Friday, 18 June 2010

Urban and Wild Survival; 'La Casa Movil'

Multi-national Monsters Vodafone, released this hi-tech model of a tiny house back in 2009.
It's quite an inspiration for what is possible with regards to 'trailer-homes'.

Wednesday, 16 June 2010

Knowledge; 'Risk'

A very interesting article on the psychology of 'risk taking'.

Hopefully this gives a better insight into the way of living that a Hazardous Pioneer undertakes on a daily basis.

From here.

In the land of seatbelts and safety helmets, the leisure pursuit of dangeris a growth industry. Some experts say that courting uncertainty is the only way to protect the inner force America was founded on. Or to define the self.


Extreme skiing--in which skiers descend cliff-like runs by dropping from ledge to snow-covered ledge--is drawing wider interest. Sports like paragliding and cliff-parachuting are marching into the recreational mainstream while the adventurer-travel business, which often mixes activities like climbing or river rafting with wildlife safaris, has grown into a multimillion-dollar industry. "Forget the beach," declared Newsweek last year. "We're hot for mountain biking, river running, ice climbing, and bungee jumping.

Thirty-six-year-old Derek Hersey knew a thing or two about life on the edge. Where most rock climbers used ropes and other safety gear, the wiry, wise-cracking Brit usually climbed "free solo"--alone, using nothing but climbing shoes, finger chalk, and his wits. As one climbing buddy put it, Hersey went "for the adrenaline and risk," and on May 28, 1993, he got a dose of both. High on the face of Yosemite's Sentinel Rock, Hersey met with rain and, apparently, slick rock. Friends who found the battered body reckon he fell several hundred feet. In the not-too-distant past, students of human behavior might have explained Hersey's fall as death-wish fulfillment. Under conventional personality theories, normal individuals do everything possible to avoid tension and risk.

In fact, as researchers are discovering, the psychology of risk involves far more than a simple "death wish." Studies now indicate that the inclination to take high risks may be hard-wired into the brain, intimately linked to arousal and pleasure mechanisms, and may offer such a thrill that it functions like an addiction. The tendency probably affects one in five people, mostly young males, and declines with age. It may ensure our survival, even spur our evolution as individuals and as a species. Risk taking probably bestowed a crucial evolutionary advantage, inciting the fighting and foraging of the hunter-gatherer.

In mapping out the mechanisms of risk, psychologists hope to do more than explain why people climb mountains. Risk-taking, which one researcher defines as "engaging in any activity with an uncertain outcome," arises in nearly all walks of life. Asking someone on a date, accepting a challenging work assignment, raising a sensitive issue with a spouse or a friend, confronting an abusive boss--all involve uncertain outcomes, and present some level of risk. Understanding the psychology of risk, understanding why some individuals will take chances and others won't, could have important consequences in everything from career counseling to programs for juvenile delinquents.

Researchers don't yet know precisely how a risk taking impulse arises from within or what role is played by environmental factors, from upbringing to the culture at large. And, while some level of risk taking is dearly necessary for survival (try crossing a busy street without it), scientists are divided as to whether, in a modern society, a "high-risk gene" is still advantageous. Some scientists, like Frank Farley, Ph.D., a University of Wisconsin psychologist and past president of the American Psychological Association, see a willingness to take big risks as essential for success. The same inner force that pushed Derek Hersey, Farley argues, may also explain why some dare to run for office, launch a corporate raid, or lead a civil-rights demonstration.

Yet research has also revealed the darker side of risk taking. High-risk takers are easily bored and may suffer low job satisfaction. Their craving for stimulation can make them more likely to abuse drugs, gamble, commit crimes, and be promiscuous. As psychologist Salvadore Maddi, Ph.D., of the University of California-Davis warns, high-risk takers may "have a hard time deriving meaning and purpose from everyday life."

Indeed, this peculiar form of dissatisfaction could help explain the explosion of high-risk sports in America and other postindustrial Western nations. In unstable cultures, such as those at war or suffering poverty, people rarely seek out additional thrills. But in a rich and safety-obsessed country like America, land of guardrails, seat belts, and personal-injury lawsuits, everyday life may have become too safe, predictable, and boring for those programmed for risk-taking.

In an unsettling paradox, our culture's emphasis on security and certainty--two defining elements of a "civilized" society--may not only be fostering the current risk taking wave, but could spawn riskier activities in the future. "The safer we try to make life," cautions psychologist Michael Aptor, Ph.D, a visiting professor at Yale and author of The Dangerous Edge: The Psychology of Excitement, "the more people may take on risks."


In Icicle Canyon, a towering rocky corridor in the Cascade Mountains of Washington state, this strange interplay between safety and risk is a common sight. When weather permits, the canyon's formidable walls swarm with fit-looking men and women, using improbably small ledges and cracks to hoist themselves upward. For novices, risk can be kept to a minimum. Beginners' climbs are "top-roped" by a line running from the climber to a fixed cliff-top anchor and back down to a partner on the ground.

Even so, the novice can quickly experience a very realistic fear--what veterans call "getting gripped." Halfway up one short cliff, a first-timer in a tee shirt and shorts stalls out beneath a rock overhang. Unable to find a foothold, the climber peels off the cliff like wet wallpaper and dangles limply from the rope. His partner lowers him back to safety, where he stands white-faced, like someone emerging from an auto accident. Five minutes later, he is back on the cliff.

It's easy to see why high-risk sports receive so much academic attention. Climbers, for example, score higher on risk-preference tests than nearly all other groups. They show a strong need for intense stimulation and seek it in environments--sheer cliffs or frozen waterfalls--that most humans seem genetically programmed to avoid.

Climbers' own explanations for why they climb illustrate the difficulty of separating genetic, environmental, and cognitive components of this or any other behavioral trait. Many say they climb for decidedly conscious reasons: to test limits, to build or maintain self-esteem, to gain self-knowledge. Some regard it as a form of meditation. "Climbing demands absolute concentration," says Barbara, a lithe, 30-ish climber from Washington State. "It's the only time I ever feel in the moment."

Yet even the most contemplative climbers concede that their minds and bodies do operate on a unique wavelength. As Forrest Kennedy, a 32-year-old climber from Georgia, bluntly puts it, "What we do for kicks, most people wouldn't do if you held a gun to their heads."

