I just booked my flight down to South East Asia. Leaving the 30th from Oslo to Bangkok and coming back on the night of the 16th. I am completely going in blind and this is my first time doing something like this so its forcing a few butterflies right now.
To be honest, I am completely winging this whole thing and I don't think i scheduled enough time to be down there with everything that I want to see, but, for flight, financial, and timing reasons, this was the best I could and hopefully it will still be an amazing trip! If anyone has suggestions, let me know. I will try to write every day about the places I see while down there and jot down a few of my own experiences. Thanks for reading
After writing the first post about this matter, I realized I don't have much of a leg to stand on regarding these issues because I don't have a child. Nonetheless, I have to stress that, under no circumstances am I trying to say that there is a certain way to do things, I am just simply saying that there may be other options, although unconventional.
So the next topic I wanted to quickly touch up on is socialization. I think this is the decision that could be the toughest one to make, for quite a few reasons actually.
The process of socializing your child is not a one time thing, unlike the vaccination choice of the nursing choice. The socializing process starts from infancy and basically keeps growing into adulthood, at which point, typically, the child has become "their own person" and actions are no longer dictated by the parent.
Starting from the beginning though, at what point is the ideal time to start with socializing your baby? Is it with other babies? Is it in adult settings? I have seen both sides of the coin and still have not been able to grasp what could promote the best scenario. On one hand, I have a friend that speaks Norwegian at home along with his child. Due to professional circumstances, he and his family had to relocate in a German speaking country which made a potentially difficult for the 7 year old child. Fortunately, at that age, a child's brain is soaking up information faster than you or I could imagine and the young boy ended up learning German through his peers and became bilingual at 7 years old. This particular instance holds a great case for promoting a second language at a young age. On the other hand, I have a friend that was in the exact same scenario but with English as the first language and chose to have his children attend an all English school while in a foreign country.
Is one better than the other? I think so, but this is only having spent the last few years in Europe. There is a saying that I learned in personal marketing class in college where the professor stated, "if you can speak 2 languages, you are bilingual. If you can speak 3 languages, you are trilingual. If you can speak 1 language, you are American." While in school, and in the States, it didn't make sense to me. I understood to a certain extent where he was coming from because I figured he was referring to the world knowing their native language and, of course, English. Then I got to Europe and I was completely mistaken. When I visited Spain, I was amazed to see that in addition to Spanish and English, the common language of the area was French. I knew that France was near but would have never guessed that if someone didn't speak Spanish, the next would be French.
In Austria, the way that I saw it, was that basically everyone under 25 years old, spoke English. Anyone from 25-50, it was kind of hit or miss as to whether or not they spoke English and beyond 50, English was almost impossible to find. When I got to Norway, I realized that everyone spoke English. Once again, I am not sure why, besides possible historic revealings, why the English language differs regionally. On the other hand, while visiting these different countries, you can also see who has adopted Western cultural aspects and who have maintained their own. This is usually a determining factor as well. Then it comes to the multicultural family I am close with where the wife speaks Russian to the child, the father speaks Swedish, and when speaking together, may chose English. Keep in mind this is a 1 year old child understanding commands from 3 different languages. To me, it is amazing how much more potential that has than the traditional 1 stressed language or learning English in America.
For some reason it just seems like knowing one language here is not good enough.
Spanish might be a better option
So a little off topic, the point is that if you have the ability or means of helping your child learn two or three languages while young, I feel it can only help.
Next, I don't know how parents make the decision of when and with who the child interacts. The reason I question this is because I know a family, Canadian but lives in Europe, with a 2 year old daughter. She is obviously not old enough to go to any type of school and therefore spends a majority of her time, if not all of her time, with her parents. The daughter, not unlike the 1 year old I was speaking about earlier, is constantly gathering information and ultimately acts in such ways that she is accustomed to; whatever happens at home. When this family tried to socialize their daughter, they found another English speaking family with a daughter around the same age, and figured it would be the best for both of the kids if they spent some time together. Most of the time, this would seem like an ideal scenario, two children with similar backgrounds in a different country spending time together. The problem arose when my friend's daughter would come home with a new found violent streak, using inappropriate words, and now hitting her parents when she didn't get her way.
