One morning Ella Sarah got up and said,
“I want to wear my pink polka-dot pants,
my dress with orange-and-green flowers,
my purple-and-blue striped socks,
my yellow shoes
and my red hat.”
                                    from Ella Sarah Gets Dressed
               written and illustrated by Margaret Chodos-Irvine
                                                 Harcourt, Inc. 2003

    When I was about seven, I longed for a pair of saddle shoes. Mom said “no” in a hurry. She said they were labor-intensive. Too much of a chance of scuffing. Too much polishing. Too much lace-tying. Mom was neat and tidy. I was not. 
    She bought me loafers and even gave me a penny to stick in each one.
    I don’t remember a line about shoes in our school’s strict dress code, but lots of girls wore saddle shoes. We had to wear dresses or skirts that reached at least mid-knee. No pants, Blouses were tucked in. No t-shirts. Yes to belts or suspenders, though. My brother wore suspenders, but, I suspect he might have preferred a belt. No jeans. The back of a boy’s hair was not permitted past the top of his collar. No shorts for boys or girls. Men teachers wore ties. Women wore dresses or skirts. 
    Authorities such as principals, guidance counsellors, and school boards promoted school dress codes to add decorum to the classrooms, encourage politeness, and promote concentration, they claimed. If scientific studies backed these claims, they weren’t cited. When the late 1960s turned into the early 1970s, school dress codes fell by the wayside (pretty universally) in favor of allowing students their freedom of expression. There were limits, of course, but they were few and far between. 
    Societies have dress codes, too. Although our parents didn’t say so outright, we all understood that dressing up was expected when we went shopping or to our yearly doctors’ appointments or for the occasional restaurant meal. 
    Whole books have been written about the history of clothing and fashion. Seems like everything from a fig leaf to a formal frock can make a fashion statement. 
    According to the on-line site Brainfodder, our clothing choices say a great deal about us. They touch on how we perceive ourselves and how others see us. For example, do your t-shirts have slogans, pictures, advertising? Do you avoid synthetic fabrics in favor of natural fibers? Do your clothes conform to society’s expectations helping you “blend in?” or do you favor bright colors and flamboyant accessories help you stand out? Do you express your cultural identity with your clothing choices? 
    “Science even has a name for this phenomenon. The term coined about 10 years ago, “enclothed cognition” describes how the clothes we wear affect our behavior, attitudes, personality, mood, confidence, and even the way we interact with others.” (Brainfodder, emphasis included) 
    A recent study split men into two groups: suits and sweatpants. The result was the suited participants won over $2 million in a simulated business deal experiment. The sweatpants group ended up losing $1.2million! Studies continually show that wearing a suit, formal and structured, puts us in the right frame of mind to conduct business. And encourages others to see us that way. Hillary Clinton comes to mind.
    Donning a white lab coat resulted in better intelligence scores when a subject was told the coat was a doctor’s lab coat than when they were told it was a painter’s smock.
    Based on many social experiments, scientists report that we tend to match our actions to our clothing more-so than the other way round. Wearing gym clothes results in more visits to the gym, for example.
    But people tend to be less open to socializing when dressed in business attire. Dress-down Friday encourages friendliness and creativity. 
    Recently the US Congress has weighed in on both sides of the argument. Senator John Fetterman (D-Pa) usually ignores the unwritten Congressional dress code. This week when he showed up in his typical sweat shirt, shorts, and sneakers, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer directed the Senate's sergeant-at-arms to stop enforcing its unwritten code. But Mr. Schumer said he would continue wearing a suit.
    Republican criticism was quick. Two days later, 46 Republicans told Schumer, “The world watches us on that floor and we must protect the sanctity of that place at all costs,” and “Allowing casual clothing on the Senate floor disrespects the institution we serve and the American families we represent.”
    Russia is continuing its assault on Ukraine. Hurricanes, tropical storms, and wildfires rage. Gerrymandering continues to proliferate. Politics is mixed in with our justice system, blurring the line between Religion and State. Book banning. Politicizing immigration. Exhibiting unfocused fear and anger. Gun violence. Anti-Semitism. Racial hatred.
    The looming shut-down of the US Government used to be unthinkable.
    Dress-down Friday would be a step in the right direction for Congress. A little creativity will go a long way toward finding compromise on so many difficult choices. A little friendliness could encourage acceptance of colleagues’ different ideas. 
    Fetterman and Schumer have the right idea.     
     