Many climbers recognize that their commitment to the sport borders on addiction, one that persists after brushes with injury and death. Seattle attorney Jim Wickwire, for example, is probably best known for being on the first American team to summit Pakistan's 28,250-foot K-2, second highest peak in the world and arguably the most challenging. (The movie K-2 was based on his story.) Yet this handsome, soft-spoken father of five is almost as wellknown for his obstinacy. On K-2, Wickwire lost several toes to frostbite and half a lung to altitude sickness. A year before, in 1977, he'd seen two climbing partners fall 4,000 feet. In 1981, on Alaska's Mount McKinley, he watched helplessly as another partner froze to death after becoming wedged in an ice crevasse.

Wickwire vowed then never to climb again. But in 1982, he attempted 29,028-foot Mount Everest, the world's tallest peak--and there saw yet another partner plunge 6,000 feet to her death. In 1993, as Wickwire, then 53, prepared for a second Everest attempt, he told a climbing magazine that he'd "stopped questioning why" he still climbed. Today, he seems just as uncertain. "The people who engage in this," Wickwire says, "are probably driven to it in a psychological fashion that they may not even understand themselves."

Until recently, researchers were equally baffled. Psychoanalytic theory and learning theory relied heavily on the notion of stimulus reduction, which saw all human motivation geared toward eliminating tension. Behaviors that created tension, such as risk taking, were deemed dys-functional, masking anxieties or feelings of inadequacy.


Yet as far back as the 1950s, research was hinting at alternative explanations. British psychologist Hans J. Eysenck developed a scale to measure the personality trait of extroversion, now one of the most consistent predictors of risk taking. Other studies revealed that, contrary to Freud, the brain not only craved arousal, but somehow regulated that arousal at an optimal level. Over the next three decades, researchers extended these early findings into a host of theories about risk taking.

Some scientists, like UC-Davis's Maddi and Wisconsin's Farley, concentrate on risk taking primarily as a cognitive or behavioral phenomenon. Maddi sees risk taking as an element of a larger personality dimension he calls "hardiness," which measures individuals' sense of control over their environment and their willingness to seek out challenges. Farley regards risk-taking more as a whole personality type. Where other researchers speak of Type A and B personalities, Farley adds Type T, for thrill seeking. He breaks Type-T behavior into four categories: T-mental and T-physical, to distinguish between intellectual and physical risk taking; and T-negative and T-positive, to distinguish between productive and destructive risk taking.

A second line of research focuses on risks biological roots. A pioneer in these studies is psychologist Marvin Zuckerman at the University of Delaware. He produced a detailed profile of the high-sensation seeking (HSS) personality. HSS individuals, or "highs," as Zuckerman calls them, are typically impulsive, uninhibited, social, and tend toward liberal political views. They like high-stimulus activities, such as loud rock music or pornographic or horror movies, yet are rarely satisfied by vicarious thrills. Some level of actual risk--whether physical, social, or legal-seems necessary. Highs tend to be heavy bettors. They may try many kinds of drugs and favor sports like skiing or mountain climbing to running or gymnastics. Highs also show a clear aversion to low-sensation situations, otherwise known as boredom.

High-sensation seeking plays a huge role in relationships. Highs favor friends with interesting or offbeat life-styles, and avoid boring people. They're also far more sexually permissive, particularly in the number of sex partners, than lows. Highs favor mates with similar proclivities for stimulation, while lows generally pair off with other lows. And woe, apparently, to those who break this rule. "The combination of a high- and a low-sensation seeker," says Zuckerman, "seems to put the marriage relationship at risk."

Indeed, one benefit of such research is that it can be applied to many areas of everyday life. Those seeking mates, the University of Wisconsin's Farley says, should focus on those who share their level of risk taking, particularly in terms of sexual habits. Likewise, thrill seekers should also look for the right level of on-the-job excitement. "If you're a Big T type working on a microchip assembly line, you're going to be miserable," Farley predicts. "But if you're Big T on a big daily newspaper or a police force, where you never know what you'll be doing next, you're probably going to thrive."

Many climbers fit the HSS profile. Many report difficulty keeping full-time jobs, either because the work bores them, or because it interferes with their climbing schedule. Long-term relationships can be problematic, especially where climbers marry nonclimbers, or where one partner begins losing interest in the sport. Non-climbing partners often complain that their spouses spend too much time away from home, or refuse to commit to projects (children, for example) that might interfere with climbing. Relationships are also strained by the ever-present threat of injury or death. As one Midwestern climber puts it, "the possibility that I might miss dinner, forever, doesn't make things any smoother."

Further, while many climbers are models of clean living, the sport has its share of hard partiers. Some even boast of making first ascents while high on marijuana or hallucinogens like LSD. Climbers say such drugs enhance or intensify the climbing experience. But studies suggest that the drugs may also mimic the process that pushes climbers in the first place.


Researchers have long known of physiological differences between high- and low-sensation seekers. According to Zuckerman, the cortical system of a high can handle higher levels of stimulation without overloading and switching to the fight-or-flight response. Psychologist Randy Larsen, Ph.D., at the University of Michigan, has even shown that high-sensation seekers not only tolerate high stimulus but crave it as well.

Larsen calls high-sensation seekers "reducers": Their brains automatically dampen the level of incoming stimuli, leaving them with a kind of excitement deficit. (Low-sensation seekers, by contrast, tend to "augment" stimuli, and thus desire less excitement.) Why are some brains wired for excitement? Since 1974, researchers have known that the enzyme monoamine oxidase (MAO) plays a central role in regulating arousal, inhibition, and pleasure. They also found that low levels of MAO correlate with high levels of certain behaviors, including criminality, social activity, and drug abuse. When Zuckerman began testing HSS individuals, they, too, showed unusually low MAO levels.

The enzyme's precise role isn't deal It regulates levels of at least three important neurotransmitters: norepinephrine, which arouses the brain in response to stimuli; dopamine, which is involved with the sensation of pleasure in response to arousal; and serotonin, which acts as a brake on norepinephrine and inhibits arousal. It's possible that high-sensation seekers have lower base levels of norepinephrine and thus, can tolerate more stimulation before triggering serotonin's dampening effect. High-sensation seekers may also have lower levels of dopamine and are thus in a chronic state of underarousal in the brain's pleasure centers.

Such individuals may turn to drugs, like cocaine, which mimic dopamine's pleasure reaction. But they may also use intense and novel stimulation, triggering norepinephrine's arousal reaction and getting rewarded by the dopamine pleasure reaction. "What you get is a combination of tremendous arousal with tremendous pleasure," Zuckerman speculates. "And the faster that arousal reaches its peak, the more intense your pleasure." Just as important, individuals may develop a tolerance for the pleasure reaction, and thus may need ever higher levels of stimulation--of risk--to achieve the same rush.

