Just like you, I was not there at the awful moment that a 29 year old took the life of a 17 year old. I don't know for certain how the confrontation began, I don't know how it escalated and I don't know exactly what was going through Zimmerman's mind when he pulled the trigger.
Normally in times like this, I lament on the tragedy, say some prayers and hope for healing where its needed. But something, other than the constant media onslaught, kept needling me. I listened to Zimmerman's call to 911, I read testimonies from trial and biased opinions on both sides... but something, something, something was on the edge of this trial that was giving me the most disturbing itch and I couldn't quite find where to scratch.
And then I allowed myself to listen again to the 911 call where you actually heard the shot. I listened to it when it was first released and got so sick I couldn't sleep or eat or think straight for a while. It is soul jarring to hear screams for help and then more so to hear the gun shot that definitively took a life.
But it was upon listening to this awful moment again and many other 911 calls made just after the shot that I realized what had been bothering me.
Someone cried for help. No one came.
People keep asking would it have been different if Zimmerman listened to the advice of the police, or if Martin just ran home, or if Martin wasn't black or wearing a hoodie, or...
But what I wonder, is would it have been different if just one person, upon hearing a scream for help, yelled something back. In any scenario I can think of, just a simple call from a window may've changed the outcome.
If Zimmerman was the aggressor and Martin was screaming and a witness offered help, wouldn't he have wanted to seem like a hero? 'I've got the perp,' I could hear him calling. If Zimmerman were screaming and being attacked but knew that someone was there with a flashlight and a phone, wouldn't he have had no excuse then to pull his gun? And if Martin were attacking and knew there were someone else coming, wouldn't he have just run away?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not shifting blame from Zimmerman nor am I saying I would encourage anyone to go charging into the blackness into the middle of a fight... And I'm definitely not saying they shouldn't have called 911.
But of all the people that heard screams for help, no one investigated? Not one person called out the window, "Hey, everyone ok?" or "What's going on?" Not one person shined a flashlight to let the fighters know that someone was watching... that someone was there?
And why is no one talking about that? If it was a woman or a small child screaming... surely someone would have done something? At least called out conspicuously from a window??
Again, I'm not judging... I'm sure I would've done the same thing and wanted to hide with my phone... but the whole time I would be cursing the fear that paralyzed me from doing more... and I would have been cursing my husband who I couldn't have stopped in a million years from 'just checking it out.'
I linked already to an Archie Andrews story that talks about the greatest enemy and obstacle to God is fear. And I feel like every part of this tragedy solidifies that point.
It was fear that caused Zimmerman to follow Martin in the first place. It may have been fear that caused Martin to "act suspiciously." It was fear that Martin was 'carrying' that probably made Zimmerman take his gun with him to investigate. It was likely fear that made Martin hurt Zimmerman and it was likely fear that made Zimmerman shoot Martin.
And all the while, fear kept scores of people shut in their houses, quiet and waiting while a tragedy took place outside their windows.
And now, fear is getting front page press and encouragement... because what is racism if not fear?
Some people say that the opposite of fear is courage. But I've been taught that the opposite of fear is love. If any of those people thought that it was their loved one in danger... they would've rushed out. What if we really tried to see other humans... all of them, as potential loved ones.
If we truly let love in, like God begs us to over and over through Jesus' words, we could see each other as brothers, sisters, equals on a journey that none of us really understand.
Not a huge fan of the song... but the lyrics from 'Where is the Love' keep playing in my head... so I'll leave you with this,
Madness is what you demonstrate
And that's exactly how anger works and operates
Man, you gotta have love just to set it straight
Take control of your mind and meditate
Let your soul gravitate to the love, y'all, y'all
Wrong information always shown by the media
Negative images is the main criteria
Infecting the young minds faster than bacteria
Where is the love...
thanks for reading,
-m
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Monday, July 15, 2013
Friday, June 28, 2013
About Wendy
The entrance bell rang minutes to closing time and I confidently walked to the front office. Miles from where I had been six months ago, I no longer instinctively put the reference binder front and center on the desk. I had administered dozens of pregnancy tests, referred countless doctors and adoption agencies and had collected and distributed hundreds of dollars worth of baby goods and maternity clothing.
I had met girls who were looking for advice and I had met girls who wanted to shut me out. “I know what you’re about here, and I just want to tell you right now that if I’m pregnant I’m getting an abortion and you can’t talk me out of it.”
My mission was the same regardless: to love them like they were my own sister and know that I have not walked in their shoes. “I’m not here to tell you to do or do not do anything, I’m here to offer any assistance and information you would like, if you would like any... but first thing’s first, let me tell you a little bit about the test you’ll be taking.”
I felt trained, I felt ready, then I met Wendy.
She was walking slowly into the office at the same time I arrived from the other room. Clearly pregnant, I hoped she wasn’t here for a test and did a mental rundown of the baby furniture we had in stock.
After a brief introduction about myself and what we do, I waited in silence.
“I don’t need anything,” she said finally. “I’m pregnant, my baby’s doing fine.”
“That’s wonderful! Have you been to a doctor?”
“Yes. They did the ultrasound a while ago and they could already tell it was a baby boy. They said they usually can’t tell so early but my baby was movin’ around and givin’ a show.”
The sentiment was joyful, and I would’ve normally laughed, but her tone and her face kept me silent. Maybe there were issues with the father? her parents? money? these were all things I had covered in my short time here.
“I didn’t know it was really a baby in there. I swear I didn’t know.” She started to cry softly into her hands.
I walked around the desk and put my hand onto her shoulder. It was painfully evident to me that I was woefully unprepared for this particular session.
She proceeded to tell me how five years earlier, in the early stages of her relationship with her now husband, she had gotten pregnant unexpectedly. She didn’t even know until she was almost three months in and she went to the student center because she thought she had mono. The center gave her the news and immediately referred her to a woman’s center.
She said she went straight there without stopping or calling anyone. When she walked in, she was told she could have a procedure the same day.
She remembered asking if it would hurt while she was signing her name. She said a nurse reassured her and said it hurt less than childbirth. And when she asked if it would hurt the baby, it was the only time that it felt like the process had paused. The nurse asked kindly, “You sure you want to do this honey, ‘cause its not really a baby yet.”
“I told her ‘no way I could be a mom,’ and that was that.”
“It was awful,” was all she could muster to say about the procedure and she quickly moved on.
“I had nightmares but I pushed it down and kept telling myself that it wasn’t a baby, and I really started believing it. I was doing ok. It wasn’t until this ultrasound...”
She pulled out photos from her purse. The profile of the face was formed as was the bulk of the body. The legs kicked out awkwardly from the center mass a little bit like ET. “I know it sounds crazy but I swear he already looks like his daddy.”
I smiled weakly and said he was beautiful.
“But that’s not all,” she cried, “he moved while the lady was taking the pictures and she said that sometimes the baby reacts to the sound.” She stopped and looked directly at me, “If this baby can hear the sound... what did my other baby hear? or see? or feel?”
My heart sank. I didn’t know what to say. I was sad and ashamed at the same time. She came here for help and here I was this punk college kid that thought I was worth something because I could read a pee stick and hand out business cards. I was sure that someone else could have done a better job and was close to asking her to wait just a minute while I desperately dialed the numbers of everyone I could think of.... but, that tiny voice that pops up when you need it most reminded me, ‘she needs someone now, are you going to turn your back?’
So I helped her up, and we walked together into the more comfortable sitting area. She talked and I listened. I learned how her boyfriend had to take time to forgive her for not talking to him before the abortion. She told me about her Christian family and her fear of what they would say if they ever knew about her choice. She talked about the utter confusion she felt and how deep down she knew how much she had hoped that it really was ‘just cells.’ She said she wishes now that she taken more time or trusted her family enough to talk to them first.
I wish now that I had known about Project Rachel or any of the other many post-abortion counseling services. But I hope that God had put me there for a reason as all I could really do is listen... maybe that’s all she needed. At least when my guilt hits me that I couldn't be better... that's what I tell myself.
I gave her my phone number and encouraged her to keep in touch, but I was sure I’d never see Wendy again once the door shut at the clinic and of course, I never did.
Over the years, through my own ultrasounds and personal health struggles, I often think of her.
When my arm had the smallest hairline fracture and the doctor made sure to show me detailed pictures so I could understand as much as possible before we talked about treatment I thought about how little information she was given.
When the scheduling nurse asked if I wanted to have my husband there for a brain MRI, I thought about how Wendy wasn’t encouraged to have anyone by her side.
When the dentist gave me a detailed analysis of my options when I chipped a tooth and then suggested I take a couple days to weigh the options, I think of how Wendy was treated as though hers was a simple decision that could be made on the spot.
When my OB gave me the laundry list of feelings I may experience from physical to emotional after the birth of my child, I think of how Wendy was never told that depression is a possibility nor where she should turn should it become a reality.
And I think about her when I hear about another Wendy in Texas being called a hero for doing her best to stop a law that would improve medical safety for women having abortions and make elective abortions illegal after 20 weeks.. “It’s all a trick to take away all abortion rights!” claimed the protestors of Texas... but I can't help but wonder how informed those protestors allowed themselves to become on the trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell.
