I'm Not a Feminist, But It's Okay if I Am to You

Originally Posted on Feministing Community

I am a big fan of the British singer-songwriter Holly Golightly. The other day, while scouring YouTube for interview clips, I came across a brief question and answer session originally aired on German television. In heavily accented English, the interviewer concludes the segment by asking something that, to this audience, will seem all too familiar.

Interviewer: As a woman [performer], do you [take] a Feminist stance?

Golightly: That's quite interesting. I don't think of myself as being a militant feminist in any sense of the word. I think what I've done is the best that I could do, according to my ability, irrespective of sex. The [songs] that have always interested me--women played a very big part in [them] and had a lot to do with production and writing, but [they] were not credited. This was something that was quite difficult for women to do, to really extend into, because it was a man's world. The music industry, per se, was a man's world, and still is, largely.

I think when you talk about Feminism, the fact that I just get up and do it---if people would like to say that I'm a Feminist by virtue of the fact that I do it and have done it independently, then that's good. If it's influenced someone, then that's good.

____________________

I believe the interviewer was attempting to allude to her lyrics and stage presence in asking the question, both of which are frequently tough, uncompromising, no-nonsense, and yes, even badass. Regarding Feminist identity, Golightly takes an odd position, making sure first to note that she isn't seen as a "militant" feminist, another example of the stereotype we have tried so hard to change. And yet, she is also not uncomfortable being labeled as a feminist by those who might find her lyrics and music inspiring. I will say that I personally think Golightly is a feminist, even if she herself would rather I form that conclusion for myself.

We've certainly sought to embrace other female musicians who are squeamish about being feminist, but certainly display Feminist stances through their art in any case. One wonders if "feminist by any other name" is the best we can do sometimes. Or, to look at it another way, I think about the number of unsubstantiated historical figures that are embraced as queer in LGBT circles. Many of these people lived such heavily closeted lives that uncovering indisputable proof of their true sexual orientation might always be a topic for debate. Discerning a queer identity, much like discerning a feminist identity, often feels somewhat like interpreting a poem. One can make educated guesses, but only the author knows the complete truth.

Memories passed

now are
landmarks

in a game of
orienteering for sport
pointing towards directions
we once traversed

a goal to be reached
on a long delayed

imaginary journey
directly due west

Odd twists and
turns towards
Ponce

But unlike a
fountain of youth

I am in search of a
fountain of peace.

Why Washington is Broken (A Resident's Perspective)

(Click to embiggen)

Last night, voters rejected the Washington, DC, establishment, signaling an electorate eager to take out its anger on political insiders of both parties. Channeling dissatisfaction with the nation's capital has long been the meal ticket for candidates espousing a strong populist streak. Such is the nature of this election cycle. Having established that, I thought I might try to add my own perspective as to why Washington runs the way it does. Close to a year spent here has given me ample opportunity to observe many of its idiosyncrasies and quirks. While I have certainly not been privy to the private world of the federal government, I have experienced a multitude of other meetings, gatherings, and functions which have inadvertently or deliberately mirrored that of the seat of power.

Politics on a national level, as evidenced by last night, is frequently a contentious, painful process predicated on constant conflict. Within the political process, this might be seen as a necessary evil, but it simply doesn't stop there. Instead, it seeps into other established entities in the city, often tainting good intentions along the way. The paradox in place is that, the way the system has been set up, unless this consistent friction exists, true change and reform will never come to pass. Still, this setup has been the undoing of many organizations with noble intentions who were utterly unraveled by in-fighting. Sustained fisticuffs have a way of wearing down even the most idealistic of reformers. It's one thing to be a spectator, but something quite different to be a prize fighter.

Especially problematic is the fact that the District itself, as well as the surrounding suburbs are closely tied to the military and to politics, two occupations which require frequent relocation. The transitory nature of the city itself frustrates any sense of continuity. Without a stable core, no one hangs around long enough to really address problematic issues. Indeed, it has taken a full year for me to properly orient myself enough to be able to speak with any sort of authority in writing this to you. That which I discovered for myself was not written down, nor did anyone trouble themselves to explain it to me. Rather, this was something I had to learn through observation and interrogatives.

To return to the subject at hand, since DC is home to so much in-flow, out-flow, sufficient inroads cannot be made in so short a time. As such, an inner core of long-time residents who have set down roots and are there to stay constantly compete against short-time residents. Washingtonians with a degree of seniority are reluctant to extend a hand of friendship or cooperation to newer transplants, primarily because so many are merely serving a tour of duty and will leave very soon. To a very large degree, this entire description might as well describe Congress as a whole. Washington, regardless of station and intent, is for many a way station, or perhaps only a couple years spent in occupational Purgatory.

Every city has its own character. Washington, DC, is a city which takes itself quite seriously. It should be noted that, in all fairness, any large city has a serious tendency to navel-gaze regarding its own idealized conception of self. As for DC, a metropolitan area which regularly attracts its fair share of celebrities, big wigs, and names to be dropped later, possesses a certain inferiority complex regarding the other cities up and down the Northeast corridor. The degree of social climbing and with it a desperation to be seen as significant speaks to the structure of the city itself. The post-war boom transformed what had been a sleepy, Southern town into a major metropolitan area. In some ways, DC has been playing catch-up ever since and does not believe that other cities in the region have ever given it the respect it deserves.

Lamentably, this only fosters testiness, suspicion, and frostiness among many. In many ways, such behavior is a kind of defensive reaction, developed among those who deal with crises and intensity on a regular basis. Washington is a fine place for a drama queen, but not for those who love peace and quiet. At some point, this sort of reflexive expectation becomes self-reinforcing, meaning that people begin to assume that the only way to get anything accomplished is to be as contentious and uncompromising as possible. This isn't exactly the best strategy to undertake in order to build community and mutual trust. Those with shields out and at the ready at all moments take a while to be convinced why they ought to lay them aside for a while.

Regardless of what anyone says, Washington, DC, has always been heavily partisan, has always been a battleground, and has always courted heavy artillery. This doesn't just stop with politics. The city itself bears lasting scars, both literal and metaphorical. Many of these are recent, relatively speaking. The assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., touched off a series of destructive riots that severely damaged large sections of the District. Even with recent gentrification, many locations have yet to fully recover. With the riots meant an increasing white flight away from the district into Northern Virginia. The Vietnam War meant years of wearying wave-after-wave of protests. The late 80's and early 90's saw the District win the ignoble distinction of murder capital of the country. Any city serving as the focal point of what is still a very affluent and populous country would have borne the burden of collective frustration. That which was true then is true now.

How does one reform Washington? A good question, though men and women much wiser than you or me have never been able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. The most accurate statement of all might be that Washington, DC was always broken. A DC-area Quaker coined a saying back in the 50's to address this very same issue. "Seek not to contest with evil, lest ye be taken by the spirit of contention, rather concern yourself with goodness." Perhaps it depends on your innate temperament. If you fancy yourself a knife-fighter, you'll always find a battle to appeal to your lust of blood. But, if you want to facilitate peace and an end to dysfunction and strife, I think taking the high ground might be a far better option. As I think you can see, politics doesn't just exist in a vacuum. It is so pervasive and influential that it penetrates every group of human beings living in close proximity. If politics could formulate its own specific code of conduct, that would be one thing, but as I have tried to illustrate, it never stops there.

