Valentines day resolution 2012

People in this country really like to torture themselves. They hype up random calendar dates into major events with outlandish expectations that no one can actually afford and then are massively disappointed and depressed when events don’t turn out like the advertisements.

News flash: Those “loving moments” in advertisements are preformed by paid actors, written by some executive to sell the moment in hopes that you will (sucker) by the product.  

When the moment doesn’t live up to the hype and, they never do, people become depressed. Then those helpful pharmaceutical companies step in to make everyone feel better with pretty pills. I have an idea, let’s stop buying the hype and just treat each other kindly everyday. 

If the last one hundred years has taught us anything it should be that money doesn’t buy happiness. Giving your loved one a box of candy one day of the year really means nothing. Telling him or her that you care about them daily and treating them with respect and dignity, that will build a relationship. 

So why don’t we treat Valentines Day a bit more like New Years Eve.  Toast each other and make a resolution to treat each other well in the coming year. 

Or we could just stay on the treadmill of over priced, over stressed, series of disappointing Valentines day dates, filled with high drama leaving us exhausted and disappointed in each other. Soon to be breaking up and starting the same pattern with a different significant other. 

You choose.  But I suggest try a little tenderness.  

RIP

I was truly saddened to hear of the death of Whitney Houston last night. Not because I consider myself a fan, I wasn’t, but because yet another gifted artist was unable to slay her dragons. Whitney had an amazing voice no matter what genre of music you follow.

The public will most likely never know what demons chased her down the rails of addiction, but once on that train there are very few opportunities to get off the track. It seemed that Whitney and earlier this year Amy Winehouse had both found a path out of the darkness. Then shockingly both were reported dead.

It is hard for many to understand that the same insecurities or personal pain that drive one to “create” are frequently a double-edged sword that can easily spiral into self-destruction.  The demons are present even with the trappings of success, or maybe because of that success such as in the case of Kurt Cobain.  

Whitney Houston despite her addictions and obvious demons, gave joy to many with her voice and contributed to numerous charities such as The Bronx Zoo, The Emmanual Cancer Center, The Boys and Girls Clubs of America, The Magic Johnson Foundation for Pediatric AIDS, The NYFD and NYPD Foundations for 9/11 Relief Workers, The Juvenile Diabetes Foundation, The United Negro College Fund, and St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital. As well  she founded the Whitney Houston Foundation for Children which aids sick and homeless children, and works toward the prevention of child abuse, teaches children to read, and has built inner city parks and playgrounds.  

People no matter what their successes in life can be tormented in ways that others don’t understand.  Kurt Cobain ended his own life, Amy Winehouse drank herself to death. We don’t yet know if Whitney relapsed or if her heart gave out after years of battling her addictions, but her gifts will be missed, as are those of all the artists who traveled this harsh path before her. 

Rest in peace, I hope you all found somewhere that the torment couldn’t reach. 

Overruled and now what

Prop 8 overruled by the US 9^th Circuit Court – now what does it mean? 

YEAH!! Score one for the liberal/progressive/gay rainbow flag/punk rock/queer/I am not narrow-minded crowd(s).  This decision means that prop H8 as it became known in many left circles will no longer be law in the State of California.

Yes, let’s celebrate. Have a beer or a coffee or march in the streets. Be loud and proud, queer and allied, party! We have won a battle, but not quite the war.

Congratulations are in order because yet another court has confirmed that Proposition 8 has no place in a free open society that separates church and State. That Country does not allow the civil rights of a minority to be voted on.

So lets spend the next few days reveling in a victory, then we need to get back to work because this isn’t over.  Why might you ask? Let me lay this out for you:

The way this 9^th Circuit decision is written is very limited. Courts have double speak down to an art form.  This decision by the 9^th Circuit is based on Romer v Evens primarily.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans  The good part of that is the Romer decision is for Gay Rights. The bad part is that it has nothing to do with marriage or the assertion that marriage is a fundamental right.  In citing Romer the 9^th Circuit is addressing Justice Kennedy the swing vote on the Supreme Court directly, however appeals court judge Stephen Reinhardt did not say gays and lesbians have an equal right to marry under the Constitution. Instead, he said California's voters violated the Constitution because "Prop. 8 singles out same-sex couples for unequal treatment by taking away from them alone the right to marry,".  (emphasis added)

Currently our Supreme Court is leaning conservative, politically and socially.  We did get the Lawrence v Texas ruling out of them in 2003 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas however, I am not convinced that the Supreme Court would take this case, or if they did, that marriage equality proponents would get the outcome they desire.  There is a 4/4 split on the court with Justice Kennedy as the swing vote, he did write the Lawrence opinion, however the 9^th Circuit cited Romer, which Justice Kennedy also wrote but that decision turns on the exclusion of rights not on a concept of enforcing a fundamental right.  The Proposition 8 case doesn’t address issues of differing laws between states nor is it framed as an issue of a fundamental individual right, therefore most likely the Supreme Court will not grant this case a hearing.

The Supreme Court hears about 1% of the cases that are appealed to them each year, normally the court hears cases based on differing laws in states or the violation of a fundamental right, with the opinion handed down by the 9^th Circuit Court the battle over Proposition 8 has neither of these issues. Basically, this decision is limited to California, and if the Supreme Court heard the decision they could still issue a ruling that only affected California.

