children processing death

Last week I published a letter from Nathan Jernigan, a licensed psychotherapist who attends our sending congregation in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.  In it Nathan offered advice as to how we ought to help our children through trauma and tragedy; this was written in response to the Sandy Hook shootings.

I mentioned in that post I’d like to share some of my thoughts on children dealing with death.  So today I am.

Here is the letter I wrote Nathan in response to his advice (I’ve bolded a few thoughts):

Nathan, this is Brett Harrison writing from Geita, Tanzania.  I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate you having written this for everyone at Stones River (and even their missionaries abroad).  While the shootings in Newtown aren’t something about which we’ve heard a great deal — and while the oldest of our children is only three — your words are very much appreciated.  

Our daughters regularly are witness to sickness, sadness, and tragedy here in Geita; and navigating these situations is difficult for me at times.

an extrovert in the mission field

100.  That was my score.

Before our mission team moved to Tanzania, we did some relatively extensive psychological testing in attempts to explore both individual health and team dynamics.  [Someone once told me these tests are developed not to tell you if you're crazy, but rather to tell you what kind of crazy you are...]

There were a number of tests and just as many scores.  But only one score stood out to me; and it’s the only one I remember today.  On the test assessing extroversion (a scale of 0 – 100), I scored 100.  And that is not my score rounded to the nearest ’10.’  I don’t have even one introverted bone in my body.  All 206 of them are outgoing and sociable… to a fault, perhaps.

But I don’t want to talk about the dangers of extroversion — though there are many, to be sure.

**********

In 1997 I transferred from Auburn University (25,000 undergrads?) to Lipscomb University (2,500?).  I remember, a couple of months into school, glancing around the student center where I was sitting.  I said to myself, “Yep, this is all of us.  I’ve likely met everyone already.  Every friend I’ll have for the next two years is in this room.  I’ll never sit next to a stranger in class again.“

To some of you, that would be a dream come true — never sitting next to a stranger, I mean.  To me, though, it felt like the walls were closing in and I’d soon begin the slow process of death by suffocation.

Two years later, I graduated from Lipscomb University.  I made a lot of good friends during my time there.  I’m sure the “Class of 1999″ 20-year reunion will be awesome.  If all ten of us show, we’ll be able to divide up and play a game of basketball.

**********

Life in Geita seems compact.  I pass thousands of people on the street everyday, but my circle of friends (applying a western concept of friendship) is small.

But I’m not writing this blog post to complain.  Extreme extroversion notwithstanding, I am thankful.  I am so thankful that God has blessed me with:

• incredible relationships here in Tanzania.  If it weren’t for my teammates (and our nearby missionary neighbors in Mwanza), I’m sure I would actually go crazy.  [...scoring 100 on numerous psychological tests.]
• family and friends who are supportive of our work in Tanzania and keep in touch with us via email and Skype.
• a sending church who remains in contact, always offering conversation, encouragement, advice, and prayers.
• a blog that allows me to talk and talk (and talk some more) — but better yet, that has connected me to a community of people willing to offer discussion and friendship over the internet.  And a limitless possibility of new friends.
• Google Reader, which daily feeds me a mass of dialogue and conversations (from which I can at any time, without being rude, take my leave if I lose interest).

God is good. Even to this excessively extroverted missionary living in small town Africa.

 

sex sells: an experiment in blogging

I just completed a highly scientific research experiment. I mean this thing was designed by eight genius researchers on three continents.  There were control groups, independent variables,and guys wearing goggles.  Also, my findings have been properly adjusted for age, gender, geography, and even unseen environmental factors.

The Hypothesis

When various and interesting links are offered, the most popular will be that one which offers readers the opportunity to see a little skin. This will hold true even if…

• the subject of the page linked to is far from sexual in nature.
• the description of said page promises only an immodestly dressed woman — and not actual nudity.

The Experiment

In this past week’s morning blend feature here on aliens and strangers, I provided a number of links — not unlike any other morning blend (except this one was posted on a Wednesday rather than the usual Tuesday, due to Auburn having won the national championship).  There were a total of six links, which covered a random assortment of topics.  One of these links — the one leading to The Everyday Minimalist blog– was described (in passing) as possessing a picture of a nearly naked woman. The woman in the photo was reported to be not only as scantily clad, but also in the act of performing yoga exercises.

The Findings

At the end of five days, the “(nearly) naked woman link” outperformed the average of all other links at a ratio of 4:1. Yep, for every click leading to one of the other (less saucy) sites, there were four clicks to the peep show at The Minimalist. I’m calling this evidence conclusive.  My readers like to look at sexy women dressed sexily.

Other Possible Contributing Factors

I will admit there could have been other factors at work.  Here’s a list:

• Perhaps many of my readers are just really into yoga? And probably didn’t even notice that I’d written something about a “picture of a nearly naked woman doing yoga.”  They actually read it this way:  ”a very non-sexual picture of a modestly dressed woman doing yoga, that is not suggestive in any way.”  Or maybe they even read it this way:  ”a picture of a woman — or quite possibly a man (I’m not sure which, because the individual is so very unattractive and unexceptionally dressed) — doing yoga.”  This is entirely possible.*
• Maybe this would have been the favorite link of the day no matter what? It was indeed about advertisements for fast food restaurants, and how the real-life burgers never look like their steroid-injected photos.  It’s very interesting subject matter.  And we all like fast food.  It’s at least possible this was simply the favorite link of the day, and nothing more.  [But at a ratio of 4:1, come on?!]
• There were two separate links on the page that went to the Minimalist website — one to the fast food post and one to the blog itself.  It would make sense, then, that two links could double the likelihood of people clicking.  [But quadruple?  Probably not.]
• We do have to consider, also, that 50% of my readers (a completely made up figure for which I have no documentation) are of the female persuasion. It’s unlikely that the promise of a sultry exerciser is going to send these women over to a particular site.  Call me naive, but I just don’t think the ladies are that into bare midriffs and tight pants.  [I suppose they may have wanted to see their competition; women are, by nature, competitive.]
• However, what I was getting at is that, in order to see the numbers we did, it’s likely that men were visiting the risque site at a ratio of 13:1.  That’s right, if women clicked the naughty at a ratio of 1:1, men favored it by a multiple of 13.  Those vulgar boys.

**********

So, it’s settled:

1. Sex sells.
2. And the guys who read my blog are a little bit gross.**

Oh, and the picture of the nearly naked woman doing yoga… She’s a cartoon lady.  I suppose you could call her an attractive cartoon lady, but she’s no Jessica Rabbit.

* cough, cough

** My wife tells me I might alienate some of my (male) readers by saying this.  I figure you guys know I’m only joking though.  In all honesty, I think the biggest reason for the imbalance in clicking was that this link probably really was the most interesting one.  The fast food false advertising subject is a real attention-getter.  You guys were just clicking to see buns.  [No 'bun' intended.]