Today's WTF Moment

In deciding what I am to write about from day to day, I read through a variety of news sources. It was much to my dismay to uncover this story, which is so unbelievably offensive that words nearly fail me at the moment. As a native of Birmingham, I can tell you that the high school referenced in the story I've included below is located in a working class, conservative, predominately white, rural, unincorporated community. That an indefensibly stupid act by a schoolteacher would be found here of all places isn't a tremendous surprise to me. The offense itself, however, is so brazen and inexcusable on all kinds of levels. It sends my blood pressure through the roof to contemplate that local residents are willing to treat it like it's no big deal. Yes, it's no big deal to invoke Presidential assassination for the sake of making a point in class.

A Jefferson County, Alabama, teacher picked the wrong example when he used as­sassinating President Bar­ack Obama as a way to teach angles to his geome­try students.


Someone alerted autho­rities and the Corner High School math teacher was questioned by the Secret Service, but was not taken into custody or charged with any crime.



"We did not find a credible threat," said Roy Sex­ton, special agent in charge of Birmingham's Secret Service office. "As far as the Secret Service is concerned, we looked into it, we talked to the gentleman and we have closed our investigation."

Corner High geometry teacher picked the wrong example, President Barack Obama, to use in a lesson on angles. The lesson resulted in a Secret Service investigation. Sexton said he generally doesn't discuss threat cases, but confirmed his of­fice investigated the inci­dent. No federal charges followed the probe.



The teacher was appar­ently teaching his geometry students about parallel lines and angles, officials said. He used the example of where to stand and aim if shooting Obama.



"He was talking about angles and said, 'If you're in this building, you would need to take this angle to shoot the president,'" said Joseph Brown, a senior in the geometry class.



I'm not sure what else there is add to that. The story doesn't provide enough additional information to merit much additional speculation without entering the world of baseless conjecture, but what did transpire is offensive enough.

Efforts to reach the teacher for comment Mon­day were unsuccessful.

 Superintendent Phil Hammonds said the teacher remains at work, and there are no plans for termination.



"We are going to have a long conversation with him about what's appropriate," Hammonds said. "It was extremely poor judgment on his part, and a poor choice of words."



Caroline Polk, the parent of a ninth-grader at the school, said she doesn't be­lieve the teacher ought to be fired.



"We all make mistakes, and we should be able to learn from our mistakes," she said. "What he said was just wrong and inappropri­ate. Everyone's got their own opinions, but we have to be aware of our sur­roundings. At this point, it just needs to be handled in a way that it won't be re­peated."

Yes, imagine the outcry if the teacher had alluded to the assassination of George W. Bush. Imagine the right-wing spin machine on Fox News. Perhaps this formerly fine upstanding citizen was a secret Al-Qaeda operative! He deserves to be sent to Gitmo! We all know he was indoctrinating our children with his evil demonic left-wing radical propaganda! Lock him up and throw away the key!

Not a peep out of them this morning. I wonder why.

Troubling the Language

Editor's Note:

I wrote this originally for a Quaker audience, but would like to share this with you as well. I've added a few notes in the text to aid the comprehension of those who are not Friends. I've also expanded the message to include those who are not people of faith.

Thanks,

The Author.

Those who have studied it, even informally, recognize that the Gospel of John is a problematic book on all sorts of levels. The last Gospel written chronologically, many scholars now believe it was, in fact, not written by a direct observer of Jesus' ministry on Earth. It is a difficult book to reconcile with the rest of the Gospels, and I admit I usually steer clear of it for the most part. Certain verses and passages are helpful and some among the most cited in the entire canon, but much about its historical veracity has been called into question over the years as well. And in that spirit, many people are unaware that most modern translations omit certain verses in each of the Gospels that were believed to have been added not in the First Century, but much later, usually by Medieval writers. Yet, since later, not earlier manuscripts formed the King James version, they nonetheless became part of Bible tradition.

One such verse is John 5:4, which rendered in the original King James reads,

For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.

From this verse Friends derived the phrase "troubling the water" to mean the process of, if you will, rocking the boat to achieve a positive end, an undertaking set about to bring forth needed reforms and spiritual renewal. Though the immediate emotional response might be uncomfortable, the inevitable end is positive and facilitates growth. Here the disabled residents of Jerusalem lay by a pool named Bethesda. Depending on how one interprets the verse, either an actual Angel disturbed the water, a miracle which cured the very first person to enter the pool, or this was simply a story believed by those in attendance. We all know that truth often depends upon those who believe it, not whether or not it is actually real. We also know that the brain is a very malleable organ, and that it's far easier than one might think to open our minds up to any idea or belief. Moreover, this verse, even with its dubious veracity, was later transformed into something quite helpful, quite sacred, and quite necessary.

One finds reference to it in the old slave spiritual, "Wade in the Water". Since Quakers were absolutely essential to the establishment and maintenance of the Underground Railroad, I'm certain this song bears our hand print somewhere along the line. But Quakers weren't the only people instrumental in opposing slavery and devising means to dismantle it, brick by brick.

Wade in the water (children)
Wade in the water
Wade in the water
God's gonna trouble the water

If you don't believe I've been redeemed
God's gonna trouble the water
I want you to follow him on down to Jordan stream
(I said) My God's gonna trouble the water

You know chilly water is dark and cold
(I know my) God's gonna trouble the water
You know it chills my body but not my soul
(I said my) God's gonna trouble the water

(Come on let's) wade in the water
Wade in the water (children)
Wade in the water
God's gonna trouble the water

Now if you should get there before I do
(I know) God's gonna trouble the water
Tell all my friends that I'm comin' too
(I know) God's gonna trouble the water

Sometimes I'm up, Lord, and sometimes I'm down
(You know my) God's gonna trouble the water
Sometimes I'm level to the ground
God's gonna trouble the water
(I Know) God's gonna trouble the water

Wade in the water (children)
Wade out in the water (children)
God's gonna trouble the water

As with so many of these spirituals, much of the language is coded and not meant to be taken strictly literally. Designed to fly over the heads of suspicious slave owners and overseers, the song talks about the initial adversity of running away, while alluding to the ultimate benefit of securing freedom in the North. Troubling the water, in this instance, took the form of opposing the peculiar institution, a practice which only came to an end after a Civil War. Yet, there are many other instances where activists, regardless of their religious convictions, have troubled the water for the sake of progress.

Because I came from a Christ-centered tradition, I still find it odd that, when so much Friendly terminology has clear Biblical antecedents, many have drifted completely away from the Scriptures. As I read my Bible, I smile as I recognize the roots of some Testimony or some saying of George Fox, our founder. A recent discussion board posting on a Friendly site about the role of language in Quaker circles reminded me again of how conscious early Friends were in shaping unique and specific words, phrases, and overarching postulates---many of which are still in constant usage. There is a whole world of Quaker speak, and those who set it out did so deliberately and exactingly, in accordance with what they believed and to conform to the teachings and leanings of the faith.

Speaking directly to all Progressives, I pose this question. Should we, with a doff of the hat to our pioneers, follow in their footsteps to remake ourselves over, or should we reverently maintain a sense of linguistic continuity, even when it might dangerously tread towards ritual? (Quakers are opposed to ritual, but I find many Progressives are as well) I myself believe that not all tradition is a bad thing, but I do also acknowledge that there comes a time where we must remove the rust and dust that has accumulated with disuse for the sake of survival. As Progressives, what beliefs and which words that summarize these beliefs do we find sacrosanct, and which require periodic revision? Are certain words and phrases themselves so offensive that they must be scrapped altogether? Do we, instead, have a need to preserve language for the sake of grounding us to the past while reverently honoring the hard work of those who came before us? We like to say that in liberal circles we have no purity tests for membership, but often we do.

