Binary Thinking

Last year I watched all of Star Trek: The Next Generation. I'd highly recommend it. I love so much about it. There are so many great episodes that truly made me think. And I think I get why modern Star Trek productions are so upsetting to many.

What was most surprising about Star Trek: TNG was the Borg. Like most people, I was vaguely aware of the Borg. I had the basic understanding that most have about them through pop-culture osmosis. If you don't know, the Borg are a pseudo-species of cyborgs that assimilate technology and species into their collective hive mind. Their only purpose is perfection through absorption. In this way, they are the perfect foil for Starfleet. "The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth. Whether it's scientific truth, or historical truth, or personal truth. It is the guiding principle upon which Starfleet is based." – Captain Jean-Luc Picard, 2368 ("The First Duty")

But what was so surprising while I was watching the show was how terrifying they are. Despite out-dated VFX and costumes, I found myself squirming in my seat whenever the crew was in close contact with the Borg. After thinking about it, I found out why they bother me so much. They represent something scarier than death. They represent a total loss of autonomy and individuality. This is not a new discovery. This is why they are scary to everyone. In TNG we see the effect that this has on Picard. He has PTSD from being assimilated by them even though he was only with the Borg collective for a short time.

Frighteningly, I see a corollary to the Borg in our culture: binary thinking. It's fitting. Just as computers run on binary code, 1s and 0s, this type of thinking forces a person to see the world in black and white. This is our modern-day Borg problem, and just as the Borg represented an existential threat to future earth, this type of thinking poses the same threat to our society.

Binary thinking is antithetical to critical thinking, and that is why it is so scary to me. So I'd like to lay out some problems with binary thinking as I see it.

Binary Thinking is Illogical

Binary thinking is illogical because it sets up false dichotomies and then suggests that a person choose between two options. Usually one of the options is so morally egregious that it forces a person to agree with "the one right answer." This is disingenuous. If there is only one "right choice," there isn't really a choice, and the binary itself is falsely constructed.

This is also deceptive because the one who is behind creating the options in the binary pretends that these binaries are spontaneous, natural, and obvious when in actuality they are manufactured and precisely worded to achieve a specific outcome: conformity.

This isn't how the world works. Everything around us exists in gray areas. Degrees of certainty. Ranges of nuance. A dazzling array of spectra. Insisting that our complex world can be whittled down to simple binaries is an affront to objective reality.

Binary Thinking Foments Conflict

This is done by forcing people to choose sides. It doesn't matter if the binary is falsely constructed, especially when moral binaries are involved. People usually feel so strongly that they immediately choose a side and demonize not just those on the opposite side, but those "in the middle."

As stated earlier, because of the nature of a binary, there can be no middle. 1 or 0. No in-between. The reasoning goes: If you claim to be in the middle, you are actually on the opposite side, and therefore my enemy. It's no wonder that people can't seem to discuss their differences nowadays. A false binary exists solely to stop disagreement. Once a false binary has been created, the discussion is over.

Binary thinking only alienates people. It slows down progress. It stops dialogue. It is intolerant of nuance. It is reductive and arrogant. It doesn't allow for exploration or new data or third-dimensional possibilities. It forces those with different opinions underground. It creates violent extremism. Stick with one side of the binary long enough without opposition and people will push their ideology to its limits.

Conclusion

Whenever you see someone express something like, "I can't imagine how someone would disagree," you can be pretty sure that a false dichotomy has been erected.

This is one of the reasons why the Borg scare me so much. From a Star Trek Fan Wiki: "Individual [Borg] drones have demonstrated puzzlement at other species' unwillingness to be assimilated, the drones believing in the superiority of their way of life."

I can see why this type of thinking is alluring. It's safe. It gives people common enemies. Something to fight against. It gives people purpose by anchoring to "sure knowledge." It's neat. In this complex world of ours, binary thinking is a safety blanket.

However, it seems many people have forgotten one of our oldest Socratic dialectics:
"True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing."

[Keep Following.]

I Can't Relate

For those of you that are out of the loop, I started teaching high school this year. I'd like to share something. The gifs should help. It has been an adventure for sure. After teaching 6th grade for four years, I thought I knew what teaching was. I thought I knew what I was doing. But I don't. Teaching is one of the most complex things I've ever done.


To put things in perspective, here's an analogy:
Imagine for a second what a computer programmer does (I  know this is reductive, but bear with me for a second). They sit down at a computer and they write complex directions for the computer to follow. The computer does exactly what it is told. Sometimes that isn't what the programmer wants, so he iterates until the computer is doing what he wants. But all in all, the programmer speaks in a language the computer can understand and together they make something greater.

Now imagine for a second that the computer doesn't even have the database to understand the language the programmer is typing in. Imagine that the programmer had to teach the computer basic logic and give it an operating system before he could give it directions. Now imagine that each computer that he works with is different. Some have gaps in their operating systems. Some were taught to do certain functions really well, and others not at all. Imagine that some computers opened up random programs and starting browsing the internet of their own accord while the programmer was trying to do his job. Then imagine some computers didn't eat breakfast that morning. Then imagine that some computers had been abused by previous owners. Some are even missing basic hardware. Now imagine that the government mandates that every single one of the 200 computers he's given needs to understand and successfully run the new program, and he has 9 months to do it. Oh yeah, and cut his average pay in half.

Hopefully this gives you a better understanding of what it's like to teach. I'm not complaining, however (except maybe about the pay). All of this is a digression. What I really wanted to share was a realization that I've had about teaching high school.

6th graders idolized me, mostly because I was the first male teacher they'd had. It was much easier to build rapport with them because they are so young and they just want to be heard and appreciated. Most high schoolers have a thicker shell. They need to be coaxed into a relationship of trust with a tremendous amount of patience. I naively thought that this would be easier than it has been. I thought the rapport would come naturally as it did with younger students.

Here was my misconception: "I'll be able to relate to high school students because I was in their shoes not too long ago."

I hope you just laughed at my naivete. I can now. There's two major things wrong with this statement:

1. "Not too long ago" was actually a very long time ago. I'm old. I don't think I'm old. But to my students I am. I'm twice their age. I graduated when they were infants (2005). I might as well be their grandfather. I know they know I'm younger than most of their other teachers, but they don't care. I'm still old.

2. I can't relate.

Here's what the rest of the post is about. I really can't relate to these kids. I consider myself caught up on my pop culture. I know the memes they joke about. I understand their slang (although I can't use it. Trust me, I tried, and it had disastrously awkward consequences. But we joke about it now). I can intellectually understand some of the things they might be going through. But intellectually understanding is akin to sympathy, not empathy.