Today such an addictive dynamic may seem largely problematic. In prehistoric times it was very likely essential. Dopamine, for example, has known links to various "approach" behaviors: feeding, fighting, foraging, and exploration. Probably, the same mechanism that gave people like Derek Hersey a rush from climbing also rewarded their predecessors for the more necessary acts of survival.

Psychologist Aptor suggests that the willingness to take risks, even if expressed by only certain individuals, would have produced benefits for an entire group. Upon entering a new territory, a tribe would quickly need to assess the environment's safety in terms of "which water holes are safe to drink from, which caves are empty of dangerous animals." Some risk takers would surely die. But, Aptor points out, "it's better for one person to eat a poisonous fruit than for everybody."

Climbers are understandably leery of such explanations. They admit that they may be more inclined to take risks than the average human. But that inclination's ultimate expression, they argue, is largely a matter of personal volition. "At some level, there is a reason, chemical, mechanical, or whatever, for why we climb. But doesn't that take the 'human' element out of it, and make us all robots?" grouses Todd Wells, a 40-year-old climber from Chattanooga. "I climb so I don't feel like a robot, so I feel like I'm doing something that is motivated by the 'self.'"

Even physiologically oriented scientists like Zuckerman admit the dopamine reaction is only part of the risk-taking picture. Upbringing, personal experience, socio-economic status, and learning are all crucial in determining how that risk-taking impulse is ultimately expressed.


Although many climbers report a childhood preference for thrills, their interest in climbing was often shaped externally, either through contact with older climbers or by reading about great expeditions. Upon entering the sport, novices are often immersed in a tight-knit climbing subculture, with its own lingo, rules of conduct, and standards of excellence.

This learned aspect may be the most important element in the formation of the high-sensation seeking personality. While risk taking may have arisen from neurochemicals and environmental influences, there is an intellectual or conscious side to it that is now not only distinct from them but is itself a powerful motivator. Working through a challenging climbing route, for example, generates a powerful sense of competence that can also provide climbers with a new-found confidence in their everyday life. "There is nothing more empowering than taking a risk and succeeding," says Farley.

No wonder scaling the face of a cliff is a potent act that can penetrate to the very essence of self and help reshape it. Many climbers report using that empowering dynamic to overcome some of their own inner obstacles. Among these, fear--of heights, of loss of control, of death--is the most commonly cited.

Richard Gottlieb, 42-year-old climber from New York, is known for climbing frozen waterfalls, one of the riskiest facets of the sport. But as a kid, he was too scared even to go to summer camp. "Yet there was something in me that wanted to get into some swashbuckling adventure," he says. Climbing satisfied that impulse while helping him overcome his fearful nature. Gottlieb believes climbing has helped him cope with his fear of death: "We open the door, see the Grim Reaper right there, but instead of just slamming the door, you push him back a few steps."


Traditional outlets for the risk-taking impulse have been disappearing from everyday life. As civilization steadily minimized natural risks, Aptor says, and as cultures have sought to maintain their hard-won stability through repressive laws and stifling social mores, risk takers have been forced to devise new outlets. In the 20th century, that has brought about a rise in thrill sports. But Aptor believes the tension between civilization and risk taking dates back eons. Aptor wonders how much of the British Empire "was built up by people trying to escape the desperately conformist society of Victorian England."

When channeled into sports like climbing, where skill and training can minimize danger, or into starting a new business, risk taking may continue to be a healthy psychological outlet. It may provide a means to cope with boredom and modern anxieties, to bolster self-esteem. Risk taking may provide a crucial sense of control in a period where so much of what happens--from crime and auto accidents to environmental disasters and economic downturns--seems almost random.

Unfortunately, the risk taking impulse doesn't always find such healthy outlets. Many high-sensation seekers don't have the money or the role models for sky diving or rock climbing, Zuckerman notes. "In such groups, the main forms of sensation seeking include sex, drugs, heavy drinking, gambling, and reckless driving." Indeed, sensation seeking may emerge as a critical factor in crime. No surprise, then, that some researchers place the risk taking personality in the "abnormal" category and regard high-risk takers almost as an evolutionarily obsolete subspecies. Maddi suggests that well-adjusted people are "good at turning everyday experience into something interesting. My guess is that the safecracker or the mountain climber can't do that as well. They have to do something exciting to get a sense of vitality. It's the only way they have of getting away from the sense that life sucks." Larsen is even blunter: "I think risk takers are a little sociopathic."

Farley is more optimistic. Even civilized society, he says, holds ample opportunity for constructive risk taking: investing in a high-stakes business venture, running for political office, taking an unpopular social stand. Farley argues that history's most crucial events are shaped by Big T behavior and Big T individuals, from Boris Yeltsin to Martin Luther King, Jr. The act of emigration, he says, is an intrinsically risky endeavor that selects individuals who are high in sensation seeking. Consequently, countries built upon immigrant population--America, Canada, Australia--probably have an above-aver-age level of risk takers. He warns that much of the current effort to minimize risk and. risk taking itself runs the risk of eliminating "a large part of what made this country great in the first place."

For all the societal aspects of this peculiar trait, the ultimate benefits may continue to be purely personal. "There's a freshness to the [climbing; experience that clears away the weariness of routine and the complexity of social norms," says Seattle climber Bill Pilling. "Climbing brings you back to a primal place, where values are being created and transformed."

To push away from society's rules and protections, Farley suggests, is the only way to get a sense of where "society" ends and "you" begin. "Taking a risk, stepping away from the guardrails, from the rules and the status quo, that's when you get a sense of who 'you' are," he says. "If you don't stretch, try to push past the frontiers, it's very difficult to know that."

True Self-Expression; Underwater Base Jump Video

..Consider the fact that the person who filmed this video, Julie Gautier, also held her breath when filming Nery, and the video seems even more incredible.

True Self-Expression; 'Are Risk Takers A Dying Breed?'

Reannon Muth wonders if the modern daredevil has become obsolete - The following article was taken from here.

Long before my first attempt at scaling the side of a mountain, I scaled the side of my parents’ two-story house.

Using my bedspread as a make-shift rope, I kicked out my bedroom window and prepared to swing Tarzan-style down to the ground 50 feet below. I was seven.

Luckily, my father caught me dangling from the window-ledge just in time to spare a trip to the ER. But not in time to spare me from a life-long addiction to thrills and daring adventures. That, apparently, had been hard-wired into my brain since birth.

According to research conducted by University of Delaware professor Marvin Zuckerman, not only is my passion for living on the edge a trait of a risk-taking personality type, it’s also hereditary. I’m a risk-taker – or high sensation-seeker – a label Zuckerman attributes to anyone who craves “novel, intense and complex sensations and experiences” and is willing to engage in risky behavior in order to achieve them.

