Tag: health

  • The Santa Claus of Donuts Must Die

    The Santa Claus of Donuts Must Die

    Let’s start with the obvious: your family bonds over food because food is reliable. It doesn’t argue with you about politics, it doesn’t criticize your life choices, and it doesn’t ask to borrow your car. It just shows up, warm and sugary, like a friend who never judges. And when you show up holding that pink box of donuts? You’re not just a guy walking through the front door—you’re the Santa Claus of Donuts, bearing gifts that turn your living room into a dopamine theme park. Everyone lights up. You are loved. You are admired. You are a hero.

    Until the sugar crash hits and you’re lying on the couch wondering how a simple box of pastries turned into a hostile takeover of your waistline. Again.

    You, my friend, have what polite society calls an “addictive personality,” but let’s not sugarcoat it (pun intended). You go overboard like it’s your patriotic duty. One treat turns into three. One bite into a blackout. You need boundaries, not Pinterest recipes.

    So here’s your prescription. It’s boring, brutal, and blessedly effective:

    Breakfast: Plain Greek yogurt, a scoop of protein powder, flaxseeds, chia seeds, and a handful of berries. Also, coffee. Strong enough to slap you awake and maybe shake loose some of your delusions.

    Lunch: A salad—yes, a salad—with actual protein in it. Maybe chicken. Maybe tuna. Add a scoop of cottage cheese if you hate joy a little less that day. Have some fruit so you don’t hallucinate cookies.
    Dinner: Protein again. Vegetables. Herbal tea, like the sad monk you are becoming. Cap it off with an apple and the faint memory of dessert.
    Snack Defense Protocol: If you start prowling like a raccoon between lunch and dinner, shove a carrot in your mouth, sip some green tea, and crack open a diet root beer. It’s not a thrill, it’s a strategy.

    And let us not forget why you had to slam the snack door shut like it owed you money: snacks are traitors. They pretend to be innocent little diversions—just a handful here, a nibble there—but they’re silent assassins. Those calories accumulate like guilt after a Vegas weekend, slowly padding your frame while you’re busy telling yourself you’re “cutting back.”

    Now, let’s address the hard truth, as spoken by the philosopher-king of overweight comedians, Tom Segura: “You don’t lose weight until you hate your fatness more than you love food.” Yes, it’s harsh. But he’s not wrong.

    Still, let’s reframe it with a little less bile and a touch more clarity:
    You won’t change until you prefer discipline to chaos. Until your craving for stability outweighs your need for a dopamine hit. Until your love of self-respect outweighs your love of Cheez-Its.

    You don’t need another meal plan—you need a code. A way of eating that doesn’t just fill your stomach, but recalibrates your priorities. Food is not your therapist. Food is not your friend. Food is fuel. And you? You’re not Santa Claus anymore. You’re something better: a man in control of his appetite, his identity, and his damn life.

    Now go make that yogurt bowl like it’s a holy ritual and not a punishment. The rest will follow.

  • An Argument for Healthy Denial: A Self-Help Sermon for the Self-Indulgent

    An Argument for Healthy Denial: A Self-Help Sermon for the Self-Indulgent

    Let’s be honest. You’ve tried the soft-glow Instagram mantras and the overpriced journaling apps. You’ve danced with dopamine like a lab rat in a Vegas casino, chasing every ping, snack, scroll, and retail hit like it was divine revelation. And where has it gotten you? Nowhere worth photographing.

    So here’s your wake-up call, preacher-style, minus the tambourine: take care of your damn self. Not in that syrupy “self-care” way that means binge-watching prestige TV while mainlining DoorDash and calling it therapy. No, I mean the kind of care that involves discipline, boundaries, and strategic discomfort—also known as healthy denial.

    Phil Stutz is right: your relationship with your body, your soul, and the people around you depends on your ability to say “no” like your life depends on it—because it does. Not “no” out of self-loathing or ascetic performance art, but “no” because you actually give a damn about the human being you’re becoming.

    You don’t skip the donut because you hate yourself. You skip it because you respect yourself enough not to let your biology, your boredom, or your bastardized idea of “treat culture” run your life. You are not a French bulldog in a baby stroller. You are a fully grown adult with responsibilities and, presumably, a spine.

    And no, this isn’t some narcissistic glow-up project. You’re not chiseling your abs to become a thirst trap or launching your “healing journey” vlog. This is not a TED Talk in the making. This is about getting better because the people who count on you deserve more than your bloated, distracted, half-baked self. Society doesn’t need another dopamine junkie sucking on algorithmic pacifiers while pretending to be “living their truth.”

    Yes, some will tell you denial is toxic, puritanical, even abusive. These are the same people who believe “treating yourself” five times a day is a human right. But let’s get something straight: healthy denial is not self-hatred—it’s self-respect with a steel backbone. You deny yourself garbage because you’re aiming for gold. You crave meaning, not just muffins. You want to die with fewer regrets, not a legacy of half-eaten potato chips and unread terms of service.

    So here’s what you’re going to do.
    You will stop snacking. Period.
    You will stop scrolling like a brainless peasant begging for dopamine crumbs from tech oligarchs.
    You will stop curating materialistic trinkets—yes, even the “limited edition” timepieces—and broadcasting your conspicuous consumption like a status-starved magpie.

    Instead, you will create.

    You will write.
    You will make music.
    You will work out with the devotion of a monk in a burning temple.
    You will show up for your family like it matters—because it does.
    And you will treat your time on this spinning sphere not as an entitlement but as the limited-edition miracle it is.

    This is not about being better than others. This is about being better for others. And if that sounds corny to you, maybe you’ve been swimming in irony so long you’ve forgotten what sincerity feels like.

    Here’s your new gospel: eat clean, think clearly, serve humbly, and waste nothing—not even time.

    Now get to it. The clock is ticking, and you’re not getting any younger.

  • The Boba-Loaded Lie: How Big Soda Got a Makeover

    The Boba-Loaded Lie: How Big Soda Got a Makeover

    Magical thinking is the bedazzled duct tape we slap onto reality to avoid facing the truth. It lets us take something objectively terrible—like a 20-ounce bottle of fizzy corn syrup—and slap on enough gloss, hashtags, and buzzwords to make it seem like an act of wellness. It’s how you turn poison into a product. And that, in essence, is what Ellen Cushing unpacks in her incisive Atlantic piece, The Drink Americans Can’t Quit.”

    Once upon a time, Big Soda was king—until the internet’s favorite shirtless gym bros decided that guzzling sugar water was about as cool as smoking indoors. Sodas became the new Marlboros: once iconic, now socially repellent. But like any villain in a rebooted franchise, soda didn’t die. It got a makeover. Now it struts back into our lives wearing a new name tag: energy drink, boba tea, cold brew, mushroom latte, functional hydration. Same blood sugar spike, new marketing copy.