For instance, I can't relate to having the social acceptance of my peers revolve around my online presence. I can't relate to never being able to escape judgement. When I was their age, even if I was made fun of during the day, I could go home and leave it behind for at least a few hours. I had a reprieve, they don't. In fact, the instrument of their torture and delight is forever attached to their bodies. And while the majority of my students have a somewhat healthy relationship with their phones, I can't relate to the ones who literally cannot fathom having their phone taken away. I'm being serious here.

The phone rules are pretty relaxed in my class. They just can't have them out when I'm teaching. I can remember the first time I tried taking the phone away from a girl. When I asked for it in a private moment, the look she gave me was not one of anger or resentment, it was of confusion. It was almost as if no one had ever suggested to her that she be without her phone. Once she understood what I was asking, she panicked and started bargaining and causing a scene, which was not my intent, so I told her to see me after class. In our ensuing conversation she apologized and rattled off ten excuses. And it has soured her attitude toward me for the rest of the year. Despite all this, she still needs to be reminded to put her phone away almost daily.

Some not in my shoes might think I'm being too easy on her, but I know I'm making the right decision when I think of that look she first gave me. Old-school hard-ass teachers might suggest the rules are the rules and they need to be enforced, outside consequences be damned. She's the student, she does what she's told. But what they fail to comprehend is that taking away a phone doesn't mean taking away an entertainment device. For some of them, it is like sending some students into drug withdrawals. For some of them, it means removing social connection. For some of them, it means removing an (artificial) self-esteem booster. For some of them, it means not knowing where their friends are going for lunch. For some of them, it means social death.

Now, I haven't commented on the ethics of their co-dependency on technology because that's a huge discussion. The simple fact is that it is what it is. Regardless of how we may feel, we need to meet these students where they are if their situation is going to improve.

Again, I can't relate with any of this, so my approach has been one of compassion rather than condemnation. And if that means trying to teach them healthy boundaries with a reminder every single day, then that's what I'll do.

I can't relate to kids struggling with suicidal ideation. I can't relate to the staggering numbers of girls self-harming (1 in 4). I can't relate to the boys who hate girls because they are so incredibly lonely and hurt.

I simply can't relate.

But I can try. And I won't stop. Despite the crappy pay.





[Keep Following.]

Rian Johnson Doesn't Care About Star Wars Fans.

I knew it. I knew as soon as the blue credits started rolling. As enthusiastic as the midnight premiere crowd was, I could hear the overwhelming praise underpinned with rumblings of discontent. There was an unease that I could sense more than I could actively discern. I felt it within myself, too. I decided to withhold my own judgement because I had had such a change of heart after my first viewing of The Force Awakens. After the first time I saw TFA, I was heartbroken. I had watched all the trailers and was up to date on all the fan theories, and I felt that the movie was nothing more than a rehash of the old Star Wars. A shell of recycled beats and themes. But after a few more viewings I came to like it more and more. I fell in love with the characters. I proceeded through a grieving process and finally accepted that despite some recycled themes, the movie had accomplished its goal. It rebooted the franchise without ruining it.

This time around, I reserved my judgement for The Last Jedi. I tuned out the rabid fan-base and wild speculation. I didn't watch the trailers or TV spots. The only thing I carried into The Last Jedi was faith in Rian Johnson and Disney. Now after seeing it for the second time, I'm ready to share my thoughts.

Rian Johnson doesn't care about Star Wars fans. In fact, I'm pretty sure that at some point he saw this T-shirt and thought, "You know what? Let's go with that."

And actually, when I googled this image, one of the first images that came up was this:

So I'm actually fairly positive that I'm right. What I mean by saying that Rian Johnson doesn't care about Star Wars fans is that he cares about the story. Not your feelings. Or theories. Or preconceived notions about what Star Wars is or isn't. His script seems to thumb its nose at everything that the fans expected. It subverts everyone's expectations. But that subversion is performed such passion and fiery dedication that it has injected the franchise with new possibility and life. Johnson didn't give us the Star Wars movie we wanted. He gave us the Star Wars movie we needed.

That said, here is a list of ways (good and bad) in which the movie subverted my (and many others') expectations. I believe this is the cause of the divisive feedback the fans have given the movie. Feel free to message me or comment about ways (good and bad) in which the movie didn't go where you expected.

*SPOILERS TO FOLLOW. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED*

1. Rey: Just Rey. No last name. Her parents are no one. In fact, she's not a Kenobi or a Skywalker, her parents are actually scum. I LOVE this. I would have HATED it if she had turned out to be related to someone important. We already have Skywalkers in the story and the story simply can't go on only being about them. It's unsustainable. It would start to get stale. Plus, it is even  more poetic that someone who is "unimportant" can make such a difference. That is what Star Wars is to me. It's not about midichlorians and bloodlines and chosen ones. It's about "nobodys" who grow up to be "somebodys." Also, another way in which Johnson subverts your expectations: Rey is untrained and yet she is strong in the force. Get over it. Luke spent a week with Yoda before he rushed off to face Vader in ESB. Training doesn't equal strength. It never has. Johnson has set up a world in which force wielders don't have to be tamed. They can be wild and instinctual. I find this exciting.

2. Luke: Luke's character is not what many wanted, including Mark Hamill himself. In TLJ, Luke is world-weary and discouraged. He is actively pessimistic about himself and especially about the Jedi. Finally we have an acknowledgement from someone that the Jedi Order are not perfect. They are not saviors of the universe. They are another piece of the puzzle. A balancing force on one end of the seesaw. What both Snoke and Luke know is that light and dark always rise to meet one another in equal measure. And what Luke learns is that this is inevitable. There's no sitting this one out. Also, Johnson subverts your expectations by giving Luke a power no one has ever seen before. Force projection is amazing. It is truly a powerful pacifistic weapon. It is the perfect weapon of a Master Jedi. It fits with what Luke has turned into as a character and allows him to become one with the force. He did plenty of "laser sword waving." Now it's time for another approach to solving problems.

3. Leia: She can use the force. Something we've always kind of known but haven't been sure about until now. I like the idea, but hated Johnson's execution of it. It pulls me out of the movie because it just looks so utterly ridiculous. But oh well. Too late to change now.

4. Finn/Rose: This is the first time we've ever seen a "desperate rebel sneak attack" fail. People universally seem to dislike the whole Canto Bight story line. And I don't like it either, but it does serve the story. It solidifies Finn's resolve to fight for the rebellion and not just Rey. Which brings me to my next point.

5. Holdo/Rebellion: Admiral Holdo and the rebels can make mistakes. Johnson has finally shown us that the rebels can be disorganized, uncommunicative, and prideful. What makes them the good guys is that they still come together to fight for what is morally correct and teach each other. Even if it means demoting and slapping and arguing and scolding. Holdo doesn't need to fill Poe in on the plan. If Poe is going to be a leader in the rebellion going forward, he needs to calm down and make hard decisions. Holdo is able to teach him this in her poignant, brief tenure in the story.