Marriage equality most likely will still have to be fought State by State, regardless of this latest victory for Californians. 

Petition

Women and progressives woke up this week to the shocking news that the Susan G. Komen Foundation was pulling its’ funding from Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings. However by weeks end, amid a hailstorm of negative press and public outrage, the Komen Foundation reinstated their Planned Parenthood funding with a meek apology. 

The question is should the progressive community really have been shocked by this latest turn from the Komen Foundation? Cancer research should not be a political issue, yet the rightwing has waged a fairly successful war on reproductive rights (read women’s rights) over the last year and Planned Parenthood is squarely in their sights. The Komen foundation has moved further and further off point from their mission statement and has aligned their “brand” with corporate dollars. The Komen Foundation seems more concerned with fundraising than with patient care or research. 

Looking at some of the corporate sponsors over the last year for the Komen Foundation, there is an alarming trend toward slapping a pink ribbon on just about anything to make a buck. Kentucky Fried Chicken, Ford, the National Football League (and Major League Baseball) Yoplait etc. This blatant pandering, in addition to reports of lobbying efforts to limit research into possible environmental links to breast cancer by Komen, has called into question the organization’s integrity and commitment to its’ mission statement.  

This is the Susan G. Komen Foundation’s stated mission "to save lives and end breast cancer forever by empowering people, ensuring quality of care for all and energizing science to find the cures." 

Obviously the current leadership is more interested in playing politics and ensuring their own salaries then actually finding a cure for breast cancer. New leadership is needed to refocus the organization away from the political and back to the needs of cancer patients and survivors as well as the ongoing research for a cure. 

Until a time when the Komen Foundation can demonstrate a recommitment to its’ mission statement, I pledge my financial support to organizations like the Avon Walk and Planned Parenthood. 

To that end I created a petition to keep the pressure on the Susan G. Komen Foundation, to refocus on their mission statement.  With high visibility comes responsibility. 

If you agree please sign and pass on.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/resign-and-refocus-the-susan-g-komen-foundation/

we the people with rights

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

• - Preamble United States Constitution, ratified 1788

This is arguably one of the greatest documents written in human history. It was radical for its time in the granting of a diversity of human rights to all classes, though it was limited to white males. These rights have been extended over the last two centuries to include all citizens of the United States regardless of race, religion or sex. Today the citizenry of the United States take these rights for granted. While the founding fathers did limit who they granted rights to I argue that they intended these rights to extent to all men in or outside of the United States, though they knew they could only enforce these rights within their country’s borders.  Thus, United States Constitutional rights should be extended to all people when they have cause to deal with the US justice system. 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. 

• - Paragraph 2 The Declaration of Independence, adopted 1776

The Declaration of Independence was written by the founding fathers twelve years before the Constitution was ratified. It clearly states, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”.  “Men” as stated in the Declaration of Independence, I assert, includes all people regardless of color, genders, religions and nationalities per the redefinition of Constitutional Law protections over the last two centuries. All human beings have unalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

So why in the United States today, is our judicial system excluding people from protections under the Constitution? 

There are many political, social and fear-based reasons for the current standing of non-documented and other political detainees to be outside of the protections of the Constitution. Most reasoning comes down to budgetary concerns and protectionist mentalities as well as a combination of conservative federal judges and limited court challenges from detainees. 

  

Detainees:

Currently the United States is engaged in one official armed conflict in Afghanistan, however we have troops in over 150 countries, in which the United States can detain people as enemy combatants in the War on Terror.  Normally, as an enemy combatant/prisoner of war a person’s human rights are protected under the Geneva Convention, however an enemy combatant is defined as having been apprehended on a battlefield, during the course of a war. This definition may or may not apply to combatants in Afghanistan, since the United States hasn’t declared “war” in Afghanistan. It most definitely does not apply to individuals turned over to the military by foreign governments or people swept up in raids in a country where there is no “open hostilities”. This allows the US government to define detainees as outside of protections of the Geneva Convention.  Since they are also rarely US citizens they do not qualify to have rights under the United States Constitution. 

Most of these individuals are held on indefinite detainment. Without the protections of the Geneva Convention or the United States Constitution they have no right to even know the charges by which they are being detained.  

Undocumented People 

There are also many detainees who are being held for violations of their immigrations status, these people may or may not have been picked up in the United States. Immigration processes disregard any Constitutional rights of these individuals based on the fact that the person is not a citizen of the United States. People in immigration detention face numerous obstacles to defending their due process and human rights, including inadequate access to lawyers and medical care. Do we really want to define that citizenship is the only basis to exercise the rights granted by the United States Constitution? 

Mistakes in immigration arrests are made on a regular basis. Does it really matter if that is a small percentage? How many people arrested for immigration violations are white?  Or rich? There are many inequalities and abuses in the system that would be rectified by the acknowledgement of detainee’s human rights under the Constitution. 

Parsing human rights as to US citizens v non-citizens is not only demeaning of everyone's humanity, it is based in an imperialist paternalistic mindset that the western world is "superior" to those deemed outside of the west. Not only is this problematic and outdated but creates the disingenuous state of mind that torture is acceptable because these aren’t “our people”. The delineation of citizenship is random lines drawn on a map; it is not a true representation of humanity or a basis for granting human rights. 

What is the benefit to limiting Constitutional rights of foreign nationals? 