    Cushing doesn’t just document this cynical rebranding—she vivisects it. The modern “status beverage” has evolved into a Trojan horse of marketing genius: wrapped in virtue-signaling wellness language, dressed in neutral tones and matte cans, and fortified with meaningless additions like adaptogens, B vitamins, or vaguely defined “nootropics.” These drinks promise energy, clarity, even spiritual alignment—because what better way to mask liquid candy than by suggesting it unlocks your third eye?

    But the rot remains. These drinks are still what Cushing calls “a remarkably unhealthy, nutritionally inessential product that costs pennies to make”—only now, they’re draped in the aesthetic of self-care. We’ve replaced high-fructose corn syrup with high-gloss delusion. It’s not soda, you see—it’s a wellness ritual. A personality in a can. A lifestyle choice with a QR code.

    And it works because the industry knows exactly who we are: vanity-ridden optimists with just enough disposable income and just little enough critical thinking to fall for it again. We don’t want hydration; we want a vibe. Something that fits in our hand, photographs well on Instagram, and makes us feel like we’re doing something good for ourselves—while doing the exact opposite.

    Cushing’s essay left me seething, in the best way. Because once you see the scam, you can’t unsee it. I don’t care if your can is minimalist, if your label says “plant-based,” or if Gwyneth Paltrow herself handed it to me with a smug nod. If it’s just soda in yoga pants, I’m out.

    So no, I won’t be purchasing a $5 can of turmeric-infused, adaptogen-enhanced, crystal-charged carbonated nonsense. Because once I understand the con, drinking it would feel like punching my own dignity in the face. I’d rather hydrate the old-fashioned way—with water and a shred of self-respect.

  • 3 College Writing Prompts: Willpower Is Not a Weight-Loss Strategy: Rewriting the Narrative of Obesity in an Age of Ozempic

    3 College Writing Prompts: Willpower Is Not a Weight-Loss Strategy: Rewriting the Narrative of Obesity in an Age of Ozempic

    Essay Prompt:

    In contemporary culture, weight loss is often framed as a matter of individual discipline: eat less, move more, stay motivated. This narrative, reinforced by diet culture, media messaging, and public health campaigns, reduces a complex biopsychosocial phenomenon into a moral test of willpower. But what if this view is not only incomplete, but damaging?

    This essay invites you to critically analyze the myth of weight loss as a simple formula of personal responsibility, using the following readings:

    • Rebecca Johns, “A Diet Writer’s Regrets”
    • Johann Hari, “A Year on Ozempic Taught Me We’re Thinking About Obesity All Wrong”
    • Harriet Brown, “The Weight of the Evidence”
    • Sandra Aamodt, “Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet”

    Drawing on these texts, write a 1,700-word argumentative essay that explores the deeper systemic, biological, and psychological forces that influence body weight. In your analysis, define what is meant by diet culture, obesity stigma, metabolic adaptation, and the illusion of control. Consider how economic privilege, the Industrial Food Complex, and the Diabetes-Management Complex affect who gets access to treatment and who gets blamed for their bodies.

    Reflect on the question: Is obesity the result of failed individual discipline—or a condition shaped by biology, capitalism, and inequality? And what are the ethical and political consequences of continuing to frame weight as a personal failing?


    Key Themes and Concepts to Define in Essay:

    • Diet culture: The belief system that prioritizes thinness as a moral virtue and equates weight loss with health and worth.
    • Obesity stigma: The systemic dehumanization, bias, and blame placed on people in larger bodies.
    • Metabolic adaptation: The body’s physiological resistance to weight loss, often leading to weight regain.
    • Ozempic and GLP-1 drugs: Medications that challenge traditional weight-loss advice by offering pharmacological interventions, often accessible only to the wealthy.
    • Industrial Food Complex: The economic system that prioritizes hyper-palatable, processed foods for profit.
    • Diabetes-Management Complex: The medical-industrial apparatus that profits from managing obesity-related conditions without addressing root causes.

    10-Paragraph Essay Outline


    Paragraph 1 – Introduction

    • Begin with a personal or cultural anecdote about dieting, body shame, or the weight-loss industry.
    • State the prevailing myth: that weight loss is just about willpower, calories, and exercise.
    • Introduce the core idea: this myth obscures structural, biological, and psychological realities.
    • End with a strong thesis: The cultural obsession with personal discipline in weight loss not only ignores science but perpetuates economic injustice, medical misinformation, and moral shame.

    Paragraph 2 – The Myth of Personal Responsibility

    • Explore how diet culture frames obesity as a personal failure.
    • Use Johns and Brown to show how this narrative is reinforced by health media and public policy.
    • Define diet culture and obesity stigma as forms of social control.

    Paragraph 3 – The Science of Weight and Metabolism

    • Explain Aamodt’s key argument: the body defends a weight range through metabolic adaptation.
    • Introduce the concept of the set point and how dieting can backfire physiologically.
    • Emphasize the biological limits of “discipline” in long-term weight maintenance.

    Paragraph 4 – Ozempic and the Medical Disruption of Diet Culture

    • Analyze Hari’s experience with Ozempic as a reframing of what obesity is and isn’t.
    • Explain how drugs like Ozempic challenge the calorie-math logic of diet culture.
    • Raise the question: if a drug changes appetite, was willpower ever the issue?

    Paragraph 5 – Economic Access and the Ozempic Divide

    • Examine the cost of GLP-1 drugs and the class-based disparity in access.
    • Discuss how the rich can “solve” obesity pharmacologically while others are blamed.
    • Introduce the concept of the Diabetes-Management Complex and its profit motives.

    Paragraph 6 – The Industrial Food Complex and Engineered Cravings

    • Analyze the food industry’s role in promoting addictive, ultra-processed foods.
    • Use Brown and outside data (optional) to show how working-class communities are targeted by fast food and soda industries.
    • Connect this to systemic inequality: people are set up to fail and then blamed for it.

    Paragraph 7 – Psychological Toll and the Shame Cycle

    • Highlight the emotional and mental health damage caused by diet failure and stigma.
    • Reference Johns and Aamodt: shame is not a motivator—it’s a trap.
    • Argue that repeated dieting often leads to worse health outcomes, not better ones.

    Paragraph 8 – Counterargument: Isn’t Some Responsibility Necessary?

    • Acknowledge the argument that individuals do make choices about food and movement.
    • Rebut by showing how choice is constrained by biology, environment, and marketing.
    • Emphasize that awareness and access—not shame—should guide public health.

    Paragraph 9 – Reframing Obesity: Toward Compassionate Policy and Practice

    • Suggest new narratives: body neutrality, medical compassion, anti-poverty approaches.
    • Point to Hari’s conclusion: we must rethink how we talk about food, body, and health.
    • Argue for policies that regulate Big Food and expand access to affordable treatment—not just lectures on willpower.

    Paragraph 10 – Conclusion

    • Reaffirm thesis: The weight-loss myth isn’t just scientifically flawed—it’s morally dangerous.
    • Remind the reader that bodies are not math problems to be solved.
    • End with a call to change the story: from blame to understanding, from shame to structural justice.