6. Snoke: He isn't a typical "sith." He just wields the dark side and wants to rule. He doesn't need to be some character from previous films. I wish we had a little more information about where he came from, but again, Johnson did what was right for the story. After TFA, the story was headed in a predictable direction. We had an ultimate bad guy with an unsteady apprentice who could have been redeemed. Now we don't. Snoke is dead and the story has room to breathe.

7. Kylo: No one saw this coming. Ben Solo is truly gone. Kylo ain't coming back to the light. This isn't Vader all over again. Kylo is far more chaotic and dangerous than a typical sith. There is no cold calculation in him. He is an angsty, rage-filled sociopath. He scares me much more than he did before. I get the feeling that he will literally go to any length to get what he wants, and that is a bad guy we can love to hate going forward. We didn't like Snoke because we weren't supposed to, but we never really knew his true motivation. We know Kylo. We know how he thinks, and we can understand his motivations. That is a great bad guy.

8. Hux/First Order: Another way in which Johnson has undercut our expectations is by making Hux angry and impetuous. This psychopath now has more power? Snoke always seemed to keep this "cur" in check. But now he's off the leash and doesn't respect Kylo as much as he did Snoke. Again, going forward, this makes the First Order seem that much more menacing and chaotic. This is not the cold, calculating, bureaucratic Empire. This is an organization with an arsenal and an army and there's no telling what devastation they are about to unleash on the galaxy.
  
Each time that I've seen the movie now, I kept thinking, "I didn't even know I wanted this until I saw it." There are some truly breathtaking moments. I've not been to a movie in a long time where everyone around me audibly gasps at what happens. When Holdo rams the cruiser at light speed, everyone's jaw drops. The throne-room scene might just be the best lightsaber battle of the entire franchise. The bombing run at the beginning has given me chills both times. Luke becoming one with the force has made me get a little misty-eyed both times. Even though Leia floats like a witch, and even though Finn and Rose ride beasts that crash through a city, and even though DelToro overacted his character (to be expected), I still really appreciate that Rian Johnson made a Star Wars movie, and not a fan film.

After The Force Awakens I was prepared for more of the same. Now, for the first time in a long time, I am excited about the future of Star Wars. 

[Keep Following.]

The God of Promises

During the first transfer of my mission in Switzerland, we taught a woman named Tanya Mader. She was our only investigator. We would spend so much time preparing our lessons because my companion knew how rare a progressing investigator was. Her husband and small son would listen politely during our lessons, but never really engage. We were so excited for our weekly appointments. We would pour out our hearts to this woman because we so rarely got to testify to someone who would actually listen. We got even more excited when she committed to baptism. The two weeks before her baptism flew by. She accepted all her commitments and began bearing her own testimony to us. Then, then on Saturday morning of her baptismal day, while my companion was ironing his white pants that he had never used, our telephone rang. After a short conversation, my companion pulled his white pants from the ironing board and hung them back in the closet. Immediately, my mind went to my Patriarchal Blessing. It states that my testimony would be accepted and relied upon during my mission. Even though I had about 20 months left, I still wondered, could God fulfill his promise?

Brothers and Sisters, our God is a God of promises. You probably know this if you’ve read a single page from anywhere in the standard works. His covenants and promises are everywhere. President Spencer W. Kimball said, “There are so many beautiful promises. To read the scriptures and turn the pages, it seems that it is almost all rewards, evidence of living the commandments of the Lord.”[1] We often see the Lord’s promises fulfilled in glorious and dramatic ways. We see this when prophets and people are delivered from oppression, saved from wild beasts or fiery furnaces, and when the enemies of the chosen people are miraculously defeated.

If we are supposed to liken the scriptures to ourselves, we must inevitably ask: could the Lord do this in my life? If he needed to, could the Lord deliver me from physical danger? Does the Lord really care enough about me to perform miracles in my life? In a recent Conference address, Elder Bednar said:

"Is it possible to exercise faith in Him, follow Him, serve Him, but not believe Him? I am acquainted with Church members who accept as true the doctrine and principles contained in the scriptures and proclaimed from this pulpit. And yet they have a hard time believing those gospel truths apply specifically in their lives and to their circumstances. They seem to have faith in the Savior, but they do not believe His promised blessings are available to them or can operate in their lives.”[2]

            When I read these words, I can’t help but feel that Elder Bednar is speaking to me directly. Often I think, “Yes, yes that’s fine for others, but those types of miraculous events and fulfillment of promises only apply to others. People who deserve it more. People who are special. The Lord won’t do that in my life because he never has.” I mean, think for a moment of some of God’s wonderful promises:

“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.”[3]

“Ask, and it shall be given unto you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.”[4]

“And all saints [...] shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones; And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures; And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint. And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them...”[5]

“...though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.”[6]

Do you really believe that you can find rest in this tumultuous world? Can you really be given special revelatory knowledge from God? Can the Lord really make you healthier? Can the Lord truly erase your sins? Make them as if they’d never happened? The answer to these questions is yes. But maybe these aren’t personal enough blessings.

So instead think for a moment of something personal that the Lord has promised you, perhaps in a Patriarchal Blessing. Do you still believe the Lord can fulfill His promise to you? If you’re not sure, I know of someone who may have felt as you do. His name was Abraham. Wisely, the scriptures not only contain straightforward examples of promise-fulfillment, they also contain covenants or promises that have not yet been fulfilled, or promises that weren’t fulfilled in the way one would expect. The book of Romans speaks of Abraham as “being fully persuaded that, what [the Lord] had promised, he was able also to perform.”[7]

            That is truly amazing when we think of what Abraham experienced. Year after year, he waited for the promised blessing of a son. And year after year, nothing. Surely he prayed. Surely he wept. Surely Sarah felt inadequate. After all, the Lord had promised a son, hadn’t He? Surely one or both members of this couple wondered if Hagar bearing Ishmael was the fulfillment of that holy promise. Perhaps they had misunderstood. And perhaps once they reached old ages they assumed that the son would come in the afterlife. But sure enough, Sarah bears a son in her old age, Isaac. What a time of astonished joy they must have felt. The Lord did it! Against all odds, He did it! The answer to that promise flew in the face of everything they knew about God and the natural order of life. But the Lord promised posterity and fulfilled His promise despite impossible odds.

And yet, a short few years later, Abraham hears this from the Lord: “Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering...”[8] Even the Lord’s phrasing here is telling. The reference is clear: thine only son. Perhaps Abraham understood Isaac’s similitude to the Savior, perhaps not. Either way, how can the Lord ask this of Abraham? This is the most tender part of Abraham’s soul. Is the Lord going back on His promise?