"The Supreme Court has also held for more than a century that aliens within the United States are persons entitled to constitutional protection. That includes aliens who are unlawfully present, although recent Supreme Court dicta suggest that intensified concerns over both drugs and migrants penetrating the border may put pressure on that commitment.”

- Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders, and Fundamental Law

  Gerald L. Neuman, JD, PhD

Historically Constitutional rights were afforded to anyone living within the US, however in the past ten years with the Unites States purging on a diet of fear post 9/11, immigration has been used extensively as an excuse to interview, detain and deport suspected “terrorists” (i.e. people of Arab descent). The assumption that terrorist are strictly from outside of the United States, solidly grounded in the identity of “other”, goes against the history of terrorist attacks like the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Atlanta Olympics Bombing, and the anthrax attacks after 9/11, all perpetrated by American Citizens. 

Expanding on the fear of “other” the Government has included the War on Drugs under the immigration authority, which is primarily directed at Latin American peoples who are living in the United States.  This coupled with the fear mongering of immigration opponents, who decry the porous nature of our southern borders reflects in the disproportionate numbers of Latin Americans being held in the immigration deportation centers.  

Part of the reading of the constitution that expands rights to non-citizens is grounded in the desire to alleviate caste-like classes from US society.  I assert that in the last ten years, since 9/11, the conservative elements in our political system have been actively pushing for a caste system under the guise of national security and an ideological identification of who is “truly” a citizen/patriot.  The argument that being able to curtail people’s human rights makes us safer is illogical at best and in actuality leads us down a path to fascism.  Short cuts around human rights are never going to ensure our safety. Not short term suspensions or in the long run, because depriving others of their human rights damages our own personal Constitutional rights. And voiding anyone’s human rights not only damages our standing in the international community, but it should damage credibility in the US social and political spheres. 

The citizens of the United States should demand their government recognize that every human being has unalienable rights, including the rights guaranteed by the Constitution regardless of where they were born.  This is the only way to ensure the rights of those that cannot protect themselves. Protecting all people’s rights is the only way to truly ensure our own human rights will be respected.

  

Troy Davis RIP

A man named Troy Davis was killed this week.  Many people died in the United States this past week, we are a large complicated society, there were many tragedies I am sure; drunk drivers, illnesses that could have been averted, or the loss of a child to a senseless accident. However those deaths weren’t done in my name. Troy Davis’s death was committed by the State of Georgia, in the name of the people of the United States.

I, for one, refuse to accept this as justice.

I am not a Christian, but I have read Jesus’ teachings. I don’t understand the preaching of Christian values with the blood lust of the death penalty. Didn’t Christ say turn the other cheek and preach forgiveness? The death penalty is about vengeance and Americans love their “vengeance” or more accurately violence.  Actually, there are appropriate individuals who should seek vengeance, namely white men, others should allow them to act in their name (women and the side kick/minority male).

Our culture has devolved into synthesized gladiator sport (football and ‘action” movies) while mouthing the virtues of forgiveness and turning the other cheek. Note that most high paid movie actors are action stars who as white men frequently spurn the laws of society to seek vengeance on someone who has “done them wrong”, usually by killing their wife or child or both. They are renegade hero’s who must ‘honor” their loved one, by murdering someone else.

Frequently this display is very black and white and of course white is right. There is no discussion of why the individual killed the wife or child, normally it is just a sadistic exercise by a very “evil” person and the audience can feel good about routing for the hero in his adventure to slay the “evil” because the person is not human, they are dehumanized into a monster.  In the end the monster almost always dies, the hero is vindicated and rides off into the sunset with his replacement women and all is well in the world.  

However, our society isn’t shot in black and white and rarely is there actual an eye witnesses or cameras catching the murder on film. We have a legal system and police who are over burdened and sometimes take short cuts. Also individuals have rights. Human rights; which include the right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I don’t know if Troy Davis was innocent or guilty, but I know there were questions about the process that convicted him, recanting of testimony from witnesses and little or no physical evidence linking him to the crime. At law we call this “reasonable doubt” and in a criminal case at trial it would result in a verdict of not guilty. Unfortunately for Mr. Davis, this evidence was presented post conviction, and the State chose not to review his conviction or commute his sentence.  Vengeance on the march. Mr. Davis was dehumanized by his conviction in the eyes of the State, but what of the virtue of forgiveness?

What if the man is not guilty?

The reality is this society views the Christian "virtues" as weakness and runs toward the Roman Coliseum piped into the living rooms or movie theaters for this week’s installment of violence. That civilization fell -- this one is slowly killing itself as well with the same tools: greed, violence and inhumanity.  We view this idealized vengeance as a limit on the violence of our society when in actuality it is a further perpetration of violence.

In such a society can we really fool ourselves into thinking that we can judge someone fairly and put them to death while calling the United States a Christian nation?  There are too many contradictions in logic and in our culture for a reasonable person to feel the vindication of vengeance in the death penalty in this country.

We are teetering on the brink of another historic fall of civilization complete with greed, corruption and gladiator sport. 

Unfortunately for Troy Davis, and this society, he was thrown to lions this week. 

reformative justice, prisons and fear

In the wake of the horrible crimes committed in Norway, many in the US think that the Norse will modify or change their prison system. Yet, it is a system that has worked in comparison to our very broken punishment based prison system.