In modern society, daredevils are usually considered oddballs or worse, adrenaline junkies with a death wish.
And while that often involves physical risks, not everyone needs to be a sky-diving instructor in order to consider herself a risk-taker. According to Zuckerman, the risk-taking trait can manifest itself in other behaviors. Someone who enjoys exploring a foreign city without a map, for example, would be considered an “Experience-seeking” risk-taker. And those easily bored by routine and who frequently move or switch jobs are called “Boredom Susceptibility” risk-takers.

Although there might be a little Evel Knievel lurking in your entrepreneurial next-door neighbor, it’s usually the climber on Everest or the crocodile hunter that receive the attention. And it’s often negative. In modern society, daredevils are usually considered oddballs or worse, adrenaline junkies with a death wish. But it wasn’t always like that.

As the theory goes, the risk-takers of yore were not only valued members of a tribe, but absolutely vital to humankind’s survival.

While the play-it-safers stuck close to their berry patches, their more adventurous counterparts risked life and limb hunting the saber-tooth tiger or investigating a newly-discovered cave.

Not surprisingly, many a risk-taking caveman didn’t survive that elephant tusk to the back or drink from that contaminated watering-hole. But as psychologist Michael Aptor, author of the book “Dangerous Edge: The Psychology of Excitement”, pointed out in the Psychology Today article, Risk, “it’s better for one person to eat a poisonous fruit than for everybody.” It was because of these early risk-takers that our species was able to survive.

But you wouldn’t know it from people’s reactions today. Up until recently, the theory was that human beings main motivation in life was tension-avoidance, so those adventurists who actively sought it were deemed impaired and even crazy. Some researchers not only consider the risk-taking personality “abnormal”, but theorize that it’s becoming obsolete.

They have a point. In the modern world, where no waters are left uncharted or lands undiscovered, there just isn’t a need in society for the girl gutsy enough to dive for oysters in shark-infested water.

Michael Alvear, in the Salon article Risky Business, wrote: “You can’t swing a helmeted cat without hitting a mandated safety precaution.” And although those helmet laws and health inspections have made the modern world safer, they’ve also sapped it of the very thing that makes life interesting: it’s wild unpredictability.

And this is bad news for those programmed to crave adventure. Because as science has shown, a thirst for novelty is in the risk-taker’s blood. While neuroscientists have yet to agree which gene is responsible for why some prefer paint-balling to painting, a study from Vanderbilt University in Nashville found that those who crave an element of danger do so because their brains have trouble regulating dopamine.

Science has shown, a thirst for novelty is in the risk-taker’s blood.
Dopamine is the brain’s “happy juice”. It’s the chemical you can thank for that blissful feeling you experience while eating that chocolate sundae or sharing a romantic evening with a lover. And in the brain of a high-sensation seeker (who is believed to have fewer of a dopamine-blocking enzyme), it’s overflowing. Which is why the risk-taker may feel bizarrely elated at the prospect of jumping off a cliff, whereas the average person feels merely frightened and stressed.

Not that the average person doesn’t enjoy the occasional weekend ski-trip. On a scale of sensation-seeking tendencies, with the couch potato on one end and the base jumper on the other, most people fall somewhere in between. And that’s unlikely to change, no matter how many safety nets or seat-belts society cocoons itself in.

But adrenaline junkies (those who struggle to cope with the mundane existence of every-day life) are a different breed. And as evolution has demonstrated, over time, when a trait ceases to be advantageous, it ceases to exist.

So with an intense desire for adventure literally pumping through their veins and with no spear-throwing tribesman in sight, what’s a modern daredevil to do?

Well, as the article “Risk” and the spike in popularity of adventure tourism would suggest, when you can’t find danger, you create it. And that’s why we find grannies giddily signing up for white-water rafting in Costa Rica or college students heading to orphanages in New Delhi for voluntourism gigs.

Last weekend, 20 years since that day on my window-ledge, I stood on a different sort of ledge, the kind 200 feet above ground and attached to a cliff on the border of a Guatemalan jungle. As I readied myself to zip-line across the tree tops, I prayed that metal and cable would prove studier than the bedspread. I was nervous. But perhaps not unsurprisingly, exhilarated, too.

Maybe we risk-takers are a dying breed. But you can be sure that if we do all die out, we’ll be going out in style: para-gliding, free-falling and bungeeing our way into extinction.

Monday, 14 June 2010

Anarcho-Spirituality; Dean Potter

Dean Potter.

All I can say is that you have to watch this 5 part documentary.

I think I've found my niche in life...

Tuesday, 8 June 2010

Anarcho-Spirituality; Anti-Work

The time has come to write another post.

These last few weeks have seen my head rear itself from the sandy depths of the silicate, systematic ant's nest, and now that the light is burning my eyes, I thought I would share my revelations with you all.

Specifically, this last month or so has been built upon the premise that we all know as 'work'; paid employment. In truth, beneath that disguise is the very nature of it all; wage slavery.

I have found myself once again questioning my reasons as to why I put myself through such monotonous, meaningless, mundane bullshit, all in the name of valueless paper - that we seem to sacrifice pieces of ourselves as we come to worship before the mythical entity that we know as 'money'.

Each shift feels more and more like an eternal-chasm that just will not come to end. I notice myself rocket-clocking - rampantly darting my eyes back and forth at the minutes presenting themself on my screen, torturing myself as I ask questions I already know the answers to; 'How much longer?' 'How long left to go?'

And why is it we seem to be able to ask that very question in a million different ways when we vest ourselves in situations that we'd really rather not have to partake in.

I personally have two weeks left in my current call-centre job. I have already had one verbal warning, and as I count the remaining days that I will have to work, I seem to have to psyche myself up for each shift - 'Can you handle this one?' 'Do you think you'll make it?'

Due to such a short time left, I find myself pushing the boundaries further from what I already know and understand as 'the art of milking'.
Today, I found that there is a loophole in the system with regards to lengths of breaktimes - I managed to blag 20 minutes instead of the usual, standard 10 minute paid break.

But like a morphine addict, that sweet sensation just wasn't enough. Immediately my brain ticked as to how the boundaries could be pushed further, and further.

'Could I not just sit in the toilet for half an hour? Would anyone notice?' I find the devil on my shoulderblade ponering.

And so, this goes on, and on and on.
Eventually, I have to conclude - as I would expect any person wishing to keep their sanity intact - that this is NOT HEALTHY!

Realistically, if the above are your mental and physical reactions to work and wage slavery in general, then one has to ask 'WHAT THE FUCK AM I DOING THIS FOR!?'

And that's precisely the point I am at right now.