Perhaps the key then is to tread that middle ground and leave strict purity in any sense alone. Though John 5:4 may not have been written in the First Century A.D., this verse nonetheless influenced Friends to coin a very useful phrase which describes a very specific, very necessary activity. Had it not been passed down over the century, slaves and abolitionists would not have been able to use it to liberate those in bondage. Words mean so much, whether they arrive one by one, or in bunches. Who knows which words or words were so inspirational that they granted the courage to act in their hearers. Had even one or two words been different, then, for all we know, it might have meant the difference between bondage and freedom, oppression and liberation. I think at times we understate the power of language and both its collective and individual impact.

I've always believed that language is a living document and that we have a duty, both as citizens and as a society, in determining meaning. This goes well beyond our status as Friends or Progressives or activists and influences every imaginable identity, role, or decision we make. The words we use to describe ourselves are the same words others use to describe us, and our role in the matter is not a passive one. May we then trouble the language with active, not passive voice.

Quote of the Week

"Even if a unity of faith is not possible, a unity of love is."- Hans Urs von Balthasar

Saturday Video

The rain is falling, it's after dark
The streets are swimming with the sharks
It's the right night for the wrong company
And there ain't nothing 'round here to look at
Move along, move along

The neon lights on Baltimore
Every shadow's getting famous
In some backyard, in some plastic chair
Hoping these cigarettes will save us
Here we go again, here we go again

You got rings in your ears
And you got kicked around and made up
Looking high, looking low
Where did all the shadow people go?
Where did all the shadow people go?
I wanna know, where the shadow people go

I stole a bike from the Second Mile
Saw a band play in the basement
I crossed the path of a friend of mine
And I know what that look upon her face meant
Something's gone from her eye
Something's gone wrong

You could be a woman or you could be a man
Wear the glove on the other hand
Or you could be twisted or you could be insane
Pushing the envelope against the grain
Just playing along, just playing along

And I got something on my mind
And I got voices on the other line.
Saying hi, saying hello
Where did all the shadow people go?
Where did all the shadow people go?
I wanna know where the shadow people go.
Where the shadow people go (Where did all the shadow people go?)
Where the shadow people go (Where did all the shadow people go?)

Mother Earth

Dedicated to a few people in Washington, DC.

You may highhand me all the time
Never go my way

But dirt is waiting for you
There's a debt you have to pay

I don't care how great you are
Don't care what you're worth

Cause when it all ends up
You're going to go back to mother earth

You may own a city
Get all the girls

You may have an aeroplane
Flying all around the world

I don't care how great you are
Don't care what you're worth

Cause when it all ends up
You're going to go back to mother earth

You may play the race horses
Even on a track

You may have enough money, baby
To buy anything you like

I don't care how great you are
Don't care what you're worth

Cause when it all ends up
You're going to go back to mother earth

-Holly Golightly

Friday's Busy Post

Today I've already spent most of my morning focusing on my performance tonight. I'll be playing a new song for the first time, one with a particularly tricky chord progression. It's proven to be a challenge, and I've also never been particularly satisfied with the lyrics. Even so, people always ask about whether I have new material, and I don't want to let them down.

In a more cynical time in my life, I wrote this poem.

Generic Rock Star

acts like he owns this
overgrown cow town

expects the
holier-than-thou
adoration

that started to fizzle away
ten years ago

unsubtle
male pattern baldness
shaved head
(not fooling anyone)

generic rock star drives
around and around town

stopping by the coffee shop
thrusting autographs into the
hands of the disinterested

we all know him here
he is no stranger

the worst kept secret

the carnal cravings
desire for youth
conquest

it scares off many a young man
cruising the street corners
the bars
the parks

unaccustomed to the advances
of those hairy knuckles
and drooping eyelids

we townspeople say

he’s creepy
but predictable

at least he’s a native

Posted Without Comment

Careful now!

Leaving, Then Cleaving

Originally posted on Feministing Community

A disclaimer up front. What follows is heteronormative, not especially Feminist, not particularly Progressive, and objectionable on all sorts of levels. Rest assured, I know this, too, and large sections of this I disagree with as fervently as I know you do.

Having said that...

Look beyond the literal. Please also forgive the God talk. I never ask anyone to believe as I do, but my own faith is very important to me, and it advances my larger point.

Some Pharisees came and tested [Jesus] by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

Jesus answered them with a question: "What did Moses say in the law about divorce?"

"Well, he permitted it," they replied. "He said a man can give his wife a written notice of divorce and send her away."

"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied.

"A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two are united into one.' Since they are no longer two but one, let no one split apart what God has joined together."

At its face, this is a decree against divorce. But taken in a completely different context, it is a condemnation of the ways that humans have, for their own selfish motives, complicated
what ought to be a simple, but powerful human experience. We have taken our gift of thought and analysis and used it to divide each other. Jewish law at the time stated that if a man could prove adultery, no matter how flimsy the charges, he could dissolve the bands of marriage. This was a man-made addition that contradicted God's design for humanity and wasn't especially respectful of women's rights, either.

How easy it is for us to use our brainpower to get in the way of the most basic of human experiences! Some of the most profound experiences I have ever felt lend themselves to no words, no weighty concepts, no five syllable terms learned in a college classroom. Some times I think that our intellect, our rational selves, our cognitive abilities get in the way of the simple joys that life has to offer.

For example, those of you who have been in love before know the supreme satisfaction and incredible euphoria that it offers. Perhaps only then can we be truly completed. Perhaps then and only then do we set aside our searching and seeking, not just for someone, but for something. And there is also great joy in connecting with others who are our friends, and this same sense of connectivity is in evidence here, also.

My desire and my prayer, for Feminism, romance, and friendship alike is this. Let no one split apart what God has joined together.

Comes A Time

Sorry for the late posting today. I had an appointment earlier this morning with an orthopedist, so that I could finally get my leg checked out. I am very fortunate to have escaped the accident with only a severe knee and ankle sprain. X-rays were taken to rule out bone chips, but each of them came back negative. Much healing has already taken place, and there's a bit more yet to come.

Enjoy the video!

Daria Day

This blog rarely confronts pop culture, except occasionally in passing. Even so, I suppose a little variety isn't such a bad thing. I found today when it was time to write that I was weary of teh serious and would rather focus on other topics. Please do forgive me this once.

The late 90's to early 2000's MTV animated series Daria was finally released yesterday on DVD in totality. I'm not sure a more perfect encapsulation of my adolescence could have ever been created. Born in an era where content on MTV still could be seen as edgy and daring, instantly creating a kind of seductively rebellious authenticity with a younger audience, the series served as a lifeline to lonely, isolated, insecure teens like myself. I myself related so much to many of the characters. Daria and her best friend Jane were a kind of wise-cracking vaudeville act, lampooning the contradictions and hypocrisies of the world around them with their own private repertoire. I also knew many in my own life who reminded me of Jane's ne'er do well brother, Trent, a chronic slacker whose dreams of rock 'n roll stardom are always frustrated by his limited proficiency as a songwriter and guitarist. Sometimes I still encounter the Trents of the world, particularly when it comes time for me to once again take my guitar in hand, sit, and play before an audience.