    Three Sample Thesis Statements


    Thesis 1:
    Despite decades of public health messaging urging personal responsibility, evidence from metabolic science and socioeconomic analysis shows that weight loss is rarely a matter of willpower; rather, it is shaped by systemic inequalities, industrial food marketing, and biological resistance that diet culture refuses to acknowledge.


    Thesis 2:
    Ozempic has exposed the hollowness of traditional dieting advice by proving that appetite, metabolism, and weight are governed by mechanisms beyond discipline—forcing us to rethink obesity not as moral failure, but as a condition entangled in capitalism, privilege, and biology.


    Thesis 3:
    While self-discipline plays a role in shaping health behaviors, framing obesity as a personal choice erases the complex realities faced by those in larger bodies—and perpetuates a culture that profits from their shame while denying them access to real solutions.

    Prompt Variation #1:

    Title:

    Ozempic Nation: Rethinking Health, Shame, and the New Politics of Body Control

    Prompt:

    In recent years, the rise of weight-loss drugs like Ozempic has disrupted the cultural script about how people should lose weight. For decades, Americans were taught that health was a product of self-control, calorie-counting, and personal virtue. Now, pharmaceutical interventions are reframing obesity not as a failure of discipline, but as a medical condition treatable through science—at least, for those who can afford it.

    In a 1,700-word argumentative essay, use the following sources to explore the tension between medical innovation and cultural shame in the weight-loss conversation:

    • Rebecca Johns, “A Diet Writer’s Regrets”
    • Johann Hari, “A Year on Ozempic Taught Me We’re Thinking About Obesity All Wrong”
    • Harriet Brown, “The Weight of the Evidence”
    • Sandra Aamodt, “Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet”

    Your essay should analyze the shifting meanings of health, body control, and legitimacy in the age of Ozempic. What happens when pharmaceutical shortcuts challenge decades of moral messaging around food and fitness? Who benefits from this shift—and who is still left behind?

    Define and explore key concepts such as obesity stigma, the illusion of dietary control, medical privilege, and the cultural performance of health. Consider how these sources challenge or reinforce the idea that technology can “fix” what social systems continue to break.


    Sample Thesis Statements:

    Thesis 1:
    Ozempic reveals the deep contradictions at the heart of American health culture: while it promises to liberate people from shame and failed diets, it reinforces an unequal system in which the wealthy gain slimness without stigma while the poor remain trapped in cycles of blame and exclusion.

    Thesis 2:
    The pharmaceutical rebranding of obesity as a treatable disease may signal progress, but it risks medicalizing a problem rooted in inequality and cultural cruelty—shifting the solution from public reform to private access.

    Thesis 3:
    Even as Ozempic offers a scientific disruption of diet culture, the surrounding narrative still clings to old myths of self-control, body optimization, and moral value, showing that shame is more durable than even the most effective drug.


    Prompt Variation #2:

    Title:

    The Hunger Trap: How Diet Culture Profits from Our Failure

    Prompt:

    For decades, diet culture has promised transformation through willpower: thinner bodies, better health, and a more valuable self. Yet mounting evidence suggests that these promises are not only false but economically and biologically rigged to ensure failure.

    Using the following texts, write a 1,700-word argumentative essay examining how diet culture operates as an economic and psychological trap:

    • Rebecca Johns, “A Diet Writer’s Regrets”
    • Johann Hari, “A Year on Ozempic Taught Me We’re Thinking About Obesity All Wrong”
    • Harriet Brown, “The Weight of the Evidence”
    • Sandra Aamodt, “Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet”

    Your task is to explore how the weight-loss industry—and the broader systems of food production, health marketing, and cultural control—profits from the manufactured failure of diets. Analyze how this industry shapes individual psychology while diverting attention from systemic issues such as poverty, food engineering, and medical access.

    Define key terms such as the weight-loss industrial complex, metabolic resistance, social shame as behavioral control, and the commodification of insecurity. Ask: who profits when we hate our bodies, and what changes when we stop believing weight loss is the solution?


    Sample Thesis Statements:

    Thesis 1:
    Diet culture functions less as a roadmap to health than as a profit engine fueled by failure, shame, and false hope—ensuring that the more we try to lose weight, the more the system wins.

    Thesis 2:
    The illusion of dietary control is not a harmless myth but a profitable one, carefully engineered by the Industrial Food Complex and the diet industry to keep consumers trapped in a cycle of craving, guilt, and spending.

    Thesis 3:
    By exposing how diets are designed to fail and shame is weaponized for profit, these texts argue that weight loss is not a health goal—it is an industry built on emotional extraction and economic exploitation.

  • Meat, Morals, and the Myth of the “Faketarian”

    Meat, Morals, and the Myth of the “Faketarian”

    In Yasmin Tayag’s Atlantic essay, “America Is Done Pretending About Meat,” she slices through the tofu-thin veneer of plant-based hype with surgical clarity. Her subtitle—“Plant-based has lost its appeal”—isn’t just a culinary observation; it’s a cultural postmortem. In today’s ideological food fight, meat isn’t just food. It’s masculinity on a plate, red-state swagger served rare. Meanwhile, the plant-based lifestyle—once the darling of climate warriors and West Coast yoga instructors—now reeks of smugness and crumbling coastal elitism.

    Pre-pandemic, faux meat had its moment. Impossible Burgers sizzled their way into fast food joints, and Beyond Meat strutted onto grocery shelves like it was about to win a Nobel Prize in moral superiority. But somewhere between mask mandates and mutual loathing, America got bored with pretending its black bean patty was filet mignon. Political tribalism hardened, and nothing says “I vote red” like a slab of charred ribeye.

    Beyond the performative virtue signaling, there’s a more primal truth: meat is delicious. Our conscience may wag its finger over climate guilt and industrial cruelty, but our mouths water for seared fat and sizzle. And let’s be honest—those plant-based patties? Nutritional Trojan horses. They’re packed with sodium, industrial oils, and the kind of pea protein that leaves you hungry two hours later. A real burger satisfies. A fake one is cosplay.

    Tayag throws another burger on the grill: half of all self-proclaimed vegans and vegetarians are liars—“faketarians,” as my cousin calls them—quietly munching chicken wings when no one’s looking. The moral high ground is slippery when coated in barbecue sauce.

    Personally, my culinary choices are less about ethics and more about domestic diplomacy. My wife and daughters are carnivores, and I’m not about to start a civil war over tempeh. Sure, I dabble in lentils and drizzle tahini on roasted vegetables, but I still rely on Greek yogurt and whey protein to keep my muscles from filing a grievance.

    So yes, I lean plant-based, but only enough to stay credible in a Whole Foods aisle—not enough to trigger a household mutiny. Call it “functional tribalism.” Call it “married life.” Just don’t call it vegan.

