THE COMFORT SYNDROME
__________________________
   
Introduction

    I am writing this article because I am guilty. I am guilty of some (if not many) of the things relating to the Comfort Syndrome. I am therefore not deprecating anyone, nor wanting them to feel guilty. These are my views on what I understand to be true. They may or may not be your truth. They are set down to enlighten you if you have not thought about them already. If they relate to you or you know all this, then it may refresh your memory. My concern is with human understanding of myself and others. I hope it is yours, otherwise you would not be reading this at all.
    Other reasons for writing this article may become apparent when (and if) you read it.
    I am concerned, here in Australia (particularly the area in which I live), that most of the population is overweight. This is not to make for a pretty sight and is a reflection of the numbers of people obviously not happy in or with themselves (for whatever reason). This 'overweigtedness' (obesity) is becoming the 'norm' and is being heavily subsidised and perpetrated by manufacturers of what (rightly in my view) is known as 'junk' food.
    Everywhere, at the moment (and heed my words 'at the moment') the scape-goat of society is the smoker. Soon, in another sense, it may be the consumer of junk food. Where would oil and sugar manufacturers go then? Why do I think this? I think this is because it is sad that people do not know why they do these things.
    I am a smoker (and ignore the gross, unscientific and obscene warnings on cigarette packets). I do drink (and have drunk to excess in my time). I recognise that these activities are 'comfort' things. I have refrained from over-drinking (because that was a conscious decision I took), but I still smoke and I still drink. I hope that I have come to terms with these things because I have thought about them and realise what I am doing. I am conscious of what I am doing.
Please read on...
The Comfort Syndrome
    The Collins English Dictionary (1974) defines:
comfort (kum-fort)-n. solace or consolation; ease of body or mind, or whatever causes it.
solace (sol'ass) n. comfort in grief, consolation.
consolation (kon-so-lay-shun) n. the act of comforting; that which comforts; solace; encouragement.
    The Sharpen English Dictionary (unpublished, 1996) defines:
comfort (kum'fort) n. something familiar with which we feel safe and produces feelings of 'all-rightness' (I'm O.K.) whether we are conscious of them or not.
    Comfort is realised in objects or beliefs which feed our senses and make us happy.
    These objects or beliefs, (real or sometimes imaginary), make us feel good; therefore they are positive.
    What is imaginary becomes real (when it is believed) and therefore, an object.
    An object is something that we latch onto. Something that takes on (almost but not always) a tangible existence. That is, can be touched directly and produces something inside us. This is an emotion.
    An emotion is something that does something to us. In the sense of comfort, it is something positive, that is good and makes us feel well, comfortable, safe and so on.
    The word 'safe' is important.
    Comfort things make us feel safe.
    Collins Dictionary (again):
safe (say-f) n. free from harm, injury or risk; unharmed; unscathed; unhurt; sound; protected; sure; trustworthy; reliable; prudent.
    Sharpen (again):
safe (say-f) n. unharmed; unhurt; protected; I don't want to know, I want to be in my own safe world (but I don't know what it is) where no-ne will hurt me or harm me or know that I exist because I am unsure of who or what I am or what I want; hidden.
hidden (hidd-en) adj. secret; what is not known to others; what goes on before we are born or as we are born; what is known to us consciously , sub-consciously or unconsciously and what 'drives' us.
    The first experience of comfort (after we are born)  must probably be being put to the breast for milk and comfort. This is the mothers' comfort as well as the baby's. If this is not so for an individual, that is, it is bottle-fed or has a 'wet' nurse, it misses a great deal in early comfort in the 'real' sense. (That is, mother's breast is best, others second best or not best at all.) The reason being that the foetus derives comfort from the mother's heartbeat and the goings on in her body (of which she may not be aware but the child is). It's the closest that the child can get to being 'safe in the womb' (where it had all these things). It's just born, after all!
    Some mothers/parents indulge in the use of objects as 'comforters' after the child is weaned from the breast (or the bottle, which although supplying some of the needs of the mothers' milk begins the trend of more artificial comforters).
    These objects still have comfort effects but they lack the feel of the body; the warmth of the body and the 'soul' (whatever you think that is) of the person that bore them. They remain objects that comfort but they are not 'natural'. They have no substance other than that they appear 'normal'; that is they feel okay at the time but they don't satisfy the needs of the child. They are therefore false and negative.
    Objects of comfort are not real. Having said that, they are  'real' but only in the sense that they comfort. But this is not real comfort, for they only satisfy immediate feelings or the needs of the parents, not necessarily the child.
    Instant gratification is for the immature (young children who have not as yet realised anything beyond their immediate universe). Some people never seem to move from this stage and it may be carried on throughout their lives. The developmental process of the individual would normally move from the stage of instant gratification through life's education to a state where individuals should be able to cope with their place in life. However, this developmental process seems to be prolonged, hence the need for long-term comforters.
    The 'security blanket', the 'dummy' are not real (except in the sense that they are material objects).
    The most common objects  are the 'security blanket', the dummy, the drinking of cans of 'Coke' or some other drink, the hats that (mostly) boys wear; the chewing of gum, the conforming to others' expectations (of body jewellery, tattoo's, others' politics, gangs, others' control etc.).
    But there are more subtle comfort things. Things that we may not realise are comfort things. Things like smoking (of any type), drinking alcohol, needing one person to replace another. These are psychological comfort things. What may start out as some kind of 'bravado' end up as comfort things.
    There are other physiological comfort things like those associated with forms of body language: hugging oneself (crossing arms or legs) or touching oneself (in any form). These are usually normal and positive.