To return to the past for a little while, let me preface by saying that I don't often like to think much about high school. Those days were largely unhappy ones. I will, however, always think fondly of Daria because it was one of the few bright spots of an otherwise dismal experience. When I was being teased mercilessly or left out of social gatherings because I refused to hide my intellect or my sensitivity, I saw my own darkly comedic defense mechanisms staring back at me in the person of the title character. As I desperately sought the company of other people who were creative and artistic, I often had Jane in mind as the ideal. I honestly saw a little bit of myself in most of the characters--the ones, that is, not completely self-absorbed or obsessed with popularity and conformity at all cost. That I relied on an animated series to serve as a primary sense of solace struck me as a bit odd, even at the time. I know now, based on the testimonials I have encountered from other people, that I was not alone. Not by a long shot.

None of the misfit characters are malicious or cruel. Instead, they are their own worst enemies, particularly in their neuroses and in the ways they discounted and short-changed their own self-worth. The truly vicious characters, rather, are the popular kids, especially Daria's sister Quinn, and her fellow Fashion Club dictator, Sandi. They are self-absorbed on a much baser, more superficial manner, turning their own insecurities towards each other rather than inward. At the time, I thought that this sort of behavior and general set-up was meant to be read as exaggeration, though as I have spoken at length with female friends, I find this to not be far off the mark at all.

Regarding other characters, as I have gotten older, I have gotten to know many of the Helen Morgendorffers (Daria's mother) of the world, both male and female: well-meaning, highly driven, Type A, workaholics married to their jobs. Had Blackberries been in existence in say, 1998, Daria's mother would have carried one, too. The fallacy of this sort of manic lifestyle is revealed during one crucial episode where Daria's mother and father press for a family camping trip. Daria and her sister Quinn are not especially enthused about what what is intended to be a totally rustic respite from the distractions from the world. The camping trip begins auspiciously enough until, however, most of the family, with the exception of Daria, eat wild berries they have found growing in the forest. These cause a trip of another sort altogether. Have no fear--the family is saved from peril because of the hypocrisy of the mother. You see, she has, in flagrant violation of the stated rules, brought along her cell phone, and Daria is able to call for help.

In some ways, the character of Helen could be Feminist. She is the family's primary breadwinner. She holds the job that yields the most power. Unlike her bumbling, fragile, and at times almost impotent husband, she is forceful, bold, and opinionated. Yet, she also reluctantly concedes that she must play the game to an extent, conceding wearily that women are judged based on their physical appearance and sense of youthfulness. My criticisms of the character are the same ones that are implied by the show itself; life is meant to be enjoyed and that nothing is so important that work responsibilities can't wait. Helen is a good mother and capable lawyer, but she is so compelled to be perfect that her occupation frequently intrudes on her personal life.

Daria lamentably defined the end of a era. Shortly after the series concluded in 2001, MTV top brass decided there was more money to be made in airing reality TV shows than sticking to a tried-and-true format of music videos. Perhaps it made sense to the bottom line, but the high water mark of that network, then at its zenith, rapidly began to recede. MTV does not hold the same instant sway over the younger set that it once did. I think in many ways a void exists that has yet to be filled, a void which began with the decline of a channel still called Music Television that, quite ironically, infrequently plays music these days. I hope that today's teenagers might find their own Daria. Nothing shores up self-esteem and provides a common basis for understanding quite as effectively. If I had known then how common my experiences were, comparatively speaking, I might have felt more confident stepping out of myself and being able to determine friends from uncomprehending peers. In all of the discussion of how the media fails us, we might learn from the ways it lifts us skyward.

There is an End

Words disappear
Words once so clear
Only echoes passing through the night

The lines on my face
Your fingers once traced
Fading reflection of what was

Thoughts rearrange
Familiar now strange
All my schemes drifting on the wind

Spring brings the rain
With winter comes pain
Every season has an end

I tried to see through the disguise
But the clouds were there
Blocking out the sun

Thoughts rearrange
Familiar now strange
All my schemes drifting on the wind

Spring brings the rain
With winter comes pain
Every season has an end
There's an end

There's an end
There's an end
There's an end
There's an end

An Open Letter to Progressives

Dear Fellow Progressives,

In reference to Progressive criticism of the latest Supreme Court pick, I thought I'd say a few words.


Until we heal the wounds within ourselves, we will never be able to health the wounds of this world.

Until we stop being reactive, rather than proactive, our agenda will not be advanced.

Until we cease being as unflinchingly unforgiving of ourselves as we are towards our opposition, we will not see substantial growth.

Until we can own our limitations, we will never have peace of mind.

Until we stand united, acknowledging the ways we are similar and not different, no protest, boycott, or movement will hold.

Until we sustain health individually, collective purpose will never be a reality.

Worldly Accomplishment or Spiritual Satisfaction?

Nine months spent in Washington, DC, has provided valuable insight. Beltway insiders and area professions are their own breed. As I've gotten my sea legs, more and more of their world makes sense to me. Once I arrived here that I was immediately given some particularly infuriating advice, namely that other people were just as smart as I was, if not smarter, and that I ought to get used to it. I think he assumed I was just like everyone else---the latest newcomer eager to play the game in a town with more than its share of naked ambition and power plays. Perhaps he was the latest candidate for burnout, having recognized that institutional idealism is often an exercise in minutia. Though my background and my academic career may be relatively humble, I am no stranger to elitism when I see it, and I am just as repulsed by it now as I ever was.

Frustration aside, in certain spaces I have begun to make more and more of a name for myself. The slow process of building connections and gaining trust has borne growth. What has been accomplished up to this point thrills me and brings great joy. It is certainly nice to admire one's handiwork from time to time. To me, the satisfaction of a job well done is one of the best feelings in the world. It caters to my own deepest ambition. Since I became an adult, I knew, innately that I was to someday take on a leadership position, and in so doing come into my own. Achieving my fullest potential is the ultimate goal I hold for myself and I am not completely there yet, of course. Still, what has been granted me up to this point leaves me hungry for more results and motivates me to keep at it.

One concern I will give voice to is that I never used to worry about letting selfish, worldly desires dominate me. When one is completely unknown, the temptations of ego, at least in this context, are minimal. Yet, once one gets a taste of the inner sanctum, it is easy to crave more and more of it. Once doors have begun to open, one fights the impulse to throw them open through force of will alone or to be resentful of those who hold the keys. Being around others similar to myself both in aptitude and drive can be quite a comfort at times and quite a challenge, also. Many of my contemporaries are far better connected than I and with common aims comes competition and the inevitable urge to race to the top. Sometimes I feel as though the secret requirement of my career requires me to engage in a scavenger hunt of sorts, with an ever increasing list of hidden items to locate and then cross off the list. My day-to-day existence, then, is proof that my spiritual life and my earthly life frequently are at loggerheads.

Jesus said,

"Watch out! Don't do your good deeds publicly, to be admired by others, for you will lose the reward from your Father in heaven.

When I am Spirit-led, not self-led, there is no limit to the eloquence and beauty of the words I write. Any number of well-received posts that I've recently written bear this out. When, however, I go it alone, the results are not nearly so inspiring. What I write frequently contains awkward wording, typos, and various grammatical mistakes. What the Light provides arrives perfectly formed and has no need for subsequent revision. I need an editor. God does not.

