacting to the unforeseen, yet imminent, disaster produced by this situation.
:(
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Order v. chaos
I was flipping through some style blogs I keep tabs on and found a blogger talking about a room they just love because of its symmetry, "how relaxing" they said.
I peered longer at the room. To me it seemed cold, stiff, overly formal. The idea of being in that room make me feel uptight.
Don't get me wrong, I'm an organization freak who loves me some clean, bold, sleek contemporary lines, but I feel most at home amidst the clutter and unordered mess of the boheme, "how comfy" I say.
And so this interests me.
To one person, an ordered environment can be calming, relaxing: no stress about chaotic, unpredictable lines and not knowing where to fit in them.
Yet to another, the chaotic environment can be more comfortable: no stress about rigidity and conforming to a defined space.
What makes the difference?
I peered longer at the room. To me it seemed cold, stiff, overly formal. The idea of being in that room make me feel uptight.
Don't get me wrong, I'm an organization freak who loves me some clean, bold, sleek contemporary lines, but I feel most at home amidst the clutter and unordered mess of the boheme, "how comfy" I say.
And so this interests me.
To one person, an ordered environment can be calming, relaxing: no stress about chaotic, unpredictable lines and not knowing where to fit in them.
Yet to another, the chaotic environment can be more comfortable: no stress about rigidity and conforming to a defined space.
What makes the difference?
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Let's throw the Christians under the bus
First off, what is it with that expression? Is everyone else using it as much as the people I'm around are? What's funny is that every single time I hear it I get an image of the scene at the end of Mean Girls where that one girl gets run over by a bus.
Anyway.
So we were in RA bootcamp a couple weeks ago and there's one particular event that I keep thinking about so I thought I'd blog about it.
We had a couple days of simulations where the old RAs acted out situations and the new RAs had to handle it. It was actually a lot more open-ended and realistic than I thought it would be (although I struggled with the fact that the actors were actors so I couldn't tap into their emotions as much, especially when I knew the actor and that they would never get themselves into that situation. But logistically getting a feel of the flow of situation dynamics and how to handle it was really good).
Anyway.
One of the simulations was a roomate coming out of the closet. Before we walked into the room to start the simulation, we would always prep as a group a little before going in, they would give us about as much information as we would have as RAs, so that the person heading it up would be prepared, and the rest of us observing (we rotated) wouldn't be clueless while watching.
We had some questions about what angle to take on approaching this, with respect to our role as an RA, and our leader made it very clear that, as in ANY case, we are primarily faciliators invested in enabling our residents to have a healthy living environment. With facilitating and enabling comes a sort of neutrality, we're open, we listen, we are flexible on how much we share and step in, but ultimately our goal is to help the residents live the life they chose to live, and to live it healthily and happily.
Neutrality....live their life......"so we can't have any opinion on if they should be gay or not?" asked one of the girls. Uh. No. The leader made if clear that anything along those lines would get you out of a job faster than you can say fire me. "But what if we don't support gays? We can't facilitate them being not gay?" was the girls response. Again: uh. no. definitely not.
I think she took it kind of personally. She rolled her eyes and sighed and said, "well let's just throw the Christians under the bus."
Hm.
In a way, I got where she was coming from, I didn't relate to her personal opinion, but given places in life I've been in the past I could relate to her feeling like she had to support the opinions of an organization that didn't align with her own and she felt jipped.
The thing is. It's not a zero sum game. DHRE wasn't saying "we are pro gay and you are not allowed to not be pro gay, so Christians, keep your opinions to yourselves." DRHE is saying that we are a neutral third party that allows our residents to decide and chose for themselves. If a student is struggling with homosexuality and they themselves do not support homosexulaity, we are there to help them access the resources and support they need to deal with it in the way that they want to. If a student is homosexual and embraces that, we're there to faciliate that aspects of life, theirs and otherwise, that are effected by that choice.
It's not that you can't have your own opinions, its just beyond your role as an RA to impose those opinions on others. Granted, maybe not speaking up about what you believe is against your principles, which is where it could get sticky.
Anyway. I thought her reaction was interesting.
Anyway.
So we were in RA bootcamp a couple weeks ago and there's one particular event that I keep thinking about so I thought I'd blog about it.
We had a couple days of simulations where the old RAs acted out situations and the new RAs had to handle it. It was actually a lot more open-ended and realistic than I thought it would be (although I struggled with the fact that the actors were actors so I couldn't tap into their emotions as much, especially when I knew the actor and that they would never get themselves into that situation. But logistically getting a feel of the flow of situation dynamics and how to handle it was really good).
Anyway.
One of the simulations was a roomate coming out of the closet. Before we walked into the room to start the simulation, we would always prep as a group a little before going in, they would give us about as much information as we would have as RAs, so that the person heading it up would be prepared, and the rest of us observing (we rotated) wouldn't be clueless while watching.
