Geoisphere

Sadness - Brilliant People - Short Aborted Lives

2012-02-19T22:03:00.000-08:00

I've been blessed in my life to have been exposed to a lot of incredible music which has made my life often a joy!

Clifford Brown died a month after my 5th birthday. Magic Sam died a week after playing at the Nitty Gritty Bar in Madison, Wisconsin - within several hundred yards of where my dorm room was. (I'd never heard of him at the time.) I love both of their music!

Clifford Brown (October 30, 1930 – June 26, 1956) was an influential and highly rated American jazz trumpeter. The clean-living Brown has been cited as perhaps breaking the influence of heroin on the jazz world, a model established by Charlie Parker. Clifford stayed away from drugs and was not fond of alcohol. In June 1956, Brown and Richie Powell were being driven from Philadelphia to Chicago by Powell's wife Nancy for the band's next appearance. While driving on a rainy night on the Pennsylvania Turnpike, west of Bedford, she lost control of the car and it went off the road. All three were killed in the resulting crash.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTN--4gy6II

Samuel "Magic Sam" Gene Maghett (February 14, 1937 – December 1, 1969) was an American Chicago blues musician. Sam's breakthrough performance was at the Ann Arbor Blues Festival in 1969,[4] which won him many bookings in the U.S. and Europe. His life and career was cut short when he suddenly died of a heart attack in December 1969.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyfoe2zSdyg

Two of my favorite musicians both died young - not killing themselves through their actions, but leaving a wonderful musical legacy despite their short lives. Sad!

I'm scared - Violence - Not Against Myself - My Family, etc.

2012-01-28T22:21:00.000-08:00

I'm watching the movie "Enough" starring Jennifer Lopez. In the movie she is an abused wife - who fights back (in the end).

This movie brings up a lot of feelings within me! I'm not scared of being assaulted. I'm not scared of anyone close to me being beaten.

It is extremely scary to me - to feel within myself a little of the fear that must go through others - who are terrorized by another, usually a former or current partner or other close relative - however it may be for them whether they are or were a boy abused by a parent, an adult woman or man - living in fear of a (former-)partner, they so desperately want to be free of or .....

It is equally scary to recognize that this violence (rape, domestic abuse, stalking, childhood sexual and physical abuse, psychological torture, etc.) is as common as it is and that while there have been decades of efforts to end these types of abuse, they remain fully "accepted" and "acceptable" in today's worlds in so many ways.

When such abuse is rare, then perhaps......

It is scary......

I'd like to really believe that in the not that distant future such violence might be rare like diseases that there are only a few new victims suffering each year, where such violence might be as unacceptable as assassinations of our leaders or most famous citizens are/would be.

I am scared for the world(s) that we live in - where so many things that seem trivial to me are seemingly so much more important based upon the time and energy that is focused upon them - than this terror is.

We can change things for the better! We can do what oft times seems impossible!

Recent Blues Deaths - Sadness - Etta James, Johnny Otis...

2012-01-20T12:15:00.000-08:00

I was saddened this morning to learn of the deaths (earlier today) of Etta James and Tuesday of Johnny Otis.

Both of them affected me in many ways over the years. I listened to the Johnny Otis Show on KPFA in Berkeley, CA for quite a few years and enjoyed his eclectic nature and the music that he loved.

There is a beautiful picture of him with his band from the 1950's in NY Times obit at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/arts/music/johnny-otis-musician-dies-at-90.html

Etta James - was simply herself - a wonderful, wonderful singer.

I was also saddened to hear in recent days of the deaths in December, 2011 of Hubert Sumlin - who played so wonderfully with Howlin Wolf for many years.

Finally, though it was last summer when it happened it was sad to hear a few days ago of the death of David Honeyboy Edwards at the age of 96. He sat in with Michael Frank - at the blues party that my first wife and I had featuring the Lonnie Brooks Band in Chicago in 1977.

My blues awakening began at the Ann Arbor Blues Festival in 1970. Many of the remaining stars from that era are in their late 70's or older now. Thankfully - there are still many wonderful performers to see, but it is sad as they increasingly are dying now.

Post-Feminism ???

2012-01-19T09:33:00.000-08:00

"Feminism doesn’t have many moves left on the board. Having achieved gender equity long ago, the ultimate goal is the full realization of female supremacy in society. The strategy has not been wholly ineffective. Half our population is now tainted with the original sin of maleness. Men are presumed guilty of inappropriate aggression and nefarious motives in all corners of society, including education, professional life, social interactions with women, and popular culture. We judge healthy male instincts such as competition and desire as moral failings."
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/ - January 17, 2012

Gender equity was achieved long ago? In a world where little boys are still scared of and totally looking down upon the concept of being a girl we have gender equity? In a world where far too many young women will try to starve themselves and spend much time trying to look "beautiful" (or more likely "not so bad") hoping to get male attention we have gender equity? In a world where many thoughtful men will do a lot in various situations to try to convince women around them that they will not assault or harass them we have gender equity?

I understand that increasingly there is a dichotomy between college educated young men and women where oft times the women are "driven" and "successful" and the men are more "party driven" and stuck in dealing with the realities that they are Not either "the alpha male" or "the successful alpha male".

I do see a need for us to change what I see as the "original sin of maleness". Life in the United States and elsewhere has changed dramatically at least since the 1960's and we men have oft times been left behind.

We haven't been left behind because of women "doing us wrong" or similar. We have been left behind because we have Not done the difficult work of struggling with each other in significant ways to build a new masculinity which will allow us to be equal partners with women.

Being glued to sports radio and tv and debating sports issues won't help us grow. Exploring how sports can be positive parts of our life may help us grow. Complaining endlessly about women and being focused upon their body parts and similar won't help us grow. Talking with other men about our lives and how we can better relate to women will help us.

Susan Walsh in her blog may be most sincere in wanting to help young women find happy, lasting primary relationships with young men. I fear, though, that her solutions for these women ignore the real problems and in the end blame women for our failures as men.

It isn't easy to move against our socialization and to learn to be whole people, but it is important! Thanks!

Piercing Winds

2011-12-10T13:22:00.000-08:00

it’s not easy

facing the strong winds

pushing, grabbing, moving

tears - from the fears, the pains

of rejection

of Not knowing What or Why

I can only
do my best

caring and supporting

as best I can

taking care of myself
so I can be there

the winds singe, pierce
and whirl by – teasing ....

but not so far – telling
a clear truth – an answer
…. Will come In time
patience isn’t easy

good morning – and good night

December 10, 2011

Another Anniversary

2011-11-12T20:29:00.000-08:00

November 13, 1964 - 47 years ago - tomorrow as I write - my brother and I were awakened by our mother with the words: "Daddy died this morning" (or similar) - Now at age 60 - I reflect - thinking again of the father I wish I could (continued to have) had.

At that time - as an immature boy of 13 - I didn't cry, though I certainly felt a huge loss. Now - I can be sad - and cry easily, feeling my loss.

I've been very lucky to have had 60 years of living in good health. I've been lucky to still have my mother and others in my life who mean a lot to me. I'm very lucky to have a wonderful son who hopefully will make a lot less mistakes in his life than I've made. I'm lucky to have a lot of memories and a history to look back at.

I'm not "owed" anything more that I'm aware of. I appreciate the opportunities I have to live and make choices in my life that are both important and trivial. My life has for the most part been good.

I'm appreciative of so much! Thanks!

Rojo - Feelings - Etc.

2011-10-28T13:48:00.000-07:00

Rojo, our Labradoodle is a cute, crazy 5 year old dog. Until the last month or so he was "ridiculous" in his extreme exuberance - getting extremely (overly) excited around other dogs and oft times people in public - particularly around men (though sometimes women) that he liked.

When Rojo is outside - those who understand dogs at all find him harmless and loveable, while those who don't know dogs at all and/or fear them, can be scared of how aggressive he seems to them. They don't see his wagging tail and silliness.

Roughly a month ago Rojo seemingly injured himself.

His vet - had x-rays done and I was told that he had and will have increasing difficulties with both hips for the rest of his life. As his condition develops - at some point he will need pain medication for the rest of his life.

I am very attached to Rojo! I first saw him as a 10 pound puppy who was about 8 weeks old and have been his primary caregiver over the five years since then. It is difficult, particularly for me, to see how he adjusts to his changed life, where his walks are shorter and controlled and his lifestyle in general is different.

Rojo - rests and sleeps more than he used to do, and has increasing periods of "moans" and other sounds (he's a very, very expressive - noisy dog)- that reflect both the pain he obviously is in at times as well as simply his slowing down and being more passive to cope with his changing body.

A part of me feels like I've been sort of "cheated" - as the innocent (and he was certainly an "innocent") carefree "boy" that I knew - is moving into being prematurely "older". It also feels to me like his carefree happiness - is in part gone forever - though he certainly handles it much better than I do.

I also reflect upon how this again, is an example of how I take things for granted until they are lost - with my sweet dog.

I am crying now - overly emotional yes - but I do feel sadness here. It is also a reminder of my own aging - though not "extreme" - as things in much smaller ways get harder as I get older.

Reaching Men (more)

2011-09-12T21:03:00.000-07:00

Brie, (and cc:d to Stacey Bellem – see below)
(note: see: http://brieakins.wordpress.com/

I’ve been reading some of what you’ve written recently related to your August 31, 2011 blog entry and the issues central in it.

I’ve never worked in primary prevention, hence at times I may miss some of the nuances related to it.

I agree with nearly all that I have read of your writings in these areas.

I would like to add several things, related to men, that I think are important to consider related to what you’ve written about.

Simply put the issues relate to

1.) Male responses to trauma and abuse – best in my mind approached by Stacey Bellem - and The Unifying Center – http://theunifyingcenter.org/ (website: currently very limited for good reasons),
2.) Male – involvement – in general, and
3.) Bringing about – Major substantive change with Men – Changing – Masculinity related to it
---------------------------------------------------------
As Stacey states much more effectively than I can, men respond to being hurt by abuse as well as trauma , which can come from many things (violence around one, deaths of relatives and friends, serious failures in schools, major illnesses or injuries, etc.), with either (or a combination of) “manning up” (e.g. stuffing oneself – reacting silently) or responding with anger and lashing out generally at others.
Men and boys – oft times including both male abuse survivors and perpetrators of abuse and other violence – commonly need an openness to, an availability of and actual use of serious therapeutic help.

Unlearning – much of “masculinity” and how it imprisons men is an important part of the therapeutic help that is necessary.
--------------------------------------------------------
Male involvement in ending violence issues is grossly small both in relation to the involvement of women and related to how men are deeply tied into the issues.
I’d estimate (and there is no way to really estimate the “correct” figure) that men have done and continue to do well under 1% of the total work done on violence issues. There is a small, but very committed, dedicated community of men such as David Lee, Chad Sniffen, Steven Botkin, Byron Hurt and others who do various important ending men’s violence related work. There is a second small community of male activists (in some cases they could be included in the first group) who focus upon their own oppressions including survivors of various types of abuse and Gay/Bi/Trans activists.

Men tend much more than women (in my estimation) to focus serious energy only upon issues that they see as being “my issue now”. A good example of this is looking back at the participation in HIV-AIDS support work in the 1980’s and 1990’s – the one group that is notable for its Non-participation was – Het identified men. While homophobia certainly limited such involvement, it also was because we Het men didn’t see a relevancy and importance of such work to our lives.

While some men complain online a lot about how there are few agency resources for male survivors of abuse, men who were not abused rarely seek out volunteer work and paid employment related to these issues. While working full-time, I was a volunteer tutor in public schools for six or seven years. I never saw another man under about age 70, doing regular volunteer work in the schools I volunteered in. I believe this was because fathers of young children are generally too busy to do such work, and that other men don’t see such work as being relevant to their (current) lives.

Violence is to me a serious “male” issue. Besides the issues of rape, domestic violence, and stalking - of women (which are very important issues to me), we have serious issues of violence directed at men and boys.

Besides the fact that men and boys are raped and are victims of domestic violence (from women), men and boys also face violence and the threat of violence from other men and boys. Such violence includes rape, domestic violence, sexual and non-sexual child abuse, bullying and the threats of and actual fighting that may occur through “normal life” as well as gangs and similar.

While there is some focus upon ending teen male violence primarily focusing upon poor, Boys of Color, in general there is relatively little focus by men upon violence issues as they relate to boys and men.

I believe that there is a general lack of awareness amongst most men related to masculinity and how it is difficult for us.

http://noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz.wordpress.com/ - is the blog of a young woman (with less writing by a male ally) “Ozymandias” – who, when she focuses upon masculinity – has amazing insights relating to men and women – feminism, male violence and similar. While at times I believe that she overly sympathizes with us men – and views things as: “men and women have it equally tough” (and a corollary – “men and women are equally oppressed”) which I do not agree with, I admire her insights. (Other writings of hers about her sex/social life better reflect that she probably is about age 19-20 and not fully “mature”.)

She and her fellow blogger have had their blogs infested with men who are constantly criticizing “Feminism” as opposed to the statements of particular feminists. O – herself – critiques feminist related issues, but doesn’t simply directly attack “Feminism” or “Feminists” (as a “Boogyman”).

I believe that in addition to the anti-Feminist men – who I tend to not empathize or sympathize with, there is also a substantive group of men who (as is common amongst men) do not “get it” related to various issues related to both – “masculinity” and feminism in general.

I know that despite thirty years of feminism influenced life, I can easily feel – “hurt” and shut down in response to what I feel. If I had learned as a child and young adult to process issues and discuss my issues with peers (particularly men), it might be different. I think that most men I know of do not have a men’s support group, as I have (I got it started some years ago). Even with my support group, it still isn’t easy for me.

I suspect that many of the men – who self-describe themselves as supportive of significant parts of what they see “O” – as supporting, find it important or necessary to attack feminism or feminists - related to their inabilities to deal with their issues related to masculinity particularly When words may hit “too close to home”. I think that they rush – emotionally – to seeing themselves as being Specifically Attacked – and lash back using the only “weapon” they see relevant to what is going on – scapegoating feminism and feminists.

Unfortunately I see such reactions to insights that are on the whole both reasonably balanced and extremely insightful as being a or the common “natural” response to a significant percentage of men being challenged (or feeling challenged when they aren’t being challenged).

I have a difficult time perceiving how it will be possible for there to be substantive change in ending violence (as well as in bringing about positive change which in general will be life affirming and supporting of people in general) until and unless:
Men – become involved – at least minimally comparable to how Women are involved in the causes and issues that exist.

I’m Not talking about 50/50 involvement! IF – one presumes that Male Involvement in these causes is 1% of the total work done, doubling that involvement will still only mean that there is 2% of the total involvement. One could try to draw a parallel – with the participation of Women in electoral politics. Is it significant now – that there are 17 women in the US Senate? I don’t know – but it’s a lot different than when it went from 1 to 2.

The involvement of men in these issues is Not a simple concept. There’s a big difference between the number of men – who were involved in Men Stopping Rape and how many of the men involved continued their activism long-term related to some of the important issues we worked on. While some women obviously similarly – leave serious causes, at least as of today, there is much more of a reminder – day-to-day – of rape as an issue based upon things such as the street harassment that younger and not-so-younger women face that reminds them of rape as an issue in ways that far less men will have similar reminders .

While in some ways there has been Dramatic Change in past decades related to gender related issues, there still are reminders that there’s a long way to go – for many issues. It is rare when women stalk men and then kill them, while men, far too frequently, stalk and then kill female ex-partners - for example.

While I heard several days ago –from a woman – posting in Prevent-Connect stating that in her state there are more Male complaints of Domestic Violence from Women – than vice versa (at least amongst youth), I find the basic part of that hard to believe. Individual men are certainly abused by individual women. I hear of relatively few situations of Men murdered by women in domestic violence cases – except when the Man has nearly killed the woman previously. Far more women are killed and I would guess threatened with and facing serious and often escalating levels of violence from their partners.

It is certainly necessary and important for there to be increased emphasis upon programs reaching both boys and girls as they grow up in schools and elsewhere to help seriously cut back upon violence. Such programs need to address both the concerns of survivors and potential survivors of violence as well as helping prevent abuse from abusers and potential abusers.

I think that it is naïve to believe that efforts such as I’ve alluded to in the paragraph above will be sufficient, by themselves, in reducing violence directed both at women/girls and men/boys to the degree that they won’t remain as very serious issues that continue to need additional attention.

While differences certainly exist, there are useful parallels in comparing the Civil Rights Movement related to Black People and ending violence issues related to women and men. In period of the mid-1960s into the early 1970’s the foci related to Black People and Civil Rights changed substantially from changing oppressive laws which limited Black People and favored White People to blaming (primarily Poor) Black people (e.g. “welfare queens”) and similar. There was almost no serious focus upon the need to change the attitudes of White People and to focus upon racism perpetrated and perpetuated regularly by White People.

As the modern Women’s Movement moved beyond some early successes there was a similar “pushback” which oft times singled out Women of Color and Poor Women for blame for various things. There was and is relatively little focus upon violence and its perpetration and prevention. It is rare when there is serious focus upon the highly significant percentage of people who are Abusers – Rapists, perpetrators of Domestic Violence and perhaps most seriously the Abusers of Children.

I cannot imagine how there will ever be serious success in greatly reducing violence until such issues are taken much, much, much more seriously by a significant percentage of men (and boys). Today violence of boys against boys is commonly seen as an issue limited to poor, generally Of Color Boys – in gangs and similar. Relatively few men see the significance of the percentages of men who are abused as boys as a Major Issue, yet alone seeing the importance of male violence directed at women and girls.

It remains problematic for me to see how men and boys will focus upon violence issues seriously and be strongly committed to working to end such violence. Ending violence issues currently and in the future seem likely to remain peripherally important to the vast majority of men as long as they don’t see such issues as being Very Important in their immediate lives.

Oft times where violence issues are important to some men, such as survivors of childhood or other abuse they face two different types of issues in coping with what they face lacking the:
1.) tools to deal with their abuse as per the first section of this writing and
2.) support and potential support of others – particularly of peers who both may not have had similar abuse and where they have been abused, are not likely to talk about it.

I believe that efforts of women to end violence over recent decades have been amazingly strong and oft times quite successful, given the lack of substantive support and involvement of men. My sense is that such efforts will continue to have some areas of limited success as well as some failures until and unless their issues become “male issues” that deal with core issues of “masculinity” – what it is and what it should become.

Bringing about – Major substantive change with Men – Changing – Masculinity related to it remains the basic issue which I’m concerned about.
How men can be reached related to violence issues remains problematic. One can debate the lack of a serious societal concern with issues related to men and violence and “blame society” for why violence continues to be a “female problem” largely in the minds of many.

