The Curiosity of Expectations

I’ve been pondering on the role and influence of expectations in relationships for the past few weeks. It seems like expectations can have both positive and negative effects. For example, the highest predictor of good teenage behavior is parental expectations. But expectations can also cause a lot of harm. Knowing of someone’s expectations of you can make you feel pressure and strain the relationship. So how can you know what expectations are good? Are all high and realistic expectations good? How do you know what is reasonable to expect?

Consider briefly the following situations:

A mother expects her child to get good grades.

A roommate expects her fellow roommates to do their own dishes.

A husband expects his wife to keep herself physically fit.

Are any of those expectations unreasonable? To a point, no. But think of the harm that each of those expectations has the potential to do. The receiver of the expectation could feel immense pressure, maybe develop a complex, etc. Perhaps they will start doing the expected action because of the other person, rather than for personal motivation. It could definitely strain the relationship.

But does that mean you shouldn’t have expectations? No, the problem is not the expectation itself. The problem lies in how the expecter is viewing the other person. It’s not what you expect, it’s how you do it. It’s how you are feeling and what you are thinking. And that’s where charity comes in. Elder Marvin J. Ashton said,

“Perhaps the greatest charity comes when we are kind to each other, when we don’t judge or categorize someone else, when we simply give each other the benefit of the doubt or remain quiet. Charity is accepting someone’s differences, weaknesses, and shortcomings; having patience with someone who has let us down; or resisting the impulse to become offended when someone doesn’t handle something the way we might have hoped. Charity is refusing to take advantage of another’s weakness and being willing to forgive someone who has hurt us. Charity is expecting the best of each other.”

Charity seeks the growth of others. So how is the expectation inherent in charity different from other expectations? I believe it is because of many reasons:

1) Charity’s expectation is what is best for the other person, not because you want it, but because you love them and want the best for them for their sakes, not yours.

2) Charity does not take offense or get upset when the other person disappoints you. Charity is unjudging and patient and kind. Thus the other person doesn’t feel fear of not reaching the expectation. Pure love casteth away all fear.

3) Perhaps most importantly, Charity empowers the other person to fulfill their potential. Instead of pressuring the other person and causing them to do the thing because you want them to, Charity builds the other person’s sense of self by seeing the greatness that lies within. Charity helps you to do what is best/become your best because you want to. You are the active agent in shaping your own life, and charity enables you to feel that. Thus, charity increases the intrinsic motivation of the person to be good.

Thus, I think that asking yourself whether your expectations are reasonable is a secondary issue. First examine your heart. Try substituting your name for the word charity, and consider this scripture in regards to the situation you are facing:

“And charity suffereth long, and is kind, and envieth not, and is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, and rejoiceth not in iniquity but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.” (Mor. 7:45)

Anyway, these are some preliminary thoughts. I’m still trying to wrap my mind around this issue. I think that expectations play a bigger role in our relationships than we may sometimes realize. And here’s even more food for thought: the root of all contention is different expectations. hmmm I just was told that one tonight. Very interesting stuff.

The Importance of Remaining Vulnerable

Several weeks ago in sacrament meeting, the speaker said, "You need to choose to remain vulnerable. Don't let trials harden you." I don't even remember the context in which it was spoken, but those words have stayed with me, and I've pondered them ever since. In my pondering I have found that the decision to remain vulnerable is essential to successful living.

There is a time in between making a decision and knowing its outcome in which you feel unsafe and vulnerable. You put yourself out there, you took a risk, and you don't know what will come of it. Will it be exhilarating success? Will you suffer a crushing defeat? You don't know. And in the meantime, you feel uncomfortably exposed.

These situations present themselves all the time--learning a new skill, sharing your feelings about the gospel to someone, making a controversial point in class, asking someone out on a date, telling someone you like them, etc. The risk taken can vary from small to momentous. In addition to risks, I believe that any time you fully invest yourself in something you are making yourself somewhat vulnerable. It is safe to be mediocre; full investment in anything can be emotionally and/or physically unsafe. And I believe that taking such risks and making such investments are what make a life lived.