I am by no means a child psychologist but I am going to venture a guess and say that their daughter could have possibly picked up this behavior from the other child, or perhaps the other family as a whole. After a few weeks of this, my friend decided that it was probably best that the two girls did not spend much time together. AT 2 YEARS OLD!
Then as they get older, parents hear so much about bullying, cliques in schools, and more violence. So this is why I ask, when is it the right time to socialize and when is it time to trust that other parents have done their part in providing a safe and stable environment for their children as well as others?
Public vs private school...
I went to both. I have seen both sides of coin, each with their greatness and each with their faults. Each in America and each in Europe. To be honest, I don't know, just based on the educational system, which is the better choice. In public school, the greatness has been almost thoroughly diminished with the poor teacher qualifications and poor teacher salaries. It has also been diminished by the students behavioral issues. There are so many poor things going on with the educational system right now it is disgusting. I saw a video link, and I'll try to find it and repost it, of a girl, the schools valedictorian, describing, in depth, the failures of the current educational system. In a nutshell, she said that the only reason that she was a 4.0 student, was because she knew how to retain information that was told to her. This seems like a logical explanation and most people are sitting there saying, "that is was you are supposed to do in school. You are supposed to listen to the teacher and what he says, retain it, and score well on the test." Then the girl states that, by no means, does that make her any more intelligent or gifted than the person in math class daydreaming about inventing a gas engine capable of 100 miles per gallon. It does not make her any more intelligent or talented than the kid practicing guitar at home for 6 straight hours while she is making last minute revisions on a science project. I hope you get my point that perhaps the educational system needs to look at allowing kids achieve their full potential, in their field, rather than a dummied down "retain redundant information and succeed" mantra.
Here is that video... listen to the message, not the monotone, clearly-reading-every-word-off-a-piece-of-college-ruled-notebook-paper speech she is giving.
This brings me to private schools. At least to a certain extent, the private school I went to did allow for dreamers to dream, and to follow a path carved by you. The main issue that I have with them is they sort of seem like an elitist group. Sort of, "if you have the money, you can come in." While there, I met some great people and still speak to some of them to this day. I do think that it is still a bit too early for kids to not have proper parental figures in their lives. I was fortunate enough to live close enough to the school where I could go home every day, but some of these kids are 13 and 14 years old, away from their parents for 9 months at a time, some coming over from Europe and Asia. I feel this can work itself out in two ways, a) you grow up extremely fast and become self-reliant very young, or, b) you rebel. At the school I went to, at the time, most chose to rebel, and it was even worse when I was younger. A major flaw in the school was the guidance that was given to the kids, because there was none. Most of the dorm parents (people who were supposed to watch over the kids) did not understand that their job, besides keeping order, was to have an open door policy for the kids. They did not understand the concept for parenting considering most of them had never been parents, and had no previous experience with 150 young, free minded kids with no parents within earshot, bogged down in a dorm facility with no one to turn to. This is a disaster waiting to happen. In my tenure there, I was one of the rebellious and eventually was "kindly asked to relieve myself" from attending school my senior year. At the time, it was devastating and I thought my life was over. Then as I got older, I realized no one really gives a shit what you did in high school besides murder or drug trafficking, so I ended up being ok.
There are tons of books, mentors, teachers, guides, etc. all voicing their opinion on what is the proper way to raise your kid. I am not close to having kids by anyone's standards but I have always enjoyed them and hope to be a great father someday, just not now. I always try to analyze parents and how they treat their kids, how they dissipate outbursts, baby talking (which I hate), choice giving, confidence building/destroying, brainwashing, nurturing, material giving, time giving, the list goes on forever.
I was talking with a friend of mine, we'll call her "Beth" for the sake of argument, and she doesn't raise her child by the typical norm that seems to have taken over traditional parenting so she has opened my eyes to ways that still potentially work, but also ways that society says don't work.
This gives me the reason to further examine what is the right way. Everything from vaccination, nursing, socialization, public vs private schools, home schooling, (a new term to me) unschooling, arts, and sports. Fortunately, a parent can give a child any opportunity possible, if done properly and if an ample amount of time is put towards these opportunities, but such is parenting.