The following are essays and excerpts from others out there that share my opinions on commerce, the system and wage slavery, and I do hope that you find some sense, truth and even heart-scalding resonance in what they too say about the tragedy that we all know as 'employment'.

This spawns deeper - mostly for me 'Why on Earth would you bother to commit your precious little time on this planet, to doing a 'job' which cuts your divine and unlimited potential short?'

If everyone's goal throughout life is essentially to find some sort of lasting, meaningful happiness whilst they're here, WHY would you waste that energy on status, wage slavery and above all, actions of such synthesis?

I should add that due to my less than 20 hour work week, I was confronted by one of my housemates with the oh, so eloquently-phrased condemnation 'Why don't you work you lazy shit!?'There was conviction in her voice, and to her, not working just seemed incomprehendible.

The following, Hannah, is for you:

Buckle up, it's about to get raw -


'THE CULT OF THE JOB' By D. JoAnn Swanson
(Bold has been added by Hazardous Davis)

The Cult of the Job

I am job-free. Out of the rat race. Unemployed, as they say, but definitely by choice. My self-esteem is intact, thank you, I'm not "in transition", and I have no intention of getting a job again.

That's right--I'm on the leisure track permanently. I don't have a cushy nine-to-five job with profit-sharing, "security", stock options, health insurance, advancement opportunities, or free parking. I also don't have to deal with office politics, attending motivation seminars, climbing the corporate ladder, employee evaluations, increasing productivity, the absurd "team player" mentality, brown-nosing, mandatory overtime, stressful commutes in rush-hour traffic, being trapped in a cubicle, or the threat of being pink-slipped. Oh, and let's not forget--I don't have the expense of a "professional" wardrobe, strong coffee to wake me up every morning, or "power lunches".

I wouldn't have it any other way.

If you ask me what seems to have become the first question new acquaintances ask each other nowadays-namely, "What do you do for a living?" I'm likely to say that I'm job-free by choice or quip that I'm an "occupational tourist", as a friend likes to say. Sometimes I'll tell 'em I'm a freelancer or self-employed, specializing in leisure. Most people, when they hear this, say something like "You mean you don't have a regular job? Wow, that's great--I'll bet more people would do that if they thought they could swing it."

I'm willing to bet that more of them could swing it if they'd just find within themselves the wherewithal to question a few of the assumptions that are often taken for granted in America, particularly by the middle class and those who aspire to wealth. So what assumptions am I talking about? Well, let's start with the cult of jobs and work.

We need to re-evaluate the role of jobs in our lives. For far too many of us, getting a job amounts to securing a means of paying for our living expenses, and not much more. At best, this attitude leads to years of "paying one's dues" in exchange for the dubious "security" of a (hopefully) steady paycheck and the promise of finally enjoying leisure when one retires. At worst, it leads to a way of life where we devote 40 or more hours of our precious time a week to doing something we don't care about mainly for the sake of having a roof over our heads and food on the table. I know I'm not the only one who thinks this is ludicrous. It took me years of trying to fit myself into some kind of job title, of devoting myself to figuring out "what I wanted to be when I grew up", before I realized that I don't want a job, nor do I feel guilty about not wanting one.

It's time for us to make a crucial distinction between "jobs" and "work". Work--particularly the kind that is motivated by interest, social welfare, connection, curiosity, learning, beauty--can be satisfying, fulfilling, fun, and honorable. However, it's exceedingly hard to see this when we are blinded by the compulsion to "get a job" or face the poorhouse, or when we're terrified by the social and financial consequences of being job-free. In addition, we've internalized a puritan work ethic which holds that laziness is a sign of moral weakness. We sense deep in our guts that even if we were to arrange our financial affairs such that we could quit our jobs for good, it would mean we are lazy. We know we'd still face guilt, social disapproval, maybe even an identity crisis once we were unemployed--especially if we were to tell everyone we meet that we're not "in transition", not hunting for a new job, that in fact we are happy this way. I maintain that a complex web of unquestioned assumptions are what keep such fears in place, and that we need to delve into those places we fear to tread if we're ever going to make lasting changes for the better.

A job, nowadays, is used as a shorthand term for whatever it is you do that occupies a large portion of your time and provides a paycheck. In a work-obsessed culture that elevates jobs and money-making capacity to crucial components of our identities, having a job and money often provides a sense of social acceptability that cannot be found any other way, or so we believe. But there are lots of (legal) ways of getting money besides jobs, and what's more, we are increasingly becoming aware that we've paid a very high price for our myopic job-centered focus.

On a personal level, many of us find ourselves disillusioned, depressed and frustrated when, day after day, we force ourselves to get out of bed and put in another eight hours at our jobs, then come home exhausted--only to get up the next day and do it all over again. The future doesn't hold out much hope for us when we consider that we're expected to continue this way indefinitely. When do we get to enjoy life, we think as we watch the clock and count the days until the weekend?

On a societal level, we hear about corporate "downsizing" as well as environmental and human rights violations, rising rents in choice areas, the growing wage gap between executives and "worker bees", the rising cost of a college education and the lack of "marketability" of liberal arts degrees, and many other factors which contribute to a widespread sense of disillusionment. This certainly isn't the way we thought it would be, is it? It's not what were promised when we were told that getting an education and a "good" job would be our ticket into the promised land.

This concept we have of jobs as the way we make a name for ourselves, "get ahead", create an identity, and earn money is ripe for re-evaluation. It's high time for us to take a hard look at the personal and environmental devastation such thinking has wrought, and to conceptualize and create alternatives to the cult of jobs and work in our lives.
Such alternatives could take many forms: self-employment, cooperative living arrangements, simplifying our lives, changes in economic policy, and so forth. Envisioning a new way of working is certainly not a new idea, but those of us who question the conventional wisdom about jobs are still considered heretics, radicals and pariahs in many circles.

Heretic or not, I'd like to see us re-define success as having more to do with people and their values, and less to do with profits or climbing the corporate ladder. I'd like to see a world where we are less relentlessly driven by the pursuit of job growth, impressive stock portfolios, the "bottom line" and material acquisition--and more motivated by active mindful learning, joyful work, and creating a web of relationships that will sustain us in our more meager times. I'm holding out for a new way of thinking, one in which we recognize that leisure is essential to our mental health rather than cause for guilt, and that we don't have to spend our lives struggling, striving to make ends meet through working at a job.

I think we all know, at some level, that we weren't meant to live this way, and that there are better, more fulfilling, and more socially responsible ways to work than by sacrificing ourselves on the altar of jobs and money. There are the stirrings of a new social movement underway as we speak--a diverse collection of people from all walks of life who are re-examining the way we've been indoctrinated into thinking our jobs are our ticket to respectability and freedom. They are re-defining success, learning how to appreciate what they have instead of endlessly questing for more growth, and discovering their passions without worrying about trying to fit them into the form of a job.