After investing yourself in something and experiencing failure, your wounded heart might encourage you to curl up in a ball and not expose yourself to defeat ever again. This is where "choosing to remain vulnerable" comes in. Remind yourself of what you want to achieve. You have to choose to take the chance of failure, for this is the only way to take the chance of success. Inaction guarantees zero success.

One of my favorite country singers, Garth Brooks, wrote a song about this. He said, "Life is not tried, it is merely survived if you're standing outside the fire." Of course it's safer to stand outside the fire, but to what end? Your dreams, your hopes, your goals and aspirations all require you to take the chance of getting burned. That is the only way to achieve what you want in life.

So if you feel that uncomfortable twinge of vulnerability, remember this and take heart: you are choosing to live the life you want to live.

The Need to Create

I really enjoyed this talk when it was given, and I really enjoyed this video that was created from it. Hope you enjoy it, too!

The Cost of Considering Opportunity Cost: An Insight into BYU Dating

Dictionary.com describes opportunity cost as, "The cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action. Put another way, the benefits you could have received by taking an alternative action."

Have you ever thought of this in terms of dating? I have, and I've talked with several friends who have, too. It usually goes like this: you like someone, have been going on dates, and are considering entering a relationship with this person, but you're not sure yet. And then you think about the opportunity cost of doing so. If you steady date this person, then that means that you can't date other people. Is it worth it? Do you like this person enough to dedicate time and energy to him (we'll just say "him" since I think him/her is atrocious and disruptive), such that your efforts are focused on him, and you stop "looking around" for a potential match? Then, the inevitable big question: WHAT if there's someone BETTER? oooh, that one makes you stop and think. "I'm pretty awesome," you think to yourself, "I know I deserve someone awesome. Is this person as good as I can get? Or is there someone better?" It sounds cocky and self-centered, but I daresay that this same thought process has entered more heads than you may think. And thus I consider the cost of considering opportunity cost.

What is the result of this thinking? I think the immediate result is perilous delay within the jaws of indecision. These things are tender and ephemeral--if you don't grab an opportunity, it may pass you by, never to return again. One possible result is that you end up single, always waiting (or searching) for greener pastures. The other result is that you may go into a relationship half-heartedly, which the other person does not deserve. Of course I acknowledge the possibility that this may actually work out for some people, and they really do end up with super awesome counterparts, but I submit that their mindset would have to be changed slightly before this happens.

One of my good friends described the problem to me in this way: when we are considering opportunity cost, we are looking at what the other person brings with them to the relationship--one person may bring more than another, and thereby be a "better" option. The thing is, in the LDS faith we believe in eternal marriage and eternal progression--thus, whatever talent (or disposition, in some cases) someone hasn't acquired in 20 years may well be acquired over the course of an eternity. So what does matter? What you build together. Relationships are about what you can build together. That is what matter most. A person may look good on paper, with their long list of accomplishments and such, but if their personality doesn't mesh with yours in a way that you can improve together and accomplish together, what does it amount to? So if you have been going on dates with someone, you are building something. You can look at that and evaluate it and see if it has the potential to continue progressing and become something really good. What you can't do is take what you've built with one person and compare it to someone that you haven't built anything with (i.e. the opportunity cost, the people you would be dating or might be meeting if you weren't with this person). If you haven't built anything with that other person, how can you even evaluate if it would be better than what you have? (summarized from a conversation, 2009)

So what do you do? You focus on truth--things as they really are. Instead of conjecturing about how good a relationship might be with some dream girl you've never met (but is amazing and surely you are deserving) or some boy you admire from afar, bring your mind back to what is concrete and real. After all, we all know what you make of you and me when you assume things... Fantasy never yields productive results. So let's focus on what you do have and what you do know: what you have (are building) with the person you are dating and considering a relationship with. Is it good? Is it growing? Does it have potential? How does it make you feel? If the answers are positive, go for it. Don't wonder about what would happen with other people if you weren't dating this person. Those other people don't got nothin'--you haven't built anything with them yet! So step out of the jaws of indecision; you can make a decision one way or the other with no feelings of regret. Whatever you decide, be committed to it.




So that's what I'm thinking. What do you think? Does looking at relationships in terms of "building" something help to see the situation clearly?

Faith to do vs. Faith to be patient

This is going off of my last post on the faith not to worry. I've been thinking a lot about the role faith plays in life, especially at the stage I'm in.