We'll start from the beginning, the choice of actually having a child. I have been fortunate enough to be enlisted in one of the biggest underground fraternities of all time, athletics. It has been a focal point of my life, a title, what many will consider "me," although, if you talk to most athletes, this is a rather shallow perspective. There is much more to an athlete besides what he does on the field, the arena. But, the media and society puts these people on a pedestal. For us, it is what we desire. The art of competition, the adrenaline rush, the succeed vs fail, the glory vs misery... All of the qualities of sports simply pertain to our hobby, our passion, but not our lives.
So after that tangent, the original point, the decision to have a child. Through sports, I have been surrounded by guys that are faced with all the same decisions at home. The best part is that we all want to learn, we all want to learn from those with experience, and in our "fraternity" we can make educated decisions. As far as I have learned, the right time to have a kid is not when "two people are in love" but rather when the timing is right, for both of you. I don't think that age has much bearing because I have seen 20 year olds get by and become great parents, I have also seen 40 year olds as shitty parents. Timing for me, is when you have done what your heart desired, from traveling, to experiences, to adequate finances. When these are all in line, the decision is simple, because for the next 18 years, you're sole purpose should be your child, so if you can block off the next 18 years of your life, the timing is pretty close to right on.
Then comes the child and your life is immediately changed. You have successfully completed every living being's sole purpose, reproduction, and then, despite every book ever written or every parent giving advice, it is your turn to do what is right, for your child, not for professional advice givers and backseat drivers. Everything that can shape your child's personality, advantages, way of life, is up to you.
So now that you have felt the timing was right and pulled the trigger on making new life, the real decisions, for the sake of your child are still to come...
Thanks to Beth, like I said, my eyes have been open to alternate methods, not necessarily better or worse, just different. One of the first things we talked about was vaccination. She chose to not have her child vaccinated. I had never even heard of this being a possibility. I was vaccinated, my brother was, my parents (I think) were, everyone I know was. What you don't know is how safe these actually are. It is the simple ideal of cause and effect. While you may be preventing an obviously destructive disease/virus, there is reason to believe you are causing other damages to your child unknowingly. Case in point, while you are getting one of the multiple shots for your child due to "a baby's immune system not being strong enough yet to fight off something of this magnitude on its own," the underlying effects of this injection are slowly and potentially just as debilitating. For argument purposes, here is something to think about; 1 vaccination shot for an 8 pound relative newborn has the equivalent toxicity of 30 consecutive doses in a 180 pound full grown man.
Simon Birch was vaccinated... just kidding, that was a bad joke
Then there are multiple studies showing the links between autism and mercury poisoning. I'll just post a link to give you an idea of what I am talking about...
When I asked Beth about her child, whether she gets sick at all etc., she said that despite no vaccinations at all, her child is almost never sick, perhaps a simple cold every now and then, but nothing to the extent of the threats perceived by most parents if their child is not immunized. For me, my idea is, what is the difference if I get the virus on my own or if someone injects it into me... I'll roll the dice and try to not get it at all. I am a bit too old to decide whether I want a childhood vaccine now but the next best thing for me is deciding whether I want my annual flu shot; why would I put the flu into my body to prevent the flu?
Once again, I am not a parent, or a conspiracy theorist for that matter, so I don't have to make this decision yet but it just gave me a different perspective.
Then comes the decision of whether to nurse or not, and for how long to do it if you make the decision that nursing is best. Many companies have come up with certain formulas that apparently mimic the natural milk of the mother. The problem I see, is that is not the maternal mother's milk. For the most part, I think that mothers will nurse. I think that a mother feels it helps with the natural bonding process of a woman and child, which I certainly agree with. I don't think that I am going to be breastfeeding any time soon but I do understand the body, and I do understand that going back to the beginning of time, when a woman goes through the pregnancy period, that her body changes in a million ways for preparation for the child, and that these changes are for the success of a healthy childbirth and post childbirth period, for the child. So, when someone comes up with a formula to mimic that of a nursing mother, there is no way that you can tell me it is the same design that a woman's body has been preparing for the last 9 months. All of this, I understand as well, begins with the original point of timing. If you are not willing or prepared for the natural mothering process, then the timing is not right. As far as the length of time at which a mother should nurse, the only feasible answer I can come up with, is how long the body allows. Once again, with an unfamiliarity to this process, I don't know if it goes on for potentially 10 years, but I have known for this process to go for at least 2 to 3 years, at which point, maybe it's time to move on. Point being, the body is a very powerful thing, and I believe that listening to it might be the best bet.