Reading this article:


http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/08/02/vbs.norwegian.prisons/index.html


I was struck by a question in the last paragraph:


"Now, in light of the July terror attacks that left 77 people dead, can Norway's humane approach to prison truly reform mass murderers? And -- more importantly -- should it?"


Should it? WTF? I am not sure that it is possible to "reform" mass murders, but why would the failure to rehabilitate a very small group of offenders call into question the track record of a very successful prison system?


"Norway has a significantly lower recidivism rate than the United States." 


That statement was made in the preceding paragraph (and it is true). So, what Norway is doing is working. Yet, the author has the gall to ask if this humane approach should be continued in light of one individual's actions? This demonstrates what is wrong with the "justice system" in the United States. In the US exclusion form society is valued over re-entry, rehabilitation and education. This model creates more criminal activity and fracturing of society, perpetuating the insecurity and fear of the citizenship. 


I would put forth that the system in the US is fatally flawed. It is based on controlling individuals without giving them any reason to reintegrate into the "normal" social fabric. Not only do convicts lack marketable job skills, they are shunned by society and are frequently have been victimized in prison or at the least have suffered the dehumanizing effects of a violent and broken prison system.  


Supposedly we want a society that is free from fear. To be free of fear we must trust our fellow citizens. Right now we don't. We are a fear based society that has imprisoned, according to a US Department of Justice report published in 2006, over 7.2 million people. That means roughly 1 in every 32 Americans are held by the justice system or almost 3 million more people than the total population of Norway. 


Per 100,000 the US has 743 adults to Norway's 71incarcerated as of 2009 and 2010 respectively. 


The US system has little if any rehabilitation programs or processes. Recidivism in the US is close to 65% as of the 2007 Department of Justice report.  


In the US we have had more individuals attack defenseless targets in mass shootings (10+) than anywhere else in the world. We have a prison system that doesn't work and definitely doesn't "deter" violence, in fact, it perpetuates it, at least against anyone in the system. However, we think the Norse should adopt our system because of one violent individual?


I think there is adequate demonstration in the US society that our prison system is not working.  Perhaps we should look at adopting some of the Norse rehabilitative programs to heal our society rather than suggest that they adopt our very broken system. 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States

Gay Pride

So what is gay pride?

A parade?

A state of mind?

pride in what?

Understand that I am gay, or queer or whatever the term of art is used these days for someone who isn't straight.  I am also a political progressive, some would say radical, who believes that the United States is in the midsts of a serious class war that few recognize.

I tend to analys things and what I see in the "gay movement" is beginning to frighten me almost as much as those rightwing teabaggers. I'll say it, we are moving toward "normal" trending toward individuals beginning to criticize and censor what they consider "fringe" elements of the "gay community"

Yesterday New York State legalized gay marriage. I won't go into how I think marriage is a broken institution. It is an institution, with legal rights granted to it. As long as the United States government is going to grant privileges to people based upon entering into this institution of marriage than marriage should be open to all people, no matter how they unite.  Black and white, man and woman, able-boded and disabled, or man and man - everyone should be able to partake - IF THEY WANT.

Here is the rub.

Some of us don't want to.

I cried watching the New York Senate vote. However, I seriously doubt that I will ever take those vows. I cried because it was a symbol of equality being achieved and I am very happy for those who want to get married. But please don't think this is the only thing we should be striving for, or that the struggle will be over once we can get married. It is partially an acknowledgement of our relationships but it is also an assimilation into a broken society.

Assimilation isn't good.

We need to take a long hard look at the gentrification of the "gay movement". I have heard and seen many gays that want to limit who may participate in gay pride marches - especially eliminating the drag queens and leather queers who started the Pride parades when many "mainstream gay" individuals were to closeted to attend a parade. Our "movement" is standing on the shoulders of people that many would prefer to push back into the closet now that we have some scraps.....

Generally, these individuals that want to limit who is in the pride parade are white and/or upper/middle to upper class.  Classism, racism and sexism are not only issues of straight american.

The pride parade isn't for everyone. Obviously there are conservatives who would get hives just thinking about standing next to one gay person. But within our community there are people who aren't comfortable with everyone's expression of themselves. Today there are more children in attendance of both gay parents and straight allies - but the parade isn't for children (maybe we need to have a kiddie parade during pride week). LGBT et al, is a very large diverse group. Our strength is our diversity. Diversity means acceptance.

Pride is about accepting everyone no matter what they look like, who they sleep with, or how they "do it". And that means consensual sex. (Yes, that means of humans of legal age for those numb nut conservatives out there who need definitions. ) People's consensual isn't for you to define. Do what you want, in your bedroom, different strokes people. This weekend is about embracing all of who we are; Drag, queer, leather, vanilla, and straight all are welcome - with their open mind.

Like my very wise Aunt Gigi used to say, "Don't like it? Then don't do it!"

Don't like drag - then don't dress. Don't like chaps - don't wear them. Don't like dykes on bikes - get there late. (gay standard time) If you don't like the way someone looks - look the other way, and frankly if you think quite a few people there will not be chiseled or ripped, well - your delusional.

Pride like the rest of life is what you make of it. There are many interesting people out there and this is an opportunity to meet a few of them.  Even if they do things you'd never dream of....

Spice of life after all....

Enjoy the parades, celebrate the hard won marriage rights in New York have a great and safe day.