In my mission, I had to have the faith to do. Going up and talking to someone on the street was exercising my faith. Challenging someone to be baptized exercised my faith. Basically, doing what I was expected to do as a missionary was exercising faith. Each time I obeyed, I was strengthening my faith and my power to do more.

I'm noticing that in daily post-mission life, faith is a bit different. There are many unknowns. Many decisions. Many things that I have to wait and see and have the faith that everything will turn out alright as long as I am being obedient. This is the faith to be patient. I think the faith not to worry is included in this term. Or maybe a better term would be the faith to trust. Being patient and not worrying both are demonstrations of trusting in the Lord. We have to trust in his timing. Trust that he knows what's best for us and cares for us. Trust that everything will go turn out for our good.

I believe that when we sincerely feel this type of faith, this calm reassuring faith, we are true believers. It is one thing to say you believe in Christ. It is another thing to let this belief become a part of you to the point where you trust in Him more than in yourself. And you feel great peace about it.

Love this clip!

The Faith not to Worry

I've been thinking a lot lately about the relationship between worrying and faith. I've been kind of worried during the past two weeks. Sometimes I would feel worried without even having anything specific to worry about--I was just stressed constantly. I haven't gotten like that since 8th grade and a few times in high school. Somehow, it seems like my capacity to deal with school is a bit diminished since coming home from my mission. During summer term it was fine because the load is less, but fall semester has been intense. I've been feeling a ton of pressure to get married (the theme is rather omnipresent here at BYU), and that has been worrying me as well.

And I've come to a conclusion: if I'm worrying, I'm neglecting my faith in Jesus Christ. Think about it, if I'm worried about something, that means that I'm taking things too much into my own hands. I think that only I am responsible for the outcomes in my life, and doubting my own ability, instead of sharing the burden with Christ and having faith in his power to magnify my abilities. If I have faith in Christ, then I have the peace to know that everything will work out. Even if there are troubles and problems, it will all end up ok. I don't need to worry about it. With faith, I can calmly face life. I am also more productive, because instead of wasting time worrying, I am calmly and steadily making progress. I am more content. Knowing this principle is true doesn't necessarily make it easy to live. I often forget about it and have to remind myself to have faith and not worry.

I think this principle is demonstrated by the woman in the story that Elder D. Todd Christofferson told in his talk "The Power of Covenants." This woman lost her house and all her belongings in a massive earthquake. Her family, however, was ok. A church leader inquired as to her situation and remarked that she was still smiling in spite of her loss. She replied, "Yes. I have prayed and I am at peace." How simple and profound! There were a million things she could be worried about at that moment. But she prayed and she felt peace. She had faith, and thus she did not worry. She knew God would take care of her.

My Quest to Define Masculinity and Femininity

For a while now, I've been trying to work this one out. I now have some ideas.

When I was younger, I considered myself a tom boy. I played in the mud, had spitting wars with my brothers, played with toy dinosaurs and cars and legos more than I did with dolls. I was ashamed at age 8 to want to play with Barbies, so I did it incognito at my neighbor's house, then slinked home, knowing my brothers would tease me if they ever found out. SO, I didn't even know how to put my hair into a pony tail until 5th grade. I'd go shopping with my mom and sisters, and have no idea what was "cute" or not. I remember praying for God to make me a boy.

Thus, even after I grew out of that, I still had warped ideas about what it meant to be feminine. To me, femininity meant pink and frills and shopping and make-up and being prissy. Everything I wasn't. So even though I decided that I liked being a girl, I thought I must not be very "feminine" because I wasn't "girly." I didn't know then, but those words mean two very different things.

Not considering myself feminine gave me a complex at times during college and during my mission, when I had girly friends or companions. I had a companion that wore frills and curled her hair, and was the epitome of both girly and feminine. I wondered if I was looked at as "one of the guys" by the elders, or as a lady. I asked a trusted friend, and he told me I was "very feminine." That made me feel validated, but also confused. And thus began my journey to define what it actually means to be feminine.

Dr. Laura has helped me to define something that I already knew intuitively. Although I do not enjoy her radio show very much, I have quite enjoyed the books of hers that I've read: The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands, Woman Power, and now The Proper Care and Feeding of Marriages. Don't let the titles turn you off--they are filled with truth and wisdom.