I have witnessed the growth of the Modern Feminist Movement in my lifetime (I’m 60 years old). The growth of a relatively strong movement of women working to end: rape, domestic violence and child abuse seems obvious to me.
Parallel to the growth of the Modern Feminist Women’s Movement has been “The Men’s Movement”. Beginning in the 1970’s there have been multiple, occasionally overlapping movements of men, with female allies in some cases. I would separate such movements as follows:

1. Men’s /Father’s Rights
2. Self Actualization including Mythopoetic
3. Gay/Trans Men
4. Pro-Feminist

Men’s/Father’s Rights advocates have become increasingly vocal in proclaiming the need for men to find themselves commonly blaming women (or some women) for the primary problems that men face. Where there has been a focus on violence issues within this Movement it has largely been one of proclaiming that violence of women against men is equally prevalent and important to violence of men against women.
While peripherally this may help increase awareness given to men as victims of violence, commonly the vitriol expressed towards women in general makes serious efforts to end violence questionable.

Self-actualization advocates may help some men deal with their own victimization and possibly help some men end their own abuse of others or prevent it from occurring. My general impression of such movements is that they tend to involve men who are privileged economically. They largely limit their effectiveness in working to end violence because their efforts are largely limited to helping small number of peer – men who have had and will continue to have common experiences with these men.

Gay/Trans men may in some cases do effective work within the Gay/Lesbian/Bi/Trans community. It is difficult for me to discern precisely how effective they are in such work. Their effects beyond the GLBT community are certainly generally negligible.

I am most familiar with the Pro-Feminist Men’s Movement having been involved in it off and on over the past 30 years. It appears to me that it reached its peak success in the 1980’s or early 1990’s and is relatively insignificant in its overall societal impact today despite the impressive efforts of a dedicated core of men committed to serious work for positive change.

The most important reason I believe that most men do Not get seriously involved in violence issues and work for positive change (such as through the Pro-Feminist Men’s Movement) relates to how such issues are not seen as currently Important in these men’s lives. A majority of men do Not see violence issues impacting upon their lives except in distant and abstract ways. Where they may fear armed violence such as men with guns around them, it is likely a different issue such as “crime”, “poverty”, “Black/Latino gangs” or similar – not: “Men” or “Masculinity” or “Violence Issues” for them.

Where men are seriously impacted by violence issues, they commonly focus most of their energy responding to such issues trying to cope with whatever they face. Male survivors of abuse and trauma commonly are either silenced and carrying a lot of weight inside themselves or lash out at others using their fear and anger in the only ways they know how to cope with their feelings. Some Male Survivors do reach out to others and build from their experiences. It is difficult for such men, though, to get support and connection with fellow Survivors and even more difficult for them to reach other men, who commonly may not relate to their issues (or even be open to hearing about them at all).

Efforts by men in the Pro-Feminist Men’s Movement over the past 35+ years have oft times brought men in for the short-term either in reaction to things such as divorces or because they connected to an issue such as domestic violence or rape. A significant percentage of these men become less involved as their issues and priorities change over time.

Efforts by both Feminist Women and Pro-Feminist Men to get men connected with violence issues out of empathy and “doing the right thing” and similar seem to attract only a limited number of men, and to keep them connected commonly for only the short-term.

I believe that serious change amongst men is unlikely to happen until a significant minority of men see how traditional “masculinity” hurts us in a variety of ways and are significantly motivated by such insights to push seriously for societal change. Such efforts will recognize how male socialization hurts us in a wide variety of ways.
Ways we oft times are hurt by our male socialization include:
1.) higher death rates particularly when we are teenagers and young adults from accidents such as driving at high speeds or otherwise acting recklessly, 2.) higher successful suicide rates when young, 3.) fears of being bullied or otherwise physically assaulted by male peers, 4. ) (partially at least) greater difficulties in school and lower grades than female students on average, 5.) seeking medical assistance less readily resulting in increased likelihood of preventable deaths from illnesses and injuries, 6.) significant emotional loneliness and excessive emotional dependency upon female significant others – most notably perhaps among men living after the death of a long-term female partner.

It is, of course, not obvious how we can seriously reach a significant minority of men and help them see how traditional masculinity hurts them to the degree that they will work to significantly change it for the better.

I think that reaching a lot more men in these ways will require both efforts that involve both men and women (and boys and girls) as well as particularly effective efforts of men reaching younger men and younger men working with their peers to build a more effective, positive movement of men.

I would argue that though such a path is difficult, it is the best way for men to help to bring about serious, societal change leading towards a world where violence will be much, much less common and where true peace will be possible.
While the support of women is obviously important, such change will Not occur until and unless a lot more men get motivated and involved in working to make it happen. I believe that only then will a really significant proportion of men begin understanding how Feminism and supporting women is really important and a positive force in their lives.

In none of what I say do I wish to imply that work with women and girls is not also very important. It is entirely self-defeating for efforts to reach boys and men be at the expense of work with girls and women.

I believe that serious work with boys and men will take the time and serious commitment of many of us. To the degree that we look for simple or quick fixes we will not effectively move forward. I hope that more men will learn much more from the failures of men of my generation as well as the relative insights and successes of parts of the modern Feminist Movement.

We men do need to work hard and struggle as well as to learn to laugh at ourselves and be happy, more self-sufficient, more effective loving and caring people. Thanks!

Masculinity - to Vice President Biden

2011-07-28T09:41:00.000-07:00

(sent separately via email)

Dear Vice President Biden,

Your efforts on behalf of women related to domestic violence and other related violence against girls and women has been greatly appreciated by many women and men!

At the same time I wonder when you will recognize a Huge problem we have in the U.S. and indeed worldwide that I might label "The Masculinity Epidemic". We, males, die at higher rates than females do from birth on. Strangely though, the rates of difference peak as we become teenagers and don't let up until we are past our mid-20's and move towards "middle age".

It should be noted that we learn to be violent in disproportionate numbers and direct our violence at women (as you've ably noted), but also at other men and boys as we learn to "be a man" in so many ways.

Our problems undoubtedly begin in the home as we learn to keep our feelings to ourselves and be independent of others. In school we disproportionately have learning problems and commonly adapt to the structure of schooling with more difficulties than girls have.

As teenagers we learn not to seek help for our issues and besides being aggressive we also are too commonly suicidal. As we grow into manhood we continue to avoid finding help for our problems, whether they are personal or medical issues.

A significant percentage of men carry scars from trauma or abuse. Stacey Bellem of The Unifying Center (http://theunifyingcenter.org) is one of the few people I know of who is seriously attempting to reach us as men to help heal us.

We should continue efforts such as you are making to societally support female survivors of abuse! We should not make efforts on behalf of boys and men at the expense of efforts for women and girls.

I have created a website: http://www.AMensProject.com - A Men's Project - to try to encourage positive, affirming efforts to help men and boys.

I hope that you will both continue your efforts on behalf of women and begin to also reach out to help boys and men in a variety of ways. Each effort will help support the other.

Thanks!

George Marx

p.s. - I'd be most happy to help in any area related to what I've written above now or at any time in the future

More on Masculinity

2011-07-20T21:47:00.000-07:00

What follows is a slightly abbreviated part of a lengthy email response - in correspondence with another man Jack.

I see one basic issue - which I do not have a clear answer for which is extremely problematic for me.

Let's assume for example, that:

a. Man 1 - is a survivor of childhood abuse,
b. Man 2 - is Gay and his Gay identity is extremely important to him,
c. Man 3 - is the father of a young child - partnered with a woman and
d. Man 4 - is heterosexual, childless, and somewhat career driven

Man 1's issues of abuse in today's world would oft times be silenced out of shame. He might be "functional" or "dysfunctional" in various ways. If he does seek out and find support (particularly locally), it likely will come primarily from women in agencies that deal primarily with women. (He might find male contacts on the internet.)

Man 2 - might relate to Man 1 - if issues of abuse were highly relevant to him. Otherwise, most likely his world(s) will focus upon his identity - and what is important within his worlds. IF he is a father by choice - he may have some things in common with Man 3, however his circles of attachments related to fathering and parenting are more likely to be with Gay (and possibly Lesbian) parents. Various - other worlds - may appeal to him based upon his identity and interests,

Man 3 - is most likely overwhelmed focusing upon parenting and his work (assuming he also works at paid employment). His support network, if any, is likely to relate to couples with young children - through common daycare connections and other ties through the parenting.

Man 4 - is likely not significantly connected to any of Men 1-3. His world(s) relate to his career, his primary relationship (if he has one), and his friends - who likely share some commonalities with him. He may have some friends who are fathers, however most probably the friendships are fleeting both because of his interests and how little time the father(s) have to spend with him.

When my son Ben was several months old - I noticed how easy it was to interact with women outside our home - who were most helpful as I struggled to shop and similar. These women - varied in many ways - could see me more than completely superficially - and reached out to try to help me. Men - that I saw - would help where it was obvious that assistance - was "polite" - such as opening a door for me, but otherwise didn't really see me in a sense.

I was immediately struck- by the understanding - that a few months earlier - even days before Ben was born, I would have been exactly like these other men.

We men - seem to focus our energies upon - what is "right in front of our faces". If we are disabled, we may see disability issues as important. If we are able bodied (including mentally), we are unlikely to connect with or volunteer time towards issues of the disabled (unless we have a close family member with such issues - where we will in a sense have that connection to which I'm referring).

AIDS support work - had women who were Lesbian, Het, Bi etc. - women saw the importance of the work - back even when AIDS was a "Gay Men's Disease". We het or hetish men - were barely on the horizon of the issue, because it wasn't "our issue".

As young children we face both biological issues as well as societal pressures which encourage us to be the one who:

1.) Plays parallel to or obliviously around - others (boys generally),
2.) Is generally not responsible for younger siblings - though a big sister may be responsible for us,

We rarely learn to socialize with both girls and boys - of varied ages unless we lack any other playmates.

We are pressured to - be with peers - and conform to the norms of our peers - "packs of boys" (our own age, and generally of similar backgrounds).

I had an excellent conversation several days ago with Stacey Bellem, whose organization (under development - website deliberately very limited now) of The Unifying Center - is going to focus substantially upon how many boys and men are wounded (e.g. childhood abuse, living around constant gunfire, growing up fighting with other boys and/or being bullied, etc.) - and how masculinity - is a prime "culprit" (my word). She sees the need for significant mental health intervention and outreach to connect to males - so that we won't remain silent - and anger focused for example.

I have no problems with women such as Stacey - trying to do work reaching out to men and boys. They can be a huge help to us men!

I do have problems with some men (not you) - who take a "we're all in this together" approach - which on the surface reaches out to younger men and women with equal focus. In such situations the women commonly respond much more and the men can be easily sucked up into the positive attention from the women. Again the men and boys in part due to how we are - remain oft times not reached.

I both agree and disagree with you in some of the important areas we deal with. Stacey spoke with me of how her father was abused emotionally by his mother and how this hurt him as a man, distrusting women. I certainly agree that such abuse is not rare.

I think that our separate discussions of issues of racism vs. gender issues are telling in how we see things differently. I would certainly agree with the first part of your discussion where you note that there were (and probably still are) no substantive advantages to being Black.

I would argue that racism remains a major societal problem today as a result of what happened in past decades. White People generally believed that the passage of the Civil Rights Legislation of the 1960's completed the necessary work on Racism related issues. The repeated emphasis upon foci on either radical extremist White People (e.g. David Duke) or upon blaming Poor Black People for their perceived problems really did not get at the core problems of Racism as a "White Peoples' Problem". The issues that remained were viewed as "Black Problems" that were the responsibility primarily of Black People.

I agree that men as a gender - have major issues and that being "male" can be as difficult or more difficult than being "female" can be.

I can not, however, see that our issues are similar in Very Important ways to the issues that women face.

Related to gender issues I've gotten a lot more support over the years from girls and women - in general than from men and boys. The pressures I've felt to "be male" have come subtly from women in some instances and steadily from men and boys in varied ways, sometimes blunt, direct, and scary.

I have been held up at gunpoint twice in my life. That is the closest experience I've had which might help me understand emotionally the fear that women and girls can face from men and boys. The fears that I have from men are limited and relate to a fear of being held up, not being assaulted. I do not have flashbacks or direct associations to my past experiences and these were limited to several months after the second holdup.

While there certainly are women who do not have fears of assault from men, the fears are quite common. I honestly don't know how men who've been abused and assaulted feel in similar circumstances. I would guess that particularly where they were assaulted by strangers in public they may have similar issues.

I can not imagine the experiences of being "hustled" and similar that (particularly young) women commonly face, sometimes related to their "appearance" and sometimes simply being perceived as being female of a young enough age to be "desirable" and thus justifiably being pursued.

It would be so simple to try to point the problems as being "the system" or "women" or indeed "men".

For me to seriously change masculinity - requires us to see that we have both:

1.) Privilege - that women and girls don't have - and see a lot of what this is as well as,
2.) Oppressions - in "masculinity" and a recognition - that it is a core part of a system that includes: Class, Race, and other factors.

The Parallel with race as an issue is important to me. One - great example - is Little Rock, Arkansas - related to its integration of public schools under Governor Faubus in the period of 1956-1958 - and leading into years beyond then. Working class Whites - were manipulated by business interests - Whites with Money - and pushed to oppose the Blacks. The battles - were not in the upper-middle class White High School - but in the high school where the poorer Whites predominated - Central High School. Class - was used as a weapon - to pit Poor Whites against the Blacks - when in a best of world they would have worked together to confront the oppressions of the wealthy White People.

Men - are manipulated by a system - that disproportionately has power - within Wealth - White, often Male White Wealth. Men have natural allies in some Women - in opposing Masculinity. Not all women, of course, are the potential allies.

As long as men - Don't Recognize - the "class power" of masculinity - in perpetuating and supporting the system through men, I don't see how men - beyond a relatively powerless minority, can seriously change masculinity. Recognizing that we have "male privilege" and that it is real, need not trap us in feeling that we want to continue in support of masculinity.

It is important to me to recognize both our potential power - because we are men, as well as how it is and will continue to be easy for men to not "get it" thinking that they will lose more than they will gain by giving up traditional masculinity.

We, of course, will always be "male" and have something that makes us different from those who are "female" that likely will be well beyond our genitals and related body differences.

I can't define seriously what we should in a sense become beyond several factors and clear things that we Don't want. We clearly need to learn the importance of relating to others in ways that deal with our feelings. We need to not focus upon things and material based communication such as is common in evaluating sports figures statistically and "qualitatively" and their teams. Sports and indeed competition need not be eliminated, however the vicarious participation and serious parts of the big name sports seem suspect to me.

I would guess that as male children we will in serious ways need to learn a lot that we don't learn now which will make it easier to relate to others. Part of this must relate to living with serious communication with others who are "different" from us. While this will of course include girls, it also will include relating to and being in relationship with others who are not our peers - older and younger children (and adults). While I don't think that a 1 year old boy will developmentally be able to relate tremendously to a diverse people world around him, I'm very, very aware that as young children we learn from much around us.

When my son B was celebrating his second birthday, a neighbor friend gave him a large plastic bat with a large plastic baseball. My (first) wife thanked her for the gift and said that she didn't think he'd know what to do with it. B picked up the bat and whacked the ball. He'd observed older kids, probably mostly boys, and had a clear understanding of elementary baseball. Girls - in many home settings lack the chance to live as boys often do as they are socialized to be caretakers of younger children as well as "homemakers".

I'm not naive enough to believe that the differences between genders are all related to how we are socialized. I'm also aware that we make decisions in our socialization efforts which greatly affect both boys and girls. Girls also need to be raised in more effective ways. I prefer to limit my focus primarily upon boys and men.

Changing socialization is not simple, nor obvious as to how it can best be done.

It is obvious that boys need to learn options in how they can develop that go far beyond what we can possibly imagine today. We need to help support behaviors which allow boys to be more like girls in some ways as well as doing the opposite with girls.

Until and unless - men in far, far, far greater numbers become far more involved in focusing upon masculinity and the difficulties that both boys and men face related to it, expecting substantive change seems problematic to me. Women have created a substantive feminist movement over the past 40+ years to focus upon their needs.

While the modern feminist movement has certainly had difficulties of its own related to racism, classism and heterosexism (at a minimum), a significant percentage of feminist women have been forced to face serious issues related to gender oppression and discrimination. Where they may deny such issues, reality can get in their way bringing such issues back to them.

I have a hard time seeing where men have had a comparable experience related to our difficulties as a gender.

We certainly face a variety of issues!!! At the same time, I can see little that has evolved in terms of men working with other men to confront the problems that we face related to masculinity.

The foci upon masculinity from my perspective has three very primary reactions from men:

1.) Apathy and non-recognition - the most common approach,
2.) Anger in general against others as well as primarily against women and against feminism - as in Men's Rights Advocates.
3.) Self-Actualization Models including:
a. Gay - Guppie Based - "let's prosper and enjoy ourselves" approaches,
b. Generic - cushioning - that some upper-middle class men have found - which allows them to feel good about themselves and to live a comfortable life - apart from most of the major problems that surround them in much of their lives,
c. A portion of the Mythopoetic Movement - which allows its adherents to live comfortably and avoid the deeper societal problems - at least at a deep level.

All of these models in my mind avoid dealing with the core issues that many, if not most of us, men face in terms of really working seriously to help others - including seeing the issues of sexism, racism and classism as well as heterosexism.

I see two very basic issues related to what I've discussed above:

1.) As men - we need to learn new ways of reaching beyond ourselves and being holistic in seeing the worlds around us as needing our support beyond our initial needs to feel good about ourselves, and

2.) We live in a "class based" world which includes: class, race and gender as primary factors in how we perceive things and move ahead in our lives.

I certainly feel that being "male" is Not giving us "privilege" in some key ways. We are more frail in terms of our survival as a gender. We are more likely to fail in school. We are much more likely to successfully kill ourselves as teenagers - due to the pains that we feel being male.

To the degree that men are victimized through sexual or other abuse as children in particular I see us as hardly, if at all, privileged. Anyone who is seriously hurting, due to major trauma can generally not realistically use most of the privileges that one may otherwise have.

I would argue, though, that a majority of us are not abused or otherwise traumatized. Particularly this is most common amongst those who are not poor, are heterosexual and are White, though some of those of us in such groups are certainly survivors of abuse and trauma.

Such men, and I would include myself within this group, in my mind have a responsibility to try to help others around us.

We face a changing world which increasingly contains fewer privileges than our fathers and grandfathers may have had, if they weren't hurt or contained by others with class privileges and similar.

At the same time I still see strong potential advantages in being male. I can not ignore that realities that are stated such as:

"I think I am even more driven because my abuser still lives at home with my parents, he was never punished and he walks around like he got away (which he did). My parents support him as do my mother’s extended family."

It may seem extreme to hear the words of a woman from the Caribbean referencing the man who has clearly repeated assaulted her and is protected within her culture.

I have never faced living in a world where others might follow me - because of my gender.
I have never faced living in a world where others might comment upon my appearance - because of my gender.
I have never felt scared of others - that they might anonymously in a sense - sexually assault me.