And on Monday, or maybe Tuesday pick up the fight again for equality everywhere. That is what the Pride Parade is about; diversity, unity and visibility for equality - FOR EVERYONE.

lazy lazy lazy

sometimes I think of myself as lazy

There are days that I do absolutely nothing productive and I can hear the voices of society telling me I am wasting time.

But isn't it my time to "waste"

What is this obsession with productivity and who gets to decide what is "productive" in my life if not me?

Understand, I am a sprinter. I am a whirlwind of activity and then depending upon that activity, it takes me time to recoup and recover. I don't think of this as a waste of time, but a necessary recharge for my personal battery.

Frankly, spending a day or two with someone I care about, doing next to nothing, just being together is something important to the growth and development of any relationship. People who have to have something to "do" together aren't going to make it as a couple.  But I digress.....

This society is obsessed with productivity. Individuals are told that if you aren't producing you have no value. The kicker is, it isn't about creativity or art or even mowing your lawn, this is all about being a cog in the wheel of the corporate machine.  This is about working 40 to 60 hours a week to "get ahead" - now no one is sure exactly who they are racing - but there is a race and you are losing! Americans hate to lose even if they didn't know they were playing, so they run the "rat race" to "win" the "brass ring" - which never appears for most part, because it is a big myth - to get you back on the treadmill each week of a 40 + hour week.

Sure there are the one in a million who "win". The successful movie producer, real estate mogul or attorney who have risen above their meager beginnings to wealth and/or fame. Someone that demonstrates that you too can "win".  My question is - do you want to?

I don't think most people want to be a multi millionaire except for the ease it would be on our financial minds. Most of us are content to live our lives within moderate means, a home, a vehicle (if needed), enough to eat, health care and good people around us. The last one is the real key. Relationships make our lives worth the time, energy and any sacrifice, and many people run the treadmill of "success" to provide for their families, which is valid, however society has hijacked that drive and transformed it into why we live.

I put forth an alternative: we work to live. We work to spend those lazy days with the people we love. Yes, there are projects outside of paid work, there are houses to clean, yards to weed, and maintenance in our lives to be done, but we should not denigrate the time spent with love ones "doing nothing" because we are doing one of the most important things humans can do. We are developing relationships and loving each other.

Even doing nothing alone we are taking care of ourselves by resting our mental facilities and recharging our batteries. There is value to rest.

Americans need to learn to stop beating themselves up for taking care of themselves.

Get off the treadmill occasionally and spend quality time "doing nothing" with someone you love.

Japan

Frankly it is just overwhelming

I have, like so many others, watched the massive destruction in Japan, and I start to cry. In our global world with instant images of everything, everywhere, I sometimes think we have grown callas to suffering; especially the suffering of others.

Then something like the Japan earthquake happens and it touches all of us. Yes, there are those who will hide their heads in reality TV or the latest charlie sheen web-post, but for the most part, people want to help. Even in the midst of their own economic crisis the common people want to help each other. We empathize with the tragedy of our sisters and brothers half a world away and we want offer a hand to them.

Some like me want to run over and start lifting the rubble, look for survivors and assist in the clean up. Others will start up collections of food, clothing and money to be sent to the survivors. But one of the best things we, especially those of us living in California can do, is prepare ourselves for the next earthquake here at home.

There are many agencies that provide disaster relief training in your area. Please sign up and get trained. Do the things to keep yourself and you family (including your animals) safe, such as having food and water stored, batteries, a radio and flashlights. First aid kits in both your car and home and tennis shoes with a change of clothes, these are things that will make a disaster easier, if you are unfortunate enough to find yourself in such situation.

here are some links to training in Los Angeles:

http://www.cert-la.com/whatiscert.htm

http://redcrossla.org/

Here are some organizations that will gladly take donations for the relief efforts in Japan:

http://www.opusa.org/

http://www.asianjournal.com/community/community-news/9316-abc7-japan-earthquake-relief-drive-march-14.html

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/donate/overview.cfm?ref=main-menu

Thank you for not losing hope and supporting the survivors. It demonstrates we support our Japanese sisters and brothers through this staggering process of rebuilding.

gang initiations and other opportunities last week

I began the event on the 22^nd

As with most groups there is an initiation of some sort. Human are notoriously cruel to outsiders and frequently insist on a demonstration of loyalty to join the group. This particular group has a mean reputation. Some of the most cut-throat, corrupt and competitive people in the world are part of this association. However it was a shocking realization to me that I had volunteered to be the newbie in a gang jump in.

A three day long initiation.

Most gang initiations are short, violent, and bloody affairs. The last one I had attended did result in a bloodied nose for me, but mostly these events produce bruises, which are mental, emotional, even somewhat spiritual, but it is brutal.  And LONG.

A friend who has been through this is probably correct in her assessment.  It is a hazing ritual. It is berating, there is an insinuation that one is not good enough to join the ranks. The gatekeepers demand that you regularly identify yourself clearly. There are bizarre regulations, anal-retentive attention to your every move and even the monitoring of bodily functions.  The leader of the hazing repeatedly admonishes the newbie group regarding prohibited items, such as speaking to others and the dreaded rule 12 violation.

The newbies tremble in their seats, years have been spent in preparation for this trek. When the announcer proclaims the clock has started adrenaline courses through my body. I was an athlete and while beneficial when competing at a very high level on a track, here it is detrimental. I get up and go outside the room with my permission slip for water, but avoid the bathroom as that would raise the attention of the monitors, especially this early in the game. 