I look at what the abortion debate has become in this country and I am at a complete loss. The same people who want the operation covered completely under medical plans, don’t want anyone to think that its a medical operation. The same people that scream that women deserve more respect don’t want women to be fully informed about a decision that could change their lives. The same political party that mocks the other side for not listening to science in cases of climate change and evolution, want Americans to turn a blind eye to biology.
I often hear, its been especially true in light of what happened recently in Texas, that this is a 'feminist issue.' With that in mind, I will end this with the words from one of the founders of the feminist movement.
“When we consider that women are treated as property it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.”
― Elizabeth Cady Stanton
― Elizabeth Cady Stanton
and to Wendy, wherever you are... I'm sending prayers and hope that you and your family have been able to let go of pain and embrace joy.
thanks for reading.
Saturday, March 2, 2013
Why marriage laws still matter.
A few months ago, I was flattered by the responses to my piece about gay marriage. In this piece, I shared a story about my friend and how I first became passionate about the issue.
Not to turn my nose up at compliments, but some of the feedback I got from this article left me feeling more than a little perplexed. It seems that people thought that my friendship with someone who was gay changed my mind. Like, if I am a republican, then clearly I'm predisposed to be 'anti-gay.'
The truth is, I hadn't thought about it one way or another. Other than my penchant for falling in love with guys that played for the other team, I didn't give sexual orientation much thought. Oh, I know what you're thinking... maybe if I had, I could've saved myself a little heartbreak here and there... Thanks Monday's quarterback, good point.
Anyway, in that piece I wanted to share why I was passionate about the issue and why I did devote a lot of time to thinking about it, and my friend is absolutely to thank for that. However, being a stubborn conservative, I like to think I wouldn't allow one example, and/or emotional pull to, in any way, dictate how I feel about policies or laws. Moods can shift, tides can change... I like my coffee black and I like my policy based on logic.
In that piece, I also promised that I had, "logical, legal, and moral reasons that I believe in marriage equality."
And what better time to express them than in this notte senza il Papa? So, here goes.
Initially we need to get past the semantics thing. "Marriage" vs "Civil Union." If they were legally the exact same thing, would this problem go away? Are people fighting over rights or over vocabulary? Because fighting over vocabulary makes me want to flick people in the head... but as of now, civil union and marriage mean legally different things so assume from here that I am talking about rights and I'll just choose to use the word 'marriage.' (If we want to change it so that all people get "civil union licenses/civil unions" from the gov't and then if they so choose, go and get a "marriage" blessed in a church... rock on as far as I'm concerned... so long as civil unions mean the same for gay and straight.)
So, on to the argument.
First, we need to establish that government has a valid interest in legalizing marriage at all. History seems to debate itself as to why the government got involved in this business to begin with. There are certainly the contractual and proprietary sides of marriage that need to be regulated and would be chaotic without some sort of oversight by the state. But, there is also the religious aspect that marriage is what God intended and thus should be the law of the land. Even in the Bible the covenant of marriage and the women as property thing are pretty intertwined.
So I'm going to do my best to not get muddled in religious vs. legal... and just concentrate on three reasons why marriage, in general is good for a society and therefore is good for a government to both encourage and regulate. Then, we'll analyze those arguments and see whether there is a logical difference between gay and straight partnerships to see if the government should differentiate.
1) Marriage creates stability in communities and creates partnerships with greater buying power. Whether it is cultural or economical, people are more likely to move, switch jobs and rent instead of buy when they are single. 77% of all homeowners are married couples (Forbes.) In this sense it makes sense for the state to encourage and support both gay and straight marriage as it is the contractual blending of two people and most likely two incomes and not the gender that matters in this statistic and in this improvement to the economy.
2) Marriage creates the best environment to raise the next generation. This will get some hairs raised, I understand, but though there are the amazing single mothers and fathers that are certainly the exception to the rule, both statistics and logic say that kids have a better chance coming from a two parent household. Children are 82% less likely to live in poverty in a married home (US Census) which, I get, can totally become a chicken v. egg argument. But it seems that logic would tell us that kids seeing people compromise, work together, and co-exist in a loving relationship is good for their overall well-being. And, I understand that here, many people would say that kids are best with a "mother and a father." And ok, I'll see you and raise you a, "kids would be best with the best mother and the best father." Or, "kids would be best with parents that understand them perfectly and always put them first and have zero mental health issues that they will pass along." or...
Look, I understand where you are coming from with a 'mom and dad,' thing... really, I do. But I have three very different children and maybe they'd each do better with people different than my husband and I... How, if they are so very different, could we be the best possible parents for all three? I know I've relied on stats for my past two examples, but in this one, we simply have not been an open society long enough to have reliable stats one way or another. All we have is the anecdotal accounts like that of Zach Wahls in front of the Iowa legislature and personal experience to know that two good people in a loving relationship who love their kids... whether gay or straight are going to do their best to be good parents.
The other thing to think about regarding kids is that the gay couple, every time, is going to want that child. Because... they aren't getting pregnant on accident... unless I missed something in my gay reading... and that alone is a hell of a lot more than we can say for millions or so kids per year that are born and/or conceived and not born.
3) Marriage controls the spread of disease. Not romantic... but true and important. Going back to Biblical stuff... so much of the Leviticus shenanigans that gets pooh poohed is all about disease control... The restrictions on when to eat meat had to do with the fact that animals were generally killed on a certain day... (Sunday I think... so by Friday, the Sabbath, the meat would spoil.) And not getting tattoos... can you imagine that being a sanitary practice back then?? And the not whoring around in general... let's face it, STD's abound then and now. God, or a medicine man or someone was hip to it for sure. So staying with one sexual partner was good for the all. Again, societally this seems a huge pro to encourage for both gay and straight.
I said I wouldn't get muddled in religious vs. legal but to say that our marriage laws do not have a basis in religion would be to deny history itself. The above secular reasons, though valid, can not paint the whole picture. We would be lying if we denied the moral and ethical importance we place on marriage, which I'll touch on now.
In trying to find a suitable mate, people are often given the advice, "you can't find love until you learn to love yourself." This, I absolutely believe. And yet... there is an entire population of people that we, as a society, seem to be telling to deny themselves and, "just find a mate of opposite sex and be normal." How can we possibly expect anyone to be in any kind of positive relationship when we are telling them that they should not love themselves? They first must change their very being... make it so that we love you... good, now just go settle down with someone with opposite genitalia please, because that is what actually matters.
I know, I know this part is less logic, more emotion... I guess I just get wrapped up because I know that if I were gay... you would still love me, you would still think I was a hopeless romantic, you would still probably ask how I got someone to want to marry me (though I'm not sure a lesbian partner would know as much about interior design or flowers as my husband...) and I know you would root for me to get married so that I could have a partner with whom to share my life.
But I digress. I do understand the slippery slope issue and I'll be the first one to say that no government (regardless of my opinion) should tell a church, or an organization (like the boy scouts) or a person how to feel or act or govern itself.
Here, I'm talking solely about law and policy. Stable relationships with greater buying power and less sexual partners are beneficial both economically and morally for our society. We have an obligation to encourage the next generation, regardless of their orientation, to be part a productive society instead of implying that by their very nature they are a degradation of it.
When it comes to religion, because I know the idea can't be avoided forever, I go back, as I often do, to Matthew 22:21 "give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Jesus was giving us not only permission, but orders to live in a society as best we can. And, both logic and morality seems to tell me that encouraging marriage between two consenting adults is good.
I'm not going to tell you that Jesus is for gay marriage. Guess what? I'm not going to tell you He's for straight marriage either since He told his disciples to leave their families and follow Him. But He did sure seem to have a lot to say about treating other people as we'd like to be treated.
And I, for one, am glad that I was able to celebrate joyfully finding the love of my life and knowing that we are bound legally... so that if he f*cks up.... "here go Hell come."
thanks for reading,
-m
Not to turn my nose up at compliments, but some of the feedback I got from this article left me feeling more than a little perplexed. It seems that people thought that my friendship with someone who was gay changed my mind. Like, if I am a republican, then clearly I'm predisposed to be 'anti-gay.'
The truth is, I hadn't thought about it one way or another. Other than my penchant for falling in love with guys that played for the other team, I didn't give sexual orientation much thought. Oh, I know what you're thinking... maybe if I had, I could've saved myself a little heartbreak here and there... Thanks Monday's quarterback, good point.
Anyway, in that piece I wanted to share why I was passionate about the issue and why I did devote a lot of time to thinking about it, and my friend is absolutely to thank for that. However, being a stubborn conservative, I like to think I wouldn't allow one example, and/or emotional pull to, in any way, dictate how I feel about policies or laws. Moods can shift, tides can change... I like my coffee black and I like my policy based on logic.
In that piece, I also promised that I had, "logical, legal, and moral reasons that I believe in marriage equality."
And what better time to express them than in this notte senza il Papa? So, here goes.
Initially we need to get past the semantics thing. "Marriage" vs "Civil Union." If they were legally the exact same thing, would this problem go away? Are people fighting over rights or over vocabulary? Because fighting over vocabulary makes me want to flick people in the head... but as of now, civil union and marriage mean legally different things so assume from here that I am talking about rights and I'll just choose to use the word 'marriage.' (If we want to change it so that all people get "civil union licenses/civil unions" from the gov't and then if they so choose, go and get a "marriage" blessed in a church... rock on as far as I'm concerned... so long as civil unions mean the same for gay and straight.)
