Consuming

The economic crisis really puts perspective on what our purpose on this earth is-- or at least according to the media and those who manipulate the economy (or "run" it), we are consumers. Nothing more and nothing less. We must consume in order to get the economy on it's feet. Where we as a society have needs? well, good luck! But we all must buy more in order to keep the economy going! We have to spend in order for those who make the real money to make more money so that they are willing to invest so that we have more to buy. Is there a point when we realize that consuming only consumes and does not rebuild or give back?

It's the economy stupid...

Paul Krugman has got the word on the economy and is pointing us all in the right direction! Check out his book The Return of Depression Economics. He breaks the economy down for any layperson in an enjoyable and entertaining way.

Speaking to the imagination

Einstein is often misquoted and misrepresented by believers who want to claim him as one of their own. But he was quoted as saying "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." From a letter Einstein wrote in English, dated 24 March 1954.* While reading his biography, the author mentions his re-embracement of his jewish heritage. While this may or may not be true (Judaism is not terribly concerned with the actual belief in god...), he also notes that Einstein's most innovative and powerful discoveries came during the period in which he totally rejected religion and all it represented. Einstein was also quoted as saying about his childlike faith "Thus I came...to a deep religiosity, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached a conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true....Suspicion against every kind of authority grew out of this experience...an attitude which has never left me."* It was freedom from the religious structures that allowed his mind to flourish and it was this self-same freedom which found him imagining himself riding alongside a lightbeam.

"The great discoveries were not made by those agog at the wonders of the divine, but by those intrigued by the wonders of the mundane." --Michael Coulter*

*http://atheistempire.com/

Your Spirit-Animal

In one of the iconic scenes from my favorite show (it becomes redundant to rename it each time...), Seamus sits in a lotus position (Well, he doesn’t really get to the classic lotus position. He’s really cross-legged.). Transition to a shot of the magnificent blue, teal, lapis lazuli, turquoise, cobalt waters where dolphins pas de deux in the waves. Seamus inhales deeply, taking in the breath of life from the island. One mammal delves into the deep, calling brightly into the darkness and smiling at the camera as the scene fades back to the contemplating New Jersey boy who was born to be a gearhead but who longs to be another Ernest Hemingway.

The dolphins are, as you come to find out, a symbol for who Seamus is... or as Sheriff Cody would say, "his spirit guide" Earlier in the scene, the mantraing peace officer explains the concept by telling his own experience at Joshua Tree ("very high energy there...")The memory is written on his face and you can see traces of his own animalistic adventures when he tells the Seeker how he became "...a lion, manifested."

His face molds into a feline grin as he describes his experience. "I started running, butt-nude, naked, barefoot over burning sands. I was a LION. I became my spirit animal.You hear what I'm saying Seeker? I was not following my bliss... I was bliss! I was the dream. I ran 23 miles, barefoot over burning sand. You follow me traveler?... That is the deepest moment I've ever experienced down here in dense matter. All I ever wanted for the rest of my life was to bound over boulders and chase small game. Couldn't live my life that way though... they'd put me in a zoo."

Most of us aren't torn between our spirit animal and the existence we would have as such. Most of us have no idea what living in that kind of wild abandonment would be like. We are consumed with what Cody realizes as a simple necessary ingredient to survival-- the "green energy." Unfortunately, when it becomes our focus, our goal, it loses "energy" and the best we can realize is a zoo-like existance, pacing in our cages, counting the steps between meals. But the life of the wild animal in the zoo is a truncated life and at some point it is time to ask yourself what kind of life you really want? WHAT is your spirit guide telling you?

Seamus, earlier in the episode (before he lost his lottery winnings) tells the conchs in Gumbo's End o' the World Cafe to follow their dreams. He espouses a famous quote of Joseph Campbell to "follow your bliss" to Rikki who is certain he is referring to the "Soup Guy." Later he asks Flame, one of the bar's dancers, what her dream is and encourages her to go to Paris to study ballet (in spite of her age and apparent lack of classical training).

This leads naturally to finding that inner self, the spirit animal that will guide you when you are tempted to climb back into the cave, stepping in time to the dinner all and will give you courage when the night is serenaded by predators.

not wild, but pets...

From a little different angle, I might compare my life as a christian and daughter of christian parents to that of a dog. I was raised to serve a master- to be at his beck-and-call. Life was limited to the back yard-- watching the birds fly overhead or watching the squirrels dance in the treetops, just out of reach. Occasionally I got out for walks but I was often overwhelmed by it and became terribly afraid of the great outdoors, preferring to nap in a sunny spot inside.

Doesn't sound too bad you say?

Yet unlike the dog, my master was not real. There was no one feeding me. Like the wild animals I still had to find sustenance. I was not able to stay indoors all the time, bathed and cared for by the kind hands of a smarter being.