We had some questions about what angle to take on approaching this, with respect to our role as an RA, and our leader made it very clear that, as in ANY case, we are primarily faciliators invested in enabling our residents to have a healthy living environment. With facilitating and enabling comes a sort of neutrality, we're open, we listen, we are flexible on how much we share and step in, but ultimately our goal is to help the residents live the life they chose to live, and to live it healthily and happily.
Neutrality....live their life......"so we can't have any opinion on if they should be gay or not?" asked one of the girls. Uh. No. The leader made if clear that anything along those lines would get you out of a job faster than you can say fire me. "But what if we don't support gays? We can't facilitate them being not gay?" was the girls response. Again: uh. no. definitely not.
I think she took it kind of personally. She rolled her eyes and sighed and said, "well let's just throw the Christians under the bus."
Hm.
In a way, I got where she was coming from, I didn't relate to her personal opinion, but given places in life I've been in the past I could relate to her feeling like she had to support the opinions of an organization that didn't align with her own and she felt jipped.
The thing is. It's not a zero sum game. DHRE wasn't saying "we are pro gay and you are not allowed to not be pro gay, so Christians, keep your opinions to yourselves." DRHE is saying that we are a neutral third party that allows our residents to decide and chose for themselves. If a student is struggling with homosexuality and they themselves do not support homosexulaity, we are there to help them access the resources and support they need to deal with it in the way that they want to. If a student is homosexual and embraces that, we're there to faciliate that aspects of life, theirs and otherwise, that are effected by that choice.
It's not that you can't have your own opinions, its just beyond your role as an RA to impose those opinions on others. Granted, maybe not speaking up about what you believe is against your principles, which is where it could get sticky.
Anyway. I thought her reaction was interesting.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Dreams
Literally every day so far this week, I've had some degree of a nightmare. As in, I wake up suddenly in a cold sweat, or out of breath, or scared, or just plain unsettled.
And every dream has involved a (ficticious) close friend or family member (or both) DYING.
A weak and sickly younger brother that falls ill and dies, an invisible serial killer who targets my closest friends, a grandfather passing away in some strange way I can't recall, etc etc.
I'm not a big dreamer, I've never been the kid who every day goes, "I had this dream last night" no, like seriously it's once in a blue moon that I wake up remebering my dreams. And as far as I can remember, death is not a common topic.
Interpretations please?
(tbh, I think it's bc I'm stressed about my relationship with some people, particularly the possibility of losing them in my life)
And every dream has involved a (ficticious) close friend or family member (or both) DYING.
A weak and sickly younger brother that falls ill and dies, an invisible serial killer who targets my closest friends, a grandfather passing away in some strange way I can't recall, etc etc.
I'm not a big dreamer, I've never been the kid who every day goes, "I had this dream last night" no, like seriously it's once in a blue moon that I wake up remebering my dreams. And as far as I can remember, death is not a common topic.
Interpretations please?
(tbh, I think it's bc I'm stressed about my relationship with some people, particularly the possibility of losing them in my life)
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
How full is full?!
I know this sounds ridiculous, but the most difficult adjustment to being back in the states was resuming my old/normal eating habits.
You'd think after 21 years of having relatively similar eating habits, it wouldn't be hard to bounce back after eating differently for a mere 9 weeks.
My best guess (I have no idea how this stuff works) is that because it was something that was difficult for me in India, and took a tremendous amount of self-discipline and effort to adjust to in India, the habits ingrained themselves just that much deeper because of how deeply it impacted me while I was there.
My (amazingly awesome) host family was Jain and thus were not only what Americans might most conceptually equate with "vegan" but also did not waste anything. As in, however much food got made for dinner, it had to be completely consumed (baring death bed status).
My parents never demanded I clean my plate as a kid so this was completely new for me. I struggled the first few weeks and derived little methods to ease trying to squeeze in the final bites I just didn't have room for.
1. Eat as fast a possible, especially at the start of the meal
2. Chug as you have never chugged before. Smoothie? Gone in a gulp.
3. Liquids last. This includes drinks and any food that doesn't require chewing. Chewing makes the inevitably approaching need to swallow that much more arduous.
(4. When all else fails, pitch the leftovers out the window in an unattended moment or feed it to a cow on the street)
This led to a bit of a paradigm shift on what eating was and my mindset while eating. I thought about my food less, enjoyed and savored it less. My focus changed. You'd think I would have been very determined and goal oriented towards finishing my food. Interestingly, that wasn't the case. I can't exactly explain it, but I....I sort of just got into automatic pilot of finishing my food. I didn't focus on the end, I just ate until I reached the end without thinking about it.
I got ice cream once that had these horrible chewy gummy things (ew gummy) in it that would have been grounds to discard the food. I noticed that I didn't continue eating out of guilt, I continued eating out of habit.
My first couple meals at home, with significantly larger portions, I exhibited the same behavior. At one meal, I realized that portions were just so incredible that I literally would have made myself sick had I kept eating and had to force myself to regain awareness of how much I was eating such that I was able to stop myself from finishing.
Yet this posed a new dilemma. If I wasn't going to finish, when did I stop? There was a large buffer range of when I could possibly be considered full.