So, on to the argument.
First, we need to establish that government has a valid interest in legalizing marriage at all. History seems to debate itself as to why the government got involved in this business to begin with. There are certainly the contractual and proprietary sides of marriage that need to be regulated and would be chaotic without some sort of oversight by the state. But, there is also the religious aspect that marriage is what God intended and thus should be the law of the land. Even in the Bible the covenant of marriage and the women as property thing are pretty intertwined.
So I'm going to do my best to not get muddled in religious vs. legal... and just concentrate on three reasons why marriage, in general is good for a society and therefore is good for a government to both encourage and regulate. Then, we'll analyze those arguments and see whether there is a logical difference between gay and straight partnerships to see if the government should differentiate.
1) Marriage creates stability in communities and creates partnerships with greater buying power. Whether it is cultural or economical, people are more likely to move, switch jobs and rent instead of buy when they are single. 77% of all homeowners are married couples (Forbes.) In this sense it makes sense for the state to encourage and support both gay and straight marriage as it is the contractual blending of two people and most likely two incomes and not the gender that matters in this statistic and in this improvement to the economy.
2) Marriage creates the best environment to raise the next generation. This will get some hairs raised, I understand, but though there are the amazing single mothers and fathers that are certainly the exception to the rule, both statistics and logic say that kids have a better chance coming from a two parent household. Children are 82% less likely to live in poverty in a married home (US Census) which, I get, can totally become a chicken v. egg argument. But it seems that logic would tell us that kids seeing people compromise, work together, and co-exist in a loving relationship is good for their overall well-being. And, I understand that here, many people would say that kids are best with a "mother and a father." And ok, I'll see you and raise you a, "kids would be best with the best mother and the best father." Or, "kids would be best with parents that understand them perfectly and always put them first and have zero mental health issues that they will pass along." or...
Look, I understand where you are coming from with a 'mom and dad,' thing... really, I do. But I have three very different children and maybe they'd each do better with people different than my husband and I... How, if they are so very different, could we be the best possible parents for all three? I know I've relied on stats for my past two examples, but in this one, we simply have not been an open society long enough to have reliable stats one way or another. All we have is the anecdotal accounts like that of Zach Wahls in front of the Iowa legislature and personal experience to know that two good people in a loving relationship who love their kids... whether gay or straight are going to do their best to be good parents.
The other thing to think about regarding kids is that the gay couple, every time, is going to want that child. Because... they aren't getting pregnant on accident... unless I missed something in my gay reading... and that alone is a hell of a lot more than we can say for millions or so kids per year that are born and/or conceived and not born.
3) Marriage controls the spread of disease. Not romantic... but true and important. Going back to Biblical stuff... so much of the Leviticus shenanigans that gets pooh poohed is all about disease control... The restrictions on when to eat meat had to do with the fact that animals were generally killed on a certain day... (Sunday I think... so by Friday, the Sabbath, the meat would spoil.) And not getting tattoos... can you imagine that being a sanitary practice back then?? And the not whoring around in general... let's face it, STD's abound then and now. God, or a medicine man or someone was hip to it for sure. So staying with one sexual partner was good for the all. Again, societally this seems a huge pro to encourage for both gay and straight.
I said I wouldn't get muddled in religious vs. legal but to say that our marriage laws do not have a basis in religion would be to deny history itself. The above secular reasons, though valid, can not paint the whole picture. We would be lying if we denied the moral and ethical importance we place on marriage, which I'll touch on now.
In trying to find a suitable mate, people are often given the advice, "you can't find love until you learn to love yourself." This, I absolutely believe. And yet... there is an entire population of people that we, as a society, seem to be telling to deny themselves and, "just find a mate of opposite sex and be normal." How can we possibly expect anyone to be in any kind of positive relationship when we are telling them that they should not love themselves? They first must change their very being... make it so that we love you... good, now just go settle down with someone with opposite genitalia please, because that is what actually matters.
I know, I know this part is less logic, more emotion... I guess I just get wrapped up because I know that if I were gay... you would still love me, you would still think I was a hopeless romantic, you would still probably ask how I got someone to want to marry me (though I'm not sure a lesbian partner would know as much about interior design or flowers as my husband...) and I know you would root for me to get married so that I could have a partner with whom to share my life.
But I digress. I do understand the slippery slope issue and I'll be the first one to say that no government (regardless of my opinion) should tell a church, or an organization (like the boy scouts) or a person how to feel or act or govern itself.
Here, I'm talking solely about law and policy. Stable relationships with greater buying power and less sexual partners are beneficial both economically and morally for our society. We have an obligation to encourage the next generation, regardless of their orientation, to be part a productive society instead of implying that by their very nature they are a degradation of it.
When it comes to religion, because I know the idea can't be avoided forever, I go back, as I often do, to Matthew 22:21 "give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Jesus was giving us not only permission, but orders to live in a society as best we can. And, both logic and morality seems to tell me that encouraging marriage between two consenting adults is good.
I'm not going to tell you that Jesus is for gay marriage. Guess what? I'm not going to tell you He's for straight marriage either since He told his disciples to leave their families and follow Him. But He did sure seem to have a lot to say about treating other people as we'd like to be treated.
And I, for one, am glad that I was able to celebrate joyfully finding the love of my life and knowing that we are bound legally... so that if he f*cks up.... "here go Hell come."
thanks for reading,
-m
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Yes. And... helping to cure the culture of defensiveness.
It is a long known rule of improvisational acting that you do not negate your scene partner or else the scene will come to an abrupt halt.
actor 1: "Doctor, my leg's been cut off in a horrible accident."
actor 2: "No it hasn't, I can see it right there."
Screeeeeech, brakes are hit and its hard to recover. It is your duty to keep the scene going by accepting what is given and then adding to it. You are not judging what is given to you, you are moving forward.
This notion occurred to me as I was pondering how to improve my conversational skills.
You see, I tend to react in conversations, which often leads to roadblocks. Whatever the last person has said, I will say how I feel about what they've said, and expand. Which, in theory seems fine... however, lately, I've seen how what I thought was dialog, can be perceived as attack. Furthermore, its seen as an attack on the person, and not on the statement they made.
Part of me feels that there is an added climate of defensiveness right now. The heated political election and fences erected seem to be saying at all times, 'are you on our side or theirs?' When in many cases the 'sides,' if they even exist, are not even close to clear. How you feel about taxation means diddly squat in how you feel about abortion or marriage rights, etc. Or, we're all on the same side (kids dying in school is a tragedy) but we'll still do our damndest to divide ourselves over it.
So, maybe it is everyone else... but it could also be me. Perhaps I've become more angry in my advanced age and tend to attack without realizing it... So, it was time to look in the mirror, and see if I can adopt new conversational techniques, and do my part to stem this culture of defensiveness.
In two women's habits I found great similarity to the improvisational rule, "Yes, and."
One woman, -let's call her Happygal- is extremely bubbly and open. She seems to lay everything out there for people to see, but she speaks only in positives even if the negative wouldn't be that big of a deal.
Friend 1: "I've been training for the Tarheel 10 miler."
Friend 2: "That's great! I just started running, but am only up to three miles."
Happygal is with these two girls listening as they chat about running and wants to be a part of the conversation.
She joins by saying: "I really love Zumba! I love having someone tell me what to do and I assume I look like Beyonce when I'm shaking it." She says it all with a smile. From this, the two friends can assume that Happygal doesn't run but never does she need to say anything negative about it, she simply asserts the positive in something else. She may hate running, she may have bad knees, it may bore her, etc. etc. but she realizes that they don't need to know every detail, especially if the details happen to be negative. (YES, you love running. AND, I love zumba!)
Another woman, Securegal, plays things a little closer to the chest and has very strong and passionate views. But, similar to Happygal, she states firmly what she believes only if and when the time seems appropriate. She makes little to no commentary on what the other person has said.
Friend 1: "The GOP is trying to cut funding to unemployment benefits again, just showing as always how racist republicans are and how much they hate poor people."
Friend 2: "Hey Securegal, I know you voted for GOP guy, do you really think it's ok to cut unemployment and let people starve? is that what America is about now?"
Securegal: "I did vote for GOP guy, I think his plan to create jobs made sense to me, I hope people get off unemployment by getting employed! And I certainly don't want anyone starving which is why my family and our church provide bags of groceries every week for anyone that needs them." (YES, I accept your statement is your belief and agree people shouldn't starve in America, AND here is how I handle that belief in my home.) She doesn't waste time getting offended at the notion that republicans are racist or take time to attack anyone else's policies.
I used to find both these girls and methodologies vaguely irritating because they can seem almost dismissive in tone. Instead of a conversation, to me, it just felt like people waiting to talk when there was no direct call and response to statements and questions. However, the people they are talking with don't get upset because, I realized, what they say is being accepted.
I lacked the basic social skills to realize at first that most people don't want to know if their logic doesn't make sense or if the source they are quoting isn't a reputable one or if they mispronounced the country they are talking about. Pointing those things out are saying, 'No' and they bring the conversation, like an improv scene, to a screeching halt.