  • The Dopamine Dumpster Fire: How I Went from Literary Scholar to Algorithm Addict

    The Dopamine Dumpster Fire: How I Went from Literary Scholar to Algorithm Addict

    In 1979, I went to college—back when students still read entire books and didn’t skim Nietzsche between TikTok scrolls. By 1986, I had a master’s degree in English and a reading habit so fierce it could scare a librarian. This was the Pre-Digital, Pre-Illiterate Age, and I was both smarter and, dare I say, happier. Then came the internet, like a radioactive vending machine of constant stimulation, and within a decade my attention span was fried, my dopamine receptors scorched, and my brain felt like a squirrel on meth.

    Reading Anna Lembke’s Dopamine Nation: Finding Balance in the Age of Indulgence was like holding a mirror up to my own cognitive and emotional decline—except the mirror was cracked and buzzing with notification pings. Lembke, a Stanford psychiatrist with a scalpel-sharp intellect, writes that we live in a world of “overwhelming abundance,” where the smartphone is the modern hypodermic needle, delivering micro-hits of dopamine at all hours like a dealer with unlimited supply and no off switch. Her message is clear: addiction isn’t a fringe problem—it’s the central operating system of modern life.

    Lembke’s insight that “pleasure and pain are processed in the same part of the brain” makes you rethink every moment of scrolling, snacking, shopping, and spiraling. The more dopamine you chase, the more pain you invite in through the back door. It’s like sprinting on a treadmill made of banana peels—every gain is followed by a crash. According to Lembke, addiction rewires your brain to seek shortcuts, and in the process, you become a hollowed-out shell of your former self, one push notification away from an existential crisis.

    I didn’t need convincing. Twenty-five years of living online has made my mind a junk drawer of fragmented thoughts and snack-sized emotions. Lembke explains that many addicts live a double life, a private underworld of shame and secrecy that eats away at their integrity. That rang uncomfortably true. She points to risk factors like having a parent with addiction or mental illness. Bingo. Both my parents were alcoholics, and my mother had bipolar disorder—my genetic cocktail came shaken, stirred, and garnished with a panic attack.

    But the biggest risk factor, Lembke argues, is access. We’re all mainlining the internet every day. The supply has become the demand. The dopamine economy, she says, thrives on overconsumption, normalized by the fact that everyone else is doing it. If your entire community is obsessed with likes, outrage, and FOMO-fueled consumerism, it starts to feel… reasonable. Normal. Even patriotic.

    Social media isn’t just a distraction; it’s a full-blown Outrage Machine, built to keep our emotional hair on fire 24/7. We are like feral raccoons pawing at glowing rectangles, convinced that salvation lies in another dopamine hit—another comment, another package, another numbing episode of low-stakes content. Our collective descent is so absurd it would be funny if it weren’t so bleak.

    Lembke leans on the wisdom of cultural critic Philip Rieff, who observed that we’ve moved from “religious man” to “psychological man”—from seeking salvation to chasing pleasure. Add to that Jeffrey Rosen’s The Pursuit of Happiness, which reminds us that classical philosophy defined happiness not as feeling good, but as being good—the moral life, not the moist towelette of consumer satisfaction.

    But that idea, in our current therapeutic culture, sounds about as appealing as a cold shower in February. We’ve been taught to medicate our moods, sedate our angst, and wrap our trauma in soft blankets of “self-care” that often amount to binge-watching and overeating. Our modern mantra is: “If it hurts, scroll faster.” The result? A crisis of meaning, a society allergic to discomfort, and a spiritual vacuum that smells faintly of Axe Body Spray.

    Lembke calls this the paradox of hedonism: the more you chase pleasure, the less capable you become of feeling it. Hedonism leads to anhedonia—a state in which nothing satisfies. You eat the cake, buy the thing, get the like, and feel… nothing. It’s like winning a prize that turns into a cockroach when you unwrap it.

    Ever since reading Dopamine Nation, I’ve been haunted by a single, searing thought: Maybe I shouldn’t try to feel good. Maybe I should try to be good. But this, in a consumer culture built on instant gratification, feels like a betrayal of the social contract. We’re not just addicted—we’re indoctrinated.

    So here I am, a relic of the Pre-Digital Age, nursing my overstimulated brain, trying to claw my way out of the dopamine pit with a few dog-eared paperbacks and a shortwave radio. Because the real question isn’t how to feel better—but how to live better in a world that confuses stimulation for meaning and pleasure for purpose.

    And if that makes me sound like a cranky monk with Wi-Fi, so be it. I’d rather be a lucid cynic than another dopamine casualty with a glowing screen and dead eyes.

  • My Disenchantment with the Hyped “Bed-in-a-Box”

    My Disenchantment with the Hyped “Bed-in-a-Box”

    Recently, my wife and I embarked on a perilous expedition to the mall, determined to sample the mystical, much-hyped “bed in a box” phenomenon. These mattresses, made of memory foam and gel, promise to unfurl from their vacuum-sealed cocoons like majestic, overpriced butterflies, transforming into full-sized California Kings. All you need is a steady hand with a box cutter and the courage to avoid slicing into your thousand-dollar slumber investment.

    We lounged on mattresses priced between three and nine thousand dollars, letting the sales pitch wash over us like warm chamomile tea. They were fine. Soft, supportive—sure. But the experience was more “meh” than mind-blowing transcendence. As I lay there, staring at the ceiling, I couldn’t shake the feeling that someone, somewhere, was having a good laugh. Thousands of dollars for glorified memory foam? I half expected Ashton Kutcher to jump out and yell, “You’ve been Punk’d.”

    Once home, I consulted the digital oracles—various AI platforms—to confirm what I already suspected. Their verdict was swift and merciless: “Bed in a box? Cute. Overpriced. Flimsy.” The collective AI wisdom aligned—luxury does not arrive folded like a quesadilla. I was told that traditional mattresses—those stalwart hybrids and innerspring titans—deliver the same materials, often at half the price, and outlive their boxed-up counterparts by years.

    The harshest critique? Longevity. You can fork over four grand for a slab of compressed foam, and in five years, that bed will be about as supportive as a wet sponge. Meanwhile, a conventional mattress, purchased for the same price, will still be cradling you like the loyal workhorse it was born to be.

    Armed with this knowledge, I basked in smug, streetwise satisfaction. I had danced through the minefield of marketing spin and emerged unscathed, my wallet intact. To celebrate, I collapsed onto my overpriced sectional and binge-watched a Netflix comedy special—content, victorious, and perched atop a couch that cost far too much but, at least, wasn’t pretending to be something it wasn’t.

  • Magical Thinking #3: If You Throw Enough Money at a Problem, It’ll Solve Itself

    Magical Thinking #3: If You Throw Enough Money at a Problem, It’ll Solve Itself

    (or, The Fine Art of Buying Your Own Delusion)

    There exists a special kind of self-deception in which people believe that spending money is the same as putting in effort. The logic is simple: if you’re financially invested, you must also be emotionally and physically committed—right? Wrong.