"But when you give to someone in need, don't let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

Taken at face value, this verse can be very confusing. What is meant here is that it is easy to give to others with mixed motives, doing something for someone if it will benefit us in the end. Selflessly giving, Jesus states, should be our own reward. Again, this runs contrary to that which I encounter multiple times a day, where quid pro quo is a way of life. One seeks constantly to pad a resume, to overtake and undercut someone else for one's own sake, to network with the established power brokers, and throughout it all, to let one's ambition blatantly show. This is considered initiative, not the beginnings of losing sight of what truly matters in this world.

"When you pray, don't be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get. But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you."

I never expect to change the culture of the city in which I live, but I do make a conscious effort not to emulate it. Modesty and restraint is a quality often in short supply, particularly in politics. If only politics pertained only to government! There are politics in the smallest of gatherings and groups, and not just in our nation's capital. I see it in my faith group, the activist groups I frequent, and certainly in my workplace. Needless political conduct has been an equally destructive force in musical groups and garden clubs, so one can hardly escape it, though it should be noted that one is under no obligation to play along.

"Don't store up treasures here on earth, where they can erode away or may be stolen. Store them up in heaven where they will never lose their value, and are safe from thieves. If your profits are in heaven, your heart will be there too."

If we build our faith and trust within people, then our life will follow suit. Of course, nothing wrought by human hands or brought to life by human means will ever be perfect or immortal. Expecting otherwise has proven to be the undoing of many who came before us. The first lesson of politics is that nothing ever stays the same and that conditions are subject to change at any time, for any reason. Thieves arrive in many forms and are probably just as smart and just as motivated at what they do as we are. Turnabout is fair play in this world.

As much as I might be compelled to force the issue or pony up at the card table, ultimately my own selfish motives and compulsions are far less important than what God has in store for me. For example, everyone who reads this post will probably get something a little different out of it. It would be foolish for me to overplay my hand and demand that everyone's interpretation must conform to my terms alone. The best art speaks to us individually and gives us the ability to personalize that which we have observed. Disseminating a message successfully requires merely that I speak from within myself and let you form your own conclusions. I trust the guidance of the divine first and foremost and have a rough ambivalence with my own leanings. In a universe where one juggles plates long overfull, learning to let go might be worthwhile to consider. Death does not thoughtfully provide a Styrofoam container allowing us to take leftovers home with us.

Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

The Best Man Won't Hang Out With the Girl Band

Originally posted to Feministing Community

All the boys in the band
know how to get down

fill our Christmas socks
with whiskey drinks
and chocolate bars

When the evening ends we won't
be thinking of you then

Although the best man
won't hang out with the girl band
the girl band.

"You're No Rock and Roll Fun"- Sleater-Kinney

______________________

One night a week I perform at an open mic. The person in charge of holding/coordinating the event and I have struck up a friendship over the past several months. She mentioned, quite offhandedly one evening before the event got going, that she'd been seeking to attract more female talent. The task had proved to be far more difficult than she'd even imagined. Speaking in terms of demographics, male musicians outnumber female musicians 2:1 there.

Quite interestingly, however, the few female regulars who show up with any consistency often have more skill than many of the men. There is no in between with women performers--only the most naturally gifted ones bother to stick around. We are glad to have them, but I myself would like to observe female musicians who have raw talent but need the practice and experience to rise to their fullest potential.

Here is an example of what one normally observes from week to week. Female musicians who do perform for the first time ever are usually so self-conscious and nervous in front of a group of people that one feels sorry for them. Their manner of presentation might be best described, as Liz Phair put it, shyly brave, and regardless of their level of talent or proficiency, they can barely raise their voices above a whisper. After having finished, they rush off stage, absolutely mortified at themselves, no doubt ashamed of themselves, and rarely return. I've tried my best to be encouraging, finding a quiet moment between sets to dispense praise and constructive feedback. It is usually received well, and with a nervous smile, but almost all of my efforts are for naught.

I think as Feminists we can form lots of conclusions as to why this might be.

The most obvious of these reveals how women are not encouraged to boldly stand out and advocate for themselves. Still, if there was absolutely no female participation at all, then that would be one thing. But, as I've revealed, there always is a core group of "the girl band" who have the courage and the poise to push past their fears and reservations. If only I and others could find a way to get that kind of complete confidence to rub off on the talented, but skittish female musicians who never really give themselves a chance to blossom as performers.

This desire of mine doesn't just stop at music. It could very well go for regular readers to this very site who never submit Community posts or who seldom leave comments. Nor does it have to stop at female-centric spaces, either. There are any number of areas and places in the greater world where the contributions of women would be in good company. If we want to encourage gender equality and female participation, we must first speak to that immediate impulse within each woman which automatically causes her to doubt the quality of her contributions. And in so doing, it would be in good keeping to reinforce the notion that no one is ever perfect the first time we do anything. The dual forces of experience and persistence are amazing teachers. If you don't believe me, consult the women in your life who you admire the most--the ones who have accomplished great things--- and ask them yourself.

Mother's Day Comic Strips

These are from the website and archives of my favorite DC-area cartoonist and friend. The strip is called "Reply All". Readers may need to click on each individual cartoon to enlarge.






and a non-Mother's Day related strip that is one of my favorites.

Quote of the Week

"The winds, the sea, and the moving tides are what they are. If there is wonder and beauty and majesty in them, science will discover these qualities. If they are not there, science cannot create them. If there is poetry in my book about the sea, it is not because I deliberately put it there, but because no one could write truthfully about the sea and leave out the poetry".- Rachel Carson

Saturday Video

A Cautious Analysis between US and UK Elections

One must be careful when invoking comparative politics. If politics is indeed local, nothing could be a greater challenge than making sweeping generalities between different countries without understanding the full context. Having said this, I have followed the recent UK General Election campaign with much attention and interest over the course of the past few weeks. Those who follow politics to any degree often look for emerging trends which might promise some early clue to predict the future. Much of what enraged and inspired Britons to turn out in relatively large numbers (provided they were able to vote at all), are the very same issues driving an anti-incumbent maelstrom, the results of which on our shores we will not fully understand until early November.

The aforementioned 2010 General Election in the UK might serve as something close to harbinger of things to come. Here, as there, a still smoldering economic crisis and demoralizing amount of government debt formed the backdrop, threatening to overshadow every other issue. David Cameron's Conservative Party picked up several seats from Gordon Brown's Labour Party, but still failed to reach the requisite number of Members of Parliament needed to secure a majority. This is telling in all sorts of ways. Those who voted Tory seem to have done more out of disgust with Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Labour more than any admiration for the Conservatives. Third parties, including the centrist to center-left Liberal Democrats, failed to make substantial gains and fared worse at the ballot box than most had expected. A Hung Parliament, also known as a coalition or minority government seems to be the outcome.

Unlike here in the United States, a Parliamentary majority and right to rule is not reached a simple majority. Achieving power without the need to form coalitions with other parties means having reached a certain threshold of representation, in this case 326 seats. In this regard, I'm reminded a bit of the delegate situation in the Democratic Presidential Primary in 2008. There, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were fighting to reach a certain number of both pledged and super delegates that would add up to 2,118. Had neither candidate gotten to that magic number by the end of the primary season, then both campaigns would have had no choice than to cut a deal with each other, one probably more along the lines of a nightmare than a meeting of the minds. To make another comparison, the nearly disastrous health care debate made us painfully aware that it takes 60 Senators of one Party or persuasion to prevent a filibuster by a minority party. At one time, it required 67 Senators to cut off debate and begin a vote.