And it was in telling my daughter, "we don't need your opinions on everything," that the mirror became crystalized. Guess what, Mandy, they don't need your opinions on everything. (I'm writing this all in a blog so you can see my opinion that you don't need my opinion... the irony doesn't escape me.)
So, in trying to be honest, but without forcing people around me to have their defenses on at all costs, I am going to attempt to feed off of the improv lesson that both Happygal and Securegal employ whether intentionally or not... "Yes, And."
YES. your statement is your truth. Yes, you have thought it out, you believe it, there it is. I'm not attempting to change it, judge it, or rate it on any grand scale of debate code. It is your yes and I accept that. AND (if I am in the scene) here's what I believe, I will add value if I can, but I will try not to devalue or 'no' your contribution.
Or, maybe I'll take my Mom's advice and just stop having conversations with idiots.
here's a Little less conversation...and a lot more Elvis!!
:)
-m
actor 1: "Doctor, my leg's been cut off in a horrible accident."
actor 2: "No it hasn't, I can see it right there."
Screeeeeech, brakes are hit and its hard to recover. It is your duty to keep the scene going by accepting what is given and then adding to it. You are not judging what is given to you, you are moving forward.
This notion occurred to me as I was pondering how to improve my conversational skills.
You see, I tend to react in conversations, which often leads to roadblocks. Whatever the last person has said, I will say how I feel about what they've said, and expand. Which, in theory seems fine... however, lately, I've seen how what I thought was dialog, can be perceived as attack. Furthermore, its seen as an attack on the person, and not on the statement they made.
Part of me feels that there is an added climate of defensiveness right now. The heated political election and fences erected seem to be saying at all times, 'are you on our side or theirs?' When in many cases the 'sides,' if they even exist, are not even close to clear. How you feel about taxation means diddly squat in how you feel about abortion or marriage rights, etc. Or, we're all on the same side (kids dying in school is a tragedy) but we'll still do our damndest to divide ourselves over it.
So, maybe it is everyone else... but it could also be me. Perhaps I've become more angry in my advanced age and tend to attack without realizing it... So, it was time to look in the mirror, and see if I can adopt new conversational techniques, and do my part to stem this culture of defensiveness.
In two women's habits I found great similarity to the improvisational rule, "Yes, and."
One woman, -let's call her Happygal- is extremely bubbly and open. She seems to lay everything out there for people to see, but she speaks only in positives even if the negative wouldn't be that big of a deal.
Friend 1: "I've been training for the Tarheel 10 miler."
Friend 2: "That's great! I just started running, but am only up to three miles."
Happygal is with these two girls listening as they chat about running and wants to be a part of the conversation.
She joins by saying: "I really love Zumba! I love having someone tell me what to do and I assume I look like Beyonce when I'm shaking it." She says it all with a smile. From this, the two friends can assume that Happygal doesn't run but never does she need to say anything negative about it, she simply asserts the positive in something else. She may hate running, she may have bad knees, it may bore her, etc. etc. but she realizes that they don't need to know every detail, especially if the details happen to be negative. (YES, you love running. AND, I love zumba!)
Another woman, Securegal, plays things a little closer to the chest and has very strong and passionate views. But, similar to Happygal, she states firmly what she believes only if and when the time seems appropriate. She makes little to no commentary on what the other person has said.
Friend 1: "The GOP is trying to cut funding to unemployment benefits again, just showing as always how racist republicans are and how much they hate poor people."
Friend 2: "Hey Securegal, I know you voted for GOP guy, do you really think it's ok to cut unemployment and let people starve? is that what America is about now?"
Securegal: "I did vote for GOP guy, I think his plan to create jobs made sense to me, I hope people get off unemployment by getting employed! And I certainly don't want anyone starving which is why my family and our church provide bags of groceries every week for anyone that needs them." (YES, I accept your statement is your belief and agree people shouldn't starve in America, AND here is how I handle that belief in my home.) She doesn't waste time getting offended at the notion that republicans are racist or take time to attack anyone else's policies.
I used to find both these girls and methodologies vaguely irritating because they can seem almost dismissive in tone. Instead of a conversation, to me, it just felt like people waiting to talk when there was no direct call and response to statements and questions. However, the people they are talking with don't get upset because, I realized, what they say is being accepted.
I lacked the basic social skills to realize at first that most people don't want to know if their logic doesn't make sense or if the source they are quoting isn't a reputable one or if they mispronounced the country they are talking about. Pointing those things out are saying, 'No' and they bring the conversation, like an improv scene, to a screeching halt.
And it was in telling my daughter, "we don't need your opinions on everything," that the mirror became crystalized. Guess what, Mandy, they don't need your opinions on everything. (I'm writing this all in a blog so you can see my opinion that you don't need my opinion... the irony doesn't escape me.)
So, in trying to be honest, but without forcing people around me to have their defenses on at all costs, I am going to attempt to feed off of the improv lesson that both Happygal and Securegal employ whether intentionally or not... "Yes, And."
YES. your statement is your truth. Yes, you have thought it out, you believe it, there it is. I'm not attempting to change it, judge it, or rate it on any grand scale of debate code. It is your yes and I accept that. AND (if I am in the scene) here's what I believe, I will add value if I can, but I will try not to devalue or 'no' your contribution.
Or, maybe I'll take my Mom's advice and just stop having conversations with idiots.
here's a Little less conversation...and a lot more Elvis!!
:)
-m
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Obama and Boehner in a tree....
So here we are. The election is over America has made its choice.
I have been so torn because like I said in a Facebook post, my kids will absolutely know that I respect the office of the president and he has my prayers. But I would be lying if I didn't say I am wary. I am not wary because of who Barack Obama is necessarily; but because of how the campaigns went and how it seems that there is more vitriol than knowledge in political conversations.
But Barack Obama is our president and John Boehner is our Speaker... both are facts and they need to work together whether anyone likes it or not.
Many democrats seemed to be convinced that the republicans wanted the country to fail so that Obama would not be re-elected. Whether you see that as Gospel truth or absolutely insane, let's just say the 'plot' failed. Obama has been elected to a second term. Plotting or no plotting, it's time to get on with it and as Obama would say, move 'forward.' But, with all the gloat tinged olive branches that seem to be being offered and the doom and gloom talk on Facebook we can see it is hard to move forward until we are honest about where we are now.
So here are some things I am contemplating and would like you also to consider.
What if:
1) We give up the words Republican or Democrat on Facebook for one full year and demand that our politicians do the same. (The media makes money with divisiveness so it'd take a while for them to catch on.) If we talk about a bill, we don't say its a 'republican measure,' we say, here is a bill introduced by Boehner. Or Nancy Pelosi has co-sponsored a bill with Harry Reid and then let's talk about the bill itself. And, what if you were not allowed to talk about/comment on said bill unless you actually read it (they have summary's on the gov't web site... that would suffice.) Also let's not make major leaps in logic, not supporting a bill, does not mean not supporting an idea, it means not supporting a bill. Instead of the phrase "republicans don't believe in fair pay for women," instead we would talk about the merits and difficulties with the lily ledbetter act, who supported it, who wrote against it and why.
I have been so torn because like I said in a Facebook post, my kids will absolutely know that I respect the office of the president and he has my prayers. But I would be lying if I didn't say I am wary. I am not wary because of who Barack Obama is necessarily; but because of how the campaigns went and how it seems that there is more vitriol than knowledge in political conversations.
But Barack Obama is our president and John Boehner is our Speaker... both are facts and they need to work together whether anyone likes it or not.
Many democrats seemed to be convinced that the republicans wanted the country to fail so that Obama would not be re-elected. Whether you see that as Gospel truth or absolutely insane, let's just say the 'plot' failed. Obama has been elected to a second term. Plotting or no plotting, it's time to get on with it and as Obama would say, move 'forward.' But, with all the gloat tinged olive branches that seem to be being offered and the doom and gloom talk on Facebook we can see it is hard to move forward until we are honest about where we are now.
So here are some things I am contemplating and would like you also to consider.
What if:
1) We give up the words Republican or Democrat on Facebook for one full year and demand that our politicians do the same. (The media makes money with divisiveness so it'd take a while for them to catch on.) If we talk about a bill, we don't say its a 'republican measure,' we say, here is a bill introduced by Boehner. Or Nancy Pelosi has co-sponsored a bill with Harry Reid and then let's talk about the bill itself. And, what if you were not allowed to talk about/comment on said bill unless you actually read it (they have summary's on the gov't web site... that would suffice.) Also let's not make major leaps in logic, not supporting a bill, does not mean not supporting an idea, it means not supporting a bill. Instead of the phrase "republicans don't believe in fair pay for women," instead we would talk about the merits and difficulties with the lily ledbetter act, who supported it, who wrote against it and why.
2) We all admit the incredible bias of the media. The Daily Show, which I genuinely enjoy, does not "give it equally to both sides," as I have heard many people say. I believe Stewart himself was alarmed by this and I think he took an active part in making himself the foil of Bill O'Reilly, who, believe it or not also 'gives it' to both sides. Stewart and O'Reilly are probably fairly equal counterparts as far as liberal to conservative leanings... If you, right now are scoffing... please take a moment to breathe and look in the mirror because you are exactly who I am addressing.