I'd like to come back to some of your words from your last email:

"We should not be surprised that many men are resisting changes that would take them into territory they have been shamed -- and some might say tricked, not just by women but by the culture in the aggregate -- into avoiding.

Moreover, I would say that the past forty years have seen a significant focus on Male Shadow and Female Virtue. Now it's time for the rest of the story -- so we can get this thing right. I acknowledge that there is much that can rightly be said about Male Shadow and Female Virtue. I wonder if you can acknowledge there is much to be said about Male Virtue and Female Shadow. That would create a bridge that could carry a lot of helpful traffic."

I am not clear how we've been tricked by women in substantive ways. The major shaming that I've seen has:

1.) Come from Men primarily -in issues relating to "being a man".
2.) Had parts that certainly had "enforcers" who were commonly our partners and ex-partners - related most commonly to ways that we really have failed to act responsibly.

Where we men are fathers, I've known of relatively few situations where it is not either:

1.) Difficult for both the man and his partner - because parenting and working and living together are difficult or
2.) Clearly problematic because the woman is working, parenting and maintaining the household and the man is carrying well under 50% of the load.

I'm not particularly familiar with other situations which obviously exist - where:

1.) The man is working at paid employment - as the sole breadwinner in the family,
2.) There is serious conflict between the partners

My general impression is that more commonly where the man is the sole-breadwinner - the roles are chosen by both partners (traditionally obviously) - and things work for both partners however they evolve.

Much more commonly, I believe, both partners work either out of choice or more likely out of perceived economic necessity.

I'm really not familiar with the male shadow and the female virtue. I see few people lauding women in general for most anything. I see complaints coming from men about women. I see complaints from children resenting their authority - and where there is divorce oft times having the "good parent" the father who buys the love of his children, during his weekends with his kids, and the "bad mother" who of necessity is the disciplinarian. I see complaints from women about how they feel trapped without options as well as criticizing other women for their choices.

Some women have it good in various ways. Some may financially have it “good” to the detriment of their ex-partners or even current partners. My sense is that this view is oft times biased by the unhappiness of the male, whose perspective is distorted by his pain and anger. Other women have it much better than the men because they develop support systems amongst other women.

I think that there has been a tremendous amount of focus culturally upon men. Indeed I think that we men oft times focus upon men in general. We are oft times caught up in our local sports teams and focus far, far, far too much upon the “greats” of baseball, basketball, football and hockey in the U.S. We may argue about other men such as President Obama.

We certainly don’t focus much upon ourselves and our fellow men and boys around us in substantive, emotional ways. When I parented my son, I faithfully went to his sports practices and games. He was an excellent athlete and cared about sports. In that sense I did far better than my parents ever did with me. At the same time I totally missed being “with my son” in terms of where he was at emotionally. I also missed being with him when what he was interested in seemed “beneath me” in various ways. My wife (ex-wife now) was the one who listened to him and really was connected to him.

I’ve also found that throughout much of my adult life, I’ve not reached out beyond my immediate world(s) to help other men and boys. In some ways I’ve done more than most men, as in having been a volunteer working within the public schools tutoring (rare amongst men) from when my son was in the 3^rd grade through 7^th grade at least, as well as an additional year more recently. Except for the most recent year, this was done while I was working full-time.

I don’t see us men – building structures – to encourage our visibility in necessary, helpful ways. We do certainly work to build some useful things for boys such as sports teams and the like. We do far less, though, at building the listening and caring for those boys who are having problems in school as well as in many other areas in their lives.

Most commonly the complaints come from our female partners and ex-partners seeking help for their sons. We are surprisingly apathetic unfortunately towards “men’s issues” until and unless we are directly connected to the issue. Prostate cancer is not an issue for men who are not aging. Gay marriage rights are rarely an issue for most het men.

I’d have more sympathy for us men if I didn’t see so many examples as to how we do really focus upon our perceived needs which are different from much of what seems important to me. Early in the 20^th Century there were the relatively poor (married) men who found outside pleasure with poor prostitutes. Today we have many ways of escaping through the internet as well as outside our homes.

Obviously, individual women are not without fault in how they treat particular individual men. Some women buy gender roles and push and otherwise encourage men to “be a man” in various ways. Women with money may seemingly “oppress” poorer men in various ways as their “class” interests are seemingly more important than gender in terms of their power and priorities.

Most commonly I see women doing bad things not out of malice, but rather out of ignorance.

Obviously men and boys also to a significant degree make what I would call “mistakes” out of ignorance.

I would like to see many men really work on our issues and get to the point where we could honestly move positively towards a healthy masculinity and then work with women related to necessary changes in both our gender roles as they relate to women and in our relationships in general with these women.

I think, however, that it will be difficult for most of us to successfully do this until and unless we begin doing serious work with men first. Such work of necessity will go well beyond what nearly all of us have done in the past.

We have a tendency, when we see the desirability (and necessity) at all, to want change(s) to occur right away and relatively simply.

To really bring about serious change I see a need for responsible varied efforts from:

1.) 1.) Older men such as you and I both working with our peers and helping share ideas with younger men and boys as well as being visible and available for them,

2.) 2.) Young (adult) men roughly from college age into young adulthood (roughly into their early 30’s) largely working with their peers age wise including helping build new models – using social media and much more to reach out to others,

3.) 3.) Young men increasingly supporting the efforts of other young men building allies.

I don’t see the efforts of any of these groups of men and boys succeeding substantially unless they:

1.) 1.) See and understand how they are in some ways favored by being male, as well as how being male can be difficult,

2.) 2.) Recognize – how they face issues of being played off against others – and seeing how gender, race and class as well as homophobia get in the way commonly and must be confronted and dealt with, and perhaps most importantly,

3.) 3.) Learn how they need to initially deal with whatever traumas and deep hurts they may have – and Then – begin to Move Beyond what I would call the “small I and We” and see others around them – finding common ground as well as celebrating differences – confronting the forces that are trying to stop them.

While women can provide substantial support, I think that in the end the efforts of the men and boys will always be both the greatest strength and weakest link in what happens or doesn’t happen. Where we may “fail” I think that we need to own our failures. Where we succeed I think that we need to recognize both how we have built the successes and how much we owe to many others who’ve helped us in building our successes.

IF we do what I think that we need to do, we will learn a lot from men and boys who are increasingly diverse and are largely not “older White Men”. Our Youth –are our future.

I do not believe that what I am saying necessarily disagrees with much that you believe in. I believe that its emphasis is rather different though.

I’ve had a hard time putting this together and it still doesn’t feel “great”, but is the best that I can do.

Thanks for listening to my words!

Sad Metaphor - on Rape - and These Times

2011-07-02T08:57:00.000-07:00

I have no idea of whether the former IMF Head is guilty or not - of the rape accusations of the immigrant housekeeper in the luxury hotel in which he was staying.

It is telling, however, that the inconsistencies of the purported victim are explored in great length, while (now) little or no attention in the media is paid to the patterns and inconsistencies of the alleged assailant.

1.) Why would she want to have "consensual sex" with him? Did he entice her with promises or was he somehow highly attractive to her?

2.) She was working on the job. Did she have time to "play around" and still get her work done?

3.) He has a history of sexual affairs (at best) with other women. Have their been similar episodes in his past? If so, were they similar "consensual" all the time?

4.) What is the "power imbalance" between a Wealthy White Man and a Poor Woman of Color?

5.) Is it somehow reasonable for this man to "seduce" or "be seduced" in such situations in non-coercive ways where he may be "the victim"?

6.) Is it reasonable to believe him and not her based upon their respective pasts?

I don't believe that we should believe the story of the alleged rape victim as the "absolute truth". I also believe that we should recognize the power imbalances here and try to give balanced coverage now on the issues recognizing the situation as it is.

It seems so relevant to the exploitations of poor and not wealthy people by powerful people in general in the US today seems to grow so expodentially!

On Maleness

2011-06-09T20:57:00.000-07:00

Oxymandias has a Most Excellent blog posting entitled: “Who Cares About Men’s Rights?” at:

http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com/2011/06/who-cares-about-mens-rights.html

that is insightful, well-thought out and just incredibly good!

I’m guessing that she is a relatively young woman. Being male and 60, my vision is different I think in some small, but perhaps significant, ways.

I think that we are in agreement about most of what is said in such a clear deep way.

As a man I grew up learning that it was a “mens’ world”, but fitting in with that world was inevitably tricky. Conformity to norms I didn’t clearly understand was enforced as a relatively young boy by the threats of getting beaten up by three older boys, who probably were getting beaten by their fathers. In school there were pressures that I never understood, growing up in an atypical household and being an awkward loner. As I grew up I still lacked the social skills to see beyond the upper-middle class, White, Jewish male goals of academic achievement and intellectual success.

Some years ago I saw a small group of young girls (with several younger brothers in tow) playing in the courtyard of our townhouse complex. They were acting out together “a verbal fight”, discussing how things should go in the “play fight”. They were cooperative in a way that astounded me. My son Ben, when their age, was playing with things such as toys and balls and similar with and around other boys. He was not engaging in dialogue as part of a social world based upon active, substantive (in my mind at least) discussions.

The “community” that I’ve experienced amongst White Men largely focuses upon shared experiences relating to areas such as spectator sports and similar. Commonly we are in a world of peers where our foci generally are within our own generally narrow boundaries. As Het Men in the 1980’s we did not focus upon AIDS because it was a “Gay Issue” and thereby not relevant to us. Before we become parents (if we become parents), we commonly have little significant concern and involvement with fathering issues.

Where there are significant “men’s issues”, we care about them when they seem relevant to our lives, but otherwise have little connection to them. Most upper-middle class White Men have little connection to the issues of poor, young Men of Color who are incarcerated, killed and seriously wounded in great numbers. Support and advocacy work for male survivors of childhood (sexual and non-sexual) abuse, who are estimated to be at least one in six of us, are generally left to the survivors themselves or support services staffed and oft times aimed more at women. Prostate cancer can be a big issue for many of us as we are in our 50’s and 60’s and older, but seems ignored by most younger men.

As Oxymandias so amazingly described, we have plenty of reasons to be concerned about both ourselves and other men. What is not explicitly stated, though many causes are noted is that we men are “the weaker gender”. From birth onward, males have a higher mortality rate than females do. While it’s easy to see the differences peak when we are roughly between the ages of 15 and 30 – when “maleness” seems most a handicap to our survival, we die more readily as babies as well. (See my blog entry of November 10, 2008 at: http://geoisphere.blogspot.com/2008/11/growing-among-men.html for specific data – for the U.S.) .

While I do Not believe that most men are rapists or batterers or abusers of children, I do believe that we tend to be “infested” with “maleness” which is harmful to our general health. I think that the biological differences that we have are compounded by socialization which harms us both physically and mentally.

In terms of physical violence, we clearly injure and kill far more men, boys, women and girls than women do. Psychologically I would argue (though some might dispute this) that the pressures to conform to norms of our “maleness” come disproportionately from male peers and older males as well.

Women commonly have reminders which make denial of their “realities” difficult, if not impossible. Menstrual cycles, pregnancy and the threat of various sexist violence from male peers and older boys/men can be reality checks that are difficult to ignore.

The worlds of boys trying to fit in and grow up have their own complexities and traps. Commonly they relate to “maleness” whether it is potential gang violence or the needs to be “the best” in competition in various areas.

Some of us attempt to help other men change in positive ways through our connections to feminism (as well as through our understandings of racism, classism, heterosexism, etc.).

Despite our efforts in recent decades, the positive changes that have occurred have oft times been matched or exceeded by scary negative changes. The internet has ended the emotional isolation of many, while also endangering others’ lives and well being for example.

I find it hard to believe that Major positive change will occur in both:

1.) Ending – rape, domestic violence, stalking and other related violence of boys and men and:

2.) Boys and Men – succeeding (substantively more) in various ways spoken of and alluded to by Oxymandias

until a significant minority of men understand that “maleness” is harmful to us as men. It will then also be necessary that such men are motivated to work to change what being “a man” is for all of us men. Men will need to start seeing how we can be happier and healthier, and how we can live longer, happier lives through positive change.

IF – we can move to such a dramatic change from current reality, men are likely to really be able to take in the positive teachings of feminism (and hopefully of racism, classism, …etc.) and really relate to and support the struggles that women and girls have been through for a long, long, long time.

A far easier path which is a trap is for men to take a “best of” approach, rejecting the worst of “maleness” while being narrowly “self” focused. One example might be that while plenty of devotees of Robert Bly and the Mythopoetic Movement are wonderful, evolving Men, it is relatively easy for White, Upper-Middle Class, generally Heterosexual Men to self-segregate with their drums and rituals in a world which does little to connect them with others who may be substantively different from themselves. (Lots of White “liberals” somewhat similarly Did Not continue the Civil Rights work of the 1960’s into the necessary Anti-Racism work amongst White People into the years and decades beyond the times proximate to Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr’s deaths.)

I see the problems of “gender” being primarily a “maleness” problem. Women have struggled and done a lot of excellent work related to Male Violence, gender roles and much more from the 1960’s through the present. While individual men and a few groups of men have done some incredible work, their numbers and influence have been far, far too small to bring about substantive change. While women can certainly support men in serious efforts they may make, they can‘t do the work that the men need to do (and aren’t responsible for waking us men up).

I am trying with: A Men’s Project - http://www.AMensProject.com - to help men find useful resources to allow for easier networking and building of positive change. Other men are doing far, far, far more than I am in the actual work of helping to change “maleness” and ending the violence and pain.

Thanks!

Palestine - Again

2011-06-07T06:45:00.000-07:00

Bassem Tamimi, the subject of an action alert by Jewish Voice for Peace, speaks up for freedom on the 44th anniversary of Israel’s Occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, June 5th, 2011.

Tamimi’s full statement:

Your Honor,

I hold this speech out of belief in peace, justice, freedom, the right to live in dignity, and out of respect for free thought in the absence of Just Laws.

Every time I am called to appear before your courts, I become nervous and afraid. Eighteen years ago, my sister was killed by in a courtroom such as this, by a staff member. In my lifetime, I have been nine times imprisoned for an overall of almost 3 years, though I was never charged or convicted. During my imprisonment, I was paralyzed as a result of torture by your investigators. My wife was detained, my children were wounded, my land was stolen by settlers, and now my house is slated for demolition.

I was born at the same time as the Occupation and have been living under its inherent inhumanity, inequality, racism and lack of freedom ever since. Yet, despite all this, my belief in human values and the need for peace in this land have never been shaken. Suffering and oppression did not fill my heart with hatred for anyone, nor did they kindle feelings of revenge. To the contrary, they reinforced my belief in peace and national standing as an adequate response to the inhumanity of Occupation.

International law guarantees the right of occupied people to resist Occupation. In practicing my right, I have called for and organized peaceful popular demonstrations against the Occupation, settler attacks and the theft of more than half of the land of my village, Nabi Saleh, where the graves of my ancestors have lain since time immemorial.

I organized these peaceful demonstrations in order to defend our land and our people. I do not know if my actions violate your Occupation laws. As far as I am concerned, these laws do not apply to me and are devoid of meaning. Having been enacted by Occupation authorities, I reject them and cannot recognize their validity.

Despite claiming to be the only democracy in the Middle East you are trying me under military laws which lack any legitimacy; laws that are enacted by authorities that I have not elected and do not represent me. I am accused of organizing peaceful civil demonstrations that have no military aspects and are legal under international law.

We have the right to express our rejection of Occupation in all of its forms; to defend our freedom and dignity as a people and to seek justice and peace in our land in order to protect our children and secure their future.

The civil nature of our actions is the light that will overcome the darkness of the Occupation, bringing a dawn of freedom that will warm the cold wrists in chains, sweep despair from the soul and end decades of oppression.

These actions are what will expose the true face of the Occupation, where soldiers point their guns at a woman walking to her fields or at checkpoints; at a child who wants to drink from the sweet water of his ancestors’ fabled spring; against an old man who wants to sit in the shade of an olive tree, once mother to him, now burnt by settlers.

We have exhausted all possible actions to stop attacks by settlers, who refuse to adhere to your courts’ decisions, which time and again have confirmed that we are the owners of the land, ordering the removal of the fence erected by them.

Each time we tried to approach our land, implementing these decisions, we were attacked by settlers, who prevented us from reaching it as if it were their own.

Our demonstrations are in protest of injustice. We work hand in hand with Israeli and international activists who believe, like us, that had it not been for the Occupation, we could all live in peace on this land. I do not know which laws are upheld by generals who are inhibited by fear and insecurity, nor do I know their thoughts on the civil resistance of women, children and old men who carry hope and olive branches. But I know what justice and reason are. Land theft and tree-burning is unjust. Violent repression of our demonstrations and protests and your detention camps are not evidence of the illegality of our actions. It is unfair to be tryed under a law forced upon us. I know that I have rights and my actions are just.

The military prosecutor accuses me of inciting the protesters to throw stones at the soldiers. This is not true. What incites protesters to throw stones is the sound of bullets, the Occupation’s bulldozers as they destroy the land, the smell of teargas and the smoke coming from burnt houses. I did not incite anyone to throw stones, but I am not responsible for the security of your soldiers who invade my village and attack my people with all the weapons of death and the equipment of terror.

These demonstrations that I organize have had a positive influence over my beliefs; they allowed me to see people from the other side who believe in peace and share my struggle for freedom. Those freedom fighters have rid their conscious from the Occupation and put their hands in ours in peaceful demonstrations against our common enemy, the Occupation. They have become friends, sisters and brothers. We fight together for a better future for our children and theirs.

If released by the judge will I be convinced thereby that justice still prevails in your courts? Regardless of how just or unjust this ruling will be, and despite all your racist and inhumane practices and Occupation, we will continue to believe in peace, justice and human values. We will still raise our children to love; love the land and the people without discrimination of race, religion or ethnicity; embodying thus the message of the Messenger of Peace, Jesus Christ, who urged us to “love our enemy.” With love and justice, we make peace and build the future.

Background
Bassem Tamimi is a veteran Palestinian grassroots activist from the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, north of Ramallah. He is married to Nariman Tamimi, with whom he fathers four children – Wa’ed (14), Ahed (10), Mohammed (8) and Salam (5).

As a veteran activist, Tamimi has been arrested by the Israeli army 11 times to date and has spent roughly three years in Israeli jails, though he was never convicted of any offence. He spent roughly three years in administrative detention, with no charges brought against him. Furthermore, his attorney and he were denied access to “secret evidence” brought against him.

In 1993, Tamimi was falsely arrested on suspicion of having murdered an Israeli settler in Beit El – an allegation of which he was cleared entirely. During his weeks-long interrogation, he was severely tortured by the Israeli Shin Bet in order to draw a coerced confession from him. During his interrogation, and as a result of the torture he underwent, Tamimi collapsed and had to be evacuated to a hospital, where he laid unconscious for seven days.