Rarely in my life have I shied away from attention or notoriety, but in this group it is best to keep one’s head down, especially at the beginning. This is a game that sheep win and I, as anyone who knows me will tell you, am much more akin to a predator than any pack animal.  However, blending into the group is in my best interest at this point.

Day two:  Pencils at the ready, my hand is slightly recovered from the previous day’s damage. Admonishments against cheating, reminders that the omnipresent watchers shall punish all deviations from “the rules” and a general cowering from the noiseless masses. Start!

I get up after an hour. I feel good about the how things are going, so I take a bathroom break. On my way back a kindly looking gatekeeper asks for my admittance slip. I show it and skip past. Yes skip. She laughs and immediately asks why I am so happy. I respond honestly, (knowing that it will break my cover). “You can’t take this too seriously! This is the definition of a high class problem.”

She laughingly agreed.  However in an hour when I returned for water, she requested that I “dance” again. I thought about refusing but realized this was something I had set myself up for so I skipped past again. Then something very interesting happened.

I became the title to a Stieg Larsson book “The girl who skipped at the Bar Exam”

All the proctors suddenly knew me, smiled at me and talked to me. I was a fan favorite, the one they were routing for, a hero in the group of faceless plebes with no personality.

I was the wolf again in a group of sheep. Now, will that help me pass the bar exam?  Most likely not, but I was true to myself and entertained a group of people in a boring job, which made them much more enjoyable to be around.

And while being a wolf won’t help me at the exam part, it will help me when I begin fighting the social injustices as an attorney.

so I had to answer a question for a job application

Not so sure that I will get the job after answering honestly......

but I had to post this b/c then I had to cut this down to 1200 characters without spaces

Sadists!

here we go.....

The intersection between race, class, gender, and sexual orientation is the crux of debate regarding opportunity in the United States as well as in the rest of the world. Basic assumptions and cultural mythos normally find their root in the dominant social paradigm of straight white male culture perpetuated through out race and classes difference by media and entertainment.  If one is isolated from the dialogue by language barriers, class issues (limited access to mainstream media) or other “outsider” status, questioning these accepted myths is frequently the result.

Personally, I am a cultural outsider (Finnish/Saami), from the working class, a women and lesbian.  I questions the basic assumption asserted by the US media/political/cultural mainstream that “working hard will get you ahead”.

My analysis of this assertion has three parts:

1.  There is an inference that poor people are lazy. This is a false assertion.  It is an assertion that encourages individual responsibility for socially disproportionate distribution of wealth to avoid any meaningful discussion of class issues.

2.  There is an inference that everyone starts off this “race” for wealth at the same place/footing. No mention is given to silver spoons or inherited millions (or billions) since we are all supposedly receive to our earned potential of “hard work”. Wouldn’t the conversation include issues of accessibility to basic human services provided by a child’s caregiver, ie parent, such as health care and education? These are necessary building blocks to ensure that all children would have an equal starting point for this great “race” toward wealth.

3. There is an inference that wealth is good and what we should strive for it. The definition of the “American Dream” has changed. It is no longer good enough to have a house in suburbia (that is a questionable goal which I shall not address here) but one needs to have a mansion and servants and a personal jet to be “successful”. The new “American Dream” comes straight out of life styles of the rich and famous, not only is this absurd but it is unsustainable. 

abandoned building, banisters, and sustainable communities

so an open question....

what if a group of us took over some of these "abandoned" bank properties and turned them into useful community centers. Adverse possession or just flat out buying them at auction - or making an offer to the bank.

I am thinking that the buildings could be low income housing with the possibility of people purchasing units. Created housing for LGBT elderly or community centers for youth and the arts. Yes, it would take money....something no one seems to have these days, and I am not saying I have the money - but what if we all worked together to create something sustainable out of this mess.

It would take work. It would take some unity of purpose, but it could solve a number of problems. From creating positive spaces for our youth to housing for the low income.  

The banks want to write off these properties. People need homes and positive spaces. What if those things could dovetail into a positive future. People in the neighborhoods could be asked what they want for their area and encourages to participate in the process so they have ownership.

possibilities are there if we can just get away from the greed element

sexual repression, christianity and this great american life

really that should be the title of a book, but this is a blog and I don't have the time today to write a book....

(things to study.....lots and lots of things to study!)

there are several theorist who believe all of our actions are based on sexual desires, I think that is a little extreme, but I do agree that many people in the US sublimate their sexual desires in to other activities. Work, food, drugs, I have seen all of these things and many others (collectors out there) replace the intimate connection for individuals.

 Is this based on the puritanical religious views of many christian groups that were integral to the early development of the United States? Or is it more modern? A side effect of the lack of interpersonal development fostered by "relationships" via the internet and the hyperfocus on techno gadgets such as iphones and other "social" media connective devises.

Other arguments claim that a lack of identifiable social structure leaves many to feel unable to interact "appropriately" as people can not read interpersonal social clues therefore they isolate from our current social structure. There is a chicken or egg element to this argument that I won't go into here, but we could revert back to the hyperfocus on technological interaction as another root cause if the basic lack of identifying social clues.

so this is a short post for people to interact with via their techno gadgets - which is an oddly appropriate forum to be having this discussion within....

motivation

I have a lot to do

There is the class I teach and all the prep time that goes into it. The LLM course I am in the middle of and the volumes of reading as well as writing assignments. I am studying for the bar exam again. I run and trying to keep up on current events can consume a good 2 to 3 hours out of my day. Not to mention this blog...