Fox News is not the counterpart to MSNBC like people try to often say. It is not even a counterpart to CNN at this point. Fox News is a trusted news source for the majority of the middle of the day. It has a morning talk show that is meant to be light with a bias counterpart to something like the Today Show or GMA. And in the evening it has punditry that has bias similar to 'Rock Center' with Brian Williams or Hardball.
Saturday Night Live, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, the local paper... so often we are being inundated with so much one-sided bias that when you see Fox News it does seem completely out of whack. If you are still scoffing, I challenge you to put CNN and Fox News on 'last channel' or whatever quick change offer your remote control has. When a major news story breaks, flip back and forth... just try it.
And, just as a little aside, on Jimmy Fallon, they did a sketch where Obama asked Romney if he was 'calling to concede or if he was still watching Fox News,' the assumption that people take away without realizing it is that Fox News was playing with the numbers to keep 'hope alive.' Fox News called it for the president before CNN did. Tiny things like that repeated over and over again give people bias without even being aware they are getting it.
3) We open our minds to the possibility that gay marriage is not just about lovey dovey 'fairness,' it, just as straight marriage is, is good for the economy and it is good for our communities and our people and would make logical sense for our country to embrace. I understand, though disagree, with people's hesitation on this matter. They, for the most part, are not bigots. They are trying to understand a very real complex shift in how we view the family unit and why as a government we sanction marriage at all.
For people living it, I hate the idea of saying that it is not an easy thing for some people to earnestly wrap their heads around. And I can absolutely understand their anger, but in the true attempt of looking at where we need to go, again, we need to be honest about where we are.
3) We open our minds to the possibility that gay marriage is not just about lovey dovey 'fairness,' it, just as straight marriage is, is good for the economy and it is good for our communities and our people and would make logical sense for our country to embrace. I understand, though disagree, with people's hesitation on this matter. They, for the most part, are not bigots. They are trying to understand a very real complex shift in how we view the family unit and why as a government we sanction marriage at all.
For people living it, I hate the idea of saying that it is not an easy thing for some people to earnestly wrap their heads around. And I can absolutely understand their anger, but in the true attempt of looking at where we need to go, again, we need to be honest about where we are.
4) Also republicans must understand and acknowledge that many people had genuinely good reasons to vote for Barack Obama, despite our dismay. They did not do so because they wanted a handout or because they want socialism or for Israel to be destroyed. And though, we may feel we have evidence that points out that these are things Barack Obama is leaning toward, we do not have a crystal ball. Those that voted for him for the most part genuinely feel that President Obama can do a better job leading this nation. And for all of our sakes, let's hope that they are right.
Though I am admittedly wary of what is to come, I will do my best to support my president and make sure I am informed and passionate about the issues that face this country.
And, because I am an American and regardless of who our president is we have the freedom to live how we believe is right. I am going to live out what I consider my very important conservative ideals, I am going to work hard and sacrifice and give to those in need without anyone forcing me to do so. I am going to continue to live my faith and pray to God and respect the religions and traditions of those around me as I expect them to respect mine. I am going to raise my kids responsibly and consider myself their primary educator in everything from morality to academics. I am going to speak up if I see injustice happening and act if I can change it. And I will support my military, my church, my family, my neighbors and my country in the best way I can.
Let's stop looking to government and worrying about who is reaching further across some 'aisle,' and instead all look in the mirrors. We, as strong willed, motivated, hard working individuals will be what makes this country strong again.
Though I am admittedly wary of what is to come, I will do my best to support my president and make sure I am informed and passionate about the issues that face this country.
And, because I am an American and regardless of who our president is we have the freedom to live how we believe is right. I am going to live out what I consider my very important conservative ideals, I am going to work hard and sacrifice and give to those in need without anyone forcing me to do so. I am going to continue to live my faith and pray to God and respect the religions and traditions of those around me as I expect them to respect mine. I am going to raise my kids responsibly and consider myself their primary educator in everything from morality to academics. I am going to speak up if I see injustice happening and act if I can change it. And I will support my military, my church, my family, my neighbors and my country in the best way I can.
Let's stop looking to government and worrying about who is reaching further across some 'aisle,' and instead all look in the mirrors. We, as strong willed, motivated, hard working individuals will be what makes this country strong again.
thanks for reading...
-m
Monday, November 5, 2012
'Twas the night 'fore elections
'Twas the night 'fore elections and all on Facebook
passion, accusations, do I even dare look?
status: my absentee ballot was mailed out with care!
I'm hoping my guy will be in the oval's chair!
Lip dubs and satire and commands to go vote.
status: If my guy doesn't win, I'm on the next boat! (2 likes)
reply: Stop Shoving Your Religion Down My Throat! (12 likes)
reply: I Swear I'll Unfriend you after that shit you wrote! (1like)
Your candidate's a lier and a jackass know-nuthin'
Damn it, I'll show you! why isn't there a 'dislike' button?!
Nice normal people throughout the year,
turned wingnut and commie... I needed a beer.
Unfriending an uncle, I hit a new low
and decided to catch up on pre-recorded shows.
In comfy pajamas with braids on my head
I settled in to see the walking dead.
When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter
I paused DVR to see what was the matter
Obama with his ears and Mitt with his hair
were out on the porch, just standing there.
'Thank you for opening they door' they did greet
'You are just the one we came out here to meet!'
I knew then I was going to miss my show
for I was the last undecided
in Ohio.
"He'll tax you," hair called, "only if your rich!" said the ears
"I am," I said, and Mitt laughed thankful tears.
"But," I said, "Gays should be able to marry"
'oh' they both said and hair looked around wary.
For the last several months they showed their best sides
and took us along for baby-kissing rides.
And when something damaging dared rear its head
diversion and distraction helped put it to bed.
Quick! Hide Akin and Palin the GOP cried!
It's Kid Rock and Eastwood we want by his side!
And those donkeys, they did not miss a beat,
they hid Biden & Pelosi deep under the street.
Now tweeters, now mailers now knockers and callers
on radios on tvs on graphiti'd bathroom stall(ers)!
To the top of Wisconsin and the tips of the beach!
All old people and women I need you to reach!
Their supporters cheered out and passionately cried,
We'll beat down the other, we'll throw mud in their eye!
We'll get the word out! On us you should bet!
Think you've seen bad, you've seen nothing yet!
I looked at these two standing tall on my lawn
and asked if it would be worth it when the 7th saw dawn.
They looked at each other and shared so warm a glance
I'd swear I was witnessing a blossoming romance.
And then it hit me with such a force
that I screamed aloud, 'of course, of course!'
Worried, they broke their stare to woo me more,
but all they saw was the click of my door.
Back to my Facebook I ran with glee
to share the secret they accidentally shared with me.
Obama was in on it and Romney was too,
you see either way, they'll be better off than you!
While the runner up's supporters are crying the day of the loss
and winners will have to defend the failings of the new boss,
the candidates themselves will be dancing a jig
their egos inflated, their bank accounts big.
Mitt will be buying another show horse.
Obama will swing his big stick 'round the course.
The economy will get better, or maybe it chokes,
but sure as hell, they know, these two won't go broke.
So let's not belittle each other for them
and pretend that either's completely a gem.
Let's work, serve and vote the way Americans can
and look in the mirrors to make ourselves better women and men.
It's America's people, from new citizens to old
that have decided our freedom's more precious than gold.
It's awesome that we all have a voice we can share,
though passions may rise and tensions may flare.
So whoever wins, be it good guy or bad.
Be good sports if you win, and if you lose don't get mad.
And whether in joy or in pain you feel need to shed tears,
just remember, we get to do it all again in four years.
I was writing this down as I heard motors roar
and through the sky their private jets did soar.
But I heard them exclaim 'ere they flashed out of site,
There is still time to contribute to my campaign tonight!
Happy Election Day!
thanks for reading,
-m
passion, accusations, do I even dare look?
status: my absentee ballot was mailed out with care!
I'm hoping my guy will be in the oval's chair!
Lip dubs and satire and commands to go vote.
status: If my guy doesn't win, I'm on the next boat! (2 likes)
reply: Stop Shoving Your Religion Down My Throat! (12 likes)
reply: I Swear I'll Unfriend you after that shit you wrote! (1like)
Your candidate's a lier and a jackass know-nuthin'
Damn it, I'll show you! why isn't there a 'dislike' button?!
Nice normal people throughout the year,
turned wingnut and commie... I needed a beer.
Unfriending an uncle, I hit a new low
and decided to catch up on pre-recorded shows.
In comfy pajamas with braids on my head
I settled in to see the walking dead.
When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter
I paused DVR to see what was the matter
Obama with his ears and Mitt with his hair
were out on the porch, just standing there.
'Thank you for opening they door' they did greet
'You are just the one we came out here to meet!'
I knew then I was going to miss my show
for I was the last undecided
in Ohio.
"He'll tax you," hair called, "only if your rich!" said the ears
"I am," I said, and Mitt laughed thankful tears.
"But," I said, "Gays should be able to marry"
'oh' they both said and hair looked around wary.
For the last several months they showed their best sides
and took us along for baby-kissing rides.