Many years ago I read The Soul of an Octopus (Atria Books, 2015) by Sy Montgomery. It’s a fascinating look at octopuses through the eyes of a journalist and marine biologist. Remarkably Bright Creatures by Shelby Van Pelt (HarperCollins, 2022) is fiction. But similar themes of loss, finding unexpected love, starting over, and how it feels to be an octopus all ring True. Highly recommended.
                                           -—Be curious! (and friendly)

One morning Ella Sarah got up and said,
“I want to wear my pink polka-dot pants,
my dress with orange-and-green flowers,
my purple-and-blue striped socks,
my yellow shoes
and my red hat.”
                                     from Ella Sarah Gets Dressed
                written and illustrated by Margaret Chodos-Irvine
                                                  Harcourt, Inc. 2003
   
    When I was about seven, I longed for a pair of saddle shoes. Mom said “no” in a hurry. She said they were labor-intensive. Too much of a chance of scuffing. Too much polishing. Too much lace-tying. Mom was neat and tidy. I was not. 
    She bought me loafers and even gave me a penny to stick in each one.
    I don’t remember a line about shoes in our school’s strict dress code, but lots of girls wore saddle shoes. We had to wear dresses or skirts that reached at least mid-knee. No pants. Blouses were tucked in. No t-shirts. Yes to belts or suspenders, though. My brother wore suspenders, but, I suspect he might have preferred a belt. No jeans. The back of a boy’s hair was not permitted past the top of his collar. No shorts for boys or girls. Men teachers wore ties. Women wore dresses or skirts. 
    Authorities such as principals, guidance counsellors, and school boards promoted school dress codes to add decorum to the classrooms, encourage politeness, and promote concentration, they claimed. If scientific studies backed these claims, they weren’t cited. When the late 1960s turned into the early 1970s, school dress codes fell by the wayside (pretty universally) in favor of allowing students their freedom of expression. There were limits, of course, but they were few and far between. 
    Societies have dress codes, too. Although our parents didn’t say so outright, we all understood that dressing up was expected when we went shopping or to our yearly doctors’ appointments or for the occasional restaurant meal. 
    Whole books have been written about the history of clothing and fashion. Seems like everything from a fig leaf to a formal frock can make a fashion statement. 
    According to the on-line site Brainfodder, our clothing choices say a great deal about us. They touch on how we perceive ourselves and how others see us. For example, do your t-shirts have slogans, pictures, advertising? Do you avoid synthetic fabrics in favor of natural fibers? Do your clothes conform to society’s expectations helping you “blend in?” or do you favor bright colors and flamboyant accessories help you stand out? Do you express your cultural identity with your clothing choices? 
    “Science even has a name for this phenomenon. The term coined about 10 years ago, “enclothed cognition” describes how the clothes we wear affect our behavior, attitudes, personality, mood, confidence, and even the way we interact with others.” (Brainfodder, emphasis included) 
    A recent study split men into two groups: suits and sweatpants. The result was the suited participants won over $2 million in a simulated business deal experiment. The sweatpants group ended up losing $1.2million! Studies continually show that wearing a suit, formal and structured, puts us in the right frame of mind to conduct business. And encourages others to see us that way. Hillary Clinton comes to mind.
    Donning a white lab coat resulted in better intelligence scores when a subject was told the coat was a doctor’s lab coat than when they were told it was a painter’s smock.
    Based on many social experiments, scientists report that we tend to match our actions to our clothing more-so than the other way round. Wearing gym clothes results in more visits to the gym, for example.
    But people tend to be less open to socializing when dressed in business attire. Dress-down Friday encourages friendliness and creativity. 
    Recently the US Congress has weighed in on both sides of the argument. Senator John Fetterman (D-Pa) usually ignores the unwritten Congressional dress code. This week when he showed up in his typical sweat shirt, shorts, and sneakers, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer directed the Senate's sergeant-at-arms to stop enforcing its unwritten code. But Mr. Schumer said he would continue wearing a suit.
    Republican criticism was quick. Two days later, 46 Republicans told Schumer, “The world watches us on that floor and we must protect the sanctity of that place at all costs,” and “Allowing casual clothing on the Senate floor disrespects the institution we serve and the American families we represent.”
    Russia is continuing its assault on Ukraine. Hurricanes, tropical storms, and wildfires rage. Gerrymandering continues to proliferate. Politics is mixed in with our justice system, blurring the line between Religion and State. Book banning. Politicizing immigration. Exhibiting unfocused fear and anger. Gun violence. Anti-Semitism. Racial hatred.
    The looming shut-down of the US Government used to be unthinkable.
    Dress-down Friday would be a step in the right direction for Congress. A little creativity will go a long way toward finding compromise on so many difficult choices. A little friendliness could encourage acceptance of colleagues’ different ideas. 
    Fetterman and Schumer have the right idea.     
     
