No Drama

There will always be drama in our lives. If ever you watched a nature documentary on animals. Especially, among primates: you'll rarely come across a noisier and melodramatic bunch. 

Facial expressions are predominantly how primates express pain, joy, sorrow, fear, boredom, ecstasy. A whole array of moods can be expressed and innately recognized by facial cues. Other males use their tails. We did have tails once in our evolutionary journey; in fact, most of the surviving primates do. Few, mainly orangutans, chimpanzees and gorillas, lack tails. On the other hand, humans are the only ones left who walk upright since we stem from the great apes who walk on two legs. This evolutionary tactic allowed them to do other stuff with their arms like crafting and the use of weapons to hunt. 

Humans are masters at hiding their state of mind. In essence, their truest nature is hidden from them. Civilization has done away with his/her most inner drives and insatiable sexual nature. After all, as most species, homo sapiens were raised in polyandrous societies where females had sex with more than one male. Humans' genetically closer relatives, the bonobos, would have sex in excharge for anything, be it grooming or food. Why would homo sapies adopt monogamy? 

In reality, a very slim margin of animals is truly monogamous, in the strict sense of the word. Those animals who pick a partner for life are a rare sight among mammals. Nature goes with plenty and what makes sense is that the probability of survival increases when the mating chances are increased, and nothing increases that likelihood like straying. 
It is the reason why our species is so stressed over the subject. Compelled not too, it creates opportunities for drama unseen among the smaller but gradually increasing segment of individuals today who live under more sexually open terms. It does not matter how strict a society is, most stray from the norm. Those who do not may lack the opportunities to do so, like the less desirable partner who does not want his or her lover going around with another.

Few males, and not a whole lot higher number of females, are monogamous. Most desire someone other than their current sexual partner, even if the desire to do so is not enough to act upon it. A lot of them are occupied with cementing and solidifying empires, occupied with acquisition and power. This is an elitist bunch, bent over backwards and forth in building societies to keep in limited quantity what should have been common property. They passed down rituals and laws to keep their subjects subjutated to a handful of mates and a lifelong of unrequited drama. We see possessiveness in nature, but no sign of jealousy. It is solely a figment of the human imagination. No bonobo has time for that nonsense, yet you see that the minute that the alpha dies, another alpha gets to enjoy his unlimited supply of coitus. 

What's more, among humans and most species, too, a small percentage choose to live monogamous existences or have a predominant desire to have lifelong lasting bonds and they seem happier than most of their promiscuous counterparts. Here, too, you can see how much less drama it is to live a rather less chaotic existence where you only get to be with one partner through thick and thin. They, too, have a rare proverbial stone in their possession, a model many of us try and fail to assimilate, causing untold misery. 

Nothing expresses more emotional states in humans than their faces. To be able to read expressions is innately paramount to our survival. In evolutionary terms, evolution endowed us with the ability to choose another mate in case things do not work out with our existing one. It seems like a lot of work if it isn't in your nature to pursue. The problem is that most adhere to a model inapt for their nature. We may grow to the circumstances, especially if led by a more faithful and dominant lover to whom the desire to please abounds, in cases where the chemistry is right and for as long as the relationship lasts. These are the part-time strictly monogamous kind who marry several times throughout their lives and may or may not have a casual encounter (if they do so, they keep that shit to themselves). 

Happiness can be worn daily by people undergoing a good deal of distress, like a pair of socks that grow dirtier by the day. Change is in order, not just when it comes to our clothes and hygiene. It is a healthy habit to unlearn the corrosive patterns witnessed throughout our formation, to slightly elevate ourselves above our personal history, to cleanse the unnecessary stain of emotions that bind us and anger us. It is a learned trait, not a survival mechanism, to stress over what our partner does with his/her body. It is the cause of unpathomable sorrow. We had to be shown to cultivate this toxic tendency, because whenever it surfaces, it does not seem or feel natural. 