And when something damaging dared rear its head
diversion and distraction helped put it to bed.
Quick! Hide Akin and Palin the GOP cried!
It's Kid Rock and Eastwood we want by his side!
And those donkeys, they did not miss a beat,
they hid Biden & Pelosi deep under the street.
Now tweeters, now mailers now knockers and callers
on radios on tvs on graphiti'd bathroom stall(ers)!
To the top of Wisconsin and the tips of the beach!
All old people and women I need you to reach!
Their supporters cheered out and passionately cried,
We'll beat down the other, we'll throw mud in their eye!
We'll get the word out! On us you should bet!
Think you've seen bad, you've seen nothing yet!
I looked at these two standing tall on my lawn
and asked if it would be worth it when the 7th saw dawn.
They looked at each other and shared so warm a glance
I'd swear I was witnessing a blossoming romance.
And then it hit me with such a force
that I screamed aloud, 'of course, of course!'
Worried, they broke their stare to woo me more,
but all they saw was the click of my door.
Back to my Facebook I ran with glee
to share the secret they accidentally shared with me.
Obama was in on it and Romney was too,
you see either way, they'll be better off than you!
While the runner up's supporters are crying the day of the loss
and winners will have to defend the failings of the new boss,
the candidates themselves will be dancing a jig
their egos inflated, their bank accounts big.
Mitt will be buying another show horse.
Obama will swing his big stick 'round the course.
The economy will get better, or maybe it chokes,
but sure as hell, they know, these two won't go broke.
So let's not belittle each other for them
and pretend that either's completely a gem.
Let's work, serve and vote the way Americans can
and look in the mirrors to make ourselves better women and men.
It's America's people, from new citizens to old
that have decided our freedom's more precious than gold.
It's awesome that we all have a voice we can share,
though passions may rise and tensions may flare.
So whoever wins, be it good guy or bad.
Be good sports if you win, and if you lose don't get mad.
And whether in joy or in pain you feel need to shed tears,
just remember, we get to do it all again in four years.
I was writing this down as I heard motors roar
and through the sky their private jets did soar.
But I heard them exclaim 'ere they flashed out of site,
There is still time to contribute to my campaign tonight!
Happy Election Day!
thanks for reading,
-m
Thursday, October 25, 2012
the only case for Obama...
I had to let my last post regarding my support for Romney/Ryan percolate a bit before I take to turning off a new batch of people. It's how I roll.
So while I still strongly support the GOP ticket for the presidency, I have to be honest about the one and only issue that holds me back from being a pom-pom waving door-to-door knocking volunteer.
The gay problem.
I'm calling it a 'problem' because it causes a problem for me, personally. It is hard to look into the eyes of my gay friends and tell them that I support Romney/Ryan. Is the GOP ticket saying your marriage is not completely equal under the law as mine? yup they are. Is that ok? no, it is not. Do I feel like a schmuck sometimes for aligning with people who think its ok to say that you are not free to love who you want to love? absofreakinglutely.
So though I have very thorough logical, legal, ethical and moral reasons that I believe in marriage equality, I would like to first share with you a story of the friendship (with my friend's blessing) that changed fundamentally who I am and helped formulate my opinion on this issue.
I have always been a conservative republican (I mean, always. We named our dog after Alex P. Keaton and I wept bitterly when Clinton beat Bush when I was 11 years old.) I have also always been a devoted (thought questioning) Catholic who was involved in the church through High School and College as a Lector and Eucharistic Minister. So you may think it odd that I was one of the early people a friend in college told that she was gay.
Over drinks, I think the admission was actually accidental, but I’d like to think that it was my complete indifference to her revelation that endeared me to her, because from that moment on our friendship strengthened.
Not long after she came ‘out,’ we were passing each other on the sidewalk between classes and she was glowing. Always beautiful, with long dark hair and olive skin, on this day she was absolutely radiant. When her eyes caught mine, she grinned and said, “I get it!”
“What?”
“The giddiness! Why you walk around like a moron, asking a thousand times if I thought whatever guy was cute or looking at you was into you... all of it!”
She had a crush. She was, for the first time, letting herself truly enjoy the beauty of the feeling that had accompanied me through most of my life since my first major crush in 3rd grade. You should also know, I am a bit of a romantic (some teachers may have written ‘boy-crazy’ in report card comments.)
In the past, she tried to play the game the way it was ‘supposed’ to be played. She went to school dances and talked about boys. She, as I mentioned, is gorgeous so she was often asked out and she went on dates but thought something was wrong with her... because never once did her heart skip a beat nor did she get caught up in it the way all the girls around her did.
And, when in high school, an upperclass girl caught her eye, she told herself it was simply admiration she was feeling. She waited patiently to find a guy that would make her feel anything at all.
And now, standing before me, she was giggling and rosy and told me all about how she and this crush had almost held hands.
‘It hit me like a truck,' no doubt is a cliche. But it applies as I was absolutely blindsided at the realization of just how incredibly naive I had been. Because, though I had never ‘judged’ her, there was always a part of me that humored the mental debates of whether homosexuality was ‘natural,’ or if it was a ‘choice’. I didn’t ‘judge’; but damn, how I had I arrogantly analyzed.
In that moment, I was dizzy with unadulterated happiness for her. There is no way, the romantic I was, I could ever want anyone to be denied the crazy giddy stupid joy that comes at the beginning of a relationship.
I could’ve listened to her joy all day. And I’m forever thankful to her for sharing that moment with me. It wasn't until later that day that my heart broke for the fact that it took so much courage and so much time for her to allow herself the same joy most of us know without thinking twice about it.
She and I became roommates. Like any roommates, we went through ups and downs... with friends, in school and in relationships. It never again amazed me that our relationship woes and joys were absolutely no different from one another’s.
She met my greatest crush of all and was the first to say ‘you should hang on to him.’ And two years later she was in my wedding to him.
Since then, I have come to know the incomparable joy of a life committed to someone, who is in turn committed to you. Despite its sometimes heartbreaking downs, it is an awesome feeling. I wouldn't dare try to rob someone of that feeling.
I honestly don't blame people for not understanding homosexuality, especially people in the generation ahead of us where being open was not as accepted or common (not that it is perfectly accepted now, of course, but we have certainly made strides as a nation.) And feel like I am blessed because of the courage a friend had and the trust she had in me.
Try to forget what happens in the bedroom (you don't want to know what your neighbors do either... I learned at a recent dinner party that 50 shades kink is waaayyyy more common than I thought... yeah, I learned I'm a boring wife and I don't ask anymore.) Instead, just think about the idea of having a partner to share your life with. Tell me that you are ok denying someone you love that feeling.
I hate this issue because it feels like it could and should be healed so quickly so easily. I wish I could stop every accusation of bigotry, ignorance, morality and righteousness before it starts because it just seems to fan the flame of misunderstanding. I wish I could give everyone a chance to be me in that moment of seeing my friend’s joy. I wish I could promise every young person that they have every right to dream of their happily ever after whatever it may be because God does not make mistakes and they are not evil or sick for wanting to be in love.
I want to beg all the same-sex couples that have been couples for decades to come out and be the spokespeople for the movement to show how their relationships have the exact same trials, tribulations, joys and sorrows as straight couples and deserve the exact same rights and respect as provided by the law.
But I can’t, because it’s not their job to be put on trial and show it... it is our job to simply clear our eyes and see it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those of you still unsure,
Look, for all I know homosexuality is an 'abomination to God'... but so may be what my hubby and I do in our bedroom... I mean, I do like the taste of sausage in the morning if ya know what I mean.
And what I mean is that my husband often makes me breakfast in bed and I like sausage links and eating the flesh of pigs is also perhaps an abomination (Leviticus 11, 7-8.) What did you think I meant?? Get your head out of the gutter, sicko. (and, btw, that's not strictly forbidden in the bible anyway... )
But most of all, I know that I don't know every opinion of God on every matter... I tend to believe that He is just a tad more complex than we can possibly understand. So I think He did his best to make things easy for us by saying... and I'm paraphrasing here. 'Look, human, you are not the greatest thing around, I am. So why don't you just chill out, be thankful for me and all I've given you and be nice to the people around you because they're my kids too regardless of what you think about them.'
And, I kind of like the idea that Jesus Himself was the first separation of church and state guy, 'give to God what is God's, give to Caeser what is Caeser's.' (in current terms, if you think gay marriage is a sin... don't get gay married, but that doesn't mean the law has to be in line with your beliefs.)
Ok. so in summary. Marriage equality needs to happen, like now. But, I'm sorry, I don't buy Obama's support because had he issued his support just one day earlier, it could have made a difference for Amendment 1 in NC... but it could've also pissed off his black baptist voters... so I think he's an opportunist. So vote Romney/Ryan because otherwise it won't matter who can get married, no one will be able to afford a marriage license.
Now I'll go to my car where I feel safest of all. watch this and come back next week! I'll go lighter... maybe.
thanks for reading,
-mandy
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
I am a binder full of women. (my feminist rant?)
First I need to give kudos to the unknown writer of, "Binder full of women? Halloween costume of the year." because that's just good humor.
But otherwise I must presume that women don't want to be taken seriously in politics at all. Because all of the self-proclaimed feminists that I know get lost in muddles of sound bites and seem to have no idea what any of the actual issues are.