As one of the organizers of the Nabi Saleh protests and coordinator of the village’s popular committee, Tamimi has been the target of harsh treatment by the Israeli army. Since demonstrations began in the village, his house has been raided and ransacked numerous times, his wife was twice arrested and two of his sons were injured; Wa’ed, 14, was hospitalized for five days when a rubber-coated bullet penetrated his leg and Mohammed, 8, was injured by a tear-gas projectile that was shot directly at him and hit him in the shoulder. Shortly after demonstrations in the village began, the Israeli Civil Administration served ten demolition orders to structures located in Area C, Tamimi’s house was one of them, despite the fact that it was built in 1965.

May 29, 2011 - Before and After

2011-05-29T18:29:00.001-07:00

WAS IT DRUGS OR INSANITY?

Seventh Third Bank - a Parable

2011-05-01T12:41:00.000-07:00

I would like to share what I see as a parable for today’s prevailing winds in the U.S. Corporations have “rights” similar to individuals as the U.S. Supreme Court tells us. We all can, of course, have complete “freedom” as long as what we seek doesn’t come into conflict with the influence of those more powerful than us. We live in a world of “smoke and mirrors”.

In some ways I am fortunate in approaching my 60th birthday. I probably will not live long enough to face the U.S. becoming a weak, ineffective country which is laughed at by people in countries such as India and China as well as most of Western Europe.

Perhaps more sadly, with all the supposed “Christian Good” around us, we rarely see true benevolence which considers true facts such as that with median household (gross) income of about $52000/year the “average” family could not possibly afford to pay the average cost of health insurance of approximately $13000/year or 25% of their gross income.

“Until May 19th you have an opportunity to effectively reduce your present mortgage interest rate from 5.375% to 4.4%.*” So stated the initial words of the sales pitch of our lender who I shall call (fictitious) “Seventh Fifth Bank” who are headquartered in a city I shall label (fictitious) Reds-Bengal-Land, USA.

If, dream, dream we could actually lower our interest rate as was implied above, our payments would be reduced $237.55/month and if we paid our loan for its remaining years we would save $82,669.13 in interest.

To explain “effectively reduce mortgage interest rate”, an example may clarify things. If one were to borrow: $100,000, for 30 years, at 12.0% interest one would agree to make 360 monthly payments of $1028.61 which would include $270,300.53 in interest . If one were to instead have made the loan for 15 years, one would agree to make 180 monthly payments of $1200.17 which would include $116,030.25 in interest.

Now, if one took out the 30 year loan (as described above), but paid $1200.17 each month (instead of $1028.61), assuming that there was no pre-paid interest penalty, one would pay the loan off in 15, rather than 30 years and “essentially save $154.27.28 in interest payments” as a result.

One could then argue that one had paid off a 30 year loan with $116,030.25 in interest (rather than $270.300.53) and thus had an “effective interest rate” of just under 6.01% (taking the total interest paid and calculating what interest rate would occur with a 30 year loan with that amount of interest paid). The Fact that one had in actuality effectively had a 12% 15 year loan would be “irrelevant”.
It is true than when I pay off a loan more quickly than its terms require, I will pay less interest (assuming non pre-paid interest penalty). This does not however lower the interest rate I am paying.

It is obvious that the Seventh Fifth Bank sends letters out to people like me in the hope of generating more business and making more money from us. In actuality there are small fees charged for their “service”. This “service” is an effort to make more profit for the Seventh Fifth Bank.

It is unfortunate that some people may read the promotion letters and believe the deceptive statements made by corporations such as Seventh Fifth Bank. They could be honest and advertise their offer as a means to pay off a loan more expeditiously and save interest paid. This would be true!

As correspondence from the Seventh Fifth Bank in response to my complaint to their state regulator makes clear, they know what they are doing and will continue to deceive their customers.

It’s “The American Way”! It makes me very proud to be an American!

Profound entry from my spam - good source for the Budget Problems!

2011-04-18T19:58:00.001-07:00

I am sorry for bouncing into your privacy. You might not know the sender of this Mail. But i got your E-mail when searching files on reputable people online. I feel quite safe dealing with you through this medium. (Internet) has been greatly abused, I choose to reach you through it because it still remains the fastest, surest and most secured medium of communication let me start by introducing myself. I Am Madam Natalia Adelfa (Phd.Msc,Fsd). I am married to Engineer David Coleman an English man who is
dead.

When my late husband was alive he deposited the sum of 3,000,000.00 (Three Million Great Britain Pounds Sterling) which were derived from his vast estates and investment in capital market with a security company here in (Athens-Greece)

My Doctor told me that I have limited days to live due to the cancerous problems I am suffering from. I have decided to donate this fund to you and want you to use this gift which comes from my husbands effort to fund the upkeep of widows, widowers, orphans, destitute, the down-trodden, physically challenged children.

Kindly contact me with my most private email address:

natalia11@blumail.org

Regards
Mrs Natalia Adelfa

Those Feisty Democrats (including President Obama)?

2011-03-18T05:37:00.001-07:00

In reading about a variety of subjects in recent months, I become puzzled about the seeming ineptitude of the Democratic Party including President Obama. In small part I can have a little sympathy and perhaps even empathy for what they have faced in terms of:

1.) The economy - and what a mess was inherited beginning in 2009,
2.) How President Bush (Jr) - messed up foreign policy,
3.) The Power of "the wealthy" and how difficult it is facing things in terms of recent Supreme Court rulings and how elites control the media and similar.

At the same time, I'm left wondering Why President Obama and his fellow Democrats have seemingly been repeatedly Whacked by opposing forces and have been so ineffective at the battle for public opinion.

It should have been obvious to Obama and the Democrats that:

1.) The Republicans and their allies would use everything they could put together to resist Obama and the Democrats, and perhaps equally or even more importantly,

2.) Positive - clear results - And a selling of the results to the public was important by at the latest early 2010 leading towards the mid-term elections.

President Obama looking at him retrospectively seems similar to Jimmy Carter in that he is "intelligent" but Not At All "savvy" politically. He clearly has no support amongst strategists that he trusts and relies upon that help him read public opinion and speak to it in ways that Karl Rove helped George W - until the economy Whacked him and which President Reagan was clearly a master at.

It may or may not be too late for Obama. It seems to me that clearly Obama will at least have a moderate chance of getting re-elected if in early 2012:

1.) the economy is clearly moving towards a normalcy where people are optimistic economically), and/or
2.) the Republicans are viewed as "extremists" and "crazy", and perhaps most importantly, and/or
3.) Obama - appears as the "confident", "effective" leader "out front".

It seems unlikely to me that the first and third areas are likely to be the case which will make the second option his only hope.

It seems obvious to me that despite the Republican opposition, Obama needs to not cave in as he seems to have related to economice measures. IF the believes that cutting Federal and State budgets significantly is going to jump start the economy over the next year, he's not even intelligent. Trying to follow "consensus" - as seems his style just isn't going to cut it with the economy.

It's not clear to me how he can effectively bring unemployment down enough both in the statistics (which seemingly show "improvement") and in the realities of so many people in such bad shape- such as the housing and employment areas seem to show.

While it is possible that the Republicans will self-destruct - with Right-Wing craziness, so far it seems like Boehner is savvy and effective enough to both appease the Tea Partyites and serve as a seeming "middle ground" - which obstructs and seems - annoying but not crazy.

Obama has a tough road in selling himself as "the leader" also. In most recent foreign policy issues Hillary Clinton, Obama and the entire leadership seem clueless related to what has and is happening in virtually all areas of foreign policy. The failures here in my estimation include:
1.) Thinking that Libya was similar to Egypt where the "revolution" could succeed without outside leadership,
2.) Not seeing - what was happening in Egypt and now not seemingly help Egypt move forward,
3.) Facing a tough path in Iraq - and not seeming to recognize the continued possibilities for a Huge failure there,
4.) Continuing to support the War in Afghanistan - with little, if any chance of "success" over the next year particularly,
5.) Sticking their necks into making peace between Israel and the Palestinians - while having no plan as to how to actually do it- being very naive here.

Barring - some type of foreign policy - "War to bring us all together" - which seems unlikely or other opportunity to be "the hero" - which lasts more than a few days in the media,

Obama needs to drastically change his image - and be viewed as "The Leader" who is effective and "out front" in the eyes of the American People with a corresponding picture of the Republicans as being "out of touch" and not "for the people".

Republicans have given Obama and the Democrats options in the latter areas - related to Wisconsin - and the extreme realities of their proposals and ideology fueled by the Tea Party.

It remains to be seen if Obama will succeed in the latter areas. To date there seems to be a lot more of the "let the Republicans self-destruct" - which may not happen rather than a pro-active, effective push to be a "real leader" in the eyes of the public.

I'm not optimistic, though it could certainly happen. Thanks!

Obama - Leadership and Coping ?

2011-02-25T21:08:00.000-08:00

I find Obama's general approach to leadership confusing and ineffective for the most part.

I think that most of the common, important things that he faces as president can fit into several categories including:

1.) "Can't Win" - e.g. no matter what he proposes there will be substantial political forces opposing it:

Example: Social Security financing reform,

2.) Important or Potentially Important issues where he has control (e.g. Congress can't readily block what he is doing),

Example: Attorney General and other defense of laws - such as the law banning Gay-Lesbian marriage recognition,

3.) Ideological issues - where controversy exists and success requires Congressional support:

Example: Health care reform legislation previous and future

--------------------------------------

1. Where one can't win no matter what one does - it's best to try to force bi-partisan consensus to be built around the reform - so push John Boehner into major influence now - appointing Republicans - along with Democrats - for Social Security reform legislation - and push them along with various speeches - not done

2. Where you actually have some control - speaking out - and showing leadership - not waffling - using the attorney general and others - to help you do things - is really helpful. This could include - for example - making judicial appointments when Congress is between sessions to force Republicans' hands on delaying votes on judicial appointments,

3. Where you need to get Congressional support - e.g. health care reform - being decisive and visible - not necessarily speaking always in specifics but involved - would be useful. Obama could be a part of discussions and be visible with Democrats and be visible with people like Boehner.

I'm not optimistic about Obama - related to his political savvy in doing any of these things. Speaking "honestly" and being sort of direct - in feeling like you can sway the American public with detailed speeches is rarely helpful. Being insightful about one's opposition and how to Confront and cooperate with them is necessary.

Obama seems made for situations that don't exist now, and he seems often times lost in the needs of the presidency. For all that one could criticize George W and Karl Rove, both knew how to manipulate the system for their own ends.

Thanks!

Health Insurance - affordability and the "Free Market'

2011-02-17T07:00:00.000-08:00

Median U.S. household income = $52,029

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html - US Census - 2008

Average Family health insurance policy cost =
**** Single *Family
2000 $2,471 $6,438
2001 $2,689 $7,061
2002 $3,083 $8,003
2003 $3,383 $9,068
2004 $3,695 $9,950
2005 $4,024 $10,880
2006 $4,242 $11,480
2007 $4,479 $12,106
2008 $4,704 $12,680
2009 $4,824 $13,375

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2009-09-15-insurance-costs_N.htm -

per Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust survey.

It’s unclear to me how many people really believe that amongst those “average families” which have more than 1 member that they could on average afford to pay 25% of their gross income for health insurance?

The “Free Market” doesn’t and won’t make health insurance affordable.

Some other interesting data – much more is easily findable on the internet.
Store Owner / Operator
$38,661 - $103,455

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Owner_%2F_Operator,_Small_Business/Salary

Answers.com > Wiki Answers > Categories > Business & Finance > Business > Small Business and Entrepreneurship

> What was the average income for small business owners in 2005?
Business Advisor & Tax CPA Helping Build Better Businesses
[Improve]

Salary.com did a survey in 2006 of business owners and CEO's salaries. The survey shows that the average income is around $233,000. Note that this salary is in fact under the threshold that Obama would raise taxes on, so Obama will not raise taxes on the average small business owner. Also, this survey defined "small" as having 500 employees or less which is fairly liberal and certainly not what most Americans think of as a small business.

I believe this is incorrect:
I believe its $258,400.

"According to the survey, the national average salary for the CEO/Partner/Owner job function is $258,400"

I also believe Obama's threshold is $250k/$200k (Family/Single)

An important note also is that 98.1% percent of small-business filers have income too low to be subject to either of the top two tax rates. Since the floor of these is below $250,000, then 98.1% of small business filers will not see any increase with Obamas plan.

http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-08tax.htm
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com

/Q/What_was_the_average_income_for_small_business_owners_in_2005#ixzz1EEBXzHPN
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_was_the_average_income_for_small_business_owners_in_2005
Effect of the high income tax cuts on business owners and the wealthy – see
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3251
Average income of Subchapter S – small businesses by business type – shows 2007 averages a number of whom are well under $100,000/year
http://smallbiztrends.com/2010/11/how-much-money-do-small-business-owners-make.html

We've Got Some Nerve!

2011-02-17T06:11:00.000-08:00

We really have some nerve in telling the Egyptian people what they should do in trying to build a democratic state there.

A few of the reasons are:

1.) Our original "democratic state":
a. Allowed slavery
b. Only generally allowed land owning (e.g. wealthy) White Men to vote

2.) Our original "democratic state" took well over 100 years to grant women the right to vote,

but perhaps more importantly:

3.) Deems individual rights to be held by businesses - allowing them a "strange" equality as you or I somehow seem "out numbered" when we take on a large corporation or their owner in many ways,

4.) Has a long history of supporting despotic rulers such as: The Shah of Iran and the recently departed Hosni Mubarek - preferring "stability" and compliance with our supposed economic interests to what we label "democracy" yet alone what a true democracy might be.

We should support the efforts of many of the Egyptian people. We should also remember that many of those who brought down Mubarek were young women and others who might well Not wield "power" in the U.S. because of the failings of our supposed democracy.

Obviously Egypt is a long way from having a true democracy, however we might better choose to focus upon our own issues in the U.S. which continue to relate to Class (often ignored), Race, and Gender.

Thanks!

The Gospel According to Ole Geo - Part II

2011-02-12T14:20:00.000-08:00

Hearing the difficult "tales" of my friend/ally Lisa - see:

http://lisahgolden.blogspot.com/

as she and her family struggle after endless unemployment as "normal" Americans as well as the Incredible picture U.S. House Republicans put forth of our country, I've got a few (perhaps)"naive" and "simple" thoughts and feelings.

I find many of the issues relating to today's economic woes in the U.S. not really that complicated. There is significant talk of how "high taxes" are "the problem" and that if we cut regulations and lower taxes, as well as cutting "waste" (e.g. "social problem spending"), magically all will be well soon.

One needn't search far to see how idiotic much of the current Republican rhetoric is.

TAXES:

One can easily see the differences, for example, between the economic plight of really small business people and that of the quite wealthy. Even if one were to consider owner's of small businesses to include those with household incomes in the range of $250,000/year for non-partnered households and $400,000 for partnered individuals, one could easily have tax policies that seriously tax the wealthy, and tax more moderately "the middle class".

Middle class people don't generally have to worry about inheritance taxes beyond the $1-2,000,000 range. Where they leave estates of $10,000,000+ their "small business" or whatever really wasn't that small.

So, assume, that perhaps we might create more equity in taxation policies, that taxed poor people little, middle class people more, and the wealthy - significant amounts. We might, for example, give tax breaks related to earned income, rather than investment income to help middle class people. It really wouldn't take that high rates for the wealthy related to their income, wealth and inheritances to raise a lot more money.

EXPENDITURES:

Much of the current debate concerning expenditures is simply idiotic. IF we assume that we are Not going to cut defense spending, social security and pension benefits and similar, but are going to focus on "the pork" out there, we very quickly end up in situations where we need to drastically need to cut things like:

1.) Police and fire departments
2.) Education
3.) Health Care

Clearly, if we are going to realistically cut spending and Not dramatically hurt all the poor and middle class in dramatic ways, we need to figure out ways to significantly cut expenditures where they can realistically be cut.

"Realistically" is however a dangerous word.

To cut medical expenses in this country, we need to cut costs. To cut costs we need to seriously look at what I would call "profiteering" in areas where people do need to make a living as well as get services. Drug company profits are one obvious target, despite the political impossibility of such an effort.

IF we do Not deal with issues such as drug costs, our alternatives end up being cutting people's health insurance coverage and increasing their medical costs.

There is not an alternative!

SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEMS:

If we are going to really work at solving our problems, as Lisa alluded to in a recent column, we might want to talk with some of the people affected by our policies such as her family, coping with a serious loss of income, due to her persistent unemployed state.

We also might want to see the need for real dialog, with real honesty and really listening and hearing both the words of others and of our allies and ourselves.

To pretend that there is Not a "Tea Party mindset" which reflects real anger and fears among some honest people seems stupid to me. Obviously the Democratic Party, President Obama and many others haven't spoken to the fears of people as effectively as the demagogues such as Rush and Michelle do every day.

I think that we need to speak our truths with others - reaching out beyond our allies to people who are "different" from us in increasing ways. For some, this may mean reaching out from their churches, to other churches. For some men, this may mean reaching out to other men.

It is difficult today to talk with people rather than at them! I can't claim that magically what I suggest will work today or tomorrow, but we must also look further in the future.

Thanks!

The Gospel According to Ole Geo - Part I

2011-02-12T14:08:00.000-08:00

The changes yesterday in Egypt brought up a lot of feelings within me, some of which I'll try to share today.

I'm cautiously optimistic that the Egyptian "Revolution" will achieve at least in the range of 50-75% of its expressed aims. If it succeeds there will be an "Arab" country which respects both its religious minorities (such as 10% Coptic Christians) as well as its Moslem normal folks who vary from being religious to not-so religious. It will also be a country which deals with its own economic ills and seeks for the first time to help its people, rather than those who have benefited from its cronyism.

It also could well become an influential country as Turkey already is which no longer is ruled over by U.S. and Israeli policies, respecting Jews, but Not supporting the continued preventing of a lasting peace as it has done for many years.

The Wiki Leaks - related to Israel and the Middle East have shown both the sham that the Israeli leadership (and the U.S. leadership) want peace and that governments such as Egypt and Jordan have tacitly supported the status quo.

Previously the Palestinians have been a "shared threat". Israel will lose "power" if there is a growing, prospering independent Palestine (though economically in the long run it might gain from increased trade - replacing the "plantation" domination that exists now).

Governments such as Egypt's have previously been threatened by a potential Palestinian State because it would suggest another way, besides the despotic leadership model in the Middle East. This should change and hopefully make things much better.

I don't want to naively think that all will go smoothly or easily, but I hope that things will work out and get better. Hopefully we will see the end of an era where the U.S. gave roughly a billion dollars a year to Egypt who then "spent" that billion on U.S. military hardware and similar.

Thanks!

The Right to be Right or Wrong ?