No, for those who serve Christ, or for that matter follow Buddha or Allah-- whatever heavenly deity they believe in order to keep their world tidy and safe-- life is lived with the same chores and burdens that the wild animals have in order to survive. They don't understand this. They delude themselves into thinking they are the free ones, but in fact they are more like Lions in the zoo or a dog in the back yard-- safe from nothing really other than the fears in their mind.

They will never experience the freedom of bounding over boulders or chasing small game.

Cody realizes that following his bliss does not come without the burden of survival but he is committed to following his bliss-- to being a lion in his heart.

The Phoenix

When asked what bird a person would choose to be, one responded, "A phoenix".

Having a special affinity for the Egyptian myths and archeology, I was reading on this site http://www.livius.org/phi-php/phoenix/phoenix.html to find out a bit more than the average Harry Potter book will tell you concerning the origins of the legendary flighted creature.

Mythology is an important part of culture... The stories we tell ourselves help to define who we are and what we will do in and with our lives. Recovering an understanding the power of myth helps to place them in the proper perspective (for instance, understanding the bible in a similar vein as Greek mythology would be a much healthier attitude for those christians who want the bible to be GOD'S WORD.) while recovering ancient stories of the goddess of sexuality would help us recover from the repressed sexuality that christianity has imprinted on the American conscience.

Even feminists have rejected the inherent sensuality of humanity, preferring to buy into the "sex is bad and as such, women are always victimized by sex" mentality. To my mind, this means a rejection of self and worse, allowing religion to dominate and define who women and men should be and how they relate to each other.

what is success?

For a writer (of which community I fancy myself to be a part of on a good day-- Like Seamus in 'Key West' my response to the comment, "A writer?" would be "Yeah... somedays... sort of... no"), as it is in many other artistic fields, it is difficult to balance the desire for an audience and to be a bestselling writer with the greater goal of being true to oneself-- and offering the best one has to offer. One might compare Hemingway and Fitzgerald... but in an age when bestsellers are written by such as John Grisham or Stephanie Meyer, Hemingway looks considerably more challenging than he was considered during his heyday. The challenge is however to curb, somehow, the desire to be number one on the Barnes and Noble list and reach for something better, to create something that will challenge the mind and heart. I don't know if I can or ever will attain that which some call "great literature" but I do know that to present less than the best that I am capable of is to sell out which ultimately makes the work meaningless.

Strong words?? perhaps...

but something to keep at heart.

riding alongside a lightbeam

Einstein said, "Accumulation of material should not stifle the student's independence"...a society's competitive advantage will not come from how well its schools teach the multiplication and periodic tables, but from how well they stimulate imagination and creativity.

His biographer notes, "Therein lies the key...to Einstein's brilliance and the lessons of his life. As a young student he never did well with rote learning. And later, as a theorist, his success came not from the brute strength of his mental processing power but from his imagination and creativity. He could construct complex equations, but more important, he knew that math is the language nature uses to describe her wonders. So he could visualize how equations were reflected in realities-- how the electromagnetic field equations discovered by James Clerk Maxwell, for example, would manifest themselves to a boy riding alongside a light beam. "

As [Einstein] once declared, "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

Dreams

Last night I dreamt of you-
dreamt of the day on the beach
our skin browned in the sun
the sand clinging to limbs
We swam out to the rocks and reclined,
limbs interlocked
flesh melting
The water laps at the rocks reminiscent of
sex
you
in me
out
in
We are tugged and pulled,
the ocean's fingers draw at us
enticing us
to dance with the residents of the deep
to linger
in our forgetfulness

Cross-stitching life

Can you start life over? Can you undo a lifetime of---well, I'll just call it what it was-- brainwashing and make yourself into who you could have been, should have been?

For nearly four years-- well, really five years-- since the October I read 'Dance of the Dissident Daughter' I have been feeling my way along, looking, learning, unraveling, reweaving. It's like one of my cross-stitch stockings. I got to a point and realized that I had made a mistake. The pattern was wrong and it was ugly- lopsided. Wrong. And unfortunately the ugliness had bled into the stockings I had made for my children. (An interesting metaphor that actually says more than I even intended-- ) So it was time to decide what to do with it. Did I hang on to it and live with what I had? Not terribly tempting since it left me in the same place essentially. Did I undo part of it and fix as much as possible? Tempting- it's hard to unravel those little stitches and even fixing it a bit is going to take quite some time... or do I take it all out and start over?? (That is going to be a LOT of work!) OR should I chuck it all out the door and just start over???? Sounds the easiest in many regards but isn't really-- after all I have to pick a new pattern, buy new thread, new cloth,etc.-- and life of course isn't as easy to get clean as an Aida cloth.

But the old had to go. It was untenable to try and salvage most of it and just repair bits. There was simply too much wrong with it.

So, little by little...

here, a really bad part. Undo that.

Ugh! that bit there is completely backwards-- you have to take that out!

And this is completely the wrong color.

Life had been based on what would be-- on there being a life after life that would reward the pain and struggle in this life. Life wasn't based on there being any value in it. The "stocking" had no value in and of itself. It was something to be made because you needed to have something to show for your time on planet earth.