Other than the binder, here are a few recent examples: women forwarding around a photo of the leaders of the catholic church when they were contesting the birth control requirement of their institutions (yes, Biden was full of "stuff" when he said they were not affected.) with some kind of commentary like this:
And, all the while, I hear women going on and on about a "war on women." The only war on women I see is when one of my friends pop on my Facebook page with some sort of assertion that any woman that votes for Romney is voting against all women. What? really? Women are so simple-minded that there can only be one side and/or one issue that matters? Liberal women claim that the GOP is starting a war on women and yet they are screaming that all female republicans are either idiots and don't understand what the evil GOP is doing, or they are simply following their master's (excuse me,) husband's orders on whom they should support. But, that shouldn't surprise me. The same kind of tactics are used on minorities or celebrities should they dare endorse a republican.
Here is why, as a woman, I am supporting Mitt Romney. I want the economy to get on track. President Obama can brag about signing the Ledbetter Act into congress all he wants, he'll never have to worry about the fallout of enforcement if there are never any jobs to be had. Governor Romney got panned when he said he'd help women in the workforce by making the economy stronger. What that said to me is he sees women as no different than men. The most important way the next president can help women in the workforce is by facilitating the creation of more jobs.
I don't want the next generation to be saddled with debt or to live with an attitude of entitlement. Again, sorry, I guess it's not a 'women''s issue other than the fact that we are 1/2 of the equation that creates the next generation... and that women happen to also be in the next generation so maybe we should care about them a little bit.
I don't want the government in my health care. I believe that the decisions I make should be between me and my doctor... oh, does this sound familiar to you? Then Why In Heaven's Name do you want the government taking over our health care?? I'm so confused by people when they say, "a women's choice should be between her and her doctor" and meanwhile they are holding up a pro ObamaCare sign...
And, since ObamaCare was passed, our family's personal insurance has gone up by 20% so, as a woman, my health care has absolutely been negatively impacted in the last four years and ObamaCare hasn't even gone into full effect.
Going back to the fair pay act for a moment, Governor Romney also got panned when he said that women may prefer flexibility. Guess what, women, he's treating you equal to men once again. He assumes that you can put your big girl pants on and negotiate your own salary and benefits without mama government doing it for you. I have been a stay at home mom for a while now, but while I was in the work force, I found out that at two of my places of employment I was making more than other women working there... because I was the only one that said what my salary should be and I asked for raises when I thought them due. In one scenario I went ahead and asked for raises for all my colleagues because they were all too nervous. Every one of them (4 ladies) got raises that day -which incidentally happened to also be the one and only day my husband has accused me of being a socialist...
I know I was lucky, I had a business owner father who taught me the importance of a dollar and the even greater importance of knowing your self worth... and I had a mom who was never scared to ask anyone anything... so it may have come more easily to me than many other women... But we should share that knowledge with women instead of holding a gun to the the head of business owners!
So I guess, in short, (too late,) what I'm trying to convey is that as an American that happens to have a vagina, I would like to see our economy in better shape, our foreign policy clearer and stronger, our government spending and reach to be contained and a (flexible) job to be there when I decide to return to work. I am voting for Romney/Ryan.
And, as for President Obama, I'm simply sick of being pandered to. And, woman friend that may be angered by reading this, if you still don't think that Obama thinks that you are an idiot that needs to be taken care of... clearly you don't know about the life of Julia... who will be a broke high school dropout and will never get to volunteer at a community garden because she died of some mysterious illness when she was 26... if Romney is elected.
But otherwise I must presume that women don't want to be taken seriously in politics at all. Because all of the self-proclaimed feminists that I know get lost in muddles of sound bites and seem to have no idea what any of the actual issues are.
Other than the binder, here are a few recent examples: women forwarding around a photo of the leaders of the catholic church when they were contesting the birth control requirement of their institutions (yes, Biden was full of "stuff" when he said they were not affected.) with some kind of commentary like this:
 |
| Appropriately bitchy, snarky and absolutely inane. Way to get us taken seriously. If you have a problem with the leadership of the Catholic and Jewish faiths being men, then take issues with the religions, but don't be shocked when those institutions that are threatened send out their leadership to defend themselves. |
 |
| And how about this one from Women for Barack Obama? Hmmmm. let me get this straight. The government is trying to take over health care... and yet the side saying it should be up to the individuals what their coverage is is the one being accused of taking away control?? It just makes no sense. When does something not being given for free equal being denied it? Is the government denying me computer rights because I have to pay for my own Internet access and monitor? |
And, all the while, I hear women going on and on about a "war on women." The only war on women I see is when one of my friends pop on my Facebook page with some sort of assertion that any woman that votes for Romney is voting against all women. What? really? Women are so simple-minded that there can only be one side and/or one issue that matters? Liberal women claim that the GOP is starting a war on women and yet they are screaming that all female republicans are either idiots and don't understand what the evil GOP is doing, or they are simply following their master's (excuse me,) husband's orders on whom they should support. But, that shouldn't surprise me. The same kind of tactics are used on minorities or celebrities should they dare endorse a republican.
Here is why, as a woman, I am supporting Mitt Romney. I want the economy to get on track. President Obama can brag about signing the Ledbetter Act into congress all he wants, he'll never have to worry about the fallout of enforcement if there are never any jobs to be had. Governor Romney got panned when he said he'd help women in the workforce by making the economy stronger. What that said to me is he sees women as no different than men. The most important way the next president can help women in the workforce is by facilitating the creation of more jobs.
I don't want the next generation to be saddled with debt or to live with an attitude of entitlement. Again, sorry, I guess it's not a 'women''s issue other than the fact that we are 1/2 of the equation that creates the next generation... and that women happen to also be in the next generation so maybe we should care about them a little bit.
I don't want the government in my health care. I believe that the decisions I make should be between me and my doctor... oh, does this sound familiar to you? Then Why In Heaven's Name do you want the government taking over our health care?? I'm so confused by people when they say, "a women's choice should be between her and her doctor" and meanwhile they are holding up a pro ObamaCare sign...
And, since ObamaCare was passed, our family's personal insurance has gone up by 20% so, as a woman, my health care has absolutely been negatively impacted in the last four years and ObamaCare hasn't even gone into full effect.
Going back to the fair pay act for a moment, Governor Romney also got panned when he said that women may prefer flexibility. Guess what, women, he's treating you equal to men once again. He assumes that you can put your big girl pants on and negotiate your own salary and benefits without mama government doing it for you. I have been a stay at home mom for a while now, but while I was in the work force, I found out that at two of my places of employment I was making more than other women working there... because I was the only one that said what my salary should be and I asked for raises when I thought them due. In one scenario I went ahead and asked for raises for all my colleagues because they were all too nervous. Every one of them (4 ladies) got raises that day -which incidentally happened to also be the one and only day my husband has accused me of being a socialist...
I know I was lucky, I had a business owner father who taught me the importance of a dollar and the even greater importance of knowing your self worth... and I had a mom who was never scared to ask anyone anything... so it may have come more easily to me than many other women... But we should share that knowledge with women instead of holding a gun to the the head of business owners!
So I guess, in short, (too late,) what I'm trying to convey is that as an American that happens to have a vagina, I would like to see our economy in better shape, our foreign policy clearer and stronger, our government spending and reach to be contained and a (flexible) job to be there when I decide to return to work. I am voting for Romney/Ryan.
And, as for President Obama, I'm simply sick of being pandered to. And, woman friend that may be angered by reading this, if you still don't think that Obama thinks that you are an idiot that needs to be taken care of... clearly you don't know about the life of Julia... who will be a broke high school dropout and will never get to volunteer at a community garden because she died of some mysterious illness when she was 26... if Romney is elected.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Debate Drinking Game!
I'm psyched! Are you? Tonight is the night that two virtually unknown decent citizens have a meaningful discussion that will help us understand who is the better suited man to lead our country over the next four years.
Wait, what? that is not what is happening tonight? Oh, that's right... two notorious probably originally decent men turned to feats of great douchebaggery will be repeating catchphrases tonight. Well, all the better... because that means it is time for the DEBATE DRINKING GAME.
Now, I'll warn you, this is hardcore. Only embark on this journey if you are dedicated.
First, in order to play you:
*should have beer, wine or any alcoholic or non-alcohlic drink you enjoy.
*preferably be watching with a member of the opposite sex that you are comfortable with.
*if you are male... wear a cup... just in case.
OK Ladies and Gents, welcome to the 1st presidential debate drinking game of 2012, keep an open mind, have fun and pace yourselves.
To get started: Pick a candidate. This may not be who you are voting for... just who you think will keep you less or more thirsty depending on your preference.
IF YOU CHOOSE OBAMA:
sip for every person and/or organization he thanks at the beginning.
sip for every time he starts a statement with "Look" or "Let me be clear"
sip for every time he says "added"
double sip every time he says he doubled anything.
chug whenever he smiles awkwardly while Romney is attacking his policies. Finish your drink if the awkward smile ends with Obama addressing the moderator like they are best buds dealing with a lunatic.