I gotta run but I'll post more later, thanks for reading!
The song, Sun Kil Moon - Alesund is the song in Sons of Anarchy, which is where I first heard of it, right as Jax is making the decision to get his kidnapped son back. He is at a crossroads, though, because he does not want his son to suffer the same fate as he has, as a rogue soul destined to the chaotic life of the TV version of Hells' Angels. Unfortunately, I don't have the actual scene to put on here to do it proper justice. The scene is him watching the adoptive parents care for the child and basically give his son what he personally would not be able to, comfort and love.
As long as I can remember, music has been a major influence for me. Not necessarily for my actions but for the triggering of certain feelings and memories; putting myself in a desired state of mind, whether it be happiness, excitement, sorrow, anger, or just to simply put my mind at ease, to free myself from interior or exterior stresses. Music also allows me to think clearly, allows me to become completely satisfied, content.
I find it interesting that there are so many desired music types. Similar emotions can be attained by two different people listening to two different types of music. For me, it is the beauty, complexity and the synergy of all instruments coming together, or the utter chaos with layered harmonies, or the simplicity of a single guitar or piano playing something that seems to be so elementary, yet it just works.
In the years that I have been playing guitar, I have gracefully entered the realm of metal music. Most will scoff and say, "how can you listen to this nonsense, all he is doing is screaming." This is where my earlier point comes into play. It seems to me that people without a certain extent of a music background will justify their statement by choosing a certain aspect of the music and picking it apart. A singer does not make music. A singer sings. What makes music is feeling. If you feel a country singer playing 4 chords on a guitar and referring to the tragic loss of his labrador retriever or '86 Ford F150 music, then it is. If it triggers an emotional response for you, then it is music.
For me, the reason I lean towards heavier music, is strictly based on an understanding of what each member represents. A band that is the true embodiment of music, I feel, is Tool. The reason I say this, is because if you take 1 member out, you lose the band, if you add another property, you lose the band. It is complete harmony and unison. There are very few artists or bands that can say that, and if they can, then they have achieved.
The singular issue I have with a majority of music that you hear on the radio, is that there is nothing to it. Take Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, Brittany Spears, Miley Cyrus, or any of the current platinum record selling pop / hip-hop artists that are out there today. There is no depth. No depth to the lyrics, no depth to the music. All you are hearing is someone that is either very good looking, very sexy, very exotic, or very stupid, averagely singing lyrics that were possibly written by someone else to the electronic sounds and beats from a Mac computer using an upgraded and more complex version of Garage Band. So while these people are making millions, selling millions and pumping out albums at a record pace, where did the music go?
An enormous selling point now is these "artists" remaking '80s and '90s classics with a sneaky catchphrase, a few people rapping obscenities, an auto-tuned chorus, and the help of an unintended bass line. So not only do these people drown out what made these originals hits of their time, but these "artists" and "professionals" have taken out of music what music is supposed to be, originality.
Like I said before, people have very subjective views on what music is, as long as it stimulates an emotional response. I just wish that in addition to the emotional response, that the listener grasped more of an understanding of the details in the music, whether it be time signatures, harmonies, melodies, what the states of mind of the musicians were while writing the music, what the intended message of the song is, the hard work the musicians put into a potential masterpiece, things of that nature.
Even though I stated earlier that my particular choice of music leans to the heavier side, I have an extremely broad listening view that covers many genres. Having said that, what people tend to overlook is that the roots of all metal are classical and blues music, whether it be particular scales, timing, or mood.
Next time you are listening to your favorite band/artist, take a step back and really examine the music, ask yourself what emotion it triggers and why it triggers that emotion. Understand its complexity or simplicity and try to logically think about why and what you enjoy about that aspect of it. I believe if you take this open and free minded approach towards music, you will broaden your horizons and find something you never thought existed.
Growing up in the US, I feel that the general population is completely misled in regards to world travel. Having not traveled to the extent that I desire, I still feel I have a place to state my opinion on the subject. All that anyone sees on the news back home is terror and anarchy everywhere in the world besides the US. When it comes to actual freedom, I believe the US has given its people the best possible scenario if it was used properly, by the people.