2011-01-10T05:23:00.000-08:00

I certainly am opinionated on many issues! While being a "leftist", I can criticize both Republicans and Democrats, as well as "leftists" and "right-wingers", and individuals from Barack Obama to Sarah Palin and beyond.

I do not claim to represent anyone besides myself. I do not claim that my beliefs are those of others. I would rarely claim to represent "popular" or "majority" opinion.

I never would call for violence to be taken against those individuals I disagree with including individuals who have killed and maimed others.

The recent shootings in Tucson are tragic, but unfortunately somewhat predictable.

There oft times seems to be "confusion" between means and ends as rhetoric reflects the desires of some to play on the emotions of many of us. "Cross hairs" may not be meant literally, however when six people were just killed, their use at best can be seen as irresponsible and just wrong.

"Now, Phelps & family have once again tried to grab the spotlight with their well-oiled hate machine. They announced they will picket the funeral of Christina Greene, age 9, who was gunned down in the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson.

Fred Phelps Sr. in a YouTube announcement (below), tells us, "Thank god for the violent shooter, one of Your soldier heroes in Tucson. God appointed the Afghanistan veteran to avenge himself on this evil nation. However many are dead, Westboro will picket their funerals."

It should probably be noted that the accused gunman was rejected from the military according to all news reports. But to Phelps, the gunman was retribution for the veterans who have hounded his organization at funerals and at home. "

http://www.topix.com/tucson/2011/01/that-was-fast-phelps-clan-to-picket-funerals-of-tucson-shooting-victims

I would hope that the above quote is false, though it probably is not.

It remains to be seen if some of those who have called for the deaths and similar of those opposed to their beliefs will learn a lesson from what tragically has happened in Tucson. It seems more likely that they will make more excuses and seemingly separate themselves from the violence rhetorically for a moment (only).

I do admit that I am wrong when I discover errors I have made. I'm waiting to hear even a few admissions related to what has happened. I'll be surprised if I hear what I think I should hear. Thanks!

Agnes Schenkman - some fond Memories

2010-11-10T06:12:00.000-08:00

Agnes Schenkman, a most wonderful woman, died last Friday at the age of 87 in NJ. She was a most significant person in various parts of my life and I'm sad at hearing of her death.

Agnes grew up in NYC, living in the back of a flat (I think) behind her parents medical office (both parents were doctors). She and her husband were strong advocates of social justice, leaving Baton Rouge in significant part because of their support of Civil Rights in 1961. She was the mother of 8 incredible children - 2 girls, then 2 boys, then 2 girls, then 2 boys all of whom I enjoyed as friends at various times.

Agnes lost her beloved husband Gene suddenly 32 or 33 years ago and as most of her kids were grown rebuilt a life for herself, which was very difficult for her.

I will never forget Epsilon Acres, the wonderful farmlet - that was their home for many years. One holiday weekend (I think Thanksgiving) one of their dogs had bitten the legs of one or more sheep, and this was going to result in an infection spreading to all the sheep killing them all. Andrew, their oldest son, and Dan, the second son (and perhaps 1-2 others - can't remember) went out in the cold evening to slaughter all the sheep.

I, of course, stayed in the house. I remember one of Gene's brothers - "went out to check on them" and was back in the house within seconds. No one said anything, however we all knew that he'd Not made it to the "killing area", though at least he made an effort to be supportive.

Agnes was a wonderful loving, caring person. Dinners and social events in general oft times had many people - like 15-20ish around their huge kitchen table. Agnes cooked for all and was most welcoming to all. The children were brought up to think for themselves and to be independent and strong, caring people.

Agnes lived a good life! She is and will be missed! Thanks!

A Men's Project - my website/project

2010-10-31T08:55:00.000-07:00

A Men’s Project, my new website of web links to resources reaching men on issues of male: violence, health care, child care and other gender issues went live at:

https://sites.google.com/site/amensproject/ Wednesday.

I'm happy to have finally reconnected with the world of men's anti-violence work in a meaningful way after 23 years of relative inactivity. My memories of Men Stopping Rape, Inc. which I helped co-found in Madison, Wisconsin, USA in 1983 are still alive.

Thanks!

Privilege -- Some Thoughts

2010-10-16T19:14:00.000-07:00

Recently I've had various experiences which have helped me reflect upon privilege and what it means to me.

In the blogosphere I've recently read parts of various self-described "radical feminist" blogs which I found through responses to Hugo Schwyzer's blog and a blog I found through Hugo's reference to it. I responded to the latter blogger's writings on radical feminism and then had brief private correspondence with him. He largely dismissed my concerns and insights as being either totally inaccurate/wrong or irrelevant to his issues with radical feminism. (I wasn't amused, though not totally surprised.)

Of far more significance was the time I spent last Friday at a conference: "Paving a Road: Removing Barriers for Engaging Men" at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington. Upon arrival I ran into and had a nice conversation with Michael Kimmel, a long-time leader in men's pro-feminist thought and activism, who I'd last seen circa 1985. As the day went on I met many other fascinating and significant people including the keynote speaker (I missed her speech unfortunately) Dr. Rachel Griffin of Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, Ben Atherton-Zeman, and Robert Jensen (who was "interesting").

Male privilege was a predominant topic at the Conference. I have long thought of privilege in terms of intersections of various areas including:

a. Gender - Male vs. Female
b. Race - White People vs. People of Color
c. Economic Status - Wealthy and Upper-Middle Class People vs.considerably poorer people

and various other factors which may include: sexual orientation, age, disability status, religion, etc.

I am personally privileged in many ways, including being: Male, White, Upper-Middle-Class, middle-aged (barely still), and predominantly heterosexual.

I have been bothered recently hearing (of) others talking in related areas including:

1. Significant, often blatant, questioning of the privilege of White People commonly with attacks upon President Obama which imply that Blacks are at worst "equal" and perhaps wield more power than Whites now, and

2. Questions of male privilege in many areas from both men and women of various perspectives.

In the past I could dismiss similar questions indicating that others were ignoring the influence of important factors most commonly related to economic status. Example: White Men questioning their power might bring me to answer readily that obviously White Women with significantly more wealth might have much more visible privilege than one did as a "White Man".

I still believe that economic status is oft times ignored or minimized in The United States particularly confusing issues relating to privilege.

I also think that we commonly face paradoxes related to dealing with privilege in general that are most important.

When one faces the privilege of another over one, one has quite common reminders of the status differences. When one is a woman and faces issues of male privilege, attempting to ignore that privilege has reminders of it that are difficult to miss.

A woman who seemingly denies male privilege may, for example, feel unsafe walking in the dark fearing a gender based assault from a male stranger. Such a woman may also face various potential business related situations where for example an automobile salesman may presume that the man she is with is "in charge" and direct his conversation initially to him, rather than her. A younger woman may be conscious of her physical appearance and where she is walking being aware the catcalls, stares or similar may common from anonymous men she may pass.

It is correspondingly different where one is from the "dominant" or "privileged" class. I, as a White Person can commonly ignore race as an issue, except in isolated situations in my life. When in a room with no People of Color, I rarely have an issue with this. Where I feel that I have been treated unfairly by someone, generally I don't wonder if why they treated me that way because I am White. Where I am in situations with a small minority of People of Color, there generally is little pressure upon me related to race from anyone else in the room.

Where we, as the privileged class face issues related to our privilege, most commonly we can deal with them in the moment and then ignore them. When I confronted a gas station attendant for his "boob" comment that I felt totally inappropriate, I had done my "good deed" and then was "back to normal". While his statement bothered and surprised me, it didn't shock me.

Where we can't ignore our privilege issues or choose not to stay "normal", it generally relates to some significant tie to the issue we have which separates us from the privileged class as a whole. Feminism became increasingly important to me 30 years ago because I was isolated as "a man" feeling torn between my love of sports and other ways in which I felt very "un-male". Racism issues have an added significance to me beginning eight years ago when I began my relationship with my Black Partner.

As a privileged person we are often must choose whether to "be normal" and go along with the flow or to be in some ways a seeming "traitor to our class". To the degree that we take the seemingly simpler approach, we can try to be "liberal" but "not radical" in what we do. Such approaches may work well for most people, though some may have issues with their conscience to the degree that they feel that they aren't doing enough towards the cause.

When privileged people act as a seeming "traitor to their class" other issues can readily arise. As a White Man if I support feminist causes in more than a token way, I can reach a point where I am seen as both a "hero" and a "villain" depending upon who I am dealing with. Within a feminist world, it is easy for men to get sucked up into the "I'm a good guy" mode which sometimes may limit them doing the work as seriously as they might otherwise do it if the praise gets to them. One can also end up socially isolated and potentially lost in such worlds as an activist. When one no longer relates easily with most men, one may need to struggle to build male allies and friends. One doesn't fit in with feminist women when they want and need "female time".

To the degree one stays close to "normal", one may seemingly have respect and potential influence with others. At the same time it is difficult to help bring about serious change when one is nudging carefully in small increments.

When one becomes "the traitor" one may easily get publicity and be visible, however it can be much harder to get people to listen to the issues and work on them seriously.

Privilege seems to me to be a larger issue, that oft times is ignored by most people. To the degree that I may live in "White Worlds" I don't need to confront issues related to being White and racism issues in general.

Sometimes we need to confront privilege issues related to fairness and integrity in our lives. Usually in such areas we don't expect to reach a lot of other people with this issue, but want to be "a good person" in doing what we do.

At other times we want to confront privilege issues because they also hurt and affect us as well as how they hurt those who are hurt by our privilege. I believe that men hurt by being men. The boxes that we are put in, most commonly by other men, make it tough on us individually and collectively.

I hope that over time we men will realize that we don't have to be an "oppressed class" or "lacking privilege" to want and need to deal with our issues. Through dealing with our issues more of us may learn how feminism and its lessons may help us have happier lives.
Through such changes we can grow and prosper without scapegoating others including both "women" (as "the other") and men who we want to be our allies and friends. Thank You!

Marjorie Reade - A Wonderful Woman

2010-10-06T12:48:00.000-07:00

I was born in Ann Arbor, Michigan almost 60 years ago. My father was a mathematics instructor at the University of Michigan until his failures to publish significantly forced him to leave (for Purdue University).

Marjorie Reade first knew me as a young baby. I remember her only from my young adulthood until 1988 or 1989 when I last visited her with my (at that time) young son Ben. She always, kind, loving, insightful and very intelligent! While I can't claim to have known her well, I always enjoyed her company.

I just learned that she died in August at the age of 92. What follows is the obituary I found of her.
-------------------------------------
Reade, Marjorie Marjorie Reade, loving spouse and mother, pillar of her church, Ann Arbor historian, Democratic Party activist, avid gardener, community volunteer and celebrated hostess, died on August 17. She was 92. Born in North Dakota as Marjorie Tibert, she grew up on a remote farm before mechanization and long before electrification. As a child, Marjorie cried when a tornado destroyed her father's crops and her 4-H winning garden. She scraped mud out of the wheels of bogged down buggies and cars, saddled and rode horses or walked five miles to get the mail, cooked for teams of field hands, swept swarms of grasshoppers from the house even as the insects ate the broom, and survived the Great Depression, the Dust Bowl, and tuberculosis. Yet, Marjorie went on to have Albert Einstein at her first wedding reception, to stand next to John F. Kennedy as he announced his intent to form a Peace Corp at the Univer-sity of Michigan, and to accept an invitation to meet Hillary Clinton at the Clinton White House along with her husband Maxwell. Marjorie graduated from high school in her early teens. She later joined the wartime secretarial pool and was selected as the assistant to two admirals, helping each earn another star. Marjorie was asked to join the newly formed Central Intelligence Agency but she declined. Instead, she married Ann Arbor native Charles L. Dolph, who was a naval officer completing his doctorate at Princeton. Later the couple moved to Ann Arbor, where Marjorie's husband produced ground breaking work on radar and led the Project Mercury plasma flow studies for the Atlas rocket nose cone, which carried astronaut John Glenn to the first earth orbit. Following the tragic deaths of three of their four children, Marjorie and Charles were divorced, but not before the couple agreed to deed Dolph Park to the City of Ann Arbor as a wildlife refuge. In 1967, Marjorie married Maxwell O. Reade, a U-M professor of mathematics whose work had helped end the submarine threat to allied convoys in the North Atlantic during World War II and who later received the university's top teaching award. Together they traveled around the world, cultivating their language and cooking skills and laying the foundation for an expanding scholarship program for promising mathematicians. Avid Wolverines, they held season tickets for over four decades, never missing a home game. Marjorie was active in the First Universalist Unitarian Congregation of Ann Arbor, managing the church's financial affairs and serving as a beloved parishioner and organizer. Marjorie co-authored the book Historic Buildings, Ann Arbor, Michigan with Susan Wineberg and was named "Preservationist of the Year" in 1993 by the Ann Arbor Historic District Commission. Throughout her prolonged illness, her ninety-four-year-old husband Maxwell was at her side, cooking and cleaning, encouraging her to eat, reading The New York Times aloud, and working with the round-the-clock aides who also fought along side of Marjorie's children to prolong her life. Marjorie is survived by her husband Maxwell, her son, Lawrence Dolph and his wife Lynn Nybell who did so much for her during the final months; by Marjorie's granddaughter Christine Dolph and spouse Brian Wachutka, and grandson John Dolph; by Maxwell's children Michael, Tim and daughter-in-law Joy, and Allison Reade; and by Maxwell's grandchildren, Francis, Christopher and Wesley Reade. A memorial service will be held at 3pm Monday, August 23 at the First Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Ann Arbor. Donations may be made in Marjorie Reade's name to the First Unitarian Universalist Congregation, 4001 Ann Arbor-Saline Rd, Ann Arbor, MI 48103; or to the Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 South Fifth Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48104.

Central High School - Little Rock - Lessons for Today

2010-10-01T09:34:00.000-07:00

Current issues including the:

1.) Scapegoating of Muslim Americans and other Muslims (e.g. Ground Zero Mosque),
2.) Racism directed at Barack Obama, other Blacks, and People of Color in general and
3.) The economic populism within the purported aims of the Tea Party Movement

all seem to resonate in the words of Karen Anderson's excellent book: "Little Rock: Race and Resistance at Central High School". Anderson moves from the mid-50's onwards and discusses the token integration that was fought so bitterly there amongst: the working class diehard segregationists, the "moderate" (male) business establishment, the "moderate" (White middle-class) women activists, the NAACP and other Blacks, the Federal Government and Governor Orville Faubus.

I've long loved Charles Mingus's classic: "Fables of Faubus" and known a little of the pathetic history of what took place in Little Rock, but this book illuminated much more for me.

Noted quotes near the end of the book include:

p.240 - "Segregationists and moderates alike went from claiming in the 1950s that laws were inadequate as a means to racial change because they could not change private feelings and actions to a fervent embrace of law as the only domain that had to change in order to create racial justice. The two positions ere not that far apart in their social vision, as the development of a new "race-neutral" law covertly incorporated most of the racial assumptions and discriminatory practices shared by the South's arch-segregationists and moderates. The legacies of 1950's moderate successes in fostering delay in desegregation while touting tokenism in school integration ultimately enabled the creation of white flight and of private schools that allowed white middle-class parents to isolate their children from working-class and minority children.

The marriage of the religious fundamentalism embraced by the arch segregationists and the capitalist fundamentalism embraced by male moderates ultimately paved the way for the formation of the New Right."

p.240-1: "Increasingly, any government action beyond the enactment of "race-neutral" laws, especially anything labeled affirmative action, came to be denounced as an un-American "reverse" discrimination. Indeed "race neutral" replaced racial justice in public discourse and as he normative standard for private institutions as well as public policies."

p.241: "Despite this, white Americans' sense of lost rights and opportunities has fueled the backlash against African Americans and those politicians perceived to be their advocates. This backlash has targeted successful blacks (who are denounced as undeserving beneficiaries of affirmation action) as well as unsuccessful blacks (who are viewed as parasitic dependents living off of welfare)."

p.241: "As Roy notes, 'Concepts of race are deeply imbedded in American culture, constituting a language that works somehow to explain the anomalies created by our classed classlessness.' Racism, indeed, allows whites to communicate a sense of oppression and powerlessness 'that somehow goes unexpressed in other forms.' "

Reading this history shows both common parallels and how we have evolved today in many ways. Maintaining tax cuts that are only for higher income individuals is an issue which fits into this tale. The "oppressions" that are felt by so many similarly fit in.

In the book the desires and needs of the Black residents of Little Rock were rarely heard or substantively dealt with. When Little Rock's high schools were entirely shut-down for school year 1958-9, no consideration was made for the most extreme hardships Black students and their families faced.

The "big" issues were how the closures might negatively impact the out-of-state future college attendance possibilities of middle-class, White children. As in the book's story we hear today of so many "bad things", but only rarely do we focus more than tokenly on the Real Problems of the Poor and others who are the real victims of our policies. While Davis Guggenheim talks about public schools related to poor, minority children, we rarely look seriously at their needs and how they are Not being met today.

I hope that someday more of us will read our history and try to learn from the mistakes and build more effectively towards a better future for all of us. Thanks!

The Myths of the "Liberal Do Gooders"

2010-09-29T11:00:00.000-07:00

Oft times in my life I have encountered others I'd label as:

"Liberal Do Gooders" though perhaps the term covers some that I'd not label this way.

Characteristics I'd note for them might include that they:

1. Clearly support one or more "liberal causes", and

2. Speak out in favor of their causes and against those opposed to such causes, and

3. Make clear by their actions and words that they are definitely not "radicals" and

4. Generally they have and oft times speak to a "balance" in their lives, except occasionally related to their "cause" if they have one single cause.

An example might (stereotypically) include:

The Democratic Obama supporter who:

1. Supports most Democratic Party and Obama positions at least relating to healthcare reform, the economy, ending "Don't Ask Don't Tell" in the U.S. military, and similar,
2. Speaks out in favor of Obama and his causes and against Tea Party and other Republican opposition,
3. Clearly indicates that they oppose various "radical causes" such as demilitarizing the U.S. or radically changing U.S. tax policy to "soak the rich",
4. Lives a "normal" life in an urban or suburban area with a balance between work, family, leisure time activities, etc.

I would distinguish the "liberal do gooder" from several other possible labels such as:

1. Liberal Activist
2. Radical Do Gooder
3. Radical Activist
4. Moderate Normal
5. Conservative Normal
6. Conservative Activist
7. Apathetic Whatever

In looking at how these (stereotyped) people are, I'd lump the liberal do gooder with the radical do gooder and separate them from the rest of groupings. These "do gooders" differ from activists of various persuasions because of their relative lack of "putting themselves on the line" for their cause or causes. Something seemingly holds them back from applying their insights (or purported insights) to sustained action. They talk their cause(s), but somehow find it impossible to really push their causes.