    Take the personal trainers I know—college students making $80 an hour babysitting wealthy clients who stumble into the gym reeking of whiskey and bad decisions. These people don’t actually work out so much as they appear to be working out. They halfheartedly swing a kettlebell, grimace into a mirror, and assume their credit card transactions will magically convert to muscle mass. When their bodies remain flabby monuments to their bad habits, they’re baffled. But I paid for a trainer!

    Then there are the yoga tourists—the ones who drop thousands of dollars on high-end mats, designer leggings, and a Himalayan singing bowl, yet still can’t touch their toes. Their bank accounts scream “devoted yogi,” but their flexibility suggests otherwise.

    And let’s not forget the gym membership martyrs—the ones who proudly drop a cool hundred bucks a month on a premium fitness club, never show up, and yet still expect their abs to materialize via direct deposit.

    Academia isn’t immune to this madness, either. Some students believe that spending two grand on textbooks will guarantee academic success, as if the mere presence of unread knowledge on their bookshelf will seep into their brains through osmosis. The books stay pristine, their spines uncracked, while their owners continue to bomb midterms.

    This is the grand illusion of transactional self-improvement—the belief that writing the check is the same as doing the work. It’s not. No amount of money, gear, or overpriced green juice will ever replace the ugly, necessary grind of actually putting in effort.

  • Claustrophobia Reveals Your True Soul to the World

    Claustrophobia Reveals Your True Soul to the World

    There are many ways to expose your raw, unfiltered self to the world. Some people achieve this through a near-death experience, a public meltdown, or a bout of food poisoning on an international flight. For me, claustrophobia is the great revealer, an unrelenting force that strips away every ounce of composure and leaves me flailing like a man trapped in quicksand. It doesn’t matter if I’m in a dentist’s chair or strapped into a sadistic amusement park ride—when the walls start closing in, I become the star of my own public humiliation showcase.

    The first great revelation of my soul came at Universal Studios, where I made the tragic miscalculation of sacrificing my personal comfort for my wife and twin daughters. A father’s love is boundless, but so, unfortunately, was my terror. The very air of the place reeked of Las Vegas grift, stale churros, and desperate cash grabs. Every corner had some overenthusiastic performer in mothball-scented epaulets or a handlebar-mustached imposter butchering a French accent for a paycheck. But nothing could have prepared me for the medieval horror that awaited on the Harry Potter Forbidden Journey ride.

    After standing in line for an eternity, I found myself wedged into an airplane seat designed for a malnourished Victorian child. A heavy metal harness slammed down on my 52-inch chest like a bear trap, and within seconds, my body entered full-blown rebellion mode. My lungs went on strike, my heart pounded out an emergency evacuation order, and my brain whispered, You are about to die in the most embarrassing way possible. As the conveyor belt dragged me toward a dark, swirling vortex of Hogwarts-themed doom, I did what any reasonable person would do—I began screaming like a man being lowered into a pit of snakes.

    “STOP THE RIDE! I’M HAVING A HEART ATTACK!” I wailed, flailing like an air dancer outside a used car lot.

    At first, no one in charge seemed to care, but the fellow prisoners trapped beside me picked up on my panic and began chanting my cause like a medieval mob: “STOP THE RIDE! STOP THE RIDE!” Finally, a burly security officer in an FBI-grade sport coat emerged, walkie-talkie in hand, and surveyed my meltdown with the practiced patience of a man who had seen worse. I looked up at him, sheepish and sweaty, and asked, “Do you need to take me to a debriefing room?” He chuckled, helped me out of my restraints, and sent me shuffling out of Universal Studios, a broken man.

    But the universe was not done exposing my fragility.

    The Dentist’s Chair: A Torture Chamber Disguised as Healthcare

    Around the same time as the Universal Studios fiasco, I had a similarly catastrophic loss of dignity at Dr. Howard Chen’s dental office. The appointment started out fine—numbing shots, ear-splitting drills, the usual dance with mortality. But then the bite block came out. For those blissfully unaware, a bite block is a rubber wedge designed to keep your mouth open during dental procedures, but in my case, it may as well have been a medieval jaw clamp designed by Torquemada himself.

    The second it locked my mouth open, my brain fired off the same claustrophobic distress signal as it had on the Harry Potter ride. I couldn’t swallow, which meant I couldn’t breathe, which meant I was about to die, right there, in a flannel shirt, under a fluorescent light, to the soft rock stylings of The Carpenters.

    Before I could stop myself, I ripped off my shirt, launched myself out of the dental chair, and began gasping like a shipwreck survivor.

    “Are you going to be okay, Jeff?” Dr. Chen asked, his voice dripping with the calm patience of a man who has dealt with neurotics before.

    “I CAN’T HAVE THIS RUBBER THING IN MY MOUTH,” I announced, holding the bite block aloft like a relic from an exorcism.

    Dr. Chen nodded, his eyes a mix of concern and professional detachment. “Okay, we’ll do it without the bite block.” He gestured toward the chair. “Go ahead and sit back down.”

    I obeyed, heart pounding, and the rest of the drilling continued without further catastrophe. But the damage to my dignity was irreversible.

    Sensory Hell: The Dentist’s Office Smells Like Death

    The claustrophobia is bad enough, but what really pushes me over the edge is that I am what some might call a “super smeller.” Lying in the dental chair, I am forced to marinate in an unholy stew of:

    • Clove oil
    • Formaldehyde
    • Acrylic
    • Glutaraldehyde
    • Latex gloves
    • The lingering decay of other patients’ tooth dust

    It is the aroma of death itself. I am not a dental patient—I am a cadaver in the early stages of embalming.

    And while I fight off nausea, my mind spirals into a full existential crisis. Something about lying prone, mouth pried open, surgical tools scraping at my enamel, makes me contemplate my soul more than any other moment in my life. The sheer vulnerability of the position mimics some prelude to the afterlife, and I am left with only my own morbid thoughts for company.

    Morbidity Hits Different with 1970s Soft Rock

    As if my anxiety needed any further provocation, Dr. Chen’s office plays 1970s easy listening on a continuous loop. The Carpenters, Neil Diamond, John Denver—songs that transport me straight back to my early years as a melancholic prepubescent. Suddenly, I am ten years old again, scribbling dramatic diary entries about my unrequited love for Patty Wilson, the rosy-cheeked blonde girl from fourth grade who never knew I existed.

    But before I can fully dissolve into a puddle of nostalgic despair, Dr. Chen interrupts.

    “You’re brushing too hard,” he warns. “You’re murdering your gum line.”

    “But I don’t trust the Sonicare to do the job!” I protest.

    “You need to have faith in the Sonicare, Jeff.”

    “But I am a man of doubt.”

    Dr. Chen sighs, shaking his head. “I can see that.”

    Final Humiliation: The Dentist Knows I’m Crazy

    During my latest visit, he threw a new horror into the mix: the possibility of a root canal.

    “What can I do to avoid it?” I asked, racked with dread.

    “Relax, Jeff,” he said. “All this stress is hurting your immune system. You need a strong immune system to fight decay.”