IF YOU CHOOSE ROMNEY:
sip for every person and/or organization he thanks in the beginning
sip for every time he says "deficit"
sip for every time he says "lost"
double sip for every times he says "class warfare"
chug every time he smiles while Obama is criticizing his policies. Finish your drink if he ends awkward smile with a sip of his own drink.
FOR BOTH CANDIDATES:
sip every time anyone says, 'jobs.'
1 sip for 'billion'
2 sips for 'trillion'
finish your drink if anyone says 'gazillion'
Chug for 4.7 seconds if you hear the number 47.
If either candidate says something in spanish, take a tequila shot.
If anyone mentions Bain, say, in your best rasp, "I am batman."
If either candidate mentions 'women's rights', feel a boob.
If either candidate mentions 'men's rights', ball swat.
If you think, for anything said tonight, "that was a good zinger." slap yourself immediately.
And if, at any point, you feel the need to quote something on Facebook or Twitter hoping that these are the magic words that will change someone's mind... finish your drink and go to bed immediately. Do not pass the computer, do not take your tablet, do not take your phone.
Thank you for playing! Have fun and vote responsibly!!
Wait, what? that is not what is happening tonight? Oh, that's right... two notorious probably originally decent men turned to feats of great douchebaggery will be repeating catchphrases tonight. Well, all the better... because that means it is time for the DEBATE DRINKING GAME.
Now, I'll warn you, this is hardcore. Only embark on this journey if you are dedicated.
First, in order to play you:
*should have beer, wine or any alcoholic or non-alcohlic drink you enjoy.
*preferably be watching with a member of the opposite sex that you are comfortable with.
*if you are male... wear a cup... just in case.
OK Ladies and Gents, welcome to the 1st presidential debate drinking game of 2012, keep an open mind, have fun and pace yourselves.
To get started: Pick a candidate. This may not be who you are voting for... just who you think will keep you less or more thirsty depending on your preference.
IF YOU CHOOSE OBAMA:
sip for every person and/or organization he thanks at the beginning.
sip for every time he starts a statement with "Look" or "Let me be clear"
sip for every time he says "added"
double sip every time he says he doubled anything.
chug whenever he smiles awkwardly while Romney is attacking his policies. Finish your drink if the awkward smile ends with Obama addressing the moderator like they are best buds dealing with a lunatic.
IF YOU CHOOSE ROMNEY:
sip for every person and/or organization he thanks in the beginning
sip for every time he says "deficit"
sip for every time he says "lost"
double sip for every times he says "class warfare"
chug every time he smiles while Obama is criticizing his policies. Finish your drink if he ends awkward smile with a sip of his own drink.
FOR BOTH CANDIDATES:
sip every time anyone says, 'jobs.'
1 sip for 'billion'
2 sips for 'trillion'
finish your drink if anyone says 'gazillion'
Chug for 4.7 seconds if you hear the number 47.
If either candidate says something in spanish, take a tequila shot.
If anyone mentions Bain, say, in your best rasp, "I am batman."
If either candidate mentions 'women's rights', feel a boob.
If either candidate mentions 'men's rights', ball swat.
If you think, for anything said tonight, "that was a good zinger." slap yourself immediately.
And if, at any point, you feel the need to quote something on Facebook or Twitter hoping that these are the magic words that will change someone's mind... finish your drink and go to bed immediately. Do not pass the computer, do not take your tablet, do not take your phone.
Thank you for playing! Have fun and vote responsibly!!
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Oh, Mr. Akin...
Guys are dumb. Not dumb... simple. But that's also what makes them great... I was explaining as much to my husband when we were watching The Land Before Time (click here for preview). The movie is awesome but war is stupid. And one of the few times a little bit of Femminazi comes out in me is when I get so worked up about the amount of wars humanity has endured... and come to the conclusion that men are often dumb.
Anyway I was thinking about Mr. Akin's comments on rape... legitimate rape, the possibility of getting pregnant, etc. And the first thing that came to mind was the Female Power onslaught that was about to take place on FB. And did it ever... Open letters to Mr. Akin from rape victims, diagrams of a women's reproductive system complete with 'anti-rape' measures, insistence that even though both Romney and Ryan said Akin should step down... that the whole GOP agrees with Akin.
What Akin said is horrible, thoughtless, and more than anything else... just dumb. In no way should rape be politicized for one side or another. Could you imagine if a woman had to fill out paperwork to prove her rape was 'legit?' I get headaches from all the paperwork I have to fill out to get my kid in preschool.
Rape is rape and its terrifying and cruel and can be life shattering, with or without a pregnancy and/or disease and/or irreparable mental or physical damage that may accompany it.
The problem that I have with all this though is that this dumb and demeaning comment came up during yet another abortion debate. So now... once again, people will try to lump together people who are pro-life with people who want to interrogate women who are raped to see if said rape was 'legit.'
And, again, that is stupid.
I am pro-life but I personally want the legality of abortion issue to be taken off the shelf as a political topic for a few years. I know... my pro-life friends will remind me that all the while, babies are perishing. But it is so omnipresent that it seems that little thought goes into it by many people and instead people pick a side and use the one-liner that best suits them. Whether it is:
"abortion is murder."
"no one should be able to legislate a woman's body."
or
"I believe its a life, but I don't feel comfortable telling other people what to do with their bodies."
The third of which is the most cowardly and dumb and often said by males who are scared to ruffle any feathers of the finer sex.
The first two... I believe at least both have points. But maybe if we took it off the table for a little while, could we pretend that the issue is not so black and white?
If one side stopped trying to make it illegal, could the other side stop saying its a right?
If one side stopped saying how dangerous it could be for the woman, could the other side stop insinuating that it's easier than pregnancy?
If one side stopped saying its a religious issue, could the other stop saying its a privacy issue? (maybe we could focus on it being a medical issue?)
Mostly, if one side stopped pretending they knew exactly when 'life' begins... could the other side also stop pretending they know exactly when 'life' begins?
We defensively hurl paper bombs filled with worn cliches at one another. Do we really need sides on this one? Rape is awful and evil we can all agree on that. Can't we all agree also that abortion is pretty terrible too and start the conversation from a place of compassion and genuine willingness to do right by each other? But that can't happen until the water settles a little.
So, I'm done... we should all sit back and watch The Land that Time Forgot! especially since it gives us the secret of evolution (spoiler alert: apparently it all started with women having a bath in a huge egg tub... I'm still a little confused by it all)
Until you get your own copy (its on TCM on Demand right now) Here's an awesome dino attack scene!!
Hope you have a lovely day,
thanks for reading...
Anyway I was thinking about Mr. Akin's comments on rape... legitimate rape, the possibility of getting pregnant, etc. And the first thing that came to mind was the Female Power onslaught that was about to take place on FB. And did it ever... Open letters to Mr. Akin from rape victims, diagrams of a women's reproductive system complete with 'anti-rape' measures, insistence that even though both Romney and Ryan said Akin should step down... that the whole GOP agrees with Akin.
What Akin said is horrible, thoughtless, and more than anything else... just dumb. In no way should rape be politicized for one side or another. Could you imagine if a woman had to fill out paperwork to prove her rape was 'legit?' I get headaches from all the paperwork I have to fill out to get my kid in preschool.
Rape is rape and its terrifying and cruel and can be life shattering, with or without a pregnancy and/or disease and/or irreparable mental or physical damage that may accompany it.
The problem that I have with all this though is that this dumb and demeaning comment came up during yet another abortion debate. So now... once again, people will try to lump together people who are pro-life with people who want to interrogate women who are raped to see if said rape was 'legit.'
And, again, that is stupid.
I am pro-life but I personally want the legality of abortion issue to be taken off the shelf as a political topic for a few years. I know... my pro-life friends will remind me that all the while, babies are perishing. But it is so omnipresent that it seems that little thought goes into it by many people and instead people pick a side and use the one-liner that best suits them. Whether it is:
"abortion is murder."
"no one should be able to legislate a woman's body."
or
"I believe its a life, but I don't feel comfortable telling other people what to do with their bodies."
The third of which is the most cowardly and dumb and often said by males who are scared to ruffle any feathers of the finer sex.
The first two... I believe at least both have points. But maybe if we took it off the table for a little while, could we pretend that the issue is not so black and white?
If one side stopped trying to make it illegal, could the other side stop saying its a right?
If one side stopped saying how dangerous it could be for the woman, could the other side stop insinuating that it's easier than pregnancy?
If one side stopped saying its a religious issue, could the other stop saying its a privacy issue? (maybe we could focus on it being a medical issue?)
Mostly, if one side stopped pretending they knew exactly when 'life' begins... could the other side also stop pretending they know exactly when 'life' begins?
We defensively hurl paper bombs filled with worn cliches at one another. Do we really need sides on this one? Rape is awful and evil we can all agree on that. Can't we all agree also that abortion is pretty terrible too and start the conversation from a place of compassion and genuine willingness to do right by each other? But that can't happen until the water settles a little.
So, I'm done... we should all sit back and watch The Land that Time Forgot! especially since it gives us the secret of evolution (spoiler alert: apparently it all started with women having a bath in a huge egg tub... I'm still a little confused by it all)
Until you get your own copy (its on TCM on Demand right now) Here's an awesome dino attack scene!!
Hope you have a lovely day,
thanks for reading...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)