Don't feel like dancin'...?

Dances. Why do I go to them? Probably just to see my friends and have fun, and maybe do a few slow dances (which practically doesn't really count as dancing anyway). Some of the music they play at dances is really good, but I've never really experienced the urge to break out into a hoppin' or twisting move. Maybe it's because I know I don't really know how without making myself look the fool, my personality simply forbids me to, or, like I said, maybe it's because I never really feel like it. Why don't I feel like dancing, at all?
My self-image, to me, has somewhat of an effect on me though I try not to let it sway me much. Standing there at a dance, when I'm not dancing, makes me feel somewhat uncomfortable, because I'm not doing something. But on the other hand I have absolutely no clue of what to do, so I'd rather do nothing than do something I don' t know how to do, unless I'm learning a step. I can't help but feel out of place or weird at least one point in the dance, because I feel like I'd stick out no matter what I do. Is the dance full of people who stick out, so if you don't stick out then you stick out?
My personality is a true blue-white, which means I can't be too creative unless I have the time to think things out and make connections. It also implies that I need guidelines or at least some kind of rule when I'm doing something or else it makes it all the harder for me to accomplish it. I can do line dances just fine and slow dances just fine, because either there's nothing to it, or you learn a specific sequence of movements and do them over, and over and over... The adrenaline powered rush/urge lacks whenever there is a climax in the song, maybe because I don't want to get caught up and actually try being creative on the spot. O_O
I guess I'll ask around for people who may be able to share some elightenment on my predicament. Until then I'll just continue to stick with line/slow dances and see if I can't learn a thing or two from my friends.

Would it be so bad to have control?

Maybe people do have more control over this than I thought, but all I know is that it's something I lack in. I think it's pretty safe to say everyone who has reached a certain age(why not everyone who has?) has "liked" (or whatever term floats your boat) someone else. I can't tell whether they have control over these natural attractions, but I think this control over one's emotions is not common. Maybe it is why there is all the heartache and sorrow that seems to inevitably accommodate such strong feelings that one has for another. Why can't I control who I like/am attracted to?

Having great friends is such a wonderful gift that one would have to be incredibly unfortunate to not have at least one other person to inquire about how their day has gone or how well they did at their sports event, etc. For me, as soon as the attraction interrupts, I lose who I am and seem like I cannot simply appreciate knowing that person and being involved in similar activities anymore. Maybe this is why some (including me) are shy or watch their normal self, the one they've had for their whole life, fly out the window just like that when that person is around. Also, maybe in order to ultimately find that special person that we would hopefully become so happy with, we must experience, in one way or another, misery or frustratedness (though it's not a word you know what I mean) that might be proportionally relative to that happiness that we might find one day. But why can't we just choose who we might become sadly disappointed with, instead of being sucked into it by our natural selves? Because for now I'd rather just be able to value having another good friend who I might have fun with or ask why we look disconcerted.

I suppose the true scientific answer to this question would only include the names of a bunch of concentrated hormones that our frontal cortex, or conscious mind, has absolutely no power over. But we came about to be like this for a reason, whether you want to believe in evolution or in that it was a higher being. Well, I guess I'll just have to suck it in and bear with it. The rest of mankind has had to and this hasn't seemed to slow down those who have come before me who have reached admirable heights.

Origin of Personality: Nature vs Nurture

The scientific question of the origin of personality has posed a challenge to many scientists. Some think that one's character comes from what we're born with, the DNA from our parents. Others propose that our associative traits arise through life's events such as being raised through infancy and adolescence. So what determines how we'll react to life and it's loop holes?
My mother has told me that it is easily seen that even babies have distinct personalities, so how could it be anything but naturally inherited? Some studies have hypothesized that our personality comes from the DNA that is not responsible for anything like storing the codes for proteins that generate the color of our hair or eyes. However there is no discovered method of proving this.
In my pondering I always thought it was mostly nurture, noticing that a child often reflects how his parents, friends and siblings treat him along with the situations he/she endures. I've even given the possibility, to some degree, that what happens to us before we are born has bearing on our characteristics in society. But are we not given something that governs our reactions to stimuli from the very beginning?
This is where I've decided that it requires both nurture and nature in the manufacturing of one's complexities. The amount of influence of both of the factors seems to differ for every person. Without nature we would not have the basis on which we decide how we'll react to peers etc. Without nurture our personalities would not progress past maturity of the very first humans in infancy, because they would be unalterable past the combinations that were made between parents. Therefore we are not completely born with, or shaped through experiences, the capacities of our personalities, but a mixture of the two.

I want a more truthful view.

Is that something acceptable to yearn for? It seems like many people consistently want what they do not have, and then when they get it they are not quite satisfied. After they figure out that they are actually not satisfied, they drop that very thing they thought would make them so happy for something else. What is the meaning of this supposed happiness cycle?
I think it is sufficiently apparent to say that this is not the answer. It is not the purpose in one's life to continually seek for things that might make them content, at least on such a basis as things that are bought and can be owned. There is a saying something similar to "If you cannot be happy without it then you will not be happy with it." I think this is applicable to everything but pure intentions of yearning for the truth, truth being what really matters/counts etc. Without a clean desire for what is right then one cannot attain true happiness. I think we have all had things that we have wanted and were very excited to get as well as things that we have had and thought we were happy. Isn't it almost like our anticipation had grown so much that when he had finally reached what we had been reaching for, but then found it to be a disappointment? Yes, some things do appear to make one happy, but thousands of these come and go throughout our lives giving us our ups and downs. Isn't such a foundation unsteady and spurious?
This is why, though some of us have heard it time and time again, that true happiness is found through the truth. What things really make us happy? The video games or sports themselves that we play or the memories we make with others while we participate? It is actually through the joy of others where one finds joy that lasts forever. Fun activities that seem appealing themselves are simply catalysts with which people produce friendships and peace. When one is mistaken and thinks it is the activity itself that makes them happy they may become selfish and/or appear to be enjoying themselves. Though I will not go into it too much further, this is where pride may originate: When someone is selfish enough to think winning and being better than others is what is important instead of everything that leads up to the end.
Are memories of associating with others through positive environments as easily forgotten as the trivial activities in which we indulge ourselves? No, because this shows that these indulgences' respective places in a more grand perspective are in a place of little significance. Therefore truth and happiness does not lie in activities and materials which are, in the end, covetous anticipations, but in acts that are, in the end, indeed selfless.