And that is essentially it-- I didn't have anything worth salvaging because it wasn't a life, it was a travail that you went through to get to the other side. My theology would adjust and I'd see my role on the planet differently but essentially it was all for the same purpose- to come to that day and have the Father tell me, "Well, done good and faithful servant." I was always waiting-- eternally waiting--- for??? Maybe to be what we all want to be- (and that for some is not as elusive as it was for me)- accepted as a REAL person- for who I WAS. Who I AM. (...although I had the problem that much of the template that had been used for the pattern of who I was had been tampered with- altered by the force of religion-- really generations of religious background that may even have been imprinted at this point in my DNA and family issues that had never been dealt with. )

So I looked it over, this stocking, and realized that what I was left with was---

shit.

and it was going to need to be started over- or at least as close as possible.

and the process of undoing has been long and painful

and is still going on.

But what I have before now me is good-- because I have gotten a good deal undone and I think I have figured out a way to add a new bit of Aida cloth rather than unraveling the whole bit. And what I have so far is good because it is done with my own hand, with my own ideas and my own conception of who I am and what I want. I know I would be a different person had I been raised without the restrictions of religion. I know that I would have made completely different choices had I not believed certain things-- and that is important because it leads me to a better place since now I know that I would have been a better person had the circumstances been different- so there is something to aim for. But also because now I know that much of what IS good about me now had nothing to do with the way I was raised. (in fact to the contrary-- my intelligence was stifled-- after all, outsmarting god or smarty pantsing your way to unbelief was a quick road to hell. Dangerous!...Now there is an effective control technique! After all, if you nurture your intelligence, if you ask too many hard questions or the questions take you to the wrong place- with wrong being doubts about god or even having different beliefs about god- then you will lose your faith which ultimately leads you to destruction -the unspoken ever present scary place... hell!Believers like to pretend that they don't want to scare people into belief in god but that is what their statements always lead them to whether they will admit it or not)

I finished a book called 'Superstition' last week (see earlier post). The author, Robert Park Prof. of Physics at Princeton, goes after superstitions of all kinds but really what he does alongside that is show what it is inside homo sampiens that has led them to accept superstition that is out of sync with reality today (although I think he could have gone further with this point) And he also shows how humanity has evolved and how the ethic of "doing unto others" is really a part of that evolution. (That's one of those things, you know-- this sort of innate, deeply ingrained prejudice that I grew up with- that people who didn't believe in god weren't really good people, that they might try to be good but they were always overcome by their real (corrupt) nature. And as many years as I have worked at undoing that mythology, it still lingers. Always more to unravel.)

So here I am-- standing at the brink of a beginning.

We, Maurice and I, want to travel-- to Key West (some more!)- to Epypt (I really want to see the pyrmids!) -to the ruins of Troy--- Our travel will always be geared around some bits of history we want to smell, touch, feel... We also want to go to Princeton and the east coast to see Fitzgerald's home (After having read 'This side of paradise' the idea of seeing the places he writes about is really intriguing).

I have a new job-- but my new job is really more than a change in where I am going to be in two weeks. I got this job as a new person, based on my experience and who I am-. When I started the job I currently have at Libaria at Grant M.S., I was hired as a body. The principal could have cared less who I was or if I loved reading, etc. I could have sat in the library here doing nothing and he would have been happy as long as the kids could get a book when they needed it. The new principal is not much better. She really only wants a body. I truly think she thought I would stay here and do what I do for less money- and while the money is not the issue- it does symbolize something in the system I work in. And it symbolizes something for me personally-- for one thing it's me saying to the world, "I have too much experience and give too much to this school to take less than what I have now" and it's me saying to myself, "You have something to offer- give it." It's me saying "I am not just a body. I have value."

--
"We are all standing at the station. The train is always leaving and the soul checks it's watch and wonders if its his time to go." -Cole, character in Key West, episode: Act of God.

"And the true realism, always and everywhere, is that of the poets: to find out where joy resides, and give it a voice far beyond singing. For to miss the joy is to miss all." -- Robert Louis Stevenson

Got milk???

Did you know that human evolution is still occurring? Although it is difficult to find pronounced evidence of changes in humans (humans sleep around too much) -- the fact that more people are able to digest milk is definitely a sign of evolution.

See these articles for more information:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/science/11evolve.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Cornell University (2005, June 2). Lactose Intolerance Linked To Ancestral Environment. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 17, 2009, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/06/050602012109.htm

In the same vein as Frank....

Michael Parenti writes this article: Capitalism’s Self-inflicted Apocalypse

To give you a taste, he concludes with these words,
"In sum, free-market corporate capitalism is by its nature a disaster waiting to happen. Its essence is the transformation of living nature into mountains of commodities and commodities into heaps of dead capital. When left entirely to its own devices, capitalism foists its diseconomies and toxicity upon the general public and upon the natural environment--and eventually begins to devour itself.