    Great. Now I have to worry about stress-induced tooth rot.

    As I staggered out of the office, I nearly reversed into an angry SUV driver, who honked with the force of a nuclear siren. But what truly shattered me was the sight of Dr. Chen, peering through his office window, watching the entire debacle unfold.

    And in that moment, as our eyes met, I knew—I was, without a doubt, the most unhinged patient he had ever seen. There would be no coming back from this.

    Claustrophobia, once again, had revealed my true soul to the world.

  • Wrestling with an especially virulent case of “Influenza A”

    Wrestling with an especially virulent case of “Influenza A”

    In I’m Dysfunctional, You’re Dysfunctional: The Recovery Movement and Other Self-Help Fashions, Wendy Kaminer lays waste to the therapeutic fads of the 1990s, particularly the trend of “reclaiming the inner child”—a ritual that took infantilization to near-religious extremes.

    She describes John Bradshaw’s workshops, where grown adults with respectable careers arrived clutching teddy bears like traumatized toddlers, preparing to embark on a guided journey into the mansion of their past. There, as Bradshaw whispered encouragements, lower lips trembled, tears streamed, and a congregation of emotionally overqualified professionals sobbed into the polyester fur of their stuffed animals.

    What floored Kaminer wasn’t the unhinged emotionalism—it was the sheer, shameless conviction. These people weren’t just indulging in a saccharine, self-indulgent spectacle—they were true believers, convinced that squeezing a doll and reliving some long-buried playground trauma was nothing short of a spiritual awakening.

    Kaminer was not impressed. What others saw as self-reflection and healing, she saw as an infantilizing orgy of narcissism, a self-help séance in which grown-ups tried to resurrect their inner kindergartener, only to be possessed by a ghost that refused to leave.

    Now, I’d like to say that my bullshit detector is too finely tuned for me to cradle a stuffed animal and regress into baby talk. But the bitter irony is that writing this memoir has forced me into my own brand of infantilization—just without the teddy bear and group cry session.

    Nothing made this clearer than the pathetic spectacle of my post-Thanksgiving downfall, which started with a game of Russian roulette—except instead of a revolver, I played with rotting cabbage.

    It all began when I decided to make chicken tacos—a wholesome, adult dinner choice. Unfortunately, the bag of shredded cabbage I retrieved from the fridge had been marinating in its own decay for two weeks, slowly transforming into hell’s compost pile.

    The moment I tore open the bag, my wife recoiled with the dramatic flair of a crime scene detective stumbling upon a long-decomposed body. She clutched her nose, waved her hands like an exorcist warding off a demon, and issued a forensic report:

    “That smells like a mix of a latrine and a horse’s taint.”

    A normal person would have taken this as a warning. But, fueled by misplaced confidence and the hubris of someone who had survived worse, I dumped the cabbage on my tacos and dug in.

    Hours later, my immune system, weakened by the Thanksgiving marathon of forced hospitality, collapsed like a debt-ridden empire. The virus that had been lurking in the shadows seized its moment, and by the next morning, I was a feverish, shivering wreck, contemplating my life choices between bouts of violent gastrointestinal reckoning.

    It seems that you don’t need a stuffed animal and a therapy circle to regress into infancy. Sometimes, all it takes is spoiled cabbage and a ruinous lack of self-preservation.

    Naturally, instead of exercising common sense, I channeled my inner cheapskate prophet. “Cabbage by its very nature has a funky scent,” I proclaimed with the confidence of a man who regularly courts disaster. “A little fermentation won’t hurt anyone.” My wife frowned and said, “It’s smelling up the entire kitchen.”
    “We’ll be fine,” I insisted, scooping copious amounts of fetid-smelling cabbage onto my tacos like I was auditioning for a daredevil cooking show.

    At dinner, I was the only one brave—or foolish—enough to eat it. Within an hour, my body issued a resounding, “You absolute moron.” No GI issues, but I felt like I’d been hit by a truck, reversed over, and then hit again. My head throbbed, my eyes were so sensitive to light I had to drape a T-shirt over my face just to listen to a Netflix show, and my energy flatlined by eight p.m. I crawled into bed, feeling like a half-baked zombie.

    The next morning was worse. Still no GI problems, but the 101 fever and crushing fatigue made me question my will to live. I tried to eat some oatmeal and grapefruit, the culinary equivalent of punishment food, but even that felt like too much effort. 

    By day three, no improvement. I’d become a cautionary tale, researching induced vomiting and discovering it was far too late. Apparently, if you don’t purge immediately, the toxins settle in like an unwanted houseguest who insists on staying for five to seven days.

    Being sick in my family makes everyone else suffer. Our teenage twins require constant care, frequent snacks that generate endless dirty dishes, and someone breathing down their necks to ensure homework gets done. My wife had to shoulder it all while I languished in my misery. I apologized profusely for my reckless hubris and promised, at the age of sixty-three, to turn over a new leaf—or at least stop eating ones that reek like death.

    For decades, I’d treated eating old, moldy food like a badge of honor, quoting my dad’s immortal wisdom: “Pilgrims who ate blue cheese on the Mayflower survived disease while the mold-avoiders died.” It was as if I’d been brainwashed into believing spoiled food was a superfood. But this cabbage debacle—this hellish, cabbage-induced reckoning—put the fear of God in me. Never again would I be the fool who eats something that smells like a medieval torture chamber. This time, I mean it. The next funky bag of cabbage? Straight to the trash. May it ferment in peace.

    As the alleged food-borne illness dragged on and my fever turned my brain into a swamp, I found myself pondering a morbid yet painfully stupid thought: What if I died because I was too cheap to toss a two-dollar bag of cabbage? Imagine the headline: “Man Perishes Over Discount Vegetables.” How could I ever forgive myself for such world-class idiocy? Worse, how could my wife ever forget that I lectured her with the smug confidence of a food-safety guru right before scarfing down a fatal dose of rotting produce? I’d be immortalized as the kind of hapless buffoon who wouldn’t even get a name in a Chekhov short story—just “The Idiot Who Ate the Cabbage.”

    Then, because fever dreams and existential crises go hand in hand, another absurd thought hit me: How would my YouTube subscribers and Instagram followers know what happened to me? I’d be gone, but my accounts would still sit there, ghostlike, leaving them to wonder why the witty guy with the diver watches and snack obsession suddenly went dark. What a tragedy—I wouldn’t even get the chance to create a final piece of content documenting my own demise in comedic glory. A video titled, “How Cabbage Killed Me (And Why You Should Toss Yours)” would surely have gone viral.

    This realization struck me as profoundly twisted: content creators care more about producing “engaging material” than their own mortality. Forget self-preservation—I was more upset that my audience might miss out on the hilarity of my self-inflicted cabbage-related downfall. The pathology runs deep: we’re so hooked on being performative, we’d probably narrate our own deaths if we could. Imagine me, breathless and feverish, croaking out, “Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe—assuming I make it to tomorrow.” The absurdity of it all made me laugh, which hurt, because even my ribs were exhausted from this cabbage-induced purgatory.