I remembered in the past, always just sort of knowing when to stop eating. Just as I had made a habit of not thinking about working on finishing, I'd previously lived a life of habit of not thinking about when to stop eating.
My paradigm hadn't shifted all the way back, and it took about a week of effort to get back in touch with my stomach capacity and forcing myself to try to be consistent on when to choose to stop eating.
I still feel like I'm eating more than "usual" and probably more than I should. It all tastes so good though! OH MY GOODNESS it feels so good to be nourished and healthy again! To feel my body strong and feel it soaking up the nutrients in the food!! Asparagus! Broccoli! Zucchini! Pasta! Salad! Chicken! Who cares if I've gained back those 12 pounds I lost, it feels GOOD! Yet, now that I'm healthy again, I recognize that it's time to exhibit some restraint; I don't need TWO plates of butter laden carrots at each meal....
You'd think after 21 years of having relatively similar eating habits, it wouldn't be hard to bounce back after eating differently for a mere 9 weeks.
My best guess (I have no idea how this stuff works) is that because it was something that was difficult for me in India, and took a tremendous amount of self-discipline and effort to adjust to in India, the habits ingrained themselves just that much deeper because of how deeply it impacted me while I was there.
My (amazingly awesome) host family was Jain and thus were not only what Americans might most conceptually equate with "vegan" but also did not waste anything. As in, however much food got made for dinner, it had to be completely consumed (baring death bed status).
My parents never demanded I clean my plate as a kid so this was completely new for me. I struggled the first few weeks and derived little methods to ease trying to squeeze in the final bites I just didn't have room for.
1. Eat as fast a possible, especially at the start of the meal
2. Chug as you have never chugged before. Smoothie? Gone in a gulp.
3. Liquids last. This includes drinks and any food that doesn't require chewing. Chewing makes the inevitably approaching need to swallow that much more arduous.
(4. When all else fails, pitch the leftovers out the window in an unattended moment or feed it to a cow on the street)
This led to a bit of a paradigm shift on what eating was and my mindset while eating. I thought about my food less, enjoyed and savored it less. My focus changed. You'd think I would have been very determined and goal oriented towards finishing my food. Interestingly, that wasn't the case. I can't exactly explain it, but I....I sort of just got into automatic pilot of finishing my food. I didn't focus on the end, I just ate until I reached the end without thinking about it.
I got ice cream once that had these horrible chewy gummy things (ew gummy) in it that would have been grounds to discard the food. I noticed that I didn't continue eating out of guilt, I continued eating out of habit.
My first couple meals at home, with significantly larger portions, I exhibited the same behavior. At one meal, I realized that portions were just so incredible that I literally would have made myself sick had I kept eating and had to force myself to regain awareness of how much I was eating such that I was able to stop myself from finishing.
Yet this posed a new dilemma. If I wasn't going to finish, when did I stop? There was a large buffer range of when I could possibly be considered full.
I remembered in the past, always just sort of knowing when to stop eating. Just as I had made a habit of not thinking about working on finishing, I'd previously lived a life of habit of not thinking about when to stop eating.
My paradigm hadn't shifted all the way back, and it took about a week of effort to get back in touch with my stomach capacity and forcing myself to try to be consistent on when to choose to stop eating.
I still feel like I'm eating more than "usual" and probably more than I should. It all tastes so good though! OH MY GOODNESS it feels so good to be nourished and healthy again! To feel my body strong and feel it soaking up the nutrients in the food!! Asparagus! Broccoli! Zucchini! Pasta! Salad! Chicken! Who cares if I've gained back those 12 pounds I lost, it feels GOOD! Yet, now that I'm healthy again, I recognize that it's time to exhibit some restraint; I don't need TWO plates of butter laden carrots at each meal....
Which lane is the right lane?
Getting used to driving on the left in India took me a while. I was around more organized roads and more traffic than I was in Uganda (in other words, another drive on the left country that I've spent comparable time in) and consequently had to adjust to it more for sake of minimizing stress.
Even then, when I personally was behind the wheel more towards the end of my time there I found myself automatically reverting to driving on the right as instinct kicked in while I tried to handle everything else on the road.
So I thought I actually wasn't that well adjusted to the road system.
Funny thing is, three weeks back, and I STILL frequently, when I'm making a left or a right hand turn, have a moment in the middle of the turn where I become very, very confused about which lane I should be turning into.
Weird, right?
But seriously, I keep having to pause and stop and intentionally tell myself to turn into the right lane. I'm sure the people behind me appreciate it.....lots.
Even then, when I personally was behind the wheel more towards the end of my time there I found myself automatically reverting to driving on the right as instinct kicked in while I tried to handle everything else on the road.
So I thought I actually wasn't that well adjusted to the road system.
Funny thing is, three weeks back, and I STILL frequently, when I'm making a left or a right hand turn, have a moment in the middle of the turn where I become very, very confused about which lane I should be turning into.
Weird, right?
But seriously, I keep having to pause and stop and intentionally tell myself to turn into the right lane. I'm sure the people behind me appreciate it.....lots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)