The immense inequality in economic power that exists in our capitalist society translates into a formidable inequality of political power, which makes it all the more difficult to impose democratic regulations.

If the paladins of Corporate America want to know what really threatens “our way of life,” it is their way of life, their boundless way of pilfering their own system, destroying the very foundation on which they stand, the very community on which they so lavishly feed"
http://www.michaelparenti.org/capitalism%20apocalypse.html

Arianna Huffington

Reporting on the economy Arianna Huffington writes today,
"1.1 million people received food stamps in November, an increase of 13 percent from a year earlier.

In Arizona, there's been a 100-percent increase in the number of people seeking social services from the state.

In Contra Costa, California, 40,000 families applied for 350 available affordable-housing vouchers.

In San Francisco, food banks report a 30-percent rise in demand for emergency food assistance. In Lehigh Acres, Florida demand is up 75 percent.

If, as it now seems likely, unemployment hits 9 percent, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates the number of Americans driven into poverty will rise by 7 to 10 million -- on top of the 37.3 million currently living below the poverty line (and while that number is the latest from the Census Bureau, it's from 2007, before the worst of the downturn).

Making matters worse -- much worse -- is the fact that the growing need is being met by a decrease in government programs and charitable services.

18 states cut their welfare rolls last year.

The number of families receiving government financial assistance is at a 40-year low.

In South Carolina, low-income women under 40 with breast or cervical cancer have had their treatment cut.

In Nevada, the state's largest public hospital has stopped providing outpatient oncology services.

In Arizona, programs to prevent child abuse and lower the number of children in foster care were slashed.

In Florida, home services for poor seniors are on the budget chopping block.

In Utah, 20,000 poor people face being removed from the state's primary care health network."

I don't think it's even necessary to comment, the stats say it all. But I will say, perhaps redundantly, that our government has committed a crime against us. Their policies have benefited the rich and powerful, meanwhile they work like robber barons against the poor. Every safety net has been stripped. It's sad---

see the full article at:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/darkening-clouds-silver-l_b_172339.html3

Superstition

Book reviewing might be subtitled "the good, the bad and the ugly"

On the other side of the spectrum from the one that Mr. Crossley-Holland has set forth (below), comes Robert L. Park's...

I have just begun it and am not reading it exclusively but at the beginning of the book he discusses the current movement among religious sects to try and unite science with religion.

In the first few pages (after revealing the mounds of money available to scientists who support and argue for intelligent design) he goes on to address the "Anthropic Principle", the principle which claims that "The fundamental parameters of the universe are such as to permit the creation of observers within it." or as he paraphrases so well... "If things were different, things would not be the way things are."

He addresses more directly a 2001 analysis of the anthropic principle "Probabilities and the Fine-Tuning Argument: a Skeptical View" by Timothy McGrew, Lydia McGrew, and Eric Vestrup. They wrote, "The Principle of Indifference: it is unreasonable to suggest that any one range of values for the constants is more probable a priori than any other similar range." Taking the author's claim on from a slightly different angle than is generally heard, Park brilliantly responds, "If the universe is designed for life, it must be said that it is a shockingly inefficient design. There are vast reaches of the universe in which life as we know it is clearly impossible: gravitational forces would be crushing, or radiation levels are too high for complex molecules to exist, or temperatures would make the formation of stable chemical bonds impossible. Even in our own solar system it seems increasingly likely that Earth is the only outpost of life. The search for life to which we are not related-- exterrestrial life-- is perhaps the greatest quest of science, but so far it has been disappointing. Fine-tuned for life? It would make more sense to ask why God designed a universe so inhospitable to life."

Crossing two pair-a-dice?

Crossing to Paradise
By: Kevin Crossley-Holland

Lengthening his stay at the shores of the middle ages, Crossley-Holland recycles a supporting character from his Arthur Trilogy for his most recent adventures. Conscripted into a local lady’s service, Gatty is rounded up with seven other loosely bound individuals to aid the Lady Gwenyth in a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Gatty quickly finds herself in a whorl of excitement from the first moment they set off- getting lost on the dark and dodgy streets of London, rescuing a compatriot when he nearly tumbles to his death and hitting the high seas on the final leg into Jerusalem- all setting Gatty on the adventure of a lifetime.

Crossley-Holland’s humdrum, yet action-packed (really there is almost too much action) adventure is fairly common in the marketplace of children’s books – or perhaps it might be better said to be too common and indistinct from the multitudes of children’s book on the shelves today. The adventure itself may keep a young reader's attention long enough to hit the streets of Jerusalem- and they won’t suffer greatly from the lack of prose but it's not a peanut-butter story. Unfortunately the author has chosen to use his middle England to Jerusalem setting as a backdrop for an introduction to modern Christianity. Third person narrative is used to put forth an ideology as in one particular scene where Gatty is lost in London. The third person narrative chimes in, "God took pity on Gatty" using the omniscient perspective to explain how it was that Gatty suddenly remembered where the group was going to stay. In other spots this same "voice" refers to “Jesus” as though he were a character in the book. In addition to this, the character's faith is often littered with a modern theology that would have been unfamiliar to people of the time. Prayers offered by the characters of the book are answered—an easy way to include a god personage into the story without preaching.