In the midst of the chaos that is going on back home as far as the struggling economy, the downturned housing market, and the lack of support from the rest of the world, it seems as though the instability of the US should be the primary concern, not the problems in the Middle East or surrounding areas. There was a lot of news a while back about the struggles of Greece and other European nations especially with the transition on the Euro as the main currency. The nations of the EU came together and bailed the struggling parties out of their deficit but only based on the promise of change... not the idea of change, but immediate action.
When it comes to the US, we do not have many supporting parties for multiple reasons but I think it is mainly for getting into other peoples' business. In Europe, if help is needed, it is asked for, not imposed by 3rd parties. This ultimately leads to the US being in a severe debt and eventually, when people come to collect this debt, the US is ready, but not by means of returning the favor, by means of military and force. Don't get me wrong, I am 100 percent pro military, but when it is used to defend us as the nation, not to overthrow what we feel is ours at the expense of 18 year old kids and their families.
All of this brings me to the initial discussion of travel. To actually visit and experience what TV says is not as great as the US, and to be engulfed in an unfamiliar culture, not one that has been Westernized and deemed a tourist destination. Most people will not do this out of fear because of what we see on TV everyday, such as, all of the problems going on as far as drug cartels, rapes, murders, kidnappings, etc. The lack of understanding comes with hearing that this is going on in Mexico... do you know how big Mexico is? Do you know how many people there are in Mexico? Do you know how many cities there are in Mexico?
My point is, is that the same could be said about the US, if you were to generalize it as a whole. It is simply too large to do that though. Comparatively, do you know how many rapes, murders, drug cartels, etc. are going on in the US as we speak? If there are legitimate issues going on in say, Mexico City, just don't go there, go to some coastal destination like Cancun and sit on the beach at an all-inclusive and enjoy yourself with a a few Dos Equis and a violent sunburn. I would be willing to say that a murderous drug dealer from Mexico City is not going to be trolling the coastline for someone to pick off, drive 400 miles back home, make a media presentation and pawn it off that they are infiltrating the entire nation. Same thing goes in the US. I am pretty sure I'll be okay roaming the streets or Prior Lake, Minnesota if there is a serial rapist in Tallahassee, Florida.
Some of the most beautiful places that I visited in Austria were completely off of the beaten path. Not places like Salzburg and Vienna, which are beautiful by the way. The city in this particular instance was Obertauern. Take a peek online at it. It gave me a chance to experience and understand their culture; why family is so important, nightly home cooked meals involving the entire family, their enjoyment of the outdoors, in particular, skiing, the absolute beauty and power of the mountains and how it plays a major role in their climate, traditional foods, social drinking and a ridiculous amount of pride for their nation and heritage through the art of obnoxious song choices... The list can go on and on, but these are the things that you experience away from metropolises and commercialization.
Additionally, when most people come to Norway, they usually will say I have been to Oslo, which is great. It is a major city and a major port and there is plenty of history here. But in order to really experience what Norway is all about, take your travels to places like Stavanger (in particular the Lysefjord and preikestolen), Bergen, Geiranger, or Trondheim. Unfortunately, that is the extent of any of my travels here due to a lack of down time and the grotesque prices here. Nevertheless, if you really want to experience countries, cities, and areas unfamiliar to you in the world, do it the right way, not the typical way. Lose yourself and relieve the American ideologies that these places are inferior to you and your nation in someway or another. If you do that, I am a firm believer that it will enhance the experience tremendously.
Another main reason that this subject came to mind was a trip I am planning in the next month down to Southeast Asia. Of all my friends, there were only 2 that were excited and intrigued, both of which have experienced and appreciated different cultures away from the US. To the rest, a sense of fear and misunderstanding seemed to take them over. Fear for my safety and misunderstanding because there seemed to be no logical explanation to why I would even think of visiting these places. It is the same when people talk about Germany back home, most everyone thinks of Hitler and his regime and the decimation of Europe. When speaking about Croatia, people think of war torn Yugoslavia. When you talk about Austria, people will make a barbecue reference possibly made famous by Dumb and Dumber. When you talk about Vietnam, horror stories of the war are the first thoughts that come to mind. What people generally don't understand is that the US is just a baby compared to these other nations. Yes, as far as industrial capabilities, world influence, innovation, etc. the US ranks very highly but when it comes down to it, these other nations have been through territorial wars, were instrumental in infrastructure development, and destructive tyranny way before the US was even a thought. So despite popular belief that the US is such an advanced nation in all aspects, we have not experienced a fraction of what these other "underdeveloped" nations have encountered.