Emotions show us an exaggerated version of ourselves, blown out of proportion into hyperbolic realms. We do not say, "I could eat"; instead, we may feel and often vociferate: "I'm starving." It's a far cry from it. The same occurs when we feel angry, threatened by a predator or a romantic rival. Whatever takes place within the confines of our minds is often expressed in exaggerated form. We see it clearly when it happens to others. Strangers, angered and belligerent, often look childish to the onlookers. It is therefore best to remain aloof to the extent possible in front of situations that others would merit lashing out. Fortunately for us heterosexual men, women represent the perfect practice ground. Nothing in life will test your will and the shit right out of you than your woman. She will call you on it, and she will fight you for no apparent reason. It's a gift; don't let anyone tell you otherwise. You can then choose to embrace her feminine energy with stout and grounded masculinity, plainly speaking, self-control. 

The spectrum of human emotion is wide, thick in its ramifications, long in its overhauling grip, and has an overtly outspoken entity manifest from time to time. We ought to listen to the voices in our heads, lower the volume in which these radical bits of information surface. A phenomenon akin to the bends can be observed under sobering parallels. Like a seasoned diver, we ought to filter and channel their impetous onslaught. If only we were to postpone, in the threshold of urgency called upon to counter the assault or perceived threat, for a few inhalations prior to response... we would fend off much useless nonsense. We do not get mad someday, out of nowhere. We practice madness throughout our lives, until the mind succumbs to its depths knees-deep first, then moves on to half immersed bodies, and finally culminates in full-blown up to our necks lunacy. 

All along, the voices of doom sew the thread of craziness. It's all around us; whether we pick and drop them at once or hold on dearly to their volatile nature, deepens our predicament. Dementia is the ultimate measured reaction. Think of the word itself. Let us not jump into its etymology which is simple enough: an overdone act. Ideally, we cannot help but react at times, and that may be unavoidable. What's not so much so is to abide and transform a reaction, which is bad enough in and of itself, into an overreaction. It can be mastered if we pay attention to it, like everything else in life. It just takes practice. 

Fortunately, existence, as is, enshrouds us with a plentiful bounty of situations going array. We can practice living our lives as an opportunity to be slightly better, if not perfect. Perfectionism is a tiresome prospect. Instead, we may opt for a saner option: leveling our standards. As a comedian on TikTok once joked: "Lower your expectations." No one who prides ifself of self-worth can submit to this maxim. Nonetheless, its wisdom therein seems solid enough for another spin. Why not, instead, level it. 

You don't want to be ever-so demanding, but there is no inherent need to be classically stoic either. Buddhism speaks of a Middle Path. Having experienced the luxurious life as a prince in a kingdom, Siddharta embodied both when he finally abandoned his privileged life and ventured off to find out why there is so much suffering in the world. Perhaps he was fed up with having it so good. Who knows? It happens. After having experienced deprivation and inanition in his wandering, he finds the revelation that satiating our appetite, even enjoying modestly ourselves, was the right path. In layman's terms, neither going hungry nor having too much to eat were it. However, there's a problem with this. We cannot conceive of indulging in activities that represent a significant threat and do so only in moderation. There are drugs, circumstances, even interpersonal relationships that would be inconceivable for some, so partially enjoying them might not be an option. Then, there's the problem with the potential of laziness creeping in. We may choose to only drink alcohol from time to time, but it wouldn't be the same if we were to say the same about crack-cocaine. 

Most of us would not find it okay for our partner to casually engage in sexual relations with another, no matter how predominantly polygamous our ancestors were. We cannot, I presume, steal a little, half-way rape someone. However the act might appear extrapolated, unless it is a convened, simulated act. No one can be awful in small ways. Or rob or kill only on certain holidays. It should be okay, just the same, to extend the paradigm and assert ourselves in the process. It is not in the interest of well-being to engage in acts of self-destruction; neither our loved ones or external societal forces ought to impose their backward views and pierce us with the double-edge sword of a double-standard. 