            Hasn’t Abraham suffered enough? Hasn’t Sarah? Abraham is intimately familiar with the evils of human sacrifice, and this is what the Lord asks? Of all things? Is this not the covenant child? Isn’t Isaac the living fulfillment of a lifetime of waiting? And the Lord asks Abraham to kill his little boy? There is no example in all of scripture that demonstrates so fully what God asks of us as his disciples. The Lord asks for us to lay everything we have on the altar. All of our pride and selfishness and disbelief. And sometimes, just sometimes he asks for that which may be the most precious to us: a child, a parent, a spouse. President John Taylor said: “You will have all kinds of trials to pass through... God will feel after you, and He will take hold of you and wrench your very heart strings, and if you cannot stand it you will not be fit for an inheritance in the Celestial Kingdom of God.”[9]

The scripture reads: “Therefore, they [who profess discipleship] must needs be chastened and tried, even as Abraham, who was commanded to offer up his only son. For all those who will not endure chastening, but deny me, cannot be sanctified.”[10]

            Think about that! We all have to be tried like Abraham in order to be sanctified.  This may sound harsh, but remember the Lord also says “after much tribulation ... cometh the blessing.”[11] So what then is the blessing? What is the point of this suffering? President George Q. Cannon said:

There is no sacrifice that God can ask of us or his servants whom he has chosen to lead us that we should hesitate about making. In one sense of the word, it is no sacrifice. We may call it so because it comes in contact with our selfishness and our unbelief, but it ought not to come in contact with our faith. Why did the Lord ask such things of Abraham? Because, knowing what his future would be and that he would be the father of an innumerable posterity, he was determined to test him. God did not do this for His own sake for He knew by His foreknowledge what Abraham would do; but the purpose was to impress upon Abraham a lesson and to enable him to attain unto knowledge that he could not obtain in any other way. That is why God tries all of us. It is not for His own knowledge, for He knows all things beforehand. He knows all your lives and everything you will do. But he tries us for our own good, that we may know ourselves.[12]

Two things stand out to me from this quote. One, that God knows what we need so well, that he can tailor your trials to fit your exact circumstances. He knows not only what you need, but how you need it. If you let Him, He will teach you things that you wouldn’t be able to learn in any other way.  

And two, God knows you. God loves you. God not only knows you as you are right now, but He knows who you’ve always been and who you eventually will be. The problem is that you don’t know who you are. He does. He isn’t asking you to wait or withholding blessings to torture you. He is trying to teach you who you are. He wants to tell you what He knows about you. You are here to find out what you are capable of.

D&C 132 states “Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose loins ye are [...] This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham [...] Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.”[13]

            So what exactly are the promises of Abraham? What did the Lord promise Abraham in exchange for laying everything he had on the altar? And by extension, what has the Lord promised us if we do the same? His promise is of exaltation. Godhood. “For whoso is faithful... They become... the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God. ...therefore all that my Father hath shall be given unto [them].”[14] This is no small promise. Yes, it hurts to lay all that we have on the altar. Yes, it will be the most difficult thing we are called to do. But the promise is sure: everything. You get everything. All you have for all that the Father has is worth it. He promises that it will be.

            With 4 months left to go on my mission, I was in the Mission President’s home for a leadership meeting when the zone leaders from my first area approached me. One of them had a photo in his hand. It was a picture of Tanya Mader, dressed in white. But she wasn’t alone. Her husband was standing with her, dressed in white as well. Today I still carry that picture in my scriptures as evidence that the Lord always fulfills his promises. I know that He can fulfill his promises. Not only do I know it, I believe Him when He promises me all that He has. That’s not to say I never waiver. I’m far from perfect. But I’m getting better at trusting Him. Truly Moroni was right when he wrote: “For the eternal purposes of the Lord shall roll on, until all his promises shall be fulfilled.”[15]  In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

---

[1] Jan.1974, The Rewards, The Blessings, The Promises

[2] Nov. 2016, “If Ye Had Known Me”

[3] Matt 11:28

[4] 3 Ne. 14:7-8

[5] D&C 89:18-21

[6] Isa. 1: 18

[7] Romans 4:21

[8] Gen. 22:2

[9] Journal of Discourses, 24:197

[10] D&C 101:4-5

[11] D&C 103:12

[12] Gospel Truth, 89

[13] D&C 132: 30-32

[14] D&C 84: 33-38

[15] Mor. 8:22

[Keep Following.]

Ketogenesis, Or How I Stopped Being Fat

I’m tired of getting asked about my diet.

Well, a lot of the time I’m not asked at all, I’m told. “That’s dangerous!” they’ll say. Or, “Don’t you know that’s unsustainable?” Or simply, “You probably shouldn’t be doing that.”

Well, I want to put this to bed. I’m on the Keto Diet. You may know it by its popular offshoots, Atkins and South Beach. Keto isn’t that. It isn’t a fad. It is a diet that uses a natural process in your body to switch from burning carbohydrates as your main fuel source to burning fat as your main fuel source. Sound too good to be true? It’s not.

A typical dinner.

If you didn’t know, most modern diets consist of large amounts of carbohydrates, or carbs for short. Carbs take many forms. They can be plain sugars or starches like sugar in soda, bread, pasta, and potatoes. They are one example of what is called a macronutrient (the others being protein and fat). Food can consist of any amount of combinations of these three macronutrients. But if you’ve ever read a food label, you’ll notice that carbs are sneaking into almost everything we eat. Most people’s diets now consist of anywhere from 50%-70% carbohydrate. Carbs are in places you’d never expect to see them. Some strange examples: Ketchup, Salad Dressing, Yoghurt, and even some canned vegetables. My mom even recently discovered her turkey bacon has added sugar. Sometimes they are in small quantities, and sometimes large. Either way, they add up fast. Just take the “Complete Breakfast” that cereal companies have peddled to us for years in their commercials. Juice = carbs. Toast = carbs. Jelly = carbs. Fruit = carbs. Cereal = carbs. This breakfast is basically 100% carbohydrate.

Why is this a problem? Well, for years the common opinion of doctors has been that diabetes, fatty liver, and heart disease are all caused by eating too many calories in general. Whereas now doctors are finding that people who exercise frequently and live relatively healthy lifestyles are falling victim to these same diseases, even when they don’t eat too many calories. Traditionally, these health problems were seen as a “calories in” vs. “calories out” problem (essentially overeating), whereas now many doctors and dieticians are more concerned with the types of calories going in. Doctors used to say avoid sugar because it had so many calories in such small amounts and would therefore lead to a “calories in” vs. “calories out” problem. Now research is beginning to suggest that what you eat is just as important as how much you eat.