The thing is, men and women are different, and they should be. In a quest to find "equality," society has been misdirected to think this means "sameness." To be equal does not mean to be the same. However, the messages we are bombarded with daily try to make men and women as same as possible. As a result, our men are becoming more womanly, and our women are becoming more manly. We are losing our unique, complimentary characteristics.

Now in defining masculinity and femininity, I have realized something. The characteristics that define each of them are not mutually exclusive. Their are women who naturally have traits that would be on the masculine side, and vice versa. This is normal. The point is not that women do not have traits on the masculine side, it means that they aren't "defined" by them. Their defining characteristics are others, although they may possess some of the prominent characteristics of the other gender.

On her website, Dr. Laura conducted a poll, asking the men what they appreciated most about women, and asking the women what they appreciated most about men. I think the answers hold keys to defining what femininity and masculinity really are. Here are the poll answers:

Question: What do you, as a man, most admire about women in general?
1. Social skills, nurturing nature, compassion, sensitivity, listening skills, focus on relationships and bonding (friends, family, community)
2. Physical softness, sexy, curvy, beautiful, and graceful bodies
3. They will sacrifice for family, the power of creation of new life, being mothers
4. Better at details (multitasking)
5. They take the rough, hard edges off this world, they bring feelings and emotions and a sense of intimacy to us logical guys
6. They can create a home out of any environment, adding aesthetics (color, grace, beauty) to life, they make a house into a sanctuary... a home, homemaking
7. The positive effect a good woman can have on her husband and family
8. In femininity there is gentle power over people

One of her male listeners made this comment, "A real woman is someone who has no shame in being a wife and a mother, and puts her career on hold until the kids are grown. A real woman is available emotionally, spiritually, and physically for her man. She is selfless, and in doing so, loves herself because she has so much to offer." That last line made me think.

Question: What do you, as a woman, most admire about men in general?
1. Hardiness, physical strength, masculinity, mental toughness, protective, courage, self-confident, persevering, emotional strength when facing fear
2. Ability to see the whole picture objectively, think logically, get things done, practicality
3. Honest, straight to the point, backbone, strength of character and opinion, uncomplicated
4. They get over things fast, can be friends with other men who have hurt their feelings (not petty, catty, or gossipy), bond easily, don't make everything a crisis, up front with anger, don't over-analyze everything
5. Provider for family, responsible, driven to fix and help, leadership and devotion
6. Chivalry, gentlemanly behavior, willingness to slay dragons every day, they will sacrifice everything to make their woman happy
7. They are put together nicely and their passion in sex, they are comfortable with their bodies
8. Their simplicity

Another comment from one of her female listeners says the following, " Feminists abandoned all the virtues of womanhood (modesty, tact, subtlety, civility) and adopted all the vices of men (promiscuity, vulgarity, aggressiveness). Perhaps this would be less appalling if the feminists adopted at least some of the male virtues (logical thought, adherence to principles, stoicism, reticence), but they have not. Paradoxically, feminism today is about hating men, but at the same time encouraging detestable behavior in mean: how, exactly, has abortion on demand improved male/female relationships?"


So I read this chapter of Dr. Laura's book with a grain of salt, comparing it with what I believe, still attempting to define what true masculinity is and true femininity is. I still need help. But here's what I got so far (keeping in mind that each set is not mutually exclusive, but are simply the defining traits):

Masculinity is: strength, loyalty, courage, responsible for family, provider and protector, dedicated, problem-solver, logical thinker, resistant (puts up with stuff/copes well), simple (not as in stupid--as in "not-complicated")

Masculinity is not: violence, crudeness, vulgarity, dominating, excessive competing, meanness, gambling/pornography/other

vices, etc. Masculinity is not created by not wearing certain colors or watching certain movies.

Femininity is: nurturing, loving, modesty, beauty/grace, connecting people, bringing positive emotion, inner strength, possessing great influence and power for good over others, selflessness

Femininity is not: being petty, catty, gossipy, being a doormat nor a power-seeking monster, busybody-ness, being a man-eater, not needing men, getting an abortion nor having 20 kids, giving free sex, etc. Femininity is not created by but may be accompanied by enjoying shopping, pedicures, certain clothing, etc.