In historical fiction, the author walks a tightrope of reality and make-believe and when an author takes license with the historical realities of the period, they risk losing the story. In this case, the historical inaccuracies by and large seem directly aimed at propagating an ideology as opposed to a lack of research on the part of the author.

As a former member of said religious affiliation, I can testify to the intention of Christian believers to spread the good news in just such a way. It was a widely taught method-- living the gospel rather than preaching it (which sounds inoccuous enough). Unfortunately in LIFE, living out perfection is much more complicated and the technique is generally not a successful method of proselytizing. In fiction it is a much more effective tool because the author can make sure god does the things that Christians believe god does or want him to do. And, as a former Christian, I considered these matters myself in my own writings-- In fact, the author's example may set a standard for just how a christian author can include christianity in as subtle and seemingly harmless way in their writing as possible. By using the third person to include jesus and god in the narrative, a Christian worldview is presupposed. Christians believe that god answers prayer-- a fiction writer can make god answer the prayer. Christians believe that jesus hears their prayers-- a fiction writer can say "jesus heard her prayers." Using this authoritative voice, the author then presents his or her religious ideology without a sermon. Using their imagination, they create the world they want to have, the one where christians have peace that others don't have or have god's guidance in the dark of night or are better than other people are because god changed them.

They, in essence, create their own reality.

Holland’s stories, while not a sampling for a Billy Graham revival, are firmly rooted in Christian theology and utilize a technique for proselytizing that is just as insidious as the 'Left Behind' series. Avoid them!

That was then, This is now

Last night we were watching our favorite television show, (can you guess?) 'Key West'. For the twenty or thirty-something time we sat and watched Seamus stand in stunned amazement at winning the lottery while babes in skimpy swimsuits jump up and down around him. He jumps in his auto and heads south to the place he's always dreamed of going- Key West, one of the homes of Hemingway and Tennessee Williams. In a moment of symbolic portent, he drives his car to the end of the world and into the water at the end of Highway 1 (Highway 1 does not really end at the ocean's edge but it's great for effect). Not content with the possibility that the car may have survived the attempted drowning, he takes a revolver out of his jacket and shoots his car, assuring himself of his intent to stay.

Seaumus's introduction to the island moves quickly from here. Jo Jo, a Rastafarian immigrant, takes him to the newspaper where Seamus meets Cole, the newspaper editor, and gets his first assignment. Then off to Gumbo's, the end of the world bar and cafe where he finds an enraged barkeep threatening his island tour agent (Gumbo and Jo Jo have a slight disagreement over the girls in the bar). And we meet Savannah, the personification of the sexual soul of the island. Savannah (played with finesse and gentility by Jennifer Tilly) meets Seamus and gives him a taste of what he is really encountering by coming to Key West- it's not just a tropical vacation land, as she says, it's "magic here. There are Angels in the Spray, Wizards in the Palm Trees, and Elves in the Sea Shells..." Later, she meets a client, a young boy whose father has hired her for his defloweration. Her words to him? "Today, you're gonna learn everything you're ever gonna need to know about women. I'm gonna teach you. And when you walk outta here tonight you're gonna have a Ph.D. in me. And your stock is gonna soar. And your self-confidence is gonna go through the roof." In yet another scene she goes to the home of a woman who was injured in a car accident to be the woman's body for her husband. It is positively electric to see her sensuality working it's own magic on the inhabitants of the little island.

I first watched this show in July of 2005 with Maurice. There was a moment that seemed faintly familiar but the newness of the show overshadowed the vague familiarity and I let the moment flutter past, a memory butterfly heading for the next shaft of sunlight. At a later date, however, the moment was so poignant that I nearly caught my breath, recalling a night years earlier (it would have been January, 19 of '93 although I could not have told you the date when the sensation occurred) when I had flipped the channel to the new little station, Fox, to see what they were airing from lack of anything better to watch. Initially I was probably intrigued by the woman sitting in the wheelchair, informing the beautiful raven haired vision that she had been in an accident and she wanted her (Savannah) to be her body. But the scene was so overtly sexual that my own, then suppressed and stifled, sexuality was immediately offended by the implications of what the woman was suggesting.

I do not feel that I can adequately explain to you what I mean by "suppressed". Being raised in a fundamentalist christian home is one thing but there was background that clearly influenced my upbringing-- background that I did not fully understand of at the time and some I just didn't know.