I have an admiration for some prominent Black, Male, Liberal Intellectuals such as Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Cornell West that I don't have for comparable (if there are any) White Male intellectuals in general. I see them taking racism as the critical issue in their lives, which is understandable. I also see them both seriously confronting their issue with their work as well as supporting other causes such as Gay/Lesbian/Transgender issues. They could defer judgment on such issues either by noting how visible homophobia is in some visible places within many visible public Black figures or by implying that their issue is "much more important" and should take precedence over the "lesser issue". They, however, recognize the inter-relatedness of such issues and the importance of coalition building between issues.

Far more commonly I see others who are defensive about their status and/or how others react to it. Many White people often feel threatened or simply not interested or focused upon the issues of People of Color, except when "the time is right". We White Men can feel threatened or attacked or just forced to face innumerable others poking at us be they: women, radical women, gays, differently abled people, people of other religions (no matter what our religious background), or others with their issues.

Oft times we may retreat into our shells for various reasons such as:

1.) I'm too busy,
2.) I'm already working on good causes and don't have the time for another cause,
3.) The other person is too _____ (young, old, threatening, radical, right-wing, etc.)
4.) I'm familiar with what you are saying and don't agree with you or
5.) Other such things.

It is very easy for many of us to resist pressures to open up and to take in things which may push our tranquility or apathy or sense that we are doing our best already. We seem to have both a sort of superiority complex about us (which keeps us from seeing and hearing others we may disagree with at times) and an inferiority complex (which similarly blinds us from being at peace and comfortable within ourselves).

It is painful for me to recognize so commonly that "the labor movement" is largely the efforts of generally poor People of Color doing serious organizing work and not the visible "labor leaders" we hear about publicly. It is sad that so many of the great people in so many causes are people that I, and many I know, may never hear about because their worlds do not focus upon reaching out to those who likely will do little to help their cause or even be polite and nice to.

Michael Moore is not my hero and is no working class hero (in my estimation).

I see relatively few people today comparable to some of the heroes of the 1940's-1960's and earlier eras. I would like to hope that we will build towards a better future and that we are on a path towards that. I fear that while we have wonderful people trying to save our world from militarism, ecological destruction, income/wealth inequality and simply hate that we are not doing enough. Thanks!

Tales - of Idiots - Re: Big Business, etc.

2010-09-24T11:50:00.000-07:00

Part I - "The Characters" - who were acted upon

A. In 2002 I separated from my first wife and we were divorced a year later in Oakland, CA, our county of residence when we separated. In 2004 I remarried and in 2005 the new "we" began our move to the Pacific Northwest.

B. My ex-wife moved from California to NYC several years ago

C. The son (my ex-wife and I had) graduated from college and began teaching high school science in Chicago in the Fall of 2009.

Part II - "The Characters who seem to lack a little"

My ex-wife and I had Merrill Lynch investment accounts for ourselves and our son. The accounts for our son got confused and initially were tied to my address. At our request they were switched to my ex-wife's address well over a year ago. At least three or four years ago I switched all my investment monies away from Merrill Lynch.

Merrill Lynch was "rescued" from disaster and purchased by Bank of America to avoid collapsing in the recent financial meltdown period.

Part III- "Action"

Today a voice mail message was left on my home phone from Merrill Lynch asking for "E" (my ex-wife) asking her to call concerning her investments.

I called the number left on my voice mail and expressed my displeasure with what had transpired. I was particularly perturbed because this was either the second or third time that this "mistake" had happened and it somehow hadn't been corrected when previously pointed out to the fine folks at Merrill Lynch.

Danny at Merrill Lynch initially indicated that they'd straighten it out and then came back on and said that they couldn't take my home phone number off their records for my ex-wife without talking with her.

I called my ex-wife and encouraged her to consider leaving Merrill Lynch - which she is seriously considering.

I then found a phone number for Bank of America - Corporate Headquarters - Public Relations or similar and the lady who answered the phone seemed sincere in trying to get ahold of the original caller and ensuring that my home phone number would be removed from their records (will it?).

Needless to say - I recommend to all: "STAY AWAY FROM MERRILL LYNCH!" They seem to be lacking in at least this one area.

Part IV - Epilogue: - A Parallel Similar and Dissimilar Tale from my recent past.

Several years ago we refinanced our first mortgage (which we've done again more recently). A traveling notary came to my wife's office where we signed the necessary closing documents and gave her a bank check from Wells Fargo Bank, where we have our checking and savings accounts.

The plot thickened about 4-5 days later involving:

1.) The mortgage broker in Georgia,
2.) The title company handling the closing which was in Texas,
3.) The branch manager of the Wells Fargo Branch where I'd gotten the bank check in Seattle - the true hero of this saga and
4.) Me

I was in Chicago with my wife who was just leaving a meeting (why we were in Chicago) when I got a phone call from the title company (2.). The woman asked me where the check was that was due. I told her that I'd given it to the notary.

After several phone calls it was clear that the Notary had lost the Bank Check! The Wells Fargo Branch Manager (3.) determined that she could stop payment on the check and re-issue the check with some paperwork.

was important that things get wrapped up quickly, so the closing wouldn't fall apart. I had to go to the nearest Fed Ex where the Title Company had I think sent an emailed (or similar) mailing label and instructions. The paperwork was Fed-Exed to Wells Fargo in Seattle and things were cleared up between them and the Title Company in Texas.

Subsequent and during this mess I got various apologetic calls from Texas and Georgia. Subsequently we received free complimentary tickets to a Seattle Mariners game from either Texas or Georgia and a Visa Gift Card from the other one together with more written apologies.

I had zero hard feelings related to anyone in this mess, except of course the Notary who I assume was let go from her work for the Title Company at least. I was impressed particularly with the Branch Manager at Wells Fargo who was an "innocent" to the entire mess who got caught in it and made things work out. Thanks!

Comments posted - on the Preceding Entry

2010-09-23T16:02:00.000-07:00

Schwartzman September 17, 2010 at 11:25 pm

Rachel,

I’ve enjoyed your posts, I have found most of everything you have said totally in line with my thoughts and beliefs of the situation. I enjoy your honesty, many people who post/comment on Mondoweiss feel they are obligated to maintain a strictly anti-Israel biased, demonizing everything Israel and all Israelis. It was nice you were able to see that they are also humans, many of them with political thoughts very similar to mine and yours. The humanization of both sides is a huge step in finding a solution and allowing the reconciliation to begin.

I agree with you that the settlements and especially those in Hebron are ridiculous. I am not as pessimistic about some sort of solution as the Israelis and Palestinians you talked to. Of course it won’t be ultimate justice, but ultimate justice is a fantasy which only perpetuates the horrible situation the Palestinians are in and have been in for the last 60+ years.

2 lyn117 September 18, 2010 at 7:27 pm

“many people who post/comment on Mondoweiss feel they are obligated to maintain a strictly anti-Israel biased, demonizing everything Israel and all Israelis.”

Notice Schwartzman’s rather sly propaganda – equating “demonizing” Israel to “demonizing” Israelis. I’ve yet to notice anyone on this blog “demonizing” all Israelis. And the only things Israeli I’ve noticed them “demonizing” are its fundamentally racist nature, its ethnic cleansing, propaganda, lies, territorial expansion, its whitewashing of crimes and mass murders. I guess he’s working up to some new twist on the criticism of Israel is anti-semitism theme.

I would call Rachel’s experience “cult lite” or maybe drop the “lite” part. Standard cult techniques, sleep deprivation, social cohesion etc. I’m so glad she had at least some immunity, a pre-knowledge of the history that allowed her to resist. I don’t doubt the humanity of Israelis but when pro-Israel clackers start talking about humanizing people while finding excuses for Israel’s and it’s supporters’ dehumanization and denial of equal rights for persons who happen to be of the wrong creed or ethnic background, I just have to doubt their sincerity.

3 Shingo September 18, 2010 at 9:43 pm

“Notice Schwartzman’s rather sly propaganda – equating “demonizing” Israel to “demonizing” Israelis.”

It’s also sly propaganda, because it’s grossly dishonest and nonsensical. No one is forced to even read Mondoweiss, much less post comments, so to suggest that “feel they are obligated to maintain a strictly anti-Israel biased, demonizing everything Israel and all Israelis” implies that they are doing so against their will.

That tells us a great deal about the derranged mind of the Zionist.

4 Avi September 18, 2010 at 11:41 pm

Listen yonira,

You’re under the false impression that Israel’s problem is a Public Relations issue. You seem to think that better PR will somehow make criticism of Israel go away.

But, the truth that which you loath and continue to hide is that Israel and Israelis behave like barbaric criminals. And until that behavior changes, Israel’s image will remain in the gutter regardless of all the shills who seek to run interference for it, both in the US and in other countries.

So if you don’t like seeing Israel dehumanized, and Israelis dehumanized, then perhaps it’s time you started urging Israel to behave like a state of human beings, rather than a state of barbaric criminals.

I realize that you like Rachel’s ’sterile/clean’ article. Being in her salad days, she presents an image of Israel that meshes well with the image which you prefer to hear, the sterile, filtered, edited and cleaned-up version, the one that presents Israel the way CNN might. And that is essentially what scares you and bothers you.

You hate it that people know of Israel’s crimes, because for you, they are not crimes, but acts of defense or whatever euphemisms and lies you choose to tell others in hope that they will gloss over said crimes and move on.

Like I said before, it’s quite instructive that a sheltered, dishonest apologist like you pretends as though he/she knows more about Israel than someone who was born there, lived and worked there. What you do know, is a list of 10 or 20 talking points which you follow verbatim over and over, rehashing them time and again. After all, discrediting myself and others on this website has been your modus operandi all along. It’s your feeble attempt, yet again, to shield Israel from criticism by attacking those who bring English speakers the truth, the harsh reality, as is.

but ultimate justice is a fantasy which only perpetuates the horrible situation the Palestinians are in and have been in for the last 60+ years.

Don’t make me laugh. Your feigned sympathy for the Palestinians is touching, but you’re not fooling anyone. I yearn for the day when Zionist hacks come up with a new propaganda tactic, one that hasn’t been overused ad nauseum.

5 thankgodimatheist September 18, 2010 at 12:06 am

“I’m from Oak and 41st,”

I could laugh if it’s wasn’t tragic..Israel in a nutshell..A playground where the boyz can go, play and give the locals hard time….Nothing extraordinary, the land is theirs! Hah!

6 James September 18, 2010 at 12:40 am

“”It’s complicated.” Of course it is. But, it’s also about power… and political will… and justice. “”

it seems to be more about power then justice… justice seems to be very far down the list of priorities that israel is interested in pursuing…

7 CTuttle September 18, 2010 at 12:43 am

Even the World Bank states unequivocally that Israel needs to do something to alleviate the economic plight of the Palestinians…

I wrote about it today, and the recent UN’s WFP and OCHA report, entitled: Between The Fence and a Hard Place…

“We Need To Feed Our Families”

8 Avi September 18, 2010 at 4:42 am

It seems to me Rachel sees herself and that Zionist ex-Canadian as integral parts of the Israeli/Palestinian equation; all, simply by virtue of their religious affiliation.

Why is it that the settlers get a rebuke as “fanatics”, but the soldiers enjoy a hands-off treatment? Why is it that the non-Israeli Jews are left out of the “takeaways”?

Sure, the author mentions that Hebron settlers are mostly American and that they “have to go”. But, she also mentions the Canadian who stands at a checkpoint in Bethlehem — a Palestinian city, on Palestinian land — and the shmuck in uniform who just got off the airplane is bossing Palestinians around as if he owns the place, making their lives miserable in the process.

Why isn’t Rachel telling us what she thinks of such “Jews”? She tells us how she feels about Hebron, about the settlements, about the settlers, and about the Israelis she met. Yet, she doesn’t seem to find it absurd that some guy from her own neighborhood in Vancouver is granted a higher status (Thanks to being born into the right religion) than the Palestinians who have lived there for centuries if not millennia.

Still, I think she is to be commended for her courage and honesty as the average Israeli would refuse to travel on those Ay-rab buses or get on a bus full of Palestinians. Her heart is in the right place, but she needs to familiarize herself with the history, the occupation, the politics.

After all, it is important to get a first hand experience on the ground, but it is equally important to have a frame of reference — i.e. the colonial history, the events of the last 60 years.

Thus, next time she visits, she’ll know what to look for, how to put things in context. In other words, she’ll have a better understanding of what her eyes are seeing. She’ll certainly avoid situations in which she will find herself unknowingly sleeping in a settlement.

May I recommend a few books?

The Seventh Million and One Palestine Complete – by Tom Segev
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine – by Ilan Pappe
The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem – by Benny Morris

These are must reads for anyone who is involved in this arena.

And I’m sure other commenters here will have a few good suggestions, as well.

9 annie September 18, 2010 at 9:49 am

interesting observations avi and i agree pappe’s Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine is a must read. i totally agree w/you about context and frame of reference. imho the ‘it’s complicated’ meme she heard a lot i heard a lot too and my guess is as time goes on she’ll realize that’s a cop out, it really isn’t complicated tho it seem confusing at times. especially the whole ‘which side of the line am i on’ because lots of planning has gone on to make that line disappear for jewish israelis.

i’m going to take a stab at analyzing from my take on rachel’s story.

I’m not Israeli and figure my Canadian-ness supersedes my Jewishness. He doesn’t seem to think so.

this statement is a pretty clear indication rachel doesn’t self identify first and foremost as a jew (global citizen, canadian, woman etc, all likely identifiers that supersede ) nor does she identify this soldier first and foremost as one either (unlike him). her connection to him is canadian-vancover-israeli and that’s why she doesn’t tell you what she thinks of such “jews” (your quotation). it’s also likely rachel didn’t feel particularly ‘courageous’ getting on an “ay-rab” bus because she’s not brainwashed (no inclination of racist indoctrination) and growing up in vancouver is accustomed to non racist transportation options. inconvenient, yes. but courageous? courageous is what i felt standing opposite the idf in bi’lin or participating in a spontaneous ‘action’ w/code pink in rabin square during a book fair. but people who aren’t indoctrinated towards racism don’t experience fear being around arabs or palestinians and therefore it doesn’t require courage to travel on one of their buses. (but i could be wrong, maybe for rachel it did require courage).

as an aside i was informed yesterday for the first time israel is ‘a concept’. confusing, yes. but complicated? not really.

10 Avi September 19, 2010 at 4:54 pm

it’s also likely rachel didn’t feel particularly ‘courageous’ getting on an “ay-rab” bus because she’s not brainwashed (no inclination of racist indoctrination) and growing up in vancouver is accustomed to non racist transportation options. inconvenient, yes. but courageous? courageous is what i felt standing opposite the idf in bi’lin or participating in a spontaneous ‘action’ w/code pink in rabin square during a book fair.

I agree, annie.

The indoctrination itself, in Israel, is what creates the mental barriers, the imaginary obstacles and proverbial cages. A person who comes from the outside tends to view things in a neutral way, free of all the self-imposed mental fear.

11 Citizen September 18, 2010 at 5:23 am

I’d like to see a pyscho-social profile of these settlers from the USA and Canada, to see the aggregate of factors that turn out such people when they were born and bred
in those two countries. Given the full array of civil rights simply by birth (and arguably even more special privilege), yet now they feel so entitled to
play lords of the jungle over the natives–at the point of a gun. They’d be
quick to claim discrimination in their birth countries, quick to take advantage of (at least) the full array of equal civil rights; now they don’t hesitate to push their supreme ethnocentric privilege and feel so righteous in doing so in the face of such obvious injustice. Perhaps Rachel has an opinion on this?

12 Susan Johnson September 18, 2010 at 6:16 am

“Over and over, I heard that Israelis are just tired of it all” “The Arabs should take more responsibility in the peace process”

Who are “the Arabs”? I think that’s the only time in the post you referred to Arabs.

If the Israelis are “tired of it all” What about the Palestinians? They’ve had their land stolen, their people imprisoned with out charges, their movement drastically curtailed, their business closed, their farms, orchards and greenhouses destroyed, their homes destroyed or taken over by Israelis…soldiers protect these Israelis as they carry on their illegal activities ….the list goes on and on.

And the Israelis? Why aren’t the settlers seen as Israelis? … Is it possible that Israel’s “separation” from settlers by the media and others, causes the public (US public) to forget settlers are Israelis. I believe this gives Israel an “out” when they want one, “this was done by the settlers” To me, one of the most disturbing aspects of the conflict is the constant invasion, actually permanent presence, of Israeli military and police in Palestinian land…defending their people. If settlers weren’t Israelis would this happen?
I believe they are ‘”legal” terrorists.

As I see it Palestinians are rarely separated from Hamas. Unfortunately and unfairlyPalestinians are too often thought of as terrorists, violent; when only a small number are party to violent actions. Many of my friends and family worried about my trip to Gaza because “Palestinians are violent”..as in Hamas, not militant members of Hamas or Palestinians who may be violent. One of my greatest concern is Israel’s terrorists in the form of their military.

I truly wonder if peace talks are peace talks when Israel has almost all the bargaining chips. Negotiations involve give and take…what does Palestine have to bargain with? How can they take “more responsibility in the peace process” under those circumstances? Even without the US as the trump in this card game; the scales weigh in Israel’s favor.

Rachel..I have found your posts interesting, looked forward to reading them….at times you seem to have held back on your thoughts and positions…specifically, if they changed how and why? If they remained the same…how and why. I’d like to more!

13 annie September 18, 2010 at 10:02 am

susan, i didn’t hear the term palestine or palestinians much in israel. w/the exception of the left they call palestinians ‘arabs’ there. rachel didn’t ‘refer to arabs’ she quoted israelis referring to arabs.

14 Mooser September 18, 2010 at 10:15 am

Swartzman’s comment says it all. A lot of common ground there.

15 eljay September 18, 2010 at 12:11 pm

>> I agree with you that the settlements and especially those in Hebron are ridiculous. I am not as pessimistic about some sort of solution as the Israelis and Palestinians you talked to. Of course it won’t be ultimate justice, but ultimate justice is a fantasy which only perpetuates the horrible situation the Palestinians are in and have been in for the last 60+ years.

“Ultimate justice” is not necessary; regular justice (not the “humanist” version of it) will do just fine, especially if it addresses and remedies – as best as it can – all wrongs past and present…and, most shamefully, on-going.

(Funny how hard-line pro-Israel types gloss over the fact that Israel continues to commit crimes despite having the power to cease immediately, completely and forever.)

16 Kathleen September 18, 2010 at 11:42 am

“The Jewish settlers, who number about 500, have built homes above both sides of the market street.” ILLEGAL JEWISH SETTLERS

“There is a rally planned for later in the afternoon to protest the closure of Shuhada Street, the main thoroughfare of Hebron, which is reserved for settlers.” ILLEGAL JEWISH SETTLERS. ILLEGAL

“In the settlers’ area, the movement of Palestinians is heavily restricted; the Jewish settlers have total freedom of movement and are protected by the IDF. And they’re really protected by the IDF. There are 2,000 soldiers in Hebron and 500 settlers — a ratio of 4:1. The settlers are primarily Orthodox (and many are American) and not obligated to serve in the military, something that seemed to bother many Israelis I talked with.”