    It was apparent I was so desperate to be relevant on social media that I had become a Gravefluencer–an influencer who extends his reach six feet under, ensuring even death is on-brand.

    After five days of relentless illness, I had a phone consultation with my doctor about what I was sure was self-inflicted food poisoning. I laid out the symptoms with the kind of detail you’d expect from someone auditioning for a medical drama. My doctor listened patiently, then unceremoniously popped my bubble of absurdity. “This isn’t food poisoning,” she said. “You’ve got the flu. It’s going around.”

    Just like that, my grand narrative of culinary hubris—the man who dared to defy rancid cabbage and paid the ultimate price—was dead. Instead, I was left with something far less glamorous: virulent flu. Part of me was relieved that I wasn’t poisoning myself with poisoned produce, but another part of me felt cheated. I’d lost the absurd, darkly comedic morality tale about a man so cheap he nearly killed himself over a two-dollar bag of cabbage. What a waste.

    The doctor wasn’t exactly brimming with solutions, either. “Rest and stay hydrated,” she advised, the way you might tell a child to eat their vegetables. That night, my fever spiked close to 104, launching me into a kaleidoscope of fever dreams where my brain decided to give me the full surrealist experience. Words from my podcasts took on physical forms—spiky, sticky, grotesque shapes—and suddenly, I was inside them. I wandered through caves of conversation, waded through cocoons of dialogue, and got tangled in thick spider webs spun from language. Each sentence wrapped around me, trapping me in its endless loops of nonsense.

    When I woke up, drenched in sweat and feeling like I’d wrestled a linguistically gifted tarantula, I realized the flu wasn’t just an illness—it was a full-blown avant-garde art installation happening in my own head. So no, I didn’t have food poisoning. I had performance art fever. And while it wasn’t the cabbage apocalypse I’d hoped for, it was plenty weird in its own way.

    For six days, I had been wrestling with the so-called “Thanksgiving Flu,” a charming little virus that kept my fever bouncing between 101 and 104, as if my body were auditioning for a medical melodrama. Being that sick wasn’t just about physical misery—it was a battering ram smashing through the cozy little mental structures I had built around my life. Aspirations? Pointless. Health goals? A cruel joke. My reading list? Forget it. Even my hunger for social belonging and validation had been knocked flat. What remained was a stripped-down nihilism so bleak it made Nietzsche look like an optimist.

    Sickness dragged me to a dark place where life felt like a cosmic prank. I could almost hear my 14-year-old self rolling his eyes as I remembered my Grandma Mildred’s wise words from one of her letters: “Illnesses bring out the doldrums.” No kidding, Grandma. That particular flu had brought out more than the doldrums—it had conjured a maudlin cocktail of despair and self-pity.

    In that state, I found myself spiraling into melodrama, muttering things like, “What’s the point? Just end the torment and let me meet my Maker already!” It was ridiculous, of course, but I couldn’t help but notice how flu-induced misery fed into a distinctly male flavor of narcissism. Egotism, after all, was a hallmark of the man-child: the guy who thought the universe should pause when he didn’t get his way.

    Men, it seemed, were uniquely gifted at turning minor discomforts into existential crises. While women powered through illness with a mix of stoicism and practicality, men turned their sickbeds into thrones of self-pity, proclaiming their impending doom to anyone who would listen. And me? I was no exception. With every feverish shiver, I became the star of my own overwrought drama, raging against the cruelty of a world that dared to continue spinning while I wallowed in flu-induced existential despair.

    Sure, Grandma Mildred, the doldrums were part of the package—but why did it feel like men turned those doldrums into an art form? Perhaps the real flu virus wasn’t in my body; it was in my ego, throwing a tantrum because life wasn’t bending to my fevered will.

    I appeared to be languishing in the Flu-tile State—a fever-fueled realization that all human endeavor was futile.

    On day 8 of this flu from hell, my doctor emailed me a cheerful little grenade: “Your symptoms are concerning. I need to see you today.” Fabulous. At 11 a.m., feverish, grouchy, and radiating the energy of a half-cooked zombie, I dragged myself to her office for the usual poking and prodding. COVID? Negative. Influenza? Oh yes, Influenza A—the viral overachiever of the season. My nurse, who’d had it two weeks earlier, gave me the kind of pep talk you’d expect from someone who survived a minor apocalypse. “Seven days of fever,” she chirped, “so you’ve probably got two more to go!” Like I’d won a spa weekend in purgatory.

    But the flu wasn’t the real sucker punch. No, that came when I stepped on the scale. At a soul-crushing 252 pounds, with blood pressure at 166 over 92, Dr. Okada laid it out with the dispassion of someone reading a menu: “You’re at high risk for a massive stroke or heart attack.” She might as well have handed me a shovel and a map to my future grave. Then, just to twist the knife, she added, “You need to lose fifty pounds in six months. Otherwise…” She trailed off, but I got the point: dead man waddling.

    Her final blow came with a steely gaze and a guilt grenade: “If not for yourself, lose weight for your wife and daughters.” Translation: stop being selfish and get your act together before they have to plan your funeral.

    Desperate for a cheat code, I asked about Mounjaro or Ozempic, those miracle weight-loss injectables I’d read about. She barely stifled a laugh. “We prescribe those for people with exclusive employer benefits.” I muttered something about how my college likely doesn’t cover luxury drugs, and her thin smile confirmed it. I’d be fighting this battle the old-fashioned way: with the DASH diet and restricted calories, not cutting-edge pharmaceuticals.

    And then there was the Motrin ban. Apparently, my go-to painkiller was a blood-pressure ticking time bomb. “No more Motrin. Tylenol only,” she said, with all the enthusiasm of a waiter recommending the tofu option. So now, my fevers would be accompanied by a dull, Tylenol-soaked march toward mortality. Fantastic.

    I thanked her—sincerely, I swear—because she wasn’t wrong. But the whole thing felt like I’d been blindsided by a particularly grim episode of The Biggest Loser: Medical Edition. On the drive home, Miley Cyrus’s “Flowers (Demo)” came on, and I—feverish, bloated, and thoroughly defeated—actually cried. Miley crooned about resilience and self-love, and all I could think about was how laxity, that slow, sneaky killer, had been working me over for years. Skipped workouts, mindless snacks, every excuse—it had all led to this: a middle-aged man sobbing in his car, mourning his dignity while stuck in traffic.

    Dr. Okada’s tough love landed like a wrecking ball. This was my moment—the kind where you either turn your life around or start drafting your obituary. Time to put down the Motrin, pick up some discipline, and drag myself back from the brink before I became the subject of one of those tragic lessons everyone ignores until it’s too late cautionary tales.

    I had entered the clinic expecting to get a quick flu diagnosis and maybe a lecture about rest and fluids. Instead, I walked out with the realization that my life wasn’t just off-track; it was an unmitigated dumpster fire rolling downhill. How had I missed it? The creeping wreckage of my existence had been unfolding right under my nose, like a slow-motion train derailment I refused to acknowledge. Denial, thy name is me.