Christianity itself is afraid of sexuality. At all points in the history of the church-- and even earlier among the Jews-- the followers of Yahweh have demonized women and marginalized them almost beyond recognition. The historical background of this is delineated by Sue Monk Kidd in her book Dance of the Dissident Daughter in far more detail than I have time to do here, but suffice it to say that the male-god images in Christianity were a powerful metaphor for the domination of the male in the home, the church and in politics (which was integrally connected to the church). It is not insignificant that the church remains one of the final institutions where women are simply not allowed to hold certain positions of leadership. It is this very connection to the godhead that gives christian men an authority that moves beyond humanity and places any woman in an automatic role of subordination. What little girls quickly learn is that momma has no power, momma is a lesser species and DADDY is like god. When, like in my case, daddy could care less that there is a little girl underfoot and the mother is too young to know anything about raising children- who was still a child herself- the implications to her personage are profound.

Add to this, my parent's sinful start... Having been nabbed by the church in their indiscretion and then having to face the judgment of people who, if truth be told were undoubtedly engaged in far uglier behavior than a youthful moment of passion, and you begin to see why I was a less than welcome presence for a man who was trapped into marriage. (The implications of living life "in community" where you are put in the position of living up to the expectations of the people of the church is yet another topic for another day- but it is appalling to envision the young couple weeping and begging forgiveness from people that had no business being involved in the situation in the first place.)

On top of that, recent revelations revealed that my mother was sexually molested by her brothers. It is obvious that her fear of men and their passions (and possibly her own) helped shape the opinions she spouted in regard to men and marriage to me. Having never dealt with the reality of the molestation, (to this day her relationship with her brothers remains outwardly like anyone else's. In the name of "forgiveness" my mother pretended it never happened and thus exposed other women, including myself, in the family to the same abuses. While understandable considering the fifties were a suppressed age that finally gave way to the "free love" generation, her insistence today that she was noble for forgiving them, is somewhat appalling), she married a man who had been raised by parents who were smothered with fear of sexual sin and had raised a son who was sexually repressed. (I don't know if there are more secrets concerning this particular emphasis. Most likely there was more abuse.) At any rate, there were many prejudices that were passed on to me and I was handed this information without full disclosure-- even into adulthood. (Had I known the background of my mother's abuse, some of the hysteria she imposed on me might have been diminished).

At any rate, all of these influences lent themselves to shaping my identity and I developed a sense of repugnance for my own sexuality.

Unfortunately, sexual urges are not like alcoholism or drug addiction-- they are an appetite that is more akin to the need for nutrition to the body. And it really is with great effort that you subordinate it-- especially to the extent that I controlled it. I was determined that I would not be controlled in any way by sexual urges. And in order to do so, I had to eradicate any visual or even musical stimulation-- even books that were sexually suggestive were taboo with the intent of keeping my "thoughtlife" pure. Sexually suggestive jokes were forbidden and even a friend's sexual disclosures caused a rosiness on my cheeks that exposed my discomfort. I worked very hard to be as pious as a priest in terms of my sexuality. The fact that I even had sex with my X is really evidence of further control by the church-- having been reprimanded at some point that it is a wifely responsibility not to withhold sex, I felt it was a... "necessary evil" so to speak.

It was at this point in my life that I watched the woman speaking to her husband about the passion they had once shared and saw Savannah's hand brush the man's cheek (he was blindfolded). The scene then switched to a darkened room with a black woman hovering around candles humming, working her voodoo.

Voodoo-- demons-- devil--

That was enough.

I changed the station away from the sinful scene, afraid to expose myself to the intensely carnal scene (nothing illicit is actually shown- the implication was enough) and the hint of black magic, I never darkened the doors of the Fox channel on Tuesday at 8 p.m. again.

That was then...

Since that time, having watched the show so many times now, I have gained an understanding of the connection that Savannah has to the island. And in addition to that I have also reconciled myself to myself. I have learned that my own sexuality is not something to be ashamed or afraid of and I can watch that scene with genuine appreciation. In fact it is remarkable to see a woman in such an intensely sexual manner without the usual focus of a cheap slut who is there to titillate and tie viewers to the screen with the tawdriness of it. While it is difficult to understand the nuances for many, Savannah's sexuality is intentionally oppositional to the mainstream T&A we see on television. Her mocking attitude toward the prince and his "staying power" and the speech she gives the "cherry" is a role reversal. Her intention to teach the young man about women is a distinctly different role than the one the prostitute generally plays-- one of sex toy to a man who has no interest in the woman he is with let alone pleasing her! This is a sexuality where the goal is to "know" women and to have them follow the boy around because he treats them well. It's revolutionary-- even 16 years after it was first aired. (After all, sexuality on American television remains very juvenile)

As I watch today I watch the scene with sincere admiration. It is, in fact, one of my favorite scenes. I now understand that my own sensuality is as much a part of who I am as the birthmark on my leg... as much a part of who I am as the course, curly ash-blond hair on top of my head. And celebrating the sexual soul is celebrating life and humanity!

Celebrating me!

This is now!

Quote for the day

Develop an interest in life as you see it; the people, things, literature, music- the world is so rich, simply throbbing with rich treasures... Forget yourself.” ~~Henry Miller

Now here's a politician...