Many years ago I read The Soul of an Octopus (Atria Books, 2015) by Sy Montgomery. It’s a fascinating look at octopuses through the eyes of a journalist and marine biologist. Remarkably Bright Creatures by Shelby Van Pelt (HarperCollins, 2022) is fiction. But similar themes of loss, finding unexpected love, starting over, and how it feels to be an octopus all ring True. Highly recommended.
                                                           -—Be curious! (and friendly)

    “Oh I’m lookin’ for my mission’ piece
    I’m lookin’ for my mission’ piece
    Hi-dee-ho, here I go,
    Lookin’ for my missing’ piece.”
                                            from The Missing Piece
                        written and illustrated by Shel Silverstein 
                                                  HarperCollins, 1976

    Some of us are content, full of gratitude for our ability to wonder, to think of new ideas, to spend precious time with our friends and family. But, humans are seekers. We seek patterns of predictability. We seek comfort in familiarity. We seek excitement in something new. 
    Research funded by the National Science Foundation has shown that variety in daily experience improves [a person’s] mood and how the brain generates that improvement. People who have many different experiences in a day say they are happier, more attentive, stronger, more relaxed, and more excited. 
    While we all fall somewhere on a continuum that defines our desire for predictability and routine on one hand, and serendipity and surprise on the other, most of us thrive when our experiences blend the two extremes to land us in the center. 
    It is when we wish for some new thing all the time, or over-schedule ourselves so we can take advantage of all (or most) experiences near and far, that we end up exhausted, depleted, and depressed. We feel left out, socially inferior, and second-guess ourselves about whether we are doing enough. 
    While not currently a diagnosable condition, Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) is real. It can disrupt our ability to make good decisions, interfere with our ability to concentrate, and leave us feeling sad, tired, and lonely.
    A lot of FOMO comes from viewing our friends’ photos of their exciting vacation, (and wishing we could be there, too) finding out we missed a “great sale” at our favorite store, not being able to contribute (or even understand) the “office talk” about a current TV show or popular music group or sports team or generally anything that fosters our feeling of being left out. 
    We humans need to feel we belong. It is fundamental to our sense of well-being. But we can’t belong to everything. We can’t choose every event or cause or opportunity that sounds interesting, fun, or important in our limited time on Earth. And that, according to Patrick McGinnis (who coined the term FOMO back in 2004) is the crux of the problem. More than fear of missing out or even fear of better options (FOBO), he attributes the inability to make choices, especially between good options, to a fear of letting go. After all, when we choose one thing, everything else is left UN-chosen. 
    Decision-making is difficult. Making the “right” decision can be anxiety-fraught, especially when the decision is an important one. Many factors influence our choices. We weigh our biases. We consider our memories. We balance the emotional “cost” of the decision with the expected consequences. And a lot of the time we’re unaware of all these internal goings-on.
    Life is a balancing act. Just like the main character in Shel Silverstein’s book quoted above, sometimes the “search” is as rewarding as the “find.”
    Even those of us who enjoy our own company need other people who share our interests, values, and memories (or want to build some new ones). They are our people, our peeps. 