I'm happy to count myself among the proponents of that movement away from the cult of jobs and toward a new way of envisioning work--a way that gives us hope for the future.

I invite you to join us.

TWO. What I Learned When I Quit My Job: Part One

Six years ago, I quit my dreadful, low-paying temp job. After years of wage slavery, I was sick of jobs altogether. I dreamed of a different kind of life, one where I could choose my own activities and meet my survival needs with ease. It's possible, and in the long run it takes something more than winning the lottery, having a rich spouse, or inheriting a fortune. But before I delve into "survival without a job", I'd like to offer some new definitions of terms we often use when discussing these matters.

Drudgery. Alienated effort expended for someone else on their terms, often a corporation or boss, doing something you don't care about, in exchange for external compensation - money, health insurance, benefits, pleasing others. Something done against one's will for the sake of a paycheck. See "wage slavery".

Satisfying, self-directed activity, sometimes (but not always) with tangible results, done for its own sake, driven by interest or fascination, sustained by intrinsic motivation. Distinguished from "job" by the fact that work can be done with joy, deep care, and pride, whether or not money is received. See "leisure".

Satisfying, self-directed activity, sometimes (but not always) with intangible results, done for its own sake, driven by interest or fascination, sustained by intrinsic motivation. Not the same thing as "free time", since that phrase suggests that everything else is "non-free (wage slave) time". Distinguished from "work" by…well, hmmm…see "work".

Being driven by an unhealthy work ethic, lacking a fulfilling sense of leisure (thinking of it as just "free time"), and/or feeling trapped in a soulless, alienated job you hate just for the sake of a paycheck. Failing to see possibility for joyful work OR joyful leisure. Feeling trapped in a cycle of spending most of one's time at a job, and much of the rest recuperating. Never being fully present in this moment; holding out for an elusive future promise. Unfortunately, a very common condition.

Defining work and leisure a whole new way. Knowing deep inside, not just intellectually, that you don't have to hold a job or be a wage slave to meet your needs in life. Being able to enter that space in the present moment where the distinction between work and leisure is blurred. Being committed to a job-free life, often while simultaneously working to free others from wage slavery.
"I'd quit this lame job in a heartbeat if only I had the money." That's what I told myself for years. But I've come to believe that lack of money is not the only thing that keeps most people stuck in wage slavery. It's a factor, yes, and my intention here is not to dismiss legitimate concerns about money - but for me it was by no means the whole story. I know society makes it hard to live without a job, but what about that slave-driving, destructive work ethic operating in our minds and hearts? Many of us never even question it. We think it's just the need for money keeping us stuck in our lousy jobs, but I've learned that the problem runs much deeper.

When I tell people I've been out of the 9-to-5 grind and happily job-free for three years (not unemployed - I write, after all, but my time is all my own), the first question I get asked is how I manage to support myself. The short, incomplete answer: a combination of good fortune and deliberate, methodical planning. The good fortune part: I've never had any trouble getting jobs when necessary, I've had supportive friends and family, and I received a small family inheritance (enough to pay my expenses job-free for about six months). The planning part: I invested my money, made a few unpopular life choices, saved earnings from the years I spent being a wage slave, and embarked upon some serious self-exploration until I knew exactly what I wanted to do with my life outside the bounds of a traditional job. That planning part is not as easy as it sounds, but I think it's much better than wage slavery. So I started, at a young age, to make choices that would allow me freedom to live a self-directed life. To wit:

1) I've consciously chosen to live simply and avoid debt. I know I can be quite happy with few material goods. I've also chosen not to marry, have children or keep pets.

2) I've shifted my perspective on wealth. Wealth has little to do with greenbacks. No matter how little money I may have, I can always find something to make me feel rich - like the fact that I can hear a bird sing a beautiful melody outside my window, for example.

3) I've invested time in friendship and creating community. As a result, I have a lot of very good friends who are happy to share their resources (homes, food, etc.) and barter services with me.

And that's just a start. I think most people who want to free themselves from the wage slave grind have other options. It's not very widely acknowledged, though, that if we hate our jobs, the questions we need to ask are much broader than "how do I get money once I quit?" Dispensing suggestions to would-be job quitters is all well and good. However, I feel I'm leaving out a crucial factor if I offer suggestions on how to get money outside the confines of a job WITHOUT addressing our deeper attitudes on work and leisure. Our attitudes are a whole lot more important than most of us would like to admit.

For a long time I thought that the only thing keeping me stuck in a job I hated was fear of not having money to eat and pay rent. That's a socially acceptable way to complain about your job nowadays - after all, gotta pay the bills - so I had lots of company. Like many of my "slacker" intellectual friends from comfortable white middle-class backgrounds, I spent untold energy griping about my job, The System, being a cog in the machine, and selling out to The Man. But then I had an experience that baffled me, and made me question everything I used to believe about what kept me stuck in shitty jobs.

With the financial support of my partner, I gratefully quit my job to write a book. Although I made a bit of progress, I still felt very stuck (for reasons I could not identify at the time), and was unable to get far on the book, even after a year's time. I felt terribly guilty about my "laziness", which added to the problem. Rather than accepting my partner's gift gracefully, I felt weighted down - I owed, I was in debt to my partner, and this made me feel pressured, which I hated. I felt obligated to repay my partner's generous support by being "productive" (read: earning money). Even worse, I felt that I was unworthy if I did not. There was a healthy part of me rebelling against the idea that I should measure my worth by my accomplishments, but deep inside I was convinced that I'd have no friends or supporters if I didn't earn money. These two parts clashed, sapping most of my energy in fighting a psychological battle, and of course that left very little energy for creative activities like writing a book.

After years of therapy and wrestling with why I remained "stuck" even after lack of money was no longer keeping me stuck in a job I hated, I've come to believe that my biggest obstacles to living a job-free life were in my own mind and heart. I had to unearth some very deep-seated beliefs and re-think my slave-driving work ethic before I was able to successfully live, guilt-free, without a traditional nine-to-five job. Once I began this process of re-thinking, I noticed that it became a whole lot easier to attract money and/or find ways to provide for my needs. It's an ongoing challenge, of course - some days I still feel guilty if I don't live up to others' ideas of "productivity" (or worse, my own hidden fears that I won't measure up if I'm not "productive") - but then again, all of life is a process of unfolding, isn't it? It isn't as though I suddenly woke up one day and had all the answers. I've learned to love the process instead of seeking instant solutions.