Playwright and Hollywood writer David Beaird created this character for the first episode of 'Key West'...Mayor Pembrooke. The speech he gives at this political rally is wonderful because he speaks to the heart of what we are missing today-- a spirit of service. Too often we think of service as a volunteer or a donor to a charitable agency-- in this case I am talking about having a government that recognizes that it is its responsibility to protect the people, to serve people. In the episode, Pembrooke is running against a Republican woman (Chaucey Caldwell played by Denise Crosby) who is allied with the wealthiest man in town and others in the business community. She also has supporters among the religious community as we find out later. In Key West(the actual city) tensions were high during the making of the show over the business community's desire to be more tourist friendly (a battle that continues- or has been mostly lost- today) He says, "I am for abortion rights. I am for gay rights. I am for human rights. I also want the right to put some criminals in jail and throw away the key! And I want the right to demand that all those on welfare get off of welfare as soon as humanly possible. I am my brother's and my sister's keeper, not their sugar daddy. If you can work and you do not work, I am for your right to starve to death!

But, if you are old or disabled, or a child born into a poverty not of your making and beyond your understanding, if you are new to these shores and are confused and unable to speak the language, if you are a woman whose husband has died, and you are breaking your back to feed your children, then it is our obligation, our right, our joy to take you in, to wrap you in our arms and shelter you against the storm, to hold you safe against our breast and to make you understand that on this, the darkest night of all our lives none of us is really safe.

The storm that has blown your houses down one day will rage for us. And the only structures that will stand are the bridges that we build from misfortune to compassion. From denial to consciousness. From one heart to another. We are, thank god, our brother's and our sister's keepers. And this is our safety. And our joy. And our salvation."

An unpopular position

There is a phenomenon that can happen among those who have been victimized-- and while I know that I am not taking a P.C. position on this, it is an issue that should be addressed-- if, for no other reason, often those who wind up being the final victims are children.

It is not an unusual occurance-- Victim becomes abuser. Unfortunately, being a victim does not necessarily mean sensitivity for victims! Historically this has been true-- obviously it is not unusual for an abused child to grow up and abuse his or her children. It was a well known phenomenon among slaves-- the ones with more prestige were oppressive and victimized the less powerful among them. Women are hit by their husbands and when one fist hits one cheek the woman's hand goes out to slap the face of her child. It's a sad reality that cannot be excused by the initial violence. Even on a societal level it is not unusual for groups to impose rules on another that they themselves would find abhorrent. For instance, the black community voted against Prop 8 in California, banning gays from marriage. Blacks hate hispanics and hispanics hate blacks. Chinese hate Taiwanese-- japanese hate Chinese, Indians hate Pakistani (which is also a religion problem and don't underestimate the role religion plays in feeding hatred and prejudices) Hatred begets hatred. (And to further your outrage at my unpopular opinion: racism didn't begin with white Europeans.)

I have tried not to use personal experience too much on this blog but perhaps it's time...

My X was a master at this– if he felt that I was taking on too much of a role in raising his son or influencing the financial decisions that he was making, then he reminded that I was ONLY a white person. And he reinforced this with our children. “You know your mother is white– she’s not hip. She doesn’t get it.” (marginalize, marginalize, she’s a nobody, she’s a nobody) My daughter (whom he beat one dark night) was heavily influenced by this and when we divorced, she would not live with me and as I have also stated, became as abusive as he was toward me. Sadly I myself fell into the trap that his experiences with racism as a child and an abusive parent would give him a sensitivity concerning race and abuse-- I was wrong. As I well knew, he was ignored in the classroom. He was harassed by the police. He was beaten by his father (step-father, really) But does this give him cartes blanches to turn it on me? Does it give him the right to control and manipulate (and in some cases become physically aggressive) with my daughters? But it was my sympathy concerning his experience with racism that allowed him to keep disappearing me and gave him the leverage to do it to them-- and worse leave them with the feeling that this was normal and okay. (And frankly, it wasn’t just his prejudice toward white people– it was a hatred for women. He treated me just like his father treated his mother. The white part was a convenient way to try and disconnect me from my daughters.)

In another, less personal situation, a young black woman penned a new book this last year. The book was about an issue of some import– a history of the Ku Klux Klan in Denver. But it was poorly written and received a bad review for being POORLY written (I know the reviewer well and I KNOW she would not reject the book if it were well written). The author emailed, called her, pushed her, bullied her into changing the review. She didn’t do herself any favors by doing this- nor did she do her book any favors. A better written tome on this ugly time in Denver would have been so much more effective! But she got her good review and stifled free speech in the process.

Some young(hispanic)men in the building I work in stole a camera from a paraprofessional (who happens to be black- although in this case I think it's more significant that the para is a woman). The young men are under the supervision of the assistant principal (who is black and hispanic but it seems more significant that he is a man- although he clearly does feel sorry for the poor hispanic boys because he feels the are headed toward disaster because their culture does not value anything that will give them any true hope for a better future...) because they have gotten into a lot of trouble-- pre-gang behavior. But when the woman accused the boys, a strange thing happened. The assistant principal called them into his office and said, "Louis (I made up the name here) said he saw you guys with Ms. C's camera. Do you have it?" But of course they all said no. And that was where the matter ended. No locker check- no questioning of individuals-- and naming the person who pinpointed them may have resulted in his receiving a pummeling. Procedure wasn't followed because this principal is too interested in saving his young hispanic men to care if they have learned the wrong lesson in all this.