ILLEGAL JEWISH SETTLERS ILLEGAL

“There are 2,000 soldiers in Hebron and 500 settlers — a ratio of 4:1. The settlers are primarily Orthodox (and many are American) and not obligated to serve in the military, something that seemed to bother many Israelis I talked with.”

ILLEGAL SETTLERS AND SOLDIERS ALL ILLEGAL.
————————————————————–

I really enjoyed your overview of your experience. Have heard many accounts of what life is like in Hebron for Palestinians on land that is internationally recognized as theirs. Land that both the illegal settlers and Israeli soldiers are there completely illegally. No need to wonder why Palestinians continued to be irate and have turned to violence.

My dear friend Art Gish who died in a tragic tractor accident here in Athens Ohio this summer has been to Hebron many times over the last several decades and lived with the Palestinians . He has shared his direct accounts with thousands. He has witnessed so many horrific incidents perpetrated by the illegal settlers. Many of his accounts are in his book” Hebron Journal: Stories of Nonviolent Peace Making”

“The soldiers tried their best to ignore me, but I am sure they heard me. I ignored their commands for me to leave. One soldier spit at me, so I walked right up to him and invited him to spit on me. He declined the offer.

Three soldiers aimed their guns at and moved toward a group of Palestinian bystanders. It looked to me like they were going to shoot. I quickly jumped in front of the soldiers, raised my hands in the air and shouted, “Shoot me, shoot me, go ahead and shoot me.” The soldiers immediately left.

A tank came roaring toward me, its big gun barrel aimed at me. I raised my hands in the air in prayer, and shouted, “Shoot, shoot, Baruch hashem adonai.” The tank stopped within inches of me.”

He added: “The Israeli military had put all of Hebron under total curfew today, saying they were looking for terrorists. Now I wonder if there really were terrorists hidden among the apples and oranges. Or, are the Israeli soldiers committing acts of terrorism against the civilian population of Hebron?”

http://palsolidarity.org/2010/08/13 (oops deleted some of the URL by mistake!)

17 Kathleen September 18, 2010 at 11:51 am

Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and E Jerusalem is ILLEGAL

Fence, Wall, Barrier illegal
http://www.haaretz.com/news/icj-west-bank-fence-is-illegal-israel-must-tear-it-down-1.128046
In the ruling, the court said that Israel’s security needs did not merit the construction of the barrier, stating that it “cannot be justified by military exigencies or by the requirements of national security or public order.”

At the Palestinians’ request, the UN General Assembly asked the World Court last December for its opinion on the legality of the barrier.

In the ruling, the court said that the barrier could become tantamount to annexation of Palestinian land if it is completed and that it impeded the Palestinian’s right to self-rule.

“The Court considers that the construction of the wall and its associate regime creates a ‘fait accompli’ on the ground that could well become permanent, in which case, and notwithstanding the formal characterization by Israel, it would be tantamount to de facto annexation,” the court said.

UN Resolutions
http://www.jatonyc.org/UNresolutions.html
Israel’s settlements in Palestine are Illegal.

Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979

“Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”

“On the basis that the Palestinian territories are occupied territory, Israeli settlements in these territories are in breach of Israel’s obligations as an occupying power and constitute a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions and that the settlements constitute war crimes.[11][12]”
————————————————————————
Mr. Bush, What about Israel’s defiance of UN Resolutions?
“During the period between 1967 and 2000, Iraq was the subject of 69 Security Council resolutions. By comparison, Israel, our closest “ally” in the Middle East, has been the subject of 138 resolutions. Not surprisingly, most of those resolutions call upon Israel to comply with basic principles of international law embodied by the UN Charter. Many of them condemn actions taken by Israel and call upon Israel on more than one occasion to comply with previous resolutions that Israel ignored and continues to ignore to this day.

On June, 14, 1967, through Resolution No. 237, the Security Council called upon Israel to “ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants, facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of the hostilities and recommends the scrupulous respect of the humanitarian principles contained in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.” In subsequent resolutions, the Security Council deplored Israel for the delay in its implementation of Resolution 237. Yet, Israel continued to defy the world community, including the United States. The Security Council, in the face of Israel’s defiance, passed no less than five subsequent resolutions demanding that Israel comply but to this day, thirty five years after June 14, 1967, the defiance continues.

On March 22, 1979, the Security Council adopted Resolution No. 446. Israel’s violation of Resolution 446 (sections quoted below) represents the most flagrant violation of Israel, not only of the UN but also the stated policy of our government under successive administrations:

(The Council) Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East; Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind it’s previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories.
http://www.mediamonitors.net/michaelsladah&suleimaniajlouni1.html

18 Kathleen September 18, 2010 at 12:13 pm

” “It is a village,” he says.

And for him, it is. Or grew up there and describes it as a “settlement lite,” or a non-ideological settlement, as it was one of the earlier developments where “no one,” he claims, was displaced. For him, it’s normal. For me, I’m more than a little miffed to finally learn that I’d been staying in a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem without knowing it.

A “village” he says. How quaint. An ILLEGAL SETTLMENT being referred to by one of the ILLEGAL OCCUPIERS as a “village”

19 Kathleen September 18, 2010 at 12:19 pm

“The settlers — religious fanatics from my point of view — just need to leave. Period.”

That would be in alignment with international law. Hebron is part of the Palestinians land according to international agreements

20 Kathleen September 18, 2010 at 12:31 pm

Illegal Israeli settler attacks in Hebron
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUUnAIIjMjo&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z97XMo9tBl8

What the Israeli soldiers are up against
http://www.pakistan.tv/videos-israeli-army-evicts-dozens-of-hebron-%5Bm1Pm8PYPb9w%5D.cfm

Palestinian Residents Say Peace Only Possible Without Jewish Settlers
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Palestinian-Residents-
Say-Peace-Only-Possible-Without-Jewish-Settlers-102992944.html

Palestinian residents in the area around Hebron – the scene of frequent clashes between the two groups – want more than a construction freeze. They are calling for a total withdrawal of settlements.
TOTAL WITHDRAWAL OF ALL ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS

21 bijou September 18, 2010 at 12:34 pm

Rachel wrote:

For me, it’s still about power. The IDF is one of the strongest militaries in the world. In 1967, Israel conquered a bunch of land that wasn’t its for the taking. People lived there. And those people are still coping with the occupation. Sure, anti-Semitism still exists, but, in terms of sheer power, the IDF could crush any country in the region….

Suggested edits (not sure if this will format correctly but I will try):

For me, it’s still about power. The IDF is one of the strongest militaries in the world. In 1967,1948,Israel conquered a bunch of land that wasn’t its for the taking. People lived there. And those people are still coping with the occupation utterly devastating consequences of dispossession and colonialism. Sure, anti-Semitism still exists, but, in terms of sheer power, the IDF could crush any country in the region….

22 Susan Johnson September 18, 2010 at 12:46 pm

Annie, thanks. good point. Do you think using the term “Arabs” distances Israelis from the fact they are, for the most part, on land that was or is Palestinian land? If they call them “Palestinians”…there must have been and is a Palestine, which is ignored.

23 Avi September 18, 2010 at 11:14 pm

Susan,

Have you made it into Gaza yet?

To answer your question, “Arabs” is used by Israelis and Zionists like Swhartz/yonira for two purposes:

1. It serves to deny the existence of a Palestinian people, a Palestinian nation — and before 1948 — a Palestine.

2. It serves to assert the notion that all Arabs in the Middle East are the same; they are united and Israel is one small Jewish and defenseless state in a sea of anti-Semitism.

3. It serves to suggest that the Palestinians — being Arabs — should move to live in one of the 22 Arab states in the region. And unlike the Palestinians who have a place to go — so goes the propaganda — Jews need Israel as a shelter.

Log in to Reply

24 annie September 18, 2010 at 1:25 pm

i’ve enjoyed your entire series too rachel and especially liked the one where you got bat mitzvah’d. i thought it was cool and affirming. i met a bunch of amazing people in israel myself and contrary to all the negative stuff we talk about day in and day out i do have optimism things will become normal in palestine/israel someday i just don’t know when or how.

thanks a lot .

25 wondering jew September 18, 2010 at 5:56 pm

Rachel- I enjoyed your series. I’m glad you got the opportunity to see much more of Israel and the occupied territories than most people have and I’m glad you shared your experience with this blog.

Besides the obvious, letting people get enough sleep, what other aspects of Birthright do you think need to be changed. Obviously they are trying to deepen the feeling of empathy and community and that is not necessarily the best way to keep one’s objectivity, so there is a type of peer pressure, be-one-of-us feeling that they are trying to induce. Objectivity is not their goal, but how precisely would you advise them to combine your point of view with what they are trying to accomplish? (Or is your ideal of objectivity and their ideal of community two opposites that cannot be combined?)

26 Richard Witty September 19, 2010 at 8:03 am

Thanks for your thoughtful posts.

More on Israel-Palestine

2010-09-23T15:59:00.000-07:00

After Birthright: Hebron – 500 settlers, 2,000 soldiers and the tensest place I’ve ever been

by Rachel Marcuse on September 17, 2010 ·

In July, activist Rachel Marcuse spent 10 days in Israel as part of the Taglit-Birthright program -- a fully sponsored trip for young North American Jews to learn more about the country. She went to bear witness and ask questions about the Israeli state's treatment of Palestinians, and to learn about other complex issues in Israel today. After the program, she spent another 10 days elsewhere in Israel and the West Bank of Palestine talking to Israeli Jews, Palestinian citizens of Israel, international activists, and Palestinians in the occupied territories. This is the last post in the seven-part series on what she found. You can read the entire series here. This series first appeared in rabble.ca and this story can be found here.

After our visit to Ramallah, Hannah and I head to Hebron -- or, in Arabic, Al-Khalil -- to meet another member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). We take a small, hot, local bus through a mostly desert landscape, passing some desolate Bedouin camps along the way, the bus radio providing lilting Arab music as our soundscape.
HebronMarcuse
"I look up at a net hanging above the souk. It’s full of garbage and other debris. The Jewish settlers, who number about 500, have built homes above the market street. I am told the net is to protect the Palestinians below." (Photo: Rachel Marcuse)

All of the highways in the West Bank are considered to be in Area C, which means that they are controlled entirely by Israel, or, more specifically, the military. Area A is controlled by the Palestinian Authority (Ramallah is one example) and Israelis are not allowed to enter. Area B, where many Palestinian farms are located, is under Palestinian civilian control, but Israel's military control. While I heard many stories of Palestinians being randomly searched along the Area C highways, when we pass some well-fortified checkpoints, our bus isn't stopped.

We arrive in Hebron in the bustling commercial area. It feels like a big place and it is -- Hebron is the biggest city in the West Bank with a population of 163,000; about half a million Palestinians live in the city and the surrounding area. We meet "Ali," who, like the other ISM members, has taken a code name. He takes us to the Old City.

As in Ramallah and Aida Camp, we are offered coffee or tea by many people, including the shopkeepers. Ali remarks that he can't make it through the souk -- the market -- without leaving over-caffeinated. I'm feeling that more caffeine would increase the dis-ease I am already feeling with the place; respectfully, I decline several offers.

My discomfort increases as I begin to more fully understand the situation, a situation which is almost literally on top of me. I look up at a net hanging above the souk. It's full of garbage and other debris. The Jewish settlers, who number about 500, have built homes above both sides of the market street. I am told that the net is to protect the Palestinians below from the garbage, urine, eggs and bleach routinely thrown at them by the settlers. I can see evidence of the refuse in the net right above me. One of the shopkeepers shows me egg stains on the scarves he is selling.

Hebron feels tense; in fact, it's the most tense place I have ever been. There is a lot of history here and a lot of contemporary conflict. Since it is the traditional burial site of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, and Jacob and Leah, the fathers and mothers of the Jewish people, it is the second holiest place in Judaism, right after Jerusalem.
It is also holy for Muslims who worship at the Ibrahim Mosque at the Cave of the Patriarchs. It was here, on February 25, 1994, during the overlapping holidays of Purim and Ramadan, that an Israeli settler and member of the far-right Israeli Kach movement, opened fire with an automatic weapon. Twenty-nine worshippers were killed and 125 wounded that day. When Hannah and I enter the mosque, after a security screening and donning long brown robes, we can see the bullet holes in the wall.

As it's Friday, demonstration day in the West Bank, today might feel even more tense than usual. There is a rally planned for later in the afternoon to protest the closure of Shuhada Street, the main thoroughfare of Hebron, which is reserved for settlers. As a consequence, this closure shut down about 800 Palestinian stores.

In the settlers' area, the movement of Palestinians is heavily restricted; the Jewish settlers have total freedom of movement and are protected by the IDF. And they're really protected by the IDF. There are 2,000 soldiers in Hebron and 500 settlers -- a ratio of 4:1. The settlers are primarily Orthodox (and many are American) and not obligated to serve in the military, something that seemed to bother many Israelis I talked with.

As a result of the limitations on Palestinian movement, about half the shops in the Israel-controlled area have gone out of business since 1994, in spite of UN efforts to compensate shopkeepers in an effort to keep them in business. Palestinians cannot come close to where the settlers live without special permits from the IDF. Palestinian control of Hebron, despite it being one of the most populous cities in the West Bank, is limited to some 20 or 30 square kilometres.

We speak with Monir, a shopkeeper, whose business is adjacent to shut-down Shuhada Street. "I have the best of a bad situation," he says, noting that all of the other shops were just closed down. But, business is bad. "There's no tourism here anymore," he says, "everyone thinks it's a war zone." I think to myself that it feels like a war zone as I note a group of young male settlers saunter by. The demo is about to start; the town has quieted.

We wander by the demo. There are a couple of hundred people there, surrounded by IDF soldiers with snipers positioned strategically on rooftops. We have been warned that there is likely to be tear gas and arrests -- and this is later confirmed. As we have committed to being in Jerusalem that evening, we are unable to stay for long.

We walk out of the Old City and find a bus heading to Bethlehem. Hannah makes friends with a gorgeous girl of about 12 and takes her photo. About 45 minutes later, we get off on a busy street in the commercial area of Bethlehem. We wait with a group of families and then get on a large green and white Palestinian bus bound for Jerusalem. It's going to take us right to our friend's place in Jewish Jerusalem, just over the hill we can see in the distance.

The bus pulls up to a vehicle checkpoint and we all get off to have our documents inspected. One of the soldiers approaches us in Hebrew and then switches to English. "We're not letting Internationals through today," he tells us. "Oh," I respond weakly, "but we're just going to the other side of the hill." He's not interested. It's Friday, demo-day, and it's likely he thinks we've been at a protest. We have. He turns us around, instructing us to wait on the highway for a bus coming from the other direction. We're about an hour's walk out of Bethlehem and it's getting dark.

We immediately befriend another International who was also turned away. He's a six-foot-five African-American basketball player from New York City who has been doing basketball training with Palestinian kids. He is surprised to be turned away at the checkpoint. He's gotten through many times before, he says, but knows that the soldiers can be inconsistent. He remarks that if it's this hard for us, imagine how hard it is for Palestinians just trying to get to work.

Settlement lite

This Bethlehem checkpoint was very obviously a checkpoint. At other times on the trip, though, it wasn't clear to us whether we were inside or outside the Green Line.

For example, days later, we go back to the house of Or, one of the Israelis who traveled with us on the Taglit-Birthright tour. We'd stayed with him in his parents' house and left a bunch of our stuff there before heading to the West Bank.

He picks us up in Jerusalem and we start driving. "Are we driving East?" I ask. "Yes," he says. "Are we past the Green Line?" I ask. "Yes," he says again. "So, your parents kind of live in a settlement?" "They don't ‘kind of live' in a settlement, they live in a settlement," he tells me. "Ah..." I respond with dim realization. "You're been referring to it as a village for the last couple of weeks." "It is a village," he says.

And for him, it is. Or grew up there and describes it as a "settlement lite," or a non-ideological settlement, as it was one of the earlier developments where "no one," he claims, was displaced. For him, it's normal. For me, I'm more than a little miffed to finally learn that I'd been staying in a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem without knowing it.

It turns out that it's not the first time I'd stayed in a settlement during the Taglit trip. I later learn from one of the soldiers who accompanied us that one of the kibbutzim we had stayed at was across the 1967 border. Looking back, I remembered that for this portion of the trip, we'd had not just the one medic/guard, a young woman who would rock her look of skinny jeans, a blue tank top and a rifle, but a second one as well. The reason for the additional soldier wasn't explained to us at the time. I had assumed it was because we were near Jerusalem. We were actually on a settlement outside Jerusalem. The very slippery slope of land encroachment is clear.

Bethlehem and the Canucks

But, this time, leaving Bethlehem, we had definitely arrived at a "real," completely unambiguous checkpoint. Eventually, another bus does arrive and we make it back into Jerusalem by way of the same checkpoint through which we'd earlier entered the West Bank. Shabbat, the Jewish day of rest, has arrived and there are no public buses to be had.

In English, I ask a soldier the best way is to get into town. He asks where I'm from. I tell him Canada. "Where?" he says. "Vancouver," I answer. "Where?" he asks again. "Umm, East Van," I respond. "Where?" I give him my intersection. "I'm from Oak and 41st," he says. "Are you Jewish?" he asks. I nod. "You're not really supposed to be in Bethlehem," he tells me. I know that while parts of Bethlehem are Area A, and forbidden to Israelis, I'm not Israeli and figure my Canadian-ness supersedes my Jewishness. He doesn't seem to think so.

The soldier takes off his yarmulke, the head covering required of observant Jews, and shows it to me. Embroidered on it is the logo of the Vancouver Canucks.

Another assumption dissipates.

Epilogue -- September 14, 2010

I've been back in Vancouver now for about six weeks and my trip to Israel and Palestine is still sinking in. People have asked what my biggest "take aways" are from the trip. Here are just a few:

- It's great to have one's assumptions blown to smithereens. This is especially true for someone like me who can be a bit, shall we say, judgmental? The participants on the Taglit-Birthright trip managed to challenge nearly all the first impressions I had of them. The same can be said for many of the Israelis I spoke with -- in particular, the soldiers. My only real contact with Israelis up until the trip was traveling in South America and coming across packs of post-army kids, constantly on the defensive. I found most Israelis to be more moderate than I had expected.

- Everyone wants to tell you their story. This was true for soldiers, who spoke of the immense social pressure to participate fully in army life, and of Palestinians dealing with incredible oppression. Art and storytelling has to be a fundamental way of dealing with conflict.

- The Jewish diaspora is a lot less progressive than much of the population of Israel. Diasporic Jews are pretty fast to call each other self-hating, while asking questions and engaging in dialogue is an integral part of Israeli culture.