    We all need comfort. We must obtain comfort in any way that we see fit for us. As long as we appreciate that that is what we are doing. As long as it is our decision to use these comforters, there is no harm to us or others. It is excesses (or what we perceive to be excesses) that lead to problems and feeling of guilt and so on. This is usually the result of listening to some-one else who hasn't come to terms with them.
    What's this article about?
    It's about realising that certain of our behaviours that may worry us are concerned with trying to find comfort. If we know them (behaviours) then we can change them if they concern us or are concerning others. The concern of others would be a mutual agreement as to what may be changed on either side, not one side. One person's comfort may not be anothers''.
    A cause of concern to me is that certain objects are being accepted, which is not fulfilling the needs of individuals and is leading top a situation where personal comfort (and thus selfishness) is not environmentally friendly because people are not living together with others. The individual rules but not in a group, where a person should, if that is the nature of Man or if there is to be any mutual living together.
    It is interesting to note that comfort things are (usually) centred round the mouth.
    The first thing inserted into the mouth is the involuntary sucking of the amniotic fluid by the foetus. The next is probably the insertion into the mouth of one or two fingers by the foetus. (Ever noticed which finger/s might or are inserted? I always remember my index and middle finger being inserted into my mouth. One of my daughters always inserted  the middle two. For some babies, it's the thumb. Curious...)
    After the baby is born, the first thing inserted into the mouth is a nipple, natural or otherwise.
    The mouth is the centre of initial comfort. Nothing is otherwise. Acceptance of exploration by the hands (and possibly feet as well) of the mother from the child is the next stage of comfort. This is mutual co-operation and mutual comfort. It's a two-sided comfort. A natural comfort that has, in my view no equal. It's a male baby's  (non-sexual) erection. It's a female's what? Tell me, I don't know.
    As the child grows, it needs (or is forced in some way) to find independence for itself. What was once a mutual comfort becomes the comfort of one individual for itself. The force is applied by the circumstances of the parents, initially. They enforce a regime of dummy-sucking, security blankets, all aimed at the mouth. I am not saying that all these things are deliberate and I fear they satisfy the parents more than the child (especially in the case of dummies which must be thrust into the mouth. Other devices such as security blankets, bits of teddy-bear and so on are normal. I am not talking of stimulus and response; that is too technical and worries me more than a bit.
    It is because all these things are aimed at the mouth that chewing, sucking and any other mouth movements is considered by the infant to be a comfort that this may extend into later life as the insertion of anything into the mouth is a comfort. Thus drinking, smoking, sucking a pencil/finger, or eating, equate with comfort, especially in times of stress. (By the way, I think stress is a reaction to not feeling comfortable)
    Eating is a necessary function of the body. Excessive eating is not a function of the body, it is a result of not feeling comfortable or happy with oneself. The worry is that people ingest food (that is unnecessary) to produce a feeling of comfort which they should not need if they were happy with themselves.
    If people ingest such food (readily available as 'junk' food, i.e. food that is not necessary and caters for their perceived needs) they become victims of the providers.
    It is the excesses of 'the need for food' that lead to physiological and psychological problems that end up[ in a descending spiral of guilt and self-dislike. Whether this self-dislike comes first and therefore needs comfort, or the other way round may be either a moot point or a chicken and egg situation. Nevertheless it is real because it is all around us. We can see it. And it's a strong person who can.
    There is another form of comfort which struck me and that is noise. When I thought of this, a great number of things entered my mind.
    Noise is something that we don't like. We can easily equate this at a basic level when we thing of music. It is common to say that music we don't feel comfortable with (for whatever reason) is 'noise'. Although that is simplistic it has the elements I am talking about.
    I don't like noise if it offends me in some way. That may be because I have been brought up without any (which I was) or otherwise. The barking of dogs, crying children, screaming women or children in a move, music on the phone, digital watches, reversing noises of a truck and so on. All these things are not natural to me and cause offence. It seems that everything has to have a noise associated with it. Some of these are 'good', most (in my view) are 'bad'. It seems comfortable to say: 'I am here'. Even electronic devices seem to have the need to say: 'I am here, listen to me.'
    Most of this noise is unnecessary. It is pollution, pure and simple.
    I admit to being a bit paranoid about this, but then I grew up in a house where crunching a sweet was not tolerated. I understand the problem. I know success when babies are brought up with a bit of noise and are happily sleeping.
    This is fine up to a point. The problem lies in the forced comfort aspect of noise. It's the replacement of listening to the world of Nature, and indeed listening to our own bodies as well as a modicum of  the noise of modern life which is what I call 'false' noise. It seems to be part of the 'Nanny' society that some individuals wish to impose on us to their own ends. It's also part of the 'aural wallpaper' that pervades the society in which we are forced to live unless we complain.
    By this 'false' noise I mean the 'music' thrust upon our ears down the telephone, or in a shopping centre, or lifts, or whatever. We don't need this noise. We have only come to have to accept it because we can't turn it off.
    I could easily be tempted to alter William Congreve's statement (from The Morning Bride): "Music hath' charms to soothe a savage beast" to Music has charms to dull the beast and deaden the mind'.
    And noise took a new turn with the invention of the 'Walkman'. It  has taken tax-payers money for scientists to determine that these devices are now causing hearing problems. It was obvious from the beginning that they might be dangerous, without costing a cent.
    All these types of noise are contrary to our lives as humans in a society. They are solitary. They make us selfish and not caring of others.