So…back to the "how do I survive without a job" question. I struggled with this for years, until I realized that there was a hidden layer of confusion, often unconscious, motivating that question at the root. I think that's why I sensed that the source of my problems was not addressed simply through having my food and rent taken care of. A list of practical suggestions (for example: live cheaply in a trailer, join a squatting group, shop at food co-ops, don't own a car, etc.), doesn't really address the core question, helpful as such a list might be. So I'd like to delve a little deeper.

When I directed my focus to wondering how I'd survive without a job, I asked questions like these:

"How will I pay my bills if I don't have a job?"
"Where will I live when I get evicted or the bank forecloses on my house?"
"How will I feed and clothe myself and my family without the security of a paycheck?"
"Doesn't everyone need to work to get money?"

Although there is a certain amount of legitimate concern involved here, I phrased these questions as though I believed some secret magical ticket to job-free life would be suddenly and completely revealed, without me having to search for it in earnest, in my own mind and heart. I wanted someone to tell me the secret. Suggestions can help, but I now think the ultimate solutions will come from inside. My experience suggests that there's no instant solution - it's more like a process that we kick off when we make a commitment to be free of wage slavery.

I conducted my life as though it were a foregone conclusion that losing my job would mean homelessness, hunger, or complete insecurity. But the lesson here for me was that no matter how much we may want it to, security does not come from outside ourselves. Security does not come from having a job or money, despite what we may have unconsciously absorbed from living in a money-worshipping and job-focused culture. We can live in a shack and feel secure; conversely, we can live in a mansion and be filled with fear and insecurity. Real security, the kind that will last a lifetime regardless of job status or bank balance, comes from facing up to our fears and mastering them. We may have heard this before…but do we believe it? Failing that, are we willing to at least give it a try, and act as if we believe it? It couldn't hurt, and it might actually work. This is not meant to suggest that we don't need any money or support to live comfortably. It is meant to suggest that if we're afraid that we can't survive without a job, we have a perfect opportunity right now to face that fear and master it. We can use that fear to learn how to find real security!

My surface questions about how to pay the rent without a job were a red herring. They covered up my unexamined and deeply ingrained fears of scarcity and lack. Once I learned to ask myself some deeper questions, I was able to address what was keeping me feeling stuck in the daily grind regardless of whether my survival needs were met. Here are some examples of how the voice of my fears cropped up. Each is followed by the response my deeper awareness gave when the question was posed.

1) "There isn't enough wealth to go around, and if I don't work hard and strive and compete and achieve, I'll be homeless or hungry or destitute."

(Are you aware that the World Game Institute, the work of R. Buckminster Fuller, and many others have confirmed scientifically that we live in an abundant world with sufficient resources to care for every person on the planet? Are you aware that the only obstacles to all of us manifesting this abundance in our lives are personal and political - e.g. our deepest beliefs about wealth, and how the resources are distributed? Are you willing to let go of your fear of scarcity, work toward more equitable distribution of the world's abundance, and ALSO replace your fear with trust in an abundant world?)

2) "I hate to admit it, but I'm afraid of what would happen if I quit my job and had that much freedom every day. For one thing, what would get me out of bed in the morning?"

(An understandable fear indeed; it's very common to fear change and cling to the familiar, even if it is stifling or harmful. Are you willing to gently push yourself past the fear, trust that you will find a joyful reason to get up, and seek your freedom anyway?)

3) "I don't know what I want to do with my life, I just know I don't want to work at this shitty job for the rest of my days."

(Can you find and nurture within yourself the desire to discover what it is you really want to do? Can you be happy day-to-day even if you never find an occupation that gives you that "A-ha, THIS is it!" feeling? How about just trying different things out for awhile, and cultivating patience? How about entertaining the possibility that the "a-ha" feeling you are seeking might come more from what kind of person you are BEING in each moment than what you are DOING?)

4) "If I quit my job, people will think I'm lazy…and what's worse, I'm afraid they might be right. What would that say about my character? Would my partner leave me? Would my friends shun me?"

(Where did you get the idea that there was some kind of character flaw involved in being lazy? Are you willing to re-think that assumption, and adopt a new, more humane attitude toward leisure and idleness (and maybe make some new, less judgemental friends)? Leisure has brought us great works of art, created memorable moments in life, lessened our burdens, and contributed immeasurably to our culture. Is it really so bad?)

5) "I'm too busy (because of my job) to take the time to figure out what I really want out of life, and even if I had the time, I don't think I could get it anyway. I have to be realistic. Living without a job is nothing more than a pipe dream."

(We find time for the things that are truly important to us. Even five minutes a day of focused thinking, if you use it well, can be enough to get you going on a plan toward a job-free life. And history is full of examples of people who brought things into being because they believed in themselves and their abilities to go after their dreams. Why not try believing in your own ability to create the life you want? It couldn't hurt to at least TRY, before you dismiss the idea.)

6) "If I were to quit my job, I'd have to be totally responsible for finding something else to do, and maybe even dealing with my family's objections and criticism. And I don't think I'm prepared to face that."

(Are you prepared to deal with the alternative: abdicating that responsibility to others, and living under their rules and restraints?)

7) "I don't want to give up the material comforts I've become accustomed to, even for a short time."

(Are you willing to spend the rest of your days living in fear that you will lose those comforts, in exchange for the "instant gratification" of not giving them up now? Are you willing to entertain the idea that you might not HAVE to give them up, but that it will loosen your psychological shackles to at least be WILLING to do so?)

8) "I've always been taught that the way to financial security is to have a job and work hard."

(Are you willing to open your mind to learning different ways to financial security, besides having money through working at a job, particularly a job you dislike?)

I hate to admit it here, but even after I started asking the kind of questions above (and listening to the answers), I wasted a lot of energy on self-blame. It took me a long time to realize that I was not at fault for my struggles simply because I felt stuck. The System is set up so that very few other options are feasible besides earning income through a job. Not to mention that our hyper-individualistic American attitudes make us labor under an additional psychological burden: our mainstream political and social discourse convinces us that any failures to find jobs are due to individual faults, ignoring the role of larger forces. We hear that we are "lazy bums" if we can't find or don't want a job. (I hope you don't fall for this garbage the same way I did). But it won't help to use all of our precious energy lamenting the state of The System, either. We still have choices. We could be using that energy figuring out how to live a job-free life instead.

Although I don't think we should fault ONLY ourselves or ONLY The System, I can't emphasize enough that even though there are coercive forces at work in The System, we still have the most important of freedoms: to change our attitudes, and claim the power we DO have. That power turned out to be very crucial for me. It helped me immensely on my quest for a life free of wage slavery.