Mostly I am more self motivated than most. I don't really need a drill sergeant or anyone else standing over me. I study because I actually like to learn. I find learning new material and facts fascinating, my motivation is something new anything really.....

but I have been having a difficult week.

there is the repetitiveness of doing MBEs (multiple choice questions for the Bar exam) and the daunting task of reading patent law treaties between European countries but there is something more base about my seeming apathy. Somehow I have to learn to care about money.

There I said it.

I don't care about money. I am told by my family that I never did from a very young age. I am not saying that I am some altruistic saint. I just never placed much of a value on stuff. I like beautiful things but ownership of anything was always intellectually problematic stemming from a world view that all things have an innate essence even if they are not self aware. This lack of monitory motivation has been problematic in some ways interacting in this modern capitalistic society.

I am convinced it isn't a negative way to look at the world. Maybe I just have to shift to a more taking care of myself value - but I am not clear how to do that.

It is an issue I shall have to revisit over time and find a way to shift the view of things. I enjoy work and working, I just need to demand more value from others for my work tome.product. I guess that begins with me placing a higher value on myself.

if I were a rich man

Somewhere in my upbringing I learned or more likely assimilated a distrust for the very wealthy. Not for the new millionaires or the upper middle class, but for the "old money" the people who have had and expect to have.

People who earned their money the old fashioned was - they inherited it.

These are the robber barons, the landed gentry that came here as second sons and became founding fathers. Some of them had very liberal views of politics and intelligence, some not so much, but they all viewed this new land as an opportunity for more and better than the old country.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo6BvfaOu5c

Now it could be my working class background showing or it could be the fact that we are living in a time when the gab between wealthy and other is getting obscenely huge - Mount Everest huge. The size of an Ed Reed hit huge. Dolly Parton, you know what, huge.  (yeah voice...) It is disheartening to most "average" (read getting poor) Americans that all their hard work is just digging them deeper into debt.

http://www.alternet.org/story/149531/the_class_war_launched_by_america's_wealthiest_is_getting_more_savage

The republicans and most Americans like to think that if you work hard, pay your taxes and save a little, you too can buy the American Dream. Which, of course, is having a home, a nice future for your kids in a safe neighborhood with a nice car and a golden retriever or maybe a labradoodle.

New flash: this just isn't happening anymore!

What is worse for the republicans and maybe America as a whole is that people are starting to wake up from the illusion. They are beginning to see that isn't just koolaid being served up, but foreclosures, unemployment and repossessions as a lovely dash of arsenic.

Now in the defense of people still sipping the "koolaid"; of course we want to believe this fairytale. It gives us some semblance of control over our lives. If we can't get "ahead" no matter what we do because there isn't really anymore to go around after the top 1% take their 45% of the gross national product, then why should I go to work. Why should I stay on this treadmill? Why should I stay a cog in the machinery that keeps the rich getting richer?

After all I could just marry a wealthy man or win a fortune in a game.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxmCCsMoD0&ob=av2nl

confessions of an agist...

Yes I am an agist...

The sight of taunt young flesh and perfect features illicitness this thought:

boring

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfk8kLJMab0

Here is the true prejudice, youth is not very smart.

Now I don't mean they are all stupid like a box of rocks, just the vast majority have no life experience to speak of and think they know EVERYTHING.
Yes, this stems from an assumption that older people have examined life, been knocked about a bit and no longer view the planet as revolving around them.  But my experience has proven my prejudice to be true for the most part.

Granted there are older individuals out there who have managed to get to an advanced stage of life and avoid any sort of inner examination - to bad for them - and again - BORING!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQZmCJUSC6g

To quote Socrates, "an unexamined life is not worth living" (yes someone said it before Madonna)  which to our current society that is star obsessed, entertainment based and generally outwardly focussed for validation or happiness, is a radical concept for many. No wonder people are so unhappy as they hit 40 or even 30 not many will have obtained the pat on the head from society that they are seeking.

Secret Number 1: Validation

The great lie being sold to so many is that validation comes form outside. Most people are just not paying attention to you, it isn't that they don't care about you; it is just that they don't care about you. Really. People are too busy managing their own rat race to stop and give you that 'atta boy' you are desperately seeking. So do yourself a favor and acknowledge yourself.

Stop looking outside for validation.

Secret Number 2: Personal

Here is something that, if you can manage it, will make your life a thousand times better. Stop taking it personal.

By "it" I mean all your daily interaction with other people. Understand that most humans are caught up in their own lives. They are paying attention to themselves and their goals, if they cut you off in traffic or bump into you on a street, don't take it personally. How could it be personal if this person doesn't even know you?

Seriously apply this to the people in your life, you will be amazed at the results. When someone you love yells at you, wait, count to 5 and think about what is going on in their lives. Is this reaction about you?

Sometimes the reaction is about you, but maybe the reaction or tone isn't. Try to remember that they are going through their life and that will have an effect on their interactions with you. If you love them why not give them the benefit of the doubt and diffuse instead of infuse with escalation.