I believe that feminine women can be found both in the home and in the work place. But I believe that a woman's source of true satisfaction comes from the work she does within her home and family. I believe that masculinity and femininity are attracted to each other and are complimented by each other. We are made different so that we can balance each other. Balance is not to be achieved by each gender coming toward the middle. Let us embrace what is naturally ours, and rejoice in the differences of the opposite gender.



What do you think? How did I do on my definition? What else should be included?

Each Life That Touches Ours For Good...

Two and a half weeks ago, I returned to BYU. Nearly all of my friends had graduated and/or married or have yet to return from their missions, so I've had to start fresh in the friend department. And I've been amazed at the quality of people that I've found here.

I've met people that inspire me. People that think wider and bigger and deeper than I do. People that are "movers and shakers." People that question the status quo and want to do things better. People with ingenuity and creativity. And that makes me want to follow suit. Not to copy them, but apply those principles to the things that I am interested in. Hearing them speak gets my creative juices flowing, and all of a sudden, I'm not content to be mediocre anymore. I want to make a difference, just like I started feeling when I was a small child.

It reminds me of a certain phrase from a well-known poem. It says:
There is nothing enlightened about shrinking
so that other people won't feel insecure around you. ...
And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously
give other people permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear,
our presence automatically liberates others.

The entire poem is quite wonderful, and I would highly recommend it (it is by Marianne Williamson even thought it is often erroneously attributed to Nelson Mandela). I chose these specific lines, because they go against what we often think/feel.

We never feel intimidated by mediocre people. Sometimes, however, we feel intimidated by brilliant and accomplished people. This would make some people fear leaving the comfortable box of mediocrity, because they do not want to make others feel uncomfortable around them. This poem, however, states the opposite. It claims that we all have the capacity and, indeed, the right to be wonderful and amazing; and by achieving one's potential, one frees the others from their bounds, and enables them to fulfill their own destiny of greatness. It's like we see that it is possible, because someone (one whom we may term a "hero") had the courage to break through.

And therefore, we should not shrink back in cowardess and do merely what is expected of us. We should raise our minds and our visions and our hearts toward the good of all, and make our footprint on the world or on some person's heart (for all of our destinies are different). But be it what it may, we would all do well to examine ourselves, and see what our contribution currently is, and what it can be. And start by surrounding yourself with good people that inspire you--liberate you--to become that.

"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of love, power, and of a sound mind." 2 Tim 1:7

Getting the Full Flavor Experience from your Food

So, I was talking to a friend the other day, and she told me that there's this expensive restaurant (in LA?) where you eat in the dark. It's all finger foods so you don't have to try to use utensils in the dark. And you can't talk. And it's WAY expensive. ...why? You may ask. Because the food tastes amazing. Most especially so because it's in the dark. The thing is that when you close down one sense, the others become more acute. Thus, by shutting down sight (you can't even see your hand in front of your face there) and minimizing hearing, your sense of taste is magnified. (I think that's why people close their eyes when they kiss) Plus, there's nothing to distract you, so you concentrate on tasting your food, instead of the conversation or a zillion thoughts in your head.

And I realized that I hardly ever think about tasting my food. Really enjoying it. If I'm like eating breakfast alone, I'm usually reading at the same time. Lunch is on the run--not thinking about tasting my food, thinking about inhaling it so that I can do something else. Dinner is with the family--thinking about the conversation. So I never concentrate on tasting.

My friend also pointed out that when you are focused on something else while eating, your brain never receives the "I'm full" message. Which is why you can eat so many ______ while watching t.v. or doing your homework. You never feel full because you were never telling your brain that you were eating in the first place. So in addition to being a full flavor experience, tasting your food is also more healthy. Cool, huh?

Born In the Covenant Syndrome (B.I.C.S.)

Toward the end of my mission, I came up with this theory that most kids who grow up in the church are in a similar state of sickness that I dubbed BICS.