Returning to our elections a little less than six months away, the best comparison to yesterday's General I can make is this--imagine if our legislative branch was unicameral, not bicameral. Visualize if there were no separate House and Senate, just one combined body that set policy and passed laws. To an extent, this is oversimplifying a little since the UK does have a House of Lords as well as a House of Commons, but the Lords has served a largely advisory role since 1949 and has no real power. Imagine if, in a few months, we would be voting first and foremost that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi could keep their jobs as Senate Majority Leader and Speaker of the House. We are doing this already to some extent, of course, but in this analogy, contemplate if either of them were President. A referendum on Democratic Party leadership, based on current trends and polls would be much more of a Republican advantage.

Yet, just like in the UK, many will soon cast their ballots in November based not on any strong preference for the GOP, but rather out of strong disgust for the Democratic Party. We have never produced a strong third party alternative more than a few brief times in our history, and the Tea Party candidates running with this explicit purpose might take note that even in a system which favors multiple parties, the largest two usually draw most representation and votes anyway. I've long been a supporter of a Parliamentary method, but I have to concede, having observed this past election that two rival parties usually end up sucking up almost all of the oxygen in the room.

Though the UK turnout this time around was 65%, much lower than initially expected, it is quite routine for General Elections to draw 70%-80%. This statistic is often cited by activists of other countries as well as for those who seek to keep voters motivated and eager to vote. Still, form dictates participation, and a usually five-year build up to a single important election is often more successful in getting out the vote than a series of smaller, regional primaries and caucuses that slowly build up to a major election. The 2008 Presidential Election drew only 57% turnout after all the ballots were tabulated, even when voter interest and motivation was at unusually high levels. The last time turnout reached 80% in the United States was in 1876 and the last time it exceeded 70% was in 1900. By contrast, in Mid-Congressional cycles, turnout in U.S. elections has hovered somewhere around 37%. The last time an off-cycle election reached close to 50% was in 1966. Our individualism and simultaneous desire to cling to regional identity first, rather than group solidarity shows plainly in just how we have structured our electoral system.

Imagine also if we didn't have an intricate, protracted system of primaries in every state. UK General Elections last approximately one full month before ballot boxes are open for business, whereas our Presidential elections seem to begin a good two years beforehand, if not sooner. Assuming our way of governance resembled that of the United Kingdom, we would vote, roughly every four to five years, to determine who both our elected leaders would be and what Party would claim majority status. Parliament is prevented by law from sitting more than five years without a vote being called. This is much more in line with the election of Senators, who serve six year terms, then the short two-year terms of House Representatives, but we also take care to stagger federal elections and terms so that the entire Senate does not run for office at the same time. The greatest difference, of course, is that the Prime Minister is not elected directly like our President, and rarely is the PM a member of a party not in primary control of the legislative branch.

Hung Parliaments are very rare, but they do happen from time to time. The behind-the-scenes wrangling now going on might well foreshadow what would happen if, God forbid, the Republicans were able to win back the House. I thought once that the Senate might be vulnerable for GOP takeover, but I have backed off on that fear. Still, even a reduced majority in the House which now seems all but inevitable is going to require concessions and deal-cutting between the White House and the GOP. When health care reform and cap-and-trade passed by the narrowest of margins, even with healthy majorities, this further underscores that, regardless of how the vote turns out, President Obama and the agenda of the Democratic Party will be forced to incorporate Conservative ideas and strategies to get crucial legislation passed. We're still in crystal ball status right now, but if ever there was a powerful incentive to keep strong Democratic majorities, one would think musing upon what a watered down and compromised agenda would be enough.

We can learn from the recent UK vote in all sorts of ways. Here is what the Guardian's Simon Jenkins wrote this morning about the immediate fallout from the election.

The British electorate has spoken but has choked on its words. Labour's glad confident morning of 1997 has clearly ended in defeat under Gordon Brown. David Cameron has rescued his Tory party from 18 years of decay but not convincingly, and not enough to give him a secure parliamentary majority.

The third party that promised so much, the Liberal Democrats, has failed to make a breakthrough, and yet it must decide which party to support in office – and with a poor mandate for so important a decision. The first-past-the-post electoral system has met its Waterloo. Britain has not been given emphatic government just when that was most required. It has been given the parliamentary mess most feared by opponents of electoral reform – or the negotiating base most desired by its advocates. British politics now departs the hustings and enters the old smoke-filled rooms of Westminster.

Our own smoke-filled room beckons ever closer. Though Democrats seem to have divided themselves to no good end, they likely will be forced to increasingly share power with Republicans, regardless of how the ultimate tally reads. American voters will go to the polls believing either that divided power fosters greater gain for all, or whether single-party rule is the best strategy. It also speaks to our belief in the existing checks and balances incorporated into law or whether an additional layer needs to be in place to ensure proper government. My immediate fear is of gridlock rather than an incentive to work together for the common good. Unlike the UK, we can't simply dissolve Congress if shared governance fails to gel. What we vote for in November will we be stuck with for two full years at minimum.

When a Partner Comes Out

Originally posted on Feministing's Community section. Modified slightly for the inevitable typos and awkward sentences, as always.

Thanks,

Ed.

_____________

An earlier discussion about country music star Chely Wright’s decision to come out inspired this post. As the story goes, she was carrying on a doomed relationship with a fellow male musician, whose devotion to her, based on her sexual orientation, she knew she could never return on the terms he needed. A relationship requires mutual love and it’s an unfortunate, deeply tragic situation for both parties involved when this happens---one more common than one might think.

Periodically I glance at the daytime television talk shows to observe the topics they discuss. Frequently whole shows will be devoted to women who married closeted gay men. These discussions inevitably are centered around a strong sense of betrayal, particularly when it is revealed that a featured guest discovered that her husband or boyfriend was carrying on a secret relationship, romantic, sexual, or both, with another man. The tension in the room when the latest participant reveals the instant where she knew is perceptible and copious.

Catharsis, perhaps, but the angry tone of these programs strikes me frequently as unfortunate and unhelpful. Some of the drama is, I recognize, manufactured to keep the attention of the viewing audience, but much of it is not. It is a natural human response to feel betrayed and rejected in situations like these, but left out of the equation altogether is the man in question and his side of the story. If the former husband or boyfriend was included on the program and allowed to speak for himself, perhaps a much fuller understanding might be reached.

A few years ago I dated a woman who later came out as a lesbian. I admit that my first thought upon being told was “Wasn’t I good enough?” So in saying this, I can relate to this strong sense of feeling passed over and bitter, but to my credit I also tried as hard as I could to get beyond my own hard feelings. Though it pained me severely, I sought to rejoice in the fact that she was finally comfortable expressing and owning who she was. It was no easy process for her and I did my best to keep this in mind when I was tempted to rail about how I had been royally deceived and wronged.

Perhaps my own bisexuality helped with my comprehension. I also recall how on a trip to Boston I struck up a conversation with a woman in a coffee shop—an out lesbian who told me that I was the sort of man she would have dated before she came out. I believe she meant it as a compliment, and I took it as such, though the revelation produced decidedly mixed feelings. Had I not personally had the experience of dating a closeted lesbian, my emotions and memories would not have complicated what was actually high praise.

I recognize my situation is a bit different than the norm. As we have talked about recently, so much of a woman’s self esteem is tied up in the hopes of attracting a partner and, having done so, being validated by a partner as worthwhile. We know this also to be indicative of what needs to change about our society, but the fact of the matter is that constant reinforcement over a lifetime is tough to overcome. Our sexist culture encourages this eternal competition known as the dating game to the extent that women constantly judge themselves based on male attention and with it confirmation of them as worthwhile people.