Obviously eating 500 calories of broccoli is better than consuming 500 calories worth of sugar. But don’t blame doctors, they weren’t educated with the right materials. A doctor named Ancel Keys duped the FDA and the American public. To find out more about how that happened back in the 70s during the anti-fat movement, go watch Sugar Coated on Netflix. It will piss you off. Learn more about this here.

Just before World War II, sugar consumption was about 4 pounds a month per person. By the early 1980’s, Americans were eating 10 pounds a month per person. By 2000, it was about 12.5 lbs/per month/per person. (source) It’s even worse today. The World Health Organization guidelines for healthy amounts of sugar in an adult’s diet is about 2 lbs/per person/month. (source)

Back to Keto. The problem is that carbs are a quick fuel source for your body. “In normal circumstances, the body's cells use glucose as their main form of energy. Glucose is typically derived from dietary carbohydrates ... which the body breaks down into simple sugars. Glucose can either be used to fuel the body or stored in the liver and muscles as glycogen.”(source) In a healthy person, a rise in glucose in the blood triggers the pancreas to release insulin which helps cells absorb the glucose where it is used as fuel.

Funny that the most unhealthy thing about this is the bun.

Put simply, the pancreas cannot keep up with the amount of glucose that is flowing through the average person’s veins nowadays. This puts extreme stress on a delicate organ and the body has to adapt. For most people, that excess glucose is stored as fat. In extreme cases, the pancreas shuts down and diabetes is the result. With the Keto diet, we get around this by limiting our carb intake to about 30 grams to 50 grams per day, or 5% of ones total macro intake. To give you a sense of how much that is, ONE kiwi has about 21 grams of net carbs. (Net carbs are carbohydrate minus the naturally occurring dietary fiber.) We supplement this lack of a major macronutrient by eating a diet consisting mainly of fat and some protein. This may sound gross if you think of fat in the traditional sense, which for most people is lard. But fat can come in many forms: olive oil, butter, avocado, cheese, nuts, and (yes) bacon. Lest it sound like all I eat is meat and cheese, let me tell you, I’ve never eaten more vegetables (or drank more water) in my life than on this diet. Most leafy vegetables are packed full of nutrients and fiber and contain very little protein, fat, or carbohydrates, so load up! The best part is that I love the vegetables I eat! Yes, I eat a lot of protein, but there are even vegan versions of the keto diet. The reason I eat a lot of protein is because I lift weights and I want them “gainz, bruh.”

Here’s a good explanation of what is going on in my body. “If there is not enough glucose available to meet energy demands, the body will adopt an alternative strategy in order to meet those demands. Specifically, the body begins to break down fat stores to provide glucose from triglycerides. Ketones are a by-product of this process. Ketones are acids that build up in the blood and are eliminated in urine. In small amounts, they serve to indicate that the body is breaking down fat.”(source) Thus the diet’s nickname: Keto.

Can you tell when I started Keto?

I could go on and on, but I’ll finish with my results and let them do the preaching. I’ve lost 38 pounds. I feel fantastic. I sleep better. I have way fewer gastrointestinal problems. I have more energy. I love feeling good about what I eat. Even the Mayo Clinic agrees: “Low-carb diets may help prevent or improve serious health conditions, such as metabolic syndrome, diabetes, high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease.” Read more here.

Do I miss carbs? Occasionally. But I had a realization recently. I realized that I miss carb culture more than I miss the actual carbs. Think of all of the occasions in our lives when we use sugar as the centerpiece! But while I may miss the culture from time to time, the feeling fades away quickly when I’m eating cheesy eggs and bacon. Or cheeseburger casserole (no noodles). Or eating my grandma’s pot roast recipe. Or a gigantic salad with fresh-sliced avocado and lime. You can keep your sugar. And your “DIBEETUS.”

If you want to know more, take a look at these sources: Added Sugars and Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Children: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association- http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/early/2016/08/22/CIR.0000000000000439
"The committee found that it is reasonable to recommend that children consume ≤25 g, or ~6 teaspoons of added sugars per day and to avoid added sugars for children under 2."

The Heart and Stroke Foundation Owes Canadian Parents an Apology: https://youtu.be/PfGzJ4mkSa0

Dr Mary Vernon, MD, is one of the world's foremost experts on treating obesity and diabetes with low carbohydrate nutrition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaquSijXJkQ  

http://www.mensfitness.com/nutrition/what-to-eat/truth-behind-worlds-most-cutting-edge-fat-burning-performance-meal-plan-keto

https://www.reddit.com/r/keto/wiki/keto_in_a_nutshell

As always, consult your doctor before making an extreme change in your diet. My results are typical of those on the diet, but that doesn’t mean that the diet would be right for you.

The Lost Generation

There is an interesting phenomenon happening in the LDS Church at the moment. I write "at the moment" lightly, because this problem has been gestating for years. I'm sure the Church is aware of what is happening, but since there haven't been any concrete steps made to solve or alleviate the problem, I am assuming they haven't figured out what to do yet.

The problem is what to do with an entire group of men and women who have "aged-out" of their Young Single Adult wards. I call them the Lost Generation. Not only is this group delaying marriage or not getting married, they are having trouble with the Church culture and its norms, and often they are simply giving up.

I'm sorry I have no estimate for how large the Lost Generation is. I only know that it is getting larger every day. Since its inception, the Church has enjoyed a higher-than-average marriage rate. And compared to national averages, it still does. But as the world has increasingly delayed marriage or gotten rid of it altogether, the same has started to happen inside the Church. I have some theories on why this may be, which I'll get into later.

For years, the Church's solution has been to impose an age cap of 30 in YSA wards. When you turn 31, you either go back into a Family Ward, or, if you're lucky, you go into a Singles Ward comprising people of ages 31-45. For many, the 31st birthday looms like a dreaded apparition that slowly rises over your shattered prospects for happiness and normalcy. Luckily for those who live in Utah, transitioning into a Singles Ward isn't totally awful, since at the very least, you can be sure that everyone else there has gone through the same transition. "You aren't young anymore. Deal with your exile. Get married," this move seems to imply.

Labels matter. Not being labeled or included in the "young" crowd anymore can be hard. Or maybe not. I'll let you know if I get there. But I can imagine that many take it hard. I can't speak for the women, but I know that many of the men respond by going to their new Singles Ward, taking one look around, and then simply finding a new place to live where they can attend a YSA ward that won't force them out. If getting people married is the goal, dividing the singles arbitrarily at 31 won't work because the men are in denial and there are simply too many of them. I get that it would be weird having 45 year-olds and 18 year-olds going to the same ward. But since there are so many young thirty-somethings who are single, there needs to be a better place for them. As a person who is almost aging-out, I would feel just as uncomfortable attending a ward with people in their forties as I would going to a ward filled with teenagers. As I approach 31, the age range I am most comfortable with is a ten year range around mine, meaning 25-35.