We shouldn't invest ourselves half-heartedly, but we shouldn't be on a constant search for the next level in thrills. When we acquire high status, it is wasteful to expect far more than solvency. For we cannot be more satisfied with life than we were when we first started. Striving for plenty and then some, and not chasing an endless proverbial tail in vicious circles. 

In some instances, the complete abstination from an activity is the norm. We cannot maim instead of kill and claim that is an acceptable middle ground. Buddhism does not work out the particulars, but it is clear enough. It needs only a more modern filter to pour out its latest iteration. We don't need to have the best body; we may strive to have a slightly better condition over time. We want to grow and attain goals in down-to-size paradigms. Instead of spending decades of our lives chasing after a higher education unless that is your true calling. We can learn throughout our lives, and adapt to the growing demands by venturing in other activities that entail far less investment in time, add to our set of tools in a virtually boundless market. As opposed to one giant field of knowledge, multidimensional traits of erudite instruction that may be coupled with and intertwined. We may find the right path if we have the proper blueprint; everything we ride on comes in waves rivering in potential. 

It is said that you cannot fight fire with fire, but that's precisely what we do when a forest is enveloped in flames: we cut its progression by incinerating a breach in its path and therefore cutting its fuel. Likewise, we can cut off the tides that bind us together but not sever the kindness and discretion interchangeably owed to one another. It may be an abrupt adaptation, a departure out of conformity. It is what the Buddha did when he renounced his riches. For comfort has inherent etymological ties to conformity. We find ourselves too relaxed, and that is not good. Look at the different Buddha figures: in some, he appears ultra slim; in others, extremely obese. Those are the two extremes, and no middle ground can be summoned upon. 

How we process the input-output of this intricate equation, be mindful. The hypothetical tags we put on them make all the difference. You can obsess on health and overthink a dietary decision, frown upon those who have poor choices, find a way to misery through your snobby ways. 

Give up trying to change people. Use that time to better yourself. And do so only for so long. Don't think you'll ever get to the point where there's no need for input. In every moment lies hidden an indifinite amount of creativity to be tapped, unsung iterations of our upgraded selves, by-products of a minimum effortless and concerted effort that undeniably rips its rewards over time. Right now, if we were to conceive of the most pressing matters, and redirect all of our efforts and energy in the task at hand for the time being, for a good portion of our leisure in exchange. We have an everlasting supply of moments to do with. We just gotta pick the ripe fruit and devour it. 

And so, giving up changing others or trying to educate the unwilling, will save us precious time. Time is of essence, and if we choose to sit idly, in a meditative, almost vegetable like state, that is an outstanding alternative. We want, above all, to be curious and prudently open at times, depending on our nature. We answer the door and a whole lot more opens. Those who resist change will invariably change, just not for the better. Betterment is attained; and once it is within our grasp or in our midst, we only have to maintain it. Some may choose to go farther than that. In the end, it causes more turmoil. Some cannot go up enough without wanting to elevate themselves still more. How can you live in a perpetual state of achievement? It may be about mastering how to breathe. Let's face it: we will have to, regardless, so we might as well learn how to do so properly; not only is it within reach: it will transform us, catapult us into an even higher gear. 

Just think, it's hard enough trying to change ourselves. We cannot help but to offer ourselves at times, seemingly aiming to be assistance in an otherwise hopeless situation. To try saving those who aren't interested in challenging their ways is a waste. Like cooking an elaborate meal for a fasting crowd. Or worse yet, people who aren't hungry. You may perhaps want to dig in deeper and understand their wisdom. If they have gotten rid of their hunger, how can that be a bad thing? Satiating one's appetites, as opposed to running around in search of constant gratification, is one fundamental pillar to amass.  