Thus, it shouldn't be surprising that the very idea of being cheated on is often every woman’s worst fear. Not only is it insulting, but it also reflects this same notion of women building their whole stability in the person of a partner--in the process feeling utterly worthless when no longer wanted or desired. I think if this infidelity arrives in the form of a philanderer like Tiger Woods or John Edwards, that this is one thing, but if a closeted partner simply cannot maintain living a lie—--well, that’s a bit different and trickier. In that situation it would, of course, be for the best if there was no other man (or for that matter, other woman) in the picture, but every human being has desires. Rest assured, I'm not excusing this sort of conduct, but trying instead to draw a sharp distinction.

I myself was cheated on by a bisexual woman who left me for another woman. The feelings of bitterness I experienced were potent. She was very physically attractive and that fact catered to the insecure part of me. Sad to say, I felt better about myself because she was beautiful and also because our society values beautiful people above those with average looks. Other men desired her too, and I saw their envious looks and took satisfaction in knowing that she was mine and not theirs. This partially speaks to the idea of possession, which to some degree is normal, but taken to extremes is unhealthy. When suddenly she was no longer my girlfriend, I felt much like the women in the daytime talk show.

This particular situation might be more analogous to that of the typical heterosexual cheating male, and less excusable, but the fact is that it happened. My pain was real. But I was also forced to confront too that I had been foolish to try to think that I could build my own self-esteem in someone else. Every relationship tells us something new about ourselves, and the tough lesson I learned then is that one ought to be strong for oneself, because there is no guarantee that any romantic partnership will last forever. We’re often so petrified of leaving relationships, either because we will suffer or we will cause pain in our partners, but there are positive lessons to be learned along with what feels at the time like agony.

Alpha

Our first instance of
personal mythology

impulsive
mutual half-concealed
ulterior motive

a pleasure cruise

powered by the potency of
the adrenal gland

(Straight to Your Heart) Like a Cannonball

Quote of the Mid-Week

"A fellow will remember a lot of things you wouldn't think he'd remember. You take me. One day, back in 1896, I was crossing over to Jersey on the ferry, and as we pulled out, there was another ferry pulling in, and on it there was a girl waiting to get off.

A white dress she had on. She was carrying a white parasol. I only saw her for one second. She didn't see me at all, but I'll bet a month hasn't gone by since that I haven't thought of that girl."- Everett Sloan as Mr. Bernstein, Citizen Kane.

You'll Never Walk Alone

When you walk through the storm
Hold your head up high
And don't be afraid of the dark
At the end of the storm
There's a golden sky
And the sweet silver song of the lark

Walk on, through the wind
Walk on, through the rain
Though your dreams be tossed and blown
Walk on, walk on, with hope in your heart
And you'll never walk alone
You'll never walk alone

Walk on, walk on, with hope in your heart
And you'll never walk alone
You'll never walk alone

R. Rodgers and O. Hammerstein II

The Short-Term Fix or the Long-Term Solution

I feel a bit late to the party writing about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Had I chosen to focus on this subject a few days ago, I might have been inclined to draft a personal narrative about the summers I spent on Alabama's Gulf Coast as a boy and young teenager. My post would have certainly have been in good company; it heartens me to recognize just how many people have an emotional and personal connection to the region. I myself didn't realize how much the warm salt water and white sand meant to me until I began to contemplate what both might look like covered in oil. It is very unfortunate that tragedies like these have to happen before we ever seriously consider the long term consequences. Off-shore drilling was, until very recently, touted as some kind of snake-oil panacea or fix-all curative. One hopes that we now understand the complexities and potentially catastrophic drawbacks in tapping the reserves present in our coastline.

The entire situation reminds me of a passage in Robert Penn Warren's classic novel, All the King's Men. Jack Burden is the book's narrator and trusted aide to Louisiana politician Willie Stark.

Jack Burden remembers the years during which Willie Stark rose to power. While Willie was Mason County Treasurer, he became embroiled in a controversy over the building contract for the new school. The head of the city council awarded the contract to the business partner of one of his relatives, no doubt receiving a healthy kickback for doing so. The political machine attempted to run this contract over Willie, but Willie insisted that the contract be awarded to the lowest bidder. The local big-shots responded by spreading the story that the lowest bidder would import black labor to construct the building, and, Mason County being redneck country, the people sided against Willie, who was trounced in the next election. Jack Burden covered all this in the Chronicle, which sided with Willie.

After he was beaten out of office, Willie worked on his father's farm, hit the law books at night, and eventually passed the state bar exam. He set up his own law practice. Then one day during a fire drill at the new school, a fire escape collapsed due to faulty construction and three students died. At the funeral, one of the bereaved fathers stood by Willie and cried aloud that he had been punished for voting against an honest man. After that, Willie was a local hero.

Over time, I'm sure the particulars of this tragedy will become known, and I wouldn't be surprised if a story similar to the above is at least partially responsible.

In defense of our President and his supposedly slow response to the crisis, one passage in this story particular jumped out at me.

“There is no good answer to this,” one senior administration official said. “There is no readily apparent solution besides one that could take three months. ... If it doesn’t show the impotence of the government, it shows the limits of the government.”

We are dealing with a situation that has no clear precedent. It does, however, strike me as supremely ironic that an oil platform built and maintained by a company that has taken in record profits in the past few years would would collapse and explode in such dramatic fashion. Oil companies have seemingly been immune to this Great Recession, so I know they can't possibly be hurting for money. When we uncover why this happened, whenever that shall be, one hopes that lots of questions will be answered, not least of which is the likelihood of something like this happening again. The greatest lesson of all might be that sensible strategies and safeguards must be in place henceforth. The process of extraction should never produce significant threats, nor put anyone's life in danger.

Some of these proposals may be a bit more expensive in the short term, though, it must be noted, they will eventually pay for themselves in time. Tragedies always expose our reluctance to delay gratification and opt for the long-term solution rather than the instant, short-term fix. Hurricane Katrina revealed that the levies around New Orleans had been weakening for years but that the money had never been allocated to shore them up adequately. The fatal Metro crash here in Washington, DC, that occurred last June revealed, in part, the financial and technological limitations of a public transportation system where crucial components of said system did not function properly with one another. The earthquake in Haiti revealed how centuries of abject poverty and government dysfunction shortchanged an entire nation. When another coal mine collapses, we see what happens when private companies put workers in dangerous situations out of an unwillingness to invest in proper safety protocols. To use an analogy often deployed in terms of legislation, in all these examples, many were quite content to kick the can down the road.

I am of the opinion that not all deficits are bad. Indeed, if there were a way to borrow the money or take out the needed loans to ensure that the trains always ran on time, so to speak, I would support it. That which we do not address now, or address only with a glancing blow, will end us costing us just as much, if not more, in the end. Whether that cost comes in financial expenditure or in ordinary human lives, I have no way of knowing, but I think it's better to brave the sticker shock up front than to let guilt or shame guide us in directions where compassion and intellect could have led us much earlier. I am no different than the rest of you. As I mentioned above, it is only when destructive consequences are lain before me that I ever take into account how much routine beauty speaks to my core--to the very fiber of my being.