Kicking people out of wards sends a weird message. And maybe that is on those of us who have to deal with it. Obviously we can choose how we react, but the culture needs to change. Being single in your thirties is a normal thing now. It used to be weird, but it isn't anymore. The Church can keep preaching about the importance of marriage constantly, but it isn't that these people don't understand marriage, it's that they simply haven't gotten married. A part of me still thinks that leaders believe that if we just understood marriage's importance well enough, that we would go out and get married. But that isn't it. We get it. Believe me, we do. The "just pick one" method of courtship and marriage is over. This is something that leadership hasn't quite understood yet. I have been told countless times just to "pick one and get it over with." President Kimball's words are repeated often:
"'Soul mates' are fiction and an illusion; and while every young man and young woman will seek with all diligence and prayerfulness to find a mate with whom life can be most compatible and beautiful, yet it is certain that almost any good man and any good woman can have happiness and a successful marriage if both are willing to pay the price."

But many who quote this leave out the next paragraph, which is one source of the modern difficulty with marriage: "There is a never-failing formula which will guarantee to every couple a happy and eternal marriage; but like all formulas, the principal ingredients must not be left out, reduced, or limited. The selection before courting and then the continued courting after the marriage process are equally important, but not more important than the marriage itself, the success of which depends upon the two individuals—not upon one, but upon two."

Getting the "two" to match up during the courting process has gotten infinitely harder over the last 20 years. Dating culture has seen a massive shift. Courting now involves an element of constant, instant communication with cell phones and the internet. And yet, leadership still looks back in fondness on the days when men wore suits and women wore dresses and you called each other on the rotary phone to go to the soda shop and a drive-in movie only to leave at the end of the night and not hear or see the person for another few days. Things were simpler back then, but being nostalgic for how things used to be, or pretending that that outmoded form of dating can still work is foolish.

There are now a myriad of ways to stay in contact with the opposite sex, and dating has become an intricate dance of communication and non-communication that would make adults' heads spin. Yes, dating has certainly changed. But so has the culture. Most of us have also grown up in an era with rates of divorce that are much different than they used to be. Everyone knows you've got basically a 50/50 chance nowadays. And that is terrifying. When salvation and livelihood are on the line, it sucks to be told to "just have faith" that it will all work out. Frankly, anyone who gets married nowadays should be congratulated on their bravery. As someone who took that chance and had it backfire, I can say that I would never tell anyone to "just pick someone." I know all too well what kind of emotional and spiritual fallout that kind of decision can have if it goes haywire.

There may also be a demographics problem that is exacerbating the issue. There was an article printed in Time magazine that examined Mormonism's marriage issue by chalking it up to demographics problems in the Church. "According to the ARIS study, there are now 150 Mormon women for every 100 Mormon men in the state of Utah—a 50 percent oversupply of women." And according to the article, this causes men to wait to find "the next best thing." This delays marriage longer and longer until we end up with the current situation of more unmarried 30-somethings. I could see this as a big contributing factor. I know many great guys who waited a very long time to get married. But I don't see this as a bad thing. If that is how long it took them, then who is to say they did it the wrong way? Different, yes. Wrong? Not necessarily. (http://time.com/dateonomics/)

Another contributing factor may be what I like to call the Disney Paradox. If men's reason for delaying marriage is to find the perfect woman, then many women expect to ride off into the sunset Happily Ever After once they do get married. This of course never happens, they become disillusioned, get divorced, and end up getting thrown back into the dating pool, sometimes years later and sometimes with children in tow. This also increases the number of singles and delays marriage because men are often reluctant to date these women if they already have a large pool of women to choose from. Both occurrences feed into one another and create a cycle where marrying gets harder and gets put off for longer.

Next is the outright rejection of Church social norms. Whereas the term "Menace to Society" was once regarded with nervous chuckles, it is now derided as coercive. Our generation is fed up with being told how to live our lives outside of the gospel. We are educated, and more of us than ever are returned missionaries. It is easier for us to detect what is doctrine and what is culture. We are in the midst of creating a new culture. This desire to create a new culture has created a divide. On one side are those who are more orthodox in their beliefs, and on the other is a growing number who believe the Church needs to get with the times and adapt to the changing world. In response, the Church has tried to become more transparent by publishing its essays on controversial topics, but many feel that it is too late and they have lost confidence because they had to go to other sources to find out about issues in the Church's past that it is uncomfortable with. What does this have to do with marriage? Well not a whole lot, other than there are more issues than ever when examining a potential partner's value systems during courtship. 30 years ago, the only question was: Is he/she LDS? Whereas now you may have to find out what that person actually believes within the Church. This is absolutely unprecedented. And it makes it that much harder to get married.

I don't know exactly how I feel about all of this. Maybe I should be more worried than I am. But honestly, since I'm divorced, I feel like so much of it is out of my hands, that as long as I am trying to be the best person I can be, things will work out. If that approach takes a little longer, so be it. Hopefully this time around it really will be "for Time and all Eternity." I do know one thing. Pretending we are living in the 50s isn't doing the Lost Generation any favors. If the Church wants to fix this, level with us, tell it to us straight, and give us better options in our ward divisions for dating people we actually want to date. Waiting until 31 to sift the singles makes it feel like a punishment. An earlier division would help it feel normal and remove the stigma that exists. And who knows? It might actually help us find the right people. Because at the end of the day, that is what is most important.

[Keep Following.]

Sunday Post - An Excerpt From An Old Talk

 God’s help doesn't always come right away or in the way that we want. Sometimes it doesn't come after we have simply “taken no thought but to ask” for His power and miracles. In fact, most of the time, it's the opposite. A counselor in a previous bishopric of mine actually said to me that because this is often the case, that our God is a “fourth-watch God.” But what does this mean? When the counselor said this he was actually referencing the story in Matthew 14:

22 ¶And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away. 23 And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone. 24 But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary. 25 And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.

Here Jesus gives the command to His disciples to cross to the other side of the sea while He retires to pray. And He prays and lets the disciples struggle until the fourth watch. The Romans broke the night into four, three-hour blocks and called each one a watch. The fourth watch is the time from about 3am until dawn. 

In other words, it is the last watch, the darkest time of night. Jesus surely knew of the coming storm. And the disciples surely felt prepared. After all, the sea was their workplace. They had been in storms before. And so they rowed, and rowed, and rowed—though the wind howled in their faces. After the first few hours, muscles screaming, they must have felt discouraged. But Jesus had commanded and so they obeyed. It wasn’t until they had literally rowed all night into a storm that Jesus came. With hands blistered, soaked with freezing water, most likely delirious, they peered across the waves:

26 And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear. 27 But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.