I look into the mirror today and I see the hard fought inner examination on my face. It is a face I might be attracted to if it weren't mine and maybe if I smiled a touch easier. But lessons learned hopefully show in my interactions with others as much as around my eyes.

I'll leave you today quote that I keep striving toward:

«I love my past. I love my present. I'm not ashamed of what I've had, and I'm not sad because I have it no longer.» — Colette

the shootings in Arizona

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40983401#40983401

Keith Obermann said it perfectly, violence has no place in our rhetoric. Violence has no place in our society but it is here, everywhere, pervasive from our sport to our movies to now it seems our politics.  We can hold politicians and talking head accountable for their inflammatory speech designed to silence opponents or garner higher ratings, but if this individual truly has mental issues, as is being inferred by news outlets, there is another issue to be addressed:

Why if he is known by authorities to be violent and mentally unstable is he unsupervised and free to obtain a gun in our community?

In the United State conservatives have used the idea of individual freedom and due process to castrate the mental health systems' ability to hospitalize all but the most violently insane; even upon the statement by an individual that they are violent or suicidal. In the past month I know of two individuals with a  diagnosis of mental illness who actively sought hospitalization for violent and suicidal thoughts and/or impulses who were held for 6 and 12 hours respectively then released.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/mental.htm

Did the hospital believe that they were mentally fit?

No.

Neither have insurance and couldn't provide a method of payment for treatment.

This all comes back to the healthcare debate.

My position is that healthcare is a basic human right, like freedom of speech or the right to assemble. As an advanced society we have a responsibility to take care of our citizens and that means providing for their physical well-being as well as protecting their personal freedoms. After all, if someone is mentally unstable how are they going to hold a job that is going to provide medical benefits to them. This is both about providing healthcare to everyone and protecting public health both physical and mental.

Yes, there can be and have been issues of accountability at mental hospitals both in the admittance of patients and the retention of individuals, but past abuses call for better procedures and oversight not denial of treatment.  The stigmatism and fear of mental illness needs to be addressed much like the hysteria around diseases such as cancer and AIDs benefited from active educational campaigns.

Todays pharmacology, while not perfect, offers greater opportunities for stability to those facing the challenges of mental illness, but treatment is key. Alienation and refusal of treatment for lack of an ability to pay is just unconscionable.  Health care, like education, fire prevention and police services, is a basic social services, none of these should be about profit margins.

Yet, conservatives want to make healthcare about privilege. The privilege of having a job that can afford to provide individuals with health care, but really it is about profit margins that the healthcare industry has been able to build on the illness of the American people. To that I say shame, profit on illness is reprehensible.  The United States needs to overhaul its healthcare system and join modern societies in caring for all of its people by providing not just individual liberties but physical and mental health care.

The very tragic irony here is that Representative Gifford may have been targeted for her support of the Health Care Bill that might provide mental health care for her assailant.

poly scale

I think this is a brilliant post:

http://londonfaerie.co.uk/2010/12/poly-scale/

The lovely and talented Steven posted this in his comments on this blog a few days ago and I just got to reading it. Of course it makes sense that people's monogamy index would be on a continuum much like their sexual identity and that these are not fixed points on a line but fluid, mutable and changing as time and  individual growth develops the human personality.

I don't know the definition put on such a continuum but I would be on the poly end of the scale.

defining love within relationship

Let me start by saying I do believe in love.

The concept of love or positive energy is what I think of as Goddess/God (why must a higher power have a gender?). There is no doubt of the powerful feelings that babies illicit from their mother and from others in their family and social groupings. There are many people that I love because of the relationships that I have developed with them over time, they include family, friends, and lovers. These people live all over the planet, are of varied ages, genders and identifications, but in some way we have connected so that I extend the hand of community to them.

 Love creates feelings of loyalty and protection towards those in my community. It also projects a desire of happiness and success for them. What that looks like theirs to define, my ideas of happiness and success are egocentric therefore do not apply to those I love. People must define for themselves what their life desires are and how to attain them, that is the joy and sorrow of living.

Occasionally I fine someone that illicit stronger physical desires. People I want to share intimate experiences with, not necessarily sexual but intimate. These are the people that would fall into the category of partner, possible marriage material if I were of that inclination, or to coin a socially common term. These people are rare; they are similarly situated to my family and friends being of diverse backgrounds but there is stronger draw, society would call it romantic love.

I don't like societal definition of romantic love.  The definition has too many assumptions on the part of the players and creates barriers to communication - a key component to honest interaction with another human. Romantic love in our society is an evolution of courtly love, an entertainment form of the upper class and nobility that was developed in the middles ages.

http://condor.depaul.edu/dsimpson/tlove/courtlylove.html

While courtly love seemed to have clearly defined rules at its height, like any game of telephone play over a few centuries, the details and rules today are muddled.  Now people are left to interpret from popular culture what the "rules" are for intimate relationships. There are a few set defaults but only two that are hard and fast to a majority of people; dyad and monogamy.

One issue is that I don't want society to define how I relate to other people. I have never liked tightly laced boxes for individuals. The phrase never judge a book by its cover comes to mind... one must actually interact with people before you truly know anything about them.  Humans are unique, that is why it is so exciting to get to know someone.

Another issue for me is the dyadic preference our society places on relationships and monogamy which attempts to limit the individual experience of intimacy and love over a lifetime .

There is so much more to write - however I come up against my self-imposed time limit for the day. To the books!