It is unfortunate that we must be presented with the emotionally wrenching before we recognize that our lives are completely interdependent with one another. For example, the Gulf Coast's tourism industry thrives or dies on those who visit. The fishing, shrimping, and oyster harvesting industry also rely heavily on those from other parts of the country and the world who spend time there. The health of the sea life, animals, plants, and other organisms is essential to those who make their living, whether directly or indirectly, off of the ocean and the beach. Yet again, our separation from each other is deceptive and we are again mistaken in believing otherwise. We may see ourselves as supremely self-reliant, but the instant a crisis hits, we reach for our friends and our loved ones for support. This is a normal response, but if only we took the time more frequently to recognize that we do not live in isolation from others, even in good times. If we did so, we might not be so guarded with our hearts, nor as reluctant to edify the systems that each of us depend on heavily---day in and day out.

Women in the Sciences: It's More Complicated than You Think

Originally posted to Feministing's Community section. I've modified the original text a bit because it had typos.

Thanks,

Ed.

______________

We have frequently discussed the reasons why so few women are in the sciences, rightly chalking up some of it to sexism. We have also recently talked about the particulars of women-only spaces as a respite from men who do not respect boundaries. I would like to speak to both of these ideas, if I may.

My anthropologist friend and I recently spoke again at some length. She talked about the time when she was the process of visiting colleges, mulling over where she would enroll in the fall to begin her Freshman year. She had scholarship offers from both co-ed and single-sex schools, and seriously considered enrolling at a woman's-only college. After visiting, however, she decided against it because while the humanities department the women's college was of excellent quality, the science and mathematics departments were appallingly bad. She found evidence of this same issue at every single-sex school she visited. At the time, my friend intended to major in engineering, a discipline that requires one to take a large number of high-level math and high-level science classes. She chose a co-ed school instead because it provided a much more well-rounded education both in the humanities and in the sciences.

As she talked about this, she proposed an interesting means of addressing this problem, suggesting that single-sex schools and colleges for both girls and women that primarily teach math and science should be established. I believe that this is a fascinating idea that should seriously be considered on a large scale. I bet there are already a few similar schools already in existence scattered around, but I think if our objective is to encourage female participation in fields long dominated by men, strategies like this would be worthwhile. Doing so would directly address the question of why it is that few women are in the sciences, negating the way things are now, which steer women into career paths where such subjects aren't highly emphasized.

It is unfortunate that this sexist discrepancy gets reinforced in the structure of women's colleges. Those who seek equal representation between men and women in every career field might contemplate reconciling the benefit of a single-sex school provides with its current academic limitations. At this juncture, the question I pose is whether men and women are genetically predisposed to gravitate to certain majors and areas of interest, or whether this is purely a result of societal conditioning. While I believe wholeheartedly in the the latter view, I wonder if biology factors in even a little to the process, and if so, how and to what degree. Notice I haven't said that I believe one gender is better than another at a particular subject, merely that I am wondering about academic leanings and areas of interest and how gender factors in to it. Men and women are similar, but they are also different, and I seek to discern the baseline biological differences, so that everything else can be easily called into question and after having done so, changed for the better.

No two people are the same. This includes both men and women. Though I am a man, I would have found a single-sex school intolerably stifling, but I know that some would have found it much to their liking. I personally am of the opinion that co-ed schools provide a sense of necessary gender balance, but I do also concede that some people thrive in a single-sex school. Temporary isolation in an educational setting would be very helpful for some, but living in a work world surrounded by men is a learned skill that only improves with time. I have always believed that single-sex arrangements for women for any reason might be seen to be temporary, since when Feminism's goals are attained, we might all work and live together side by side.

Quote of the Week

“If you realized how powerful your thoughts are, you would never think a negative thought.”- Peace Pilgrim

Embassy Days!

www.flickr.com cabaretic's Embassy Days photoset

Providing a Way to Encourage the Best in Other People

So much of my life I spend cynically griping about the bad side of human nature. The work I do every day frequently centers around a ceaseless source of constant frustration. Seeking strategies to reform destructive behaviors is the basic skill set of many professions and basic activism. Influencing people so that they might understand the correct means of conducting their lives is a substantial challenge and a constant energy drain. I'm sure many of you understand this quandary all too well. While it is true that we all possess a dark side, some more than others, recent events in my life have provided a unexpected but welcome sense of clarity and perspective. I note with joy over the past three days that I have, much to my great surprise, seen the very best in people. Once again I am humbled to have been proven incorrect in my assumptions about others.

You see, on Wednesday, I was in a traffic accident. While walking across the street on my way to the gym, I was blindsided by an oncoming shuttle bus. The vehicle either ran the light or failed to recognize that I, walking in a pedestrian crossing, had the right of way. I am okay, and fortunately not seriously injured but my right leg was hurt in the process of seeking to avoid the collision. The driver lingered long enough to determine that I had not been knocked to the pavement, then quickly continued on to wherever it was he was supposed to be going. Suffice to say, at that precise point in time, I was not exactly a believer in the idea that people are basically good at heart.

As the shock of the situation eventually gave way yet again to clear-headed analysis, I tried to make sense of what had just transpired. Increasingly these days, I have applied the same query to whichever intense, sometimes painful situation in which I have found myself: What is God trying to teach me? As far as this instance is concerned, I think I have been granted a partial answer, one that blindsided me just as surely as did the shuttle bus.

To wit, my eyes have truly been opened. Since the accident happened, I have seen the very best in completely strangers. People have offered me their seat on the bus or the rail, have opened doors for me, or have shown me a thousands acts of simple kindness. Their behavior is very touching, though I admit I am not used to it at all. I have been independent and self-reliant for a long time. It embarrasses me a bit to see this outpouring of assistance, mainly because I dislike calling undo attention onto myself. However, I do admit that everything that others have offered unselfishly has been a huge help. A person limping down a busy city street, or boarding a bus, or waiting in a Metro rail station sticks out dramatically and quite unintentionally calls attention to his or her limitations. Based on what had happened before, I believed people would be just as callous towards me as was the driver of the offending vehicle, but the reverse has proven to be true.

It is written,

Live within my love. When you obey me you are living in my love, just as I obey my Father and live in his love. I have told you this to so that you will be filled with joy. Yes, your cup of joy will overflow! I demand that you love each other as much as I love you. And here is how to measure it--there is no greater love than to lay down one's life for one's friends. You are my friends if you do what I command. No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you.

I suppose I could now complain about how we need to act this way towards each other every day, especially to those who do not have obvious limitations. Yet, if I adopt this attitude, I step right back into the same mindset that I mentioned earlier, one which I usually present to the world like a uniform. Though I would be correct in putting it in that fashion, such an attitude can quickly turn to self-righteousness. I'd rather focus first on other ways of looking at this situation. You see, I have learned through this entire ordeal that if we provide a way for each other to let the best parts of us shine through, most people, I find, will respond with compassion and empathy. This revelation is the most powerful of all.

Here, a familiar story which needs no introduction. Many of us have committed it to memory over the years. Even those who are not people of faith, I have discovered, find little within it to disagree. Forgive me for one more retelling. I personally need to be reminded regularly and consistently of the lessons it teaches, lest I get too caught up in the hustle and bustle of my own busy life.

The man [an expert in the law] wanted to justify his actions, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. By chance a priest came along. But when he saw the man lying there, he crossed to the other side of the road and passed him by. A Temple assistant walked over and looked at him lying there, but he also passed by on the other side. Then a despised Samaritan came along, and when he saw the man, he felt compassion for him.

He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he handed the innkeeper two silver coins, telling him, 'Take care of this man. If his bill runs higher than this, I'll pay you the next time I'm here.' Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

Saturday Video