When the oppressed take the role of oppressor then the cycle continues to continue in the neverending cycle of oppression. And if we don't recognize and hold accountable those who become oppressors via their own status of victimhood, then we give a rubber stamp to yet another abuse. Just a cursory a moment of deliberation would add some sanity to this issue, but the knee jerk reaction of many liberals who believe that you can't speak on a subject unless you have experienced it, allows the abuse cycle to go unaddressed. After all, if all blacks are victims that are beyond reproach then how can you hold them accountable for abuse they may themselves issue??? And who is it that often incurs the wrath of the abuse? Their children.

We voted for issues, not values!

The systemic problems we have with patriarchy are not going to be solved by going nuts over individual incidents. Yes, we should all feel aware and empowered enough to address an offender in an appropriate manner and as an individual each time I do this, it makes me stronger. But it will not fix the failure of the system (though we often have the illusion we can fix things one person at a time)…

We have a BAD system which needs to overthrown. Not just in the U.S. but internationally. The U.S. in case after case makes the rules –and supports oppressive regimes that use sexism, racism, etc. in order to keep segments of the population down. And women and children are the easiest target although they are not, by any means, the only victims.

We need to change things. We won’t change them with a Civil rights kind of movement. There is simply no way to do that now. We really need to change the government and stop allowing them to tell us that we have to work within the system. For a example– If women had healthcare via the government and could find work that pays them what the men in the building make (and to that point– Education: Education is not valued in this country- Anti-intellectualism in this country is insidious! but in addition to that educators are paid what they are because it’s generally “woman’s work”. They don’t really need the income in too many voters opinion. And the voters vote school board members in who uphold their values– is that local and instant enough?…) but I digress, if women made better incomes then there would be one less thing to be dependent on a man for. But changing the healthcare system or education system in place won’t happen with the lobby system that currently operates in this country. Insurance companies and healthcare companies are far too powerful. They pull the strings where this issue is concerned. Any politician who is not willing to take on the insurance companies with the awareness that they are failing women in this country is not the woman’s rights advocate he claims to be. And as long as there is no way to provide the basic most fundamental needs that a woman has when she leaves-- then we can’t expect women to leave bad situations with the pie in the sky dream that they will just walk out in the world, get a job and everything is now good. They have to be able to provide for themselves, get healthcare, get food, pay electric bills, etc. The system is set up right now so that trying to get help for issues such as this is nearly impossible.

Here’s another example: Right wing agencies are now in the business of “helping”– I was a referred to one not too long ago when I needed some legal advice. Here is what happened: I was afraid I needed some representation because my X was pushing me into transporting my son back and forth to sports on his side of town (30-45 minutes away). It was creating havoc on our time together but it was also impeding my ability to work the second job I have to work to provide for us. So I called this agency that offered legal aid. Initially I was told that the "expert", the person best able to help me was not in and would call me back. She did- almost right away. All good, right? Wrong. No one said they were a christian agency but it was pretty clear, pretty quickly OR if I am wrong, then they have been influenced heavily by christian values. At any rate, I told the woman my story. She said, “Well I think you just need to take advantage of that drive time… you know, just talk and have time to be together.” “What???” says I. “But I have a second job and I wasn’t so much as ASKED about the schedule for this. I was told. And on top of that, I don’t want my son to play football.” Her condescending response?? “Well, I think you have to do what’s right for your son here. He wants to play football and you should just take advantage of that drive time.” When I expressed my outrage at her advice she said, “I’m sorry I’m not saying what you want to hear, dear.”

So this is the advice that is being offered to women who have nowhere else to turn–??? their ex is taking advantage of the situation, using the children to bully her now and the “helpful” people that the government now pays to “help” are christians who want their patriarchal sytem to be the defining system in this country.

Sorry but that is a bad system! Our government should not be giving a dime to religious institutions -for women’s sake -for humanity’s sake. For that matter they should be taxing these damnable institutions.

It is the rich and powerful in this country who benefit and encourage ongoing systems that subordinate and they are the real problem. If our government were about the business of protecting PEOPLE in the first place, rather than being of and for and by the corporations, then we might BEGIN to change the systemic problems inherent in the patriarch. If we had a government that did not walk hand in hand with big business (and I will include the church in that “big business” category because the religious institutions in this country are big business, they have tons of political power and they have a tremendous desire to be the defining influence in what the family should look like, men’s roles, etc.) then we might have a system that protects women -for that matter protects all the poor- when they need help rather than continuing their subordination.

That is where real change begins!

Any chance our "leader" will lead us on this?