I've come to believe that wage slavery is, at its core, a mindset. This does not mean it's solely an individual problem and that all we have to do is adjust our attitudes and our job-related problems will disappear; there are definitely systemic factors involved. But it's just as important to remember that it's not entirely the fault of The System that we feel stuck in jobs we hate, because blaming it all on The System discourages us from recognizing our other options (and no matter how limited they may be, we DO have other options). It's even possible to have a "normal" job and not be a wage slave. But that's another topic for another time.

The way we interpret events has a lot to do with the filters we have in our minds. Let's say that, like me, you already realize that you've spent a lot of energy battling fears - energy that could be used to pursue your dreams. And let's say you realize that focusing on scarcity thoughts creates barriers to getting what you want before you've even begun. Why not continue on by digging deeper until you find your most stubborn block? For example, I once believed, unconsciously, that the only viable means to ensuring an income (and thus survival) is to have a job. That meant that jobs which provide a paycheck, or make-money-fast scams, were the only income opportunities I ever noticed. That "belief filter" made it as if I had blinders on - I didn't even perceive the other possible ways to survive or receive money, or even more commonly, I quickly wrote them off as "impractical" before giving them any serious consideration.

Once again, because I think this bears repeating: I don't mean to over-emphasize the role of the individual in achieving a life free from wage slavery. I want to make it clear that I recognize and affirm the necessity for social change work. I certainly don't intend to trivialize the concerns of those who suffer from severe poverty, homelessness and hunger; people in those situations often don't have the luxury of considering the kind of questions I pose here. In fact, I believe that the more thought we give to what it might take to have a job-free life ourselves, the more we will understand that as long as wage slavery exists, for us or anyone else, we can never be truly free as a society. When I realized that, I felt drawn toward working for social change and abolition of wage slavery, as well as my own freedom from the daily grind. The two go hand in hand.

Here are some other questions I asked myself: How committed am I to freeing myself (and others) from wage slavery? Not how committed would I like to be "if only" - how committed AM I, today? What would I be willing to do in order to be free to spend my time pursuing things I value? Am I willing to face the fear that I might end up as a bag lady? Am I willing to devote time to putting together a plan for how I'll meet my needs without a job? Am I willing to eat at soup kitchens, or cook and clean in exchange for room and board with family and friends, if that becomes necessary? Would I take the time to write up a classified ad specifying what non-traditional living situation I want and try to connect with others who could help me get it?

These questions were scary for me. For many years, I made a lot of excuses and used a lot of rationalizations. The job-free life, in a job-obsessed culture, isn't for the faint of heart. It asks of us an "I'll do whatever it takes for my freedom" kind of attitude, combined with the willingness to get very clear about what we want in life and face our fear of the unknown in order to have it. But if we are devoted to doing so, and willing to find that quiet force within us, it will enrich our entire lives - not just our outlook on work and leisure.

The next step for me was to apply what I'd learned about where real security comes from. I began a shift in my life that continues to this day. Here is how I maintain it.

1) Every day, I consciously cultivate a feeling of gratitude for the things I already have, rather than endlessly pining for more. If I just ate a good meal, and have a full stomach, I recognize that as a blessing. If I have a comfortable place to sleep tonight, that's certainly worth feeling thankful for. If I can name friends and family who love and care about me, and who teach me to stretch my own ability to love, I am deeply blessed. These are the important things in life - not "what I do for a living" or how fat my pocketbook happens to be. Keeping the focus on the blessings we already enjoy (and away from those insidious survival fears) opens the way for more blessings to flow in life.

2) I ask myself often, honestly and unflinchingly, what my life and the world would look like if I could wave a magic wand right now and miraculously cure all my money or job problems. What would I do if I never had to work solely for the sake of a paycheck again? What would I be doing? Where would I be living? These questions inspired me. Once I got crystal clear on the answers (and it didn't happen overnight), I didn't want to waste another minute. Life is precious and short, and this realization gave me the courage to take action now to move toward the kind of life I longed for. It might not look exactly the way I've planned, but I don't want to die without giving it a shot. Of course, the kind of life I wish for may change over time, and that's fine too.

3) I make a point of re-thinking the nature of work, jobs, and leisure. As mentioned above in our "new definitions", work does not have to equal suffering; it can be done with ease and joy. "Jobs", on the other hand, usually involve doing things we'd rather not. Even if I end up as one of the lucky few who happen to get paid for doing exactly what I'd be doing anyway regardless of remuneration, I know of FAR too many others who'd quit their jobs tomorrow if they felt money was not an issue. This suggests a social problem that cannot be cured by "creating more jobs", as politicians often claim. I continuously educate myself about it, and am doing my part toward creating a world where wage slavery is a thing of the past. Want to help? You can start today, right now, with yourself. Besides, the more self-respect you develop, the less you will be willing to settle for a job that deadens your soul.

4) I remind myself daily that not wanting a job does not necessarily mean I am "lazy", and even if it did, there is nothing morally wrong with laziness. Wage slaves are sometimes driven to suffer in jobs they hate by the fear that others would think them indolent or somehow remiss if they admitted their love of leisure and their disdain for jobs. Remember when people were saying that technology was such a huge blessing because it would take over much of the "grunt work" and provide us with more leisure time? Do you think the people who spearheaded this movement stopped pushing for progress because they feared being considered lazy? On the contrary…leisure was seen as a good thing, not just what you do when you're not at your job. Leisure is much more than just the time you have when you're not getting paid. Refer to our new definitions above.

For me the process I've described above was necessary before I could really, seriously consider the alternatives to taking a wage slave job. I've gone into detail here about my struggles in the hopes that I'll be able to shed some light on the portion of living a job-free life that can't be addressed by having more money. That part, I've found, isn't very glamorous, but it's a crucial step. I know it's only part of the story, though - so Part Two of "What I Learned When I Quit My Job" will offer some down-to-earth, practical suggestions that I have found useful in my quest for a job-free life. Until then…good luck. Believe in yourself. You can realize your own unique beauty and go after your dreams.

A lot of this has to do with self-respect and delving within oneself and asking questions that most of us don't want to ask.

However, if you know you're selling yourself short living as you are now, then there's really no thought needed as to which path to take; stifled, or free?

There will be some more posts on this subject coming soon - my latest escapade is my move of location to southern New Zealand to Queenstown. Yet again I can experiment with some of the afformentioned ideas and theories, in realtime and see where the balance lies in the toss up between 'to work, or not to work?'

Hopefully you've taken something from all of this. And if you haven't, well, then you're one of those then aren't you...