The reassurance that we can take from this scripture is that even though God may wait until what seems like the last moment to reveal His hand, once He does appear, He is mighty to save.

32 And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased. 33 Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.

If we manage to but hold on until the last moment, God will work miracles in our lives. And not just any miracles. These experienced fisherman had never seen such a thing as the wind suddenly ceasing, and it was so powerful that they proclaimed Jesus’ divinity without hesitation. These are big miracles. They are testimony building ones. But they come at a price. They come when you are about to give up.

Most of my personal troubles with God operating in the fourth watch come when I compare myself to others. I notice when other people’s troubles seem to be fixed before my own. I see miracles or read of them or hear about them and I wonder, “Why aren’t my prayers being answered? Where is my miracle? When is it my turn to be rescued?”

And then a few weeks ago I read the passage in Luke 8 where the woman with the issue of blood is healed when she touches Jesus’ robe. And suddenly I could see the scene in my mind’s eye. I could see what it must have looked like to an outsider, perhaps with their own troubles and tribulations. It would have been easy to think that this was an immediate miracle. Indeed, a miracle that seemed to be almost taken by force and not in patient waiting like is expected.

But how long did it truly take this woman to be healed? And what was the price? To a bystander, the answers to those questions were: three seconds and an outstretched hand. But Luke, our physician-apostle, knows better. He must have inquired about her condition after the miracle because out of all the Gospel authors he is the only one who writes these details:

43 ¶And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, 44 Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.

So how long did the miracle actually take? And what was the real cost? Sometimes miracles take twelve years and all of your earthly wealth. But the miracles do come. This was the fourth-watch God in action.

 Elder Jeffrey R. Holland’s said in a legendary BYU devotional speech entitled “The Inconvenient Messiah:”

“And as you labor to know him, and to know that he knows you; as you invest your time—and your convenience—in quiet, unassuming service, you will indeed find that 'he shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up' (Matthew 4:6). It may not come quickly. It probably won’t come quickly, but there is purpose in the time it takes. Cherish your spiritual burdens because God will converse with you through them and will use you to do his work if you carry them well.”

“So if your prayers don’t always seem answered, take heart. One greater than you ... cried, ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’ (Matthew 27:46). If for a while the harder you try, the harder it gets, take heart. So it has been with the best people who ever lived.”

“It is not easy to go without—without physical gratifications or spiritual assurances or material possessions—but sometimes we must since there is no guarantee of convenience written into our Christian covenant. We must work hard and do right, as Abraham Lincoln said, and sometimes our chance will come. And when we’ve tried, really tried, and waited for what seemed never to be ours, then ‘the angels came and ministered unto him.’ For that ministration in your life I pray.”

Please don’t doubt whilst waiting for miracles. Jesus may wait to come until the fourth watch of the night. But He does come.

[Keep Following.]

Fake Outrage

I hate fake outrage. In our social media society, there seems to be new drama every week. Whether it's Dadbod, Deflategate, or the latest "normalizebreastfeeding" hashtag. I hate all of these things with varying degrees of fiery passion.

But it's not because these things shouldn't be talked about. My dislike of these things is not a value judgment. What I really hate is the fake outrage that accompanies each "trending topic." Each issue like the ones mentioned above seems to occupy the public psyche for progressively shorter timespans. It's almost as if the more drama there is, the faster each issue fades from the public eye.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. We live in an amazing time. We live in the age of technology and information. We have more access and exposure to our world than any of the previous generations that have called this planet home. And yet this information age comes with a price. Our ability to process and digest this information has not increased. So instead we pretend to process, and we feign digestion. Why? We don't have any more time than our grandparents did. There are thousands more voices vying for our attention, but the same 24-hour day in which to address them all. We literally can't give our full attention to the things demanding it. So we pick and choose as many as we can, but fully invest in none.

Because of this, maybe our "Share This" widgets on social media should really read: "Share This & Forget."

One way this fleeting attention manifests itself is through the aforementioned fake outrage. We encounter information that should genuinely concern us, but rather than latching onto it and doing something about it, we become suddenly aware that this is the third time today that we have felt this way. And we also remember that we didn't do anything after feeling this way the first two times. So we resolve to act. Thus, fake outrage is born. We take to our preferred method of social media and we share and comment and argue and consider our job done and guilt banished. That is, until we wake up tomorrow. Nothing is accomplished other than a temporary relief of guilt for not actually doing anything.

We are all exposed to several different strata of drama in social media.

1. Close family and friends
2. Community
3. National 

Fake outrage can be a response to any issue at each or all of these drama strata. Maybe your cousin recently decided not vaccinate her kids. Outrage! Maybe your friends are all blogging about modesty because of some dork's stupid note to a girl on campus. Outrage! Maybe some celebrity said something controversial about a subjective moral principle. Outrage! 

Again, the problem isn't that we shouldn't have the right to talk about these things. That is a consequence of living in the society that we do, and it is part of the freedoms we enjoy. I just can't stand when things aren't followed by action. If you were truly outraged, you wouldn't have a "share & forget" mentality. You would do something. 

A quote that is often attributed to Socrates is "To be is to do." With this in mind, it seems that the ones most guilty of fake outrage are nothing more than armchair crusaders, searching for the next thing that they can share on facebook with a witty quip or two, hoping that someone will disagree so they can argue it out and stave off the guilt a little longer. 

So please, next time, spare me your fake outrage and stop the pointless "trending."

[Keep Following.]

What I Learned From The Best Of The Best

  [100th Post!]

So awhile ago I watched the top 100 movies of all time. When I say awhile ago, I mean, like, a year and a half ago. It hurts a little to write that. And when I say the top 100, I mean, like, the top 120... or so.

I had just graduated college and I was stuck. I didn't know it right away, mind you. But I was.

I had spent five years periodically slogging through and/or relishing the best the world had to offer in literature, art, history, philosophy, and religion. I honestly didn't know what to do next. Despite being lost, I did however have one advantage that I realized not many people have: lots and lots of free time. I was still part-time at Costco (read:depressingly so).

So, in true BYU fashion, I said to myself "What the flip?! Might as well." So I did a quick surf of the net and found that every "Top 100" list I found was slightly different. I quickly got over my annoyance and decided to make my own using the two I found most appealing: AFI's Top 100 and IMDb's Top 250.

Both lists contained movies I had already seen before, so I didn't bother re-watching those, save a few that I hadn't seen in quite some time (my brother and sisters will recall the JAWS incident that had kept me away for so long). And luckily, there were very few that I wasn't able to find in one form or another. So combining a collection from both lists, I still ended up watching over 100 new (to me) movies.