It's like this: Although you may be showing forth the correct "works," you still have not developed "faith". Faith, for these purposes, is defined as a confidence in Jesus Christ that leads a person to obey him. People with BICS aren't obeying out of confidence/trust/love for Jesus Christ. They're obeying for a variety of other reasons...parental pressure, tradition, strict conscience, etc. But they never stop to question themselves as to if they really have faith. So when they find themselves in new circumstances (bad group of friends, leave for college, death in the family, etc.), they can't sit on the fence anymore, and either choose to draw closer to Christ or they drift away. Without opposition, they could potentially remain a luke-warm Mormon for their whole lives.

The reality is, I think very few teenagers have developed real faith. At least, I know I didn't. I remember going to EFY as a 15 year old, and my counselor had us write down our feelings about Jesus Christ. I was dumb-founded. Feelings? I didn't have any feelings toward him. He was an abstract figure that I knew was very important. If she had asked what I knew about Jesus Christ, I could write a whole essay. But feelings...no. The truth was, I liked being a member of the Church. I was "strong." I kept the standards. I liked learning about things like the Second Coming, emergency preparedness, patriarchal blessings, and so-called deep doctrine. I focused on the outermost branches instead of the actual roots of the gospel. And I actually didn't get to the roots until my mission. If I hadn't gone, I don't know if I would have ever gotten to them. I thought the basics were boring. When I got to the MTC I had a major reality check and had to start at the beginning, with faith in Jesus Christ. Nothing means anything without it. You can't just teach the standards and desired behaviors without the WHY. Jesus is why. It all begins with him and the Plan of Salvation.

I talked with an Elder about this, and he had his own little theory. He said that because we've been going to Sunday School for years and have been taught so much, we have a huge knowledge level. Our conscience grows according to our knowledge level. (The more you know you're supposed to do and not supposed to do, the more guilty you feel, the more you obey out of fear of guilt). But our faith level is very small, until trials and other things cause us to develop it.

And that just made sense to me. That's what I went through. Now I'm in the process of getting my faith level up to my knowledge level. And it's one principle at a time. Gain a testimony of fasting (I "know" it works, but do I actually have faith that my fasting will work?), of prayer, of repentance and the atonement, etc. etc. etc. Now I'm going brick by brick and gaining faith in the individual parts of the gospel, through personal experience. It's not just about knowing that the Church is true as a whole and then doing what I'm supposed to without further thought. It's about personal experiences with the Spirit that take your faith to the next level. And since there is no end to knowledge in the gospel, this process is eternal.

I'm Baaaaack!

Hey! I'm back from my mission and I want to ressurrect my blog! Hopefully Portuguese hasn't messed up my English all that bad, and people actually read it and comment! :)

Here's a brief summary of my life since I last wrote:
I flew to Brazil, spent an amazing 2 months in the MTC in Sao Paulo, and went up to Maceio. For the next 12 months I was in the field, with 8 companions (all Brazilian) and 6 areas (so I never stayed anywhere too long). I had a way hard time adjusting in the beginning, but by the end I didn't want to leave. I love Brazilian culture more than American culture. I also enjoy talking to random people, building relationships, teaching the gospel, and seeing people's lives change. However, my mission was cut short at 14 months due to a potentially cancerous tumor, that miraculously disappeared upon my arrival in the United States. So now that I'm here, I gotta figure out something meaningful to do with my life. Since I only planned on being back for Fall semester, I've improvised some things to do until then. I'm registered with a temp agency (that gave me half a day's work so far), I observe teachers at my old elementary school and talk to them to get ideas, I'm trying to learn piano, I'm being my dad's apprentice for fixing things around the house, yard, and cars, and most recently I've become involved in learning how to be a clown (i.e. face paint and balloon twisting). In 3 weeks I'll go to summer term at BYU and take classes just for fun.

Yet even though that may seem like a bunch of stuff, and even though it's all good stuff, I still sometimes struggle with the fact that I'm not on my mission anymore. Even though being a missionary was the hardest thing I've ever done, it was more fulfilling because I dealt with things of eternal significance everyday. And now my life seems....very temporal. And me-centered. And that feels a bit empty. I try to keep real busy, but I gotta admit that when p-day comes around and I get e-mails from my mission buddies, I get a bit misty-eyed.

But that's enough about my life. This isn't supposed to be a journal. The next posts will have ideas. :)