Are the needs of comforts different between girls and boys?
    This seems to me to be an interesting question that I don't know the answer to, though I suspect they are, very much so.
    It's close to the truth, I think, that mean are always nearer to childhood than women, as women have a better survival mechanism...built-in. They, (after all) have to bear their offspring and look after them no matter what their circumstances are.
    [There is a joke which says that men are easier to psychoanalyse because when asked to go back to their childhood, they are already there.]
    This has its serious side because, although men set out to prove their masculinity, a woman never has to prove her femininity. I think, therefore, that men need more comfort than women in a lot of ways (although they pretend not to a wrap up their need in ways which are secret to them (or they think they are)) and exclude women (who probably see through this anyway).
    I am not denigrating a man (I am one!) but I do realise my own shortcomings and those of others and I am prepared to admit it. Acceptance of this is one way of coming to terms with what we are and realising our needs.

Conclusion
    We all need comfort. What worries me is that this is being exploited. What worries me is that having been exploited we then assume that what is, is right, or the 'norm'. What worries me is that we are using objective devices to cover the basic comforts that we need or are being offered to us.
    These include spurious things from outside our senses and things that we do not really need but are offered to us at a profit to those who know what I am talking about and want to exploit it for gain. These 'spurious objects of comfort' include hats, chewing gum, cigarettes, noise, dummies, and any other object which can be put into the mouth. They are not the natural things that offer us comfort but are deliberately produced or accepted and promoted as 'comforters'. They are the lazy wo/man's way of doing things. Man is lazy. If he can get something for nothing, he will. We are all guilty, but this should not make us feel guilty.
    Some of us want to be independent of others' control of us and make up our own minds. The production, exploitation or promotion of comfort things is another's control of us if it is not our desire.
    Given a choice, few of us would ever elect a group of amateurs to 'govern' us. We would not be that stupid, nor would we need to. We are brain-washed into believing that we need to.
    "Given a choice' means that we are able and should, make our own choices and not be dictated to by others, otherwise they have control of us, which we don't want.
    There are, of course, people who want others to direct them. This is fine. But we must not give the impression that everyone is like that, most of us aren't. The so-called government is the master comforter; the nanny who says I will look after you if you obey me. Nuts.
    The 'Comfort Syndrome' refers to things which are implanted in the minds of people. These things do not refer to the real comfort that we need. They are spurious at least; false at more ; dangerous (to the individual) at most.



Return to CONTENTS page