Sorry if this next part reads a little bit like a Buzzfeed article, but it is a list after all. And it's a long one, so because of your short attention spans, you've forced my hand.

Without further ado, I give you what I learned from my experience:

1. Prejudice
I had a prejudice toward black and white films that I didn't know about. I began, I'm embarrassed to admit, with more recent movies. They were ones I had at least heard of, or had exciting covers. I know, I know, I 'm supposed to sound all cultured and high and mighty and say I went straight for Italian Neorealism, but a guy's got to start his education somewhere. And even the smartest kids start out reading Dr.Seuss.

From these more recent movies, I learned how much I've been missing out on pop culture references that I was supposedly "in" on. Take DeNiro for example. Everybody knows the line. It's everywhere. And while I knew it was a famous DeNiro line, I had no idea where it actually came from. Now I do. Now, I'm "in" on the reference for real. And I have to say, it feels gratifying.

2. Older Than Your Grandma 
As I progressed further back into the annals of film history, I suddenly couldn't avoid them anymore. I would have to start watching some black and white ones and some color films with old-fashioned looking covers. Try to tell me that these don't look at least a little boring:

I know, right?

Much to my chagrin, my prejudices were obliterated in the best way possible. As chance would have it, one of the first "old" movies I watched was A Place in the Sun. Call me a sucker for young Elizabeth Taylor. I sat down on a Friday night by myself like some elderly cat lady with a blanket over my lap. 120 minutes later I was yelling at the screen, practically in tears over what has to be one of the most insane endings to a movie in all of history. I immediately wanted to watch it again, that is, after I could somehow manage to pull my foot out of my proverbial mouth.

Despite my amazing first experience, I still found myself wondering if perhaps that movie was simply a fluke. "It was great, but these others are probably snooze fests." And yet I was wrong. Over and over and over again. I can't tell you how wrong I was. Each movie that I watched seemed to poke me right in the eye and rub in the error of my ways.

3. The Moment(s)
It's safe to say that as time progressed, I began being less dumbfounded at each new discovery, and I started to appreciate these films more. And after thinking about what I was witnessing with skills I had honed to razor-precision during my tenure at BYU, I did something I never thought I'd do in the "real world." I analyzed.

*gasps from the crowd*

Something I noticed right away in my analysis, and probably the most obvious, was that older movies have an entirely different pace than more recent films. This change can be most accurately demonstrated in another of my Highly Technical and Polished Graphs (TM):

Here the (y) axis is the viewer's excitement level and the (x) axis is the length of the film. The graph on the left represents our new, more modern conception of how movies should be. The graph on the right represents the average plot escalation for older films. All of this data is based on extensive research with a standard deviation of .33 (repeating of course).

I don't really know if I have thoughts as to one being better than the other. They're just different. The new way robs them of a powerful climax since the whole thing is exciting. Whereas the old way takes a lot longer to get going, but once things start to escalate, it is insane how exciting they get. The other difference is that newer movies are filled with pointless fluff in the denouement, whereas in old movies, you are getting little bits and pieces of information until the very moment the screen goes dark.

4. Moral of the Story
Not only do these movies eradicate the stereotypes that I had constructed, they transcend them. I thought black and white movies would somehow be morally simple. I assumed that old-fashioned people couldn't handle dark moral complexity like more modern audiences. What I realized is that I've had it the other way around this whole time and didn't know it. WE are the ones who can't handle or don't appreciate moral complexity in cinema. (Luckily, this problem isn't as apparent in TV.) But just try to think of a truly morally complex character in recent cinema. You probably can't.

Something they understood "back in the day" is that we love stories about people who are essentially bad, but somewhere along the line they make a good choice or two. Ya know, kinda like us. Kinda like real people. But no, today we are content with our Supermans and Will Turners and Katnisses. Or on the other side of the spectrum, our Corleones, Vincent Vegas, and Tyler Durdens. Don't get me wrong, I like all of these characters. But if On The Waterfront were released today, people would complain about how unlikable the main character is. And he is an unlikable character. He is a crappy guy that makes a good decision or two. And despite his shortcomings, I'll be damned if you aren't rooting for him by the end.

5. The Pain Sets In
Despite my newly opened mind, there were still some movies on the list that I thoroughly disliked. One that comes to my mind immediately is Raging Bull. I know it's a Scorsese film, but I honestly couldn't stand it. I get that it's supposed to be the way that it is, I know it was on purpose, but it just wasn't for me. The main character has no redeeming qualities and you come away from the film feeling depressed and angry--in a bad way. I've come away from other movies feeling something similar, but I loved how depressed and angry I was. After Raging Bull, I just wanted to forget it.

There were also a few musicals that I had to fast forward through large portions of. Not because they aren't classics,  but again, not for me. I'm looking at you An American in Paris. I have a hard time with movies that sacrifice story in favor of 18 minute dance numbers. But still, I watched all the musicals despite my misgivings. And to be fair, I also fast-forwarded through the twenty minute wandering through the desert scene in Lawrence of Arabia.

6. For Teh Lulz
This is a small thing, and closely related to #2, but I find it astounding that we think the same things are funny as people thought were funny 100 years ago. Charlie Chaplin is incredible. I was laughing deep belly laughs at both Modern Times and City Lights. And don't forget Some Like It Hot. Fantastic! Brings a smile to my face just thinking about it.

7. Heey LADIES!
Which brings me to my final lesson. Romance. Man, what happened? We used to know how to add romance to movies! At some point we conflated sex with romance. Despite non-existent sex scenes in older movies, there was still passion and desire. Hollywood has forgotten that sex is incidental to romance. Call me naive, but I don't think people go to romantic comedies to see if there will be a sex scene. They go to see the falling in love part, not the sweaty, fleeting consequence.

A good example is The Best Years of Our Lives. In addition to being an excellent post-war film, it is also wonderfully romantic. And who can forget Annie Hall? I think I related a little too well to little Alvy Singer. I don't know if that was supposed to happen, but it did.

On a related note, they don't quite make them like they used to. I don't know what it is, maybe something about how the romance was presented, but I think as a man you can't help but fall in love with the leading ladies.

From left to right: Lauren Bacall, Anne Baxter, Elizabeth Taylor, Jane Russell, and of course Audrey

Veronica Lake, Anne Baxter, and no one could leave out Grace Kelly

So a quick recommendation, besides watching any of the movies mentioned above (honestly, you can't go wrong), I would immediately recommend watching All About Eve. It's one of my favorite movies now. And after watching you'll also understand why Anne Baxter appears twice in the photos above.

You made it to the end, congratulations. Feel free to ask me any questions about my experience in the comments. I'm no expert, but I'll do my best to answer.

[Keep Following.]