    Dr. Okada, bless her clinical professionalism, had held up a mirror and forced me to see what I’d been expertly avoiding for years: that my life, much like my blood pressure, was a ticking time bomb. I’d been blind to my own unraveling, and now the blinders were off. The view wasn’t pretty, but at least now I knew what I was working with—a fixer-upper existence in desperate need of a renovation.

    My visit to the doctor turned into an unplanned catalyst for a long-overdue moral metamorphosis. I left not just diagnosed, but afflicted by a new condition I can only call the Scales of Justice (and Shame)—that peculiar state where the doctor’s scale transforms into the ultimate moral arbiter. Each number glaring back at me didn’t just measure pounds; it weighed my life choices, my discipline, my worthiness as a functioning adult. It was less a medical device and more a courtroom, and let’s just say I was found guilty on all counts.

    I was convinced that had I been ten years older, this bout of influenza would have finished me off. The first week felt less like an illness and more like the aftermath of a roadside bombing, with me as the unfortunate bystander left mangled in a ditch. My body was a buffet for phantom wolves and mosquitoes—every nerve ending seemed to host its own ravenous pest. Mentally, I spiraled into fever-induced madness, complete with hallucinatory jungle scenes: Gumby-esque AI bodybuilders, sculpted and sinewy yet gelatinous, painted the revolting hue of yellow sea slugs, slithered around me in an Amazonian hellscape.

    By Week Three, the influenza had mercifully downgraded its malevolence, though “mild” feels like an insult to language. I still shivered like a Victorian orphan in a snowstorm, my body temperature yoyoing between inferno and tundra. Aches gnawed at me persistently, like bad houseguests who don’t get the hint. And mentally? I was underwater—grasping at reality as it floats just out of reach. My brain felt stripped of a few critical screws, rattling around and threatening to unscrew the rest.

    At some point, I recalled, in the hazy, fevered way of someone stranded in a desert, that my daughter had lozenges in her room. Fueled by desperation, I shuffled to her door, knocked weakly, and thrust my trembling hands forward as if auditioning for a Dickens adaptation. “Please,” I croaked, my voice barely above a whisper, “fill my hands with lozenges for your poor ailing father.”

    The response? Hysterical laughter. Both of my daughters, cozied up watching TV, howled with the kind of delight usually reserved for viral cat videos. I caught a glimpse of myself in the hallway mirror: pajamas wrinkled like a bad alibi, beanie perched jauntily askew, my face the pallor of a sickly sailor. I was every bit the tragicomic figure they saw—a fevered street urchin begging for cough drops.

    My wife, ever the realist, stormed in to restore order. “We have plenty of lozenges in the kitchen,” she barked, clearly unimpressed by my Oscar-worthy theatrics. She led me, limping and pathetic, to the cupboard, where she proceeded to dump several bags of lozenges onto the table with all the ceremony of Santa Claus unloading his sleigh. My daughters, tears of laughter streaming down their faces, declared me Oliver Twist reincarnated.

    I retreated to bed clutching a handful of lozenges, humiliated but momentarily soothed, only to lie awake wondering when this fever would break—or if the AI bodybuilders would show up again to finish the job.

    Four weeks into my bout with influenza, I emerged bleary-eyed, fever-wrecked, and staring down my old nemesis: addiction. Not the sexy kind you’d brag about in a memoir—just the creeping, mundane kind that comes with a tendency to overindulge in things like self-pity, compulsive behaviors, and yes, an irrational attachment to writing books.

    And so, I emerged from this fever-ridden odyssey not as a transformed man, but as someone who had simply suffered enough to pause and reflect—until the next catastrophe beckoned. If John Bradshaw were leading my recovery workshop, he’d likely hand me a stuffed animal and instruct me to embrace my inner child, soothing my cabbage-traumatized soul with affirmations of self-love. But after weeks of sweating, hallucinating, and contemplating my own obituary over a bag of rotting vegetables, I didn’t need a teddy bear. I needed a referee, a financial adviser, and possibly an exorcist.

    The true lesson here? My inner child doesn’t need rescuing. He needs a restraining order. Because left to his own devices, he’ll continue to eat spoiled food out of spite, spiral into existential despair at the first sign of adversity, and demand that every brush with mortality be converted into premium content. So if I’m to move forward as a recovering writing addict, I have to acknowledge this truth: The inner child is not a sage. He’s a lunatic. And I should probably stop taking his advice.

    CHAPTER FORTY-SIX

    As part of my rehabilitation from writing novels I have no business writing, I remind myself of an uncomfortable truth: 95% of books—both fiction and nonfiction—are just bloated short stories and essays with unnecessary padding. How many times have I read a novel and thought, This would have been a killer short story, but as a novel, it’s a slog? How often have I powered through a nonfiction screed only to realize that everything I needed was in the first chapter, and the rest was just an echo chamber of diminishing returns?

    Perhaps someday, I’ll learn to write an exceptional short story—the kind that punches above its weight, the kind that leaves you feeling like you’ve just read a 400-page novel even though it barely clears 30. It takes a rare kind of genius to pull off this magic trick. I think of Alice Munro’s layered portraits of regret, Lorrie Moore’s razor-sharp wit, and John Cheever’s meticulous dissections of suburban despair. I flip through my extra-large edition of The Stories of John Cheever, and three stand out like glittering relics: “The Swimmer,” “The Country Husband,” and “The Jewels of the Cabots.” Each is a self-contained universe, a potent literary multivitamin that somehow delivers all the nourishment of a novel in a single, concentrated dose. Let’s call these rare works Stories That Ate a Novel—compact, ferocious, and packed with enough emotional and intellectual weight to render lesser novels redundant.

    As part of my rehabilitation, I must seek out such stories, study them, and attempt to write them. Not just as an artistic exercise, but as a safeguard against relapse—the last thing I need is another 300-page corpse of a novel stinking up my hard drive.

    But maybe this is more than just a recovery plan. Maybe this is a new mission—championing Stories That Eat Novels. The cultural winds are shifting in my favor. Attention spans, gnawed to the bone by social media, no longer tolerate literary excess. Even the New York Times has noted the rise of the short novel, reporting in “To the Point: Short Novels Dominate International Booker Prize Nominees” that books under 200 pages are taking center stage. We may be witnessing a tectonic shift, an age where brevity is not just a virtue but a necessity.

    For a failed novelist and an unapologetic literary wind-sprinter, this could be my moment. I can already see it—my sleek, ruthless 160-page collection, Stories That Eat Novels, four lapidary masterpieces gleaming like finely cut diamonds. Rehabilitation has never felt so good. Who says a man in his sixties can’t find his literary niche and stage an artistic rebirth? Maybe I wasn’t a failed novelist after all—maybe I was just a short-form assassin waiting for the right age to arrive.