All in all, you have to see it to believe it. You have to experience it as it is meant to be, not though photographs and history books and political propaganda. A major comparison that I could give, despite not going there, is the Grand Canyon. People will look at pictures and say, "wow, that's really neat" then turn to the next page, but it is not until you are at the top of a 2000 foot cliff peering down at the unassuming Colorado River that you realize its true power and beauty.
Due to a number of different reasons, writing a blog for all to see was never really something that I would imagine myself doing. 1) I did not understand the concept of people showing general interest in the thoughts and experiences that I may be living through. 2) I tend to think of myself as more of an observer in situations, sort of understanding my surroundings, "taking it all in" if you may, and I figured that was subjective, that basically all people would experience a different psychological, physical, and emotional charge than what I experience. 3) I was scared.
Which brings me to today.
I was talking with a friend of mine through the obvious avenues of skype and facebook. She is a bit more "vocal" when it comes to these types of things, as well as a writer, so this was something a bit more seamless for her. Nonetheless, she suggested that this be something that I do, not so much for people to be able to read and keep up to date with my travels and experiences, but more as a reminder to myself of the fortunate journey that I have embarked upon.
All in all, I could write for hours about the course I took to justify writing on the internet and why its great and why its dumb but that wastes time so I'll just let you guys read on. I have no idea how people respond to these things so if there is stuff you want me to touch up on, let me know, otherwise I'll just post as I desire and try to throw some good articles from www.cracked.com on here, as I think those guys are brilliant.
This being my 3rd year in Europe, the expectations that I had coming into this year were pretty much neutral, I knew and anticipated what life would be like as it is mostly the same throughout the EU... except for I am not in the EU anymore.
I had to help a friend out with a school assignment, and to sum it up, it more or less compared the U.S., the EU, and Norway, and why certain cultural attributes helped these 3 either succeed or fail. Unfortunately, the U.S. is completely different and diversified so it was a bit difficult to describe the States as a whole, rather than regionally; same goes for the EU. Norway, on the other hand, is a country of only 5 million people and they are all the same so that part was easy.
I have had a bunch of people ask how anyone can afford living here based on its average of a 50 dollar meal per person, its 13 dollar beers at the bar, its over-8 dollar a gallon gas prices, etc... And the answer is socialism my friends. This is not a political debate. I refuse to talk about that on here. This is simply what makes this country run and run successfully. I'll try to break it down for you.
Follow this way of life and you will have no worries,
a) go to school for free
b) pass the free school using the A, B, C, D, E, and F grading system (I don't know what E is)
c) go to university for free
d) pass free university
-sidenote - If at anytime you are injured while going to free school, go to the free hospital
e) be placed in a job
f) work there for as long as you want and if you don't like it, the government will give you a new one
g) both men and women are given either a 6 month or a 1 year paid leave of absence in the event of the birth of a child
h) tell your kid to do the same thing
All in all, this is socialism at its finest. All of these things come at a cost though, the government mandated 45 percent tax as well as a 25 percent tax on any purchases and even more tax on alcohol and tobacco. So, when you average everything out, it allows everyone who follows these guidelines to live a happy life, not rich, not poor, just right in the middle, which, ultimately eliminates competition and jealousy, both of which are extremely prevalent in the U.S.
Now, the glaring hole in this that people forget to take into account, is I believe that it takes the dreamers, the innovators, the experimentalists, out of the equation. I listened to a friend talk about how when he was growing up, he wanted to learn more than what the teacher was teaching, he wanted to use his free will to explore and as a result, was told in a polite manner to "slow down" that he doesn't need to learn about these things yet. The end result, I believe, is complacency, and despite being the wealthiest country in the world as well as, as studies have portrayed, the happiest, I believe the minimal drive, determination, and conviction to greatness is what has made me believe that Norway is not a place I could ever see myself living.