You know that inner game they talk about? It's getting under control the impulses that drive our minds at any given moment. What is the world, if not a social mascarade? said the great German philosopher Schopenhauer. We cannot see others for who they truly are; everything, and everyone, is tainted with our own way of seeing the world. The physicist Albert Einstein himself would have trouble conceiving a new trend in physics that implied "spooky interactions at a distance", and wondered if he ever died, would the moon he experienced would still be there? He found it inconceivable that it would not, as the latest quantum theory stipulated. The moon we experience is an absolute subjective experience, uniquely tailored to the one enthralled in its observation, a phenomenon that has no outer explanation other than that of the observer. A mascarade, too, is a polite way of saying that we all wear psychological masks. Whether we like it or not, our truest self would never be revealed. If so, only blurry, unphantomable projections of mental echoes in a vitological cave, a repertoire of voices, past instances, iddle figments of our imagination overblown to the neat yet unnerved experience, like staring into a mirror for long enough to appear as if it were you who looked at yourself from your own reflection. We can see ourselves in this weirdest condition of being, immersed convincingly in our role. But no one has ever really seen us, themselves or ourselves, really. No one has ever seen their own face, only photographic or mirrored depictions of it. We edit out our noses in the visual field; we have blind spots that cannot be spotted unless properly shown. It is not only that insignificant unseen spot that we mascarate. We have tailored to its most intimate detail the experience of ourselves and others, and everything in between. Except there are no such esoteric items such as "them" or "us" or "me". We cannot find the exact point in time and measure that the world outside begins and our inner self ends. It's all one and the same, an optical illusion at core. 

Think of the problems all of us face: they're heightened by our perception of things. Things, in and of themselves, are within the realm of our perception.  Say you're a fictional character, a boss in a crime family whose daughter has been kidnapped. This scenario plays out all the time: given how much is at stake, the boss usually gives in to the demands. What if the boss did not care too much about a compromising situation such as a kidnap, what if this boss really didn't care for anything that would make him/her change his mind? Then he wouldn't be a pack leader. 

Alpha males enjoy tribal perks that lesser male counterparts only dream of. But the privilege comes at a price: when shit hits the fan, it is up to the strongest among us to put up a fight and fend off any disputed rivalry or claim to its domain by an outsider.

Love is not for the weak

People hurt, in a way, because they accept as painful a situation that has been deemed so by societal norms. We do not want to offend, except perhaps state the obvious. No one can adhere to the demands others have for us, because the more you serve, the more that hunger grows. Instead, we learn to hint at solutions, and entertain ourselves with the prospect of a fleeting instance. We cannot be in the moment; it turns its anecdotal wheels into motion, transcending into a state of being. The present moment therefore is not a static experience, it is like a cascade, it keeps on coming, unfolding, ramifying, in an ever-changing flux. 

We have known this for millennia. The thread that knits a moment to the next can be overlapped like a riveting echo through the conscious walls in a mouthful of air. We pay attention to our breathing becomes nothing is farther than madness and melodrama as is conscious breathing. You cannot do it in an altered state of mind. It may at times seem inescapable to avoid others' disdain or contempt, but how to react to any given stimulus. An array of elements coexist at play, too: the type of environment in which a given subject thrives, the culture, the toxic elements we were exposed to, the time and place where we grew and the people met along the way. So many factors, indeed, that the mere ambition to objectify it lies in peril. 

  

We may seem at the mercy of our emotional whims. Everyone plays a stellar role in this existential theater. We can and ought to rewire our visceral responses, cultivate patience, aplomb, and pragmatism. 

Everywhere we turn, there's an emotional component, a piece of the gutsy puzzle. Our emotions propel us to action, in order for them to be taken seriously, and the voice raised by this entity has to be loud and clear, enough to be inequivobly heard and so clear-cut that all other pressing matters simply subside. The focal imperative then is to be conquered, the issue at hand squashed and until that is the case, the state of inner alertness will not cease nagging at us, relentlessly taunting us. Again, meditation (as in breathing consciously) is as much an indispensable ally as sleep.