I just finished reading The Extraordinary Life of Sam Hell by Robert Dugoni (Lake Union Publishing, 2018). It’s the journey to self-acceptance told through flash-backs and present time by an eye-doctor who overcame intolerance, bullying, and a Catholic education. The balance between plot and character development makes this one truly extraordinary. Recommended
                              -—stay curious! (and find your peeps)

See you right here next week. 

    Humans are allergic to change. They like to say, “We’ve always done it this way.” I try to fight that. 
                 from Grace Hopper: Queen of Computer Code
                                         written by Laurie Wallmark
                                               illustrated by Katy Wu
                                      Sterling Children’s Books, 2017

    My mom did not let me have a Barbie doll. She told me they were too mature. When Mom grew up, all dolls were baby dolls. Heck, when I was little, at least until I was 7, all dolls were baby dolls. 
    When Ruth Handler and her husband Elliot created Mattel in their garage in 1945, I wonder if they envisioned a global toy company that would grow to be one of the “strongest portfolios of children’s and family entertainment franchises in the world.” Their mission, “to create innovative products and experiences that inspire, entertain and develop children through play,” is noble.
    The company has had iconic success, especially with their Fisher Price line including xylophones, snap beads, and corn poppers. One million Magic 8 Balls are still sold every year. 
    Then, in 1959, Barbie was born. Ruth, inspired by her daughter Barbara, recognized the opportunity to inspire girls to become anything they dreamed of. And grown up girls in the real world were, well, grown up. We needed, reasoned Ruth, a role model. Her new doll needed to be grown up too.
    Indeed, Barbie can be and is everything to any girl with an imagination. Again from their website, [p]laying with dolls empowers children to develop empathy and social skills such as caregiving, friendship, collaboration, and conflict resolution.
    Children's’ play is crucial to their development. Scholarly articles have been written after scientists have conducted extensive research. Books for parents and teachers are easy to find in bookstores and libraries. Most is common sense that most parents are doing, anyway and calling attention to how children learn is affirming to most parents and teachers. Here’s a whole collection of books and articles about the importance of play from the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). 
    So why is the Mattel website gender specific? Probably not on purpose, but the children playing with Barbie are girls. The children playing with vehicles are boys. Action figures, boys. The girl playing with building sets is wearing glasses. (To show us she is intelligent?) OK, all that’s a subject for another day. 
    I just wanted to mention it because the Barbie Movie, distributed by Warner Brothers, is in theaters now. I saw it last weekend. 
    First, the movie is not a chick flick. It’s also not for children. And I came out with a lot to think about. Next, you will find no spoilers here, even though I was probably one of the last people to see it.
    Stereotypical Barbie, the main character played by Margot Robbie, wanted to be everything to everyone until she realized she didn’t and couldn’t. As she experiences her existential crisis, she enters our real world to find herself. Of course, Ken comes with her and while Barbie is discovering the power of self-confidence, he gets a whiff of macho masculinity that goes right to his head. I’m not sure he ever comes to understand that he has no identity except to be Barbie’s boyfriend. 
    The movie is a spoof on our materialistic, consumeristic culture. It also makes a statement about the importance of reaching our potential, making goals and working toward them, discovering what (and who) we love, and that human ideals should not be gender-specific. 
    Didactic? a little. Funny? yes. Thought provoking? absolutely. From the opening scene to America Ferrara’s portrayal of Gloria in her speech toward the end of the film, the wonder of being female and the unlimited good that is possible when everyone’s success is celebrated is shouted loud and clear.   
    Part of the movie’s message echoes Carlo Collodi’s Pinocchio. But whether you’re a puppet who comes to life or a young woman who loses her stereotypicality when she gains her uniqueness, all of us who become “adults,” discover that being human is complex, ever-changing, and mostly pretty wonderful. 
    I’m ready to see this one again.

I’m still reading The Measure (Nikki Erlick, William Morrow, 2022) after not reading at all during a week of distraction. I told my daughter I was putting it down, but she encouraged me to keep going. More next week!
                  -—Be curious! (and look for your own uniqueness)