- Taglit-Birthright is an incredibly smart program. By building social cohesion, as in my "birthright equation," participants create bonds with each other and with the physical -- and emotional -- place. The program, despite its rhetoric to the contrary, makes critical thought difficult.

- The West Bank is simultaneously tiny and gigantic. Despite being filled with some of the most friendly people I've ever met, there is a heaviness there. While certainly not hopeless, most didn't see an authentic peace process happening anytime soon.

- Many Israelis agree that Israel's policies have had the (unintended?) consequence of increasing anti-Semitism around the world, but there is nonetheless an overwhelming sense of social cohesion and national unity clearly tied to military service.

- Hebron is just totally and completely screwed up. The settlers -- religious fanatics from my point of view -- just need to leave. Period.

People have asked if my politics have changed from the experience. Despite the unequivocal nature of my last take-away -- some things are just wrong and I don't want to be too sucked into relativism -- they have. My politics are certainly more nuanced, as happens when you spend time with people from different backgrounds. I shifted my opinion on lots of specific policies and suspended my judgments about many people and how they live their lives. However, I wouldn't say that my politics have changed on a fundamental level.

For me, it's still about power. The IDF is one of the strongest militaries in the world. In 1967, Israel conquered a bunch of land that wasn't its for the taking. People lived there. And those people are still coping with the occupation. Sure, anti-Semitism still exists, but, in terms of sheer power, the IDF could crush any country in the region. The once-oppressed too easily becomes the oppressor and what Israel is doing to the Palestinian people simply breeds more hatred around the world.

"With great power comes great responsibility," as the old cliché goes, but I think it's true. Consistently, I heard people say that the Arabs needed to take more responsibility for a peace process. I don't necessarily disagree with that (or that Hamas isn't a problematic part of the equation), but I feel that it's Israel's responsibility -- and the responsibility of the Jewish diaspora as well -- to be sure that responsibility is taken for moving a truly equitable peace process forward.

So, what next? The Palestinians and Israelis I spoke with didn't think a resolution to the conflict was going to arrive soon, but there did seem to be a sense that the peace process and its ultimate terms would unfold more quickly this time. Over and over, I heard that Israelis are just tired of it all. Peace talks have begun since I returned to Canada, surely a positive sign. Netanyahu is going to have to prove that he can get his coalition together to continue the settlement expansion freeze. But the settler and conservative lobby in Israel is strong.

As Israelis repeated over and over again to me about the situation, "It's complicated." Of course it is. But, it's also about power... and political will... and justice. As the young woman from the International Solidarity Movement said to me, "It's the responsibility of all of us."

Rachel Marcuse is a Vancouver-based activist, facilitator and apparatchick. The executive director of the Coalition of Progressive Electors (COPE), a municipal political party, she also freelances, focussing on facilitation skills, youth-engagement and strategic planning. Her views do not necessarily represent the positions of any organization whatsoever.

Quote - re Americans - taxes/class

2010-09-21T15:25:00.000-07:00

On NPR today I heard a British commentator talking related to taxing the wealthy in the U.S. about Americans (and why Americans don't support progressive taxation):

"19 percent of Americans think that their income is in the upper one percent and 30 percent think that they will shortly be in the upper one percent" - or something similar!

On Sex within Primary (Het) Relationships

2010-09-18T06:47:00.000-07:00

Recently I've read a fair amount related to Het relationships related to Sexism, inequalities because of it and "PIV Sex" (penis-in-vagina).

Some radical feminists believe that PIV Sex is dangerous to women for various reasons. They may believe that truly egalitarian relationships should at least have the option for women to choose Not to have PIV Sex related to issues such as:
1.) Pregnancy,
2.) Sexually transmitted diseases and
3.) Meanings related to PIV Sex that may relate to - domination of women by men, "scoring" for men and/or other such issues.

I am a 59 year old man who for the past several years has been totally unable to have PIV sex due to erectile dysfunction (ED) issues and who has dealt with related issues for close to 15 years.

I think that "sex" within primary Het relationships can be a number of things (or combinations of them) including:

1.) PIV Sex by itself - whether a "Qwickie" or some other act that is focused Primarily upon such sexual intercourse,
2.) PIV Sex as part of a set of actions - whether a set of routines leading up to or moving "around" such sexual intercourse or a varied set of behaviors which includes such sexual intercourse,
3.) Other clearly defined "sexual behaviors" such as:
a. Oral sex - "for the man" or "for the woman"
b. Anal sex
c. Digital/Masturbation - whether by the partner or while with the partner
d. Using sex toys such as vibrators, dildo's, cock rings, etc.
e. Various - bondage and discipline related things
f. Phone or Cyber - sex
4.) Including others in one's sex - including three-somes, swinging, and/or various forms of open relationships,
5.) Sexual and Sensual Touch - whether intended to lead to orgasm or not

Other issues can exist related to pornography, ties to the other gender outside of the primary relationship, etc.

What does it mean to have sex? For some this means having PIV Sex which may imply specific behaviors related to Who initiates it, How it is initiated and What transpires leading up to and after the "sex act".

Is "the sex" - the orgasm that one or both partners may have or wish to have, the "sex act itself, the feelings endendered in the moments and/or something else?

When I was physically easily able to have PIV Sex for me "good sex" was what I would call "being sexual" over an extended period of time (hours) which nearly always included PIV Sex. How "good" it was had little or nothing to do with how many orgasms either one of us had.

When I was new to sex as a young man "sex" was me kissing and sexually stimulating my partner so that she was "wet" and having PIV sex and then it was over.

I find the whole issue of debating having or not having PIV sex as a seeming: "political issue" related to sexism troubling, though understandable. To the degree that a relationship is not fully consensual and egalitarian, it is potentially important. Where there is open communication and mutuality. PIV sex would seem generally to be likely to occur because both partners would want it. How frequent it was and how it fit into the spectrum of mutual sexual behaviors would seem a more likely issue for most couples.

Where a relationship will last or Not last related to having or not having PIV Sex seems to me to relate to a tiny minority of couples which commonly would relate to particulars of that relationship. Besides physical issues I could imagine some women who had been vaginally raped with PIV sex might have flashbacks to their rape with PIV sex. In such a situation the male partner would need to be able to accept his partner as she was, else the relationship wouldn't have a future.

Otherwise to me the "political nature" of PIV Sex is part of a bigger area of coping in our society which also includes issues related to gender roles in general and related to Het marriage issues such as what name the woman (or man) has after the marriage, rings, and similar.

More important to me in general are the issues of emotional and physical closeness as they pertain to "sex" and the relationship in general.

I would hope that most individuals in Het relationships can talk through their differences with their partners and work out what best works for them both. Acceptance isn't always getting what one wants of course. Having a decent, balanced, loving relationship seems most important to me.

I could only dream that I will live to see the day when Sexism is "extinct", though I hope that things will get better over time. In my lifetime I've seen things get much better in some ways and much worse in others. Thanks!

Much Younger Women - Older Men - A Personal Perspective

2010-09-07T17:33:00.000-07:00

Last Saturday I, age 59, was with my 48 year old (female) partner at a large local music and arts festival. At one point during the Festival we were sitting on the grass in front of two "attractive" 17 year old girls (looked like they could have been 15). They were quite enthusiastic and having a good time talking with various people sitting near them. When B went to a porta-potty, one of the young women moved onto our blanket (we were both standing)and began talking to me.

It was quite evident that she was high on something (B later guessed Ecstasy from my description). She kept saying that B and I were wonderful people. She tried to engage me in dancing (loosely) with her. She hugged me and seemingly wanted to hug me a second time.

She seemed to notice my reticence, but it didn't seemed to stop her that much. I told her that if "my wife" saw her with me, she might presume that I was hustling her and might be upset. After several such statements she reiterated how nice we were and went back to her area with her friend.

Her friend briefly talked with me telling me her name and to remember her name (she was purportedly an excellent singer) and asked our names. She was equally friendly and outgoing, but not as "attentive" or "connected".

The two of them then left (before B returned) with two 30-35 year old men that the second girl had invited to join them and sought attention from seemingly to get seats for the Bob Dylan - headliner show together - that was scheduled a little later at the main stage.

Both of these girls were dressed moderately "sexily", though totally appropriately. They were reasonably short, fairly thin, and definitely fit most stereotypes of being "attractive", "young", "cute" or whatever, while not being "stunning" or similar.

The feelings that I felt were a mixture of horror/fear - from the "thinking" side of me - "younger than my oldest child" - "disgusting" etc. and then from the "simple man" ("feeling") side of me - "am I really attractive", "wouldn't it be wonderful some day in the distant, distant future - to have someone much younger touch me and desire me to touch her" and the like.

The latter types of feelings came from the "fantasy" side of part of my maleness and my being.

I could Not imagine ever, ever being in a relationship with a woman younger than my partner - it's tough enough dealing with our age differences after years together. I couldn't imagine having a sexual escapade (presuming I was widowed or similar) with someone faintly (within 20-25 years) close to as young as this young woman at any time during the rest of my life.

I also thought and wondered at the time at the age difference between the men that these girls (and I wouldn't call them "women) went off with, however it seemed like it was none my business.

Experiencing what I did - as an "old man" or at least "older man" - I can only faintly imagine what goes through the heads of many other men - who may be 35 with a 20 year old or 45 with a 25 year old or whatever.

Whether drugs or alcohol are involved or whether it is simply hormones and "middle aged male syndrome" or whatever - it's not difficult for me to imagine many other men making moves or responding to moves (or perceived moves) of women much younger than they are.

I both don't want what I say to excuse - "bad" behavior, nor to be on some high horse related to what others may feel. We obviously choose How we respond to our feelings! Thanks!

Ikhlas Jebara - some context (amazingly crazy!!!):

2010-09-05T20:02:00.000-07:00

(what follows is from A Jewish Voice for Peace's The Only Democracy blog. The source is stated at the end: "The family was automatically blacklisted by the Shin Bet after the father Sa’el was murdered by a settler in fall 2004.)

The cruelty of the Occupation regime is perhaps most directly illustrated via this story. The settler, a German convert with troubled history, was nonetheless given – like most settlers – an M16 automatic assault rifle by the military for his “self defense”. He then used it to murder an innocent civilian, who happened to be Ikhlas’ dad, in broad daylight. The lengthy legal proceedings end with his conviction of manslaughter. But the judge inexplicably allows the murderer a home leave before his sentence is set. He disappears without a trace, and to this day no one has found him (has anyone even looked for him?). If you find this hard to believe, here’s an account from the Israeli mainstream news site Ynet (note: see original source for this link).

Meanwhile, the victim’s family having lost its father and provider without recourse to justice, is automatically labeled as a “security threat” because now they have a reason to revenge! Therefore, they are placed under even tighter confinement than other Occupied Palestinians.

This year Villages Group activists petitioned the authorities, arguing that 6 years after the murder perhaps the victims should be allowed a reprieve from their punishment, due to their good behavior. The plea was rejected. Knowing how mindless and arbitrary the Occupation system is, the activists did not give up and submitted the exact same petition again. This time it was accepted. The Jebara family was treated to a day of fun, visiting the homes of their Villages Group friends for the first time ever, and seeing the Mediterranean Sea – second time for Ikhlas and Mohammed, first time ever for their siblings.

This fall, Ikhlas will begin her M.A. studies in English literature at the Nablus University."

http://theonlydemocracy.org/2010/09/songs-by-ikhlas-yasmin-jebara-from-salem-part-ii/

2010-09-05T13:34:00.000-07:00

Ikhlas ("Yasmin") Jebara's Significant Words - from Palestine
If you would like to respond to this wonderful Palestinian poet-song writer, please contact me and I will give you her email address.

TO SAY OR NOT TO SAY

I wonder whether to say or not to say
To be enthusiastic
to revolve
or to obey
For God or for people to pray
Or like a refugee without home to stay
Or like a child in the streets to play
Or to pass through a narrow or wide way
Or our hopes for future to delay
Or to sit under the red x-ray
Here we are my friend
with no decision
Whether to be or not to be
we do not know
Whether to say or not to say
————————–
IN OUR NARROW STREET

In our calm narrow street
I followed the traces of his feet
I heard the echo of hope
when she said you should meet
you should meet
Darkness bitterness of days you should defeat
My tongue had also said no blame no blame
Forget the past and live for your dream
For hope in your eyes would gleam
No one but echo answered me
No he is not free
With him we can not be
Until the masters of the fates agree
In a dark cloudy atmosphere
Moon, sun, stars seem to be very clear
Safety… bravery… oh grasped fear
In the eyes of the sky there is no tear
Just the glimmer of hope that is so near
From them you can not flee
I bitterly answered ‘what do you claim?’
She laughed and said I will achieve my aim
Until the end of my game
I trust myself and I do not feel shame
Hope -she is so strong and stout
And she is able my fears to wipe out
She laughed with her echo-voice so loud
One day in the hands of you will be found
———————————-
GIFT FOR THOSE WHOSE PARENTS ARE LOST

Here on that street my dad died
Death attacked him from an unknown side
What did his death for us hide ?
Grief and pain did for us decide
His death the hearts of our family did divide
Loss and departure were emphasized
While happiness at that moment seized
Here on that street my father drove
On the same street he was shot
By a settler who was provoked
From an innocent person his revenge he got
From an unknown origin he is derived
Responsible that in my family’s life
grief, pain and anger reside
But there are people of his religion who have tried
For us a new beginning to provide
They really appreciate the size of grief in our hearts
Monday in the afternoon was the opening of our wound
And it caused the broken hearts of our catastrophe to moan
At that moment the stagnant grief in our souls was grown
We lived in darkness with no fraction of dawn
A black tragedy for me was drawn
Like a nic in the neck… it is in the heart a wound
————————–
TO BE A GRADUATE

Have you ever felt like a person who will graduate
Who is standing on the edge of the university and life’s gate
People are coming to say ‘we congratulate’
They within me a glimmer of hope create
I am like a king who won the state
I am a person who is loved by fate
For this day I am willing to wait
All love from my heart is sent
To my parents my sisters my brothers my doctors and friends
For you I say ‘happy new year’
I wish we will the dress of happiness wear
No matter how the last days were
The principles of a new life in this modest party we declare
The black papers of our last tragedies in our lives we will tear
The bitterness of days we no longer bear
We in the eyes of future stare
Happiness and hope we can see there
But we also notice some sort of fear
I hope that peace is near
for those whom to me are so dear
You are to me my jewels
In the siege of my heart you fell
I rang my tongue’s bell
good words for you to tell
Let us together say grief farewell
grief farewell grief farewell
———————————-
BELIEVE ME WE CAN NOT DARE

Believe me we can not dare
to say that occupation is something that we can not bear
But even if we said it
they will our bodies like pieces of cloth tear
Not by human butchers
rather it has become the machine butcher’s career
Be silent my friend
and do not say whether it is cruel or fair
Because if you said this
you will be thrown in fire
—————————
IF YOU TRIED TO TURN YOUR FACE

If you tried to turn your face
In a moment you will be in the hospital as a critical case
Occupation is willing to chase
Every person who is from the Arabic race
And the steps of history trace
Occupation has no conscience
when it the bodies of Gazan children dismember
in the last December
I am torn by pain when I remember
the bodies of children trampled under the feet
of an unworthy Israeli soldier member
Dying words on their tomb door
saying war is every where
On the heads of the poor
Palestinian life will become sore
You will live in pain more and more
Let it be forever let it be forever
When will facts chant?
When will Justice on her feet stand?
When will we together
in the face of cruelty stand?
When will we our rights defend?
When will we like a bomb explode?
When will we our rights defend ?
Or shall we wait for someone to rescue us?
—————————
DO YOU KNOW

Do you know what your life is like?
Your life is a play
if you wonder I will say
what role in this life I play
a good person I may be
as a fruitful tree
slave people I can free
if they appreciate they will agree
a source of evil I contribute to life
by carrying my sharp sword and knife
I can steal a husband from his wife
And deprive a person of his life
To me you can describe
What type you want your self to ascribe
No matter you are from this or that tribe
But what really matters is you are mature and ripe

A Metaphor in my Life - Blaming - Tea Party etc.

2010-08-31T13:00:00.000-07:00

This morning I struggled with my first gentle yoga class, after having felt deeply humbled when I previously had tried a regular yoga class. I hope to continue the gentle yoga classes at least weekly.

Background: I have exercised regularly for a long time. Spin cycling is my love and I'm pretty good at it. I gave up long distance running in the 1980's because I constantly was pulling leg muscles, due to inflexibility and my difficulties in stretching. I enjoyed yoga several times years ago, though I wasn't real good at it. More recently I'm aware of how at age 59 my body is less flexible and more difficult to manipulate. I hope that yoga will help me avoid periodic back pain as well as making it less likely that if I live to a ripe old age that I will be hunched over as my 83 year old mother is now.

When I exercise and struggle as I do with yoga my feelings go in strange, not always pleasant ways. I see the women near me with much envy as they bend and stretch out far "better" than I do. It is very easy to go into a space of: "it's hopeless" either with some specific thing we are asked to do or with yoga in general.

When I reflect upon some of what I've gone through with my recent yoga classes I think of some of the much larger issues that many people face such as losing (or fearing the loss) of their jobs and/or their homes in the current "recession". Under pressures far greater than what I face, it is very easy for people to want to find reasons and blame for what is occurring.

It is no accident that making President Obama into a "Muslim" or worse and radical right wing efforts such as The Tea Party Movement have seeming strength now in these difficult times. It is more difficult to offer support and help so many people see the traps of these simplistic, narrow often bigoted answers to the tough issues we face today. Thanks!

From Jewish Peace News

2010-08-21T17:59:00.000-07:00

Gary Leupp: Chronology of a Bizarre Controversy - Hurt Feelings and the ground Zero Mosque
Saturday, August 21, 2010 8:31 AM
From: "Jewish Peace News"

This article describes the chronology of events surrounding the project aiming to build an islamic center in the vicinity of "Ground Zero".
I found it is especially interesting because it shows how a local, modest, and initially uncontroversial project could become a major tool for
pushing islamophobia once sufficiently unprincipled shakers and movers got hold of it. The scary part, of course, isn't that some
opportunistic nitwits would try to make hay of such a project, but the fact that they've been having such enormous success.

Racheli Gai.

http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp08192010.html

Gary Leupp: Chronology of a Bizarre Controversy - Hurt Feelings and the Ground Zero Mosque

August 20, 2010

Here is the order of events producing this bizarre “controversy.”

2009: A Muslim organization having arranged to purchase an abandoned Burlington Coat factory on Park Place in Lower Manhattan plans to build a 13-story Islamic community center. It will feature a culinary school, conference hall, basketball court, swimming pool, and place of worship among other things and while principally servicing the Muslim community be open to all. It is to be called the Cordoba House, an apparent allusion to Muslim Spain in which Islam flourished alongside Christianity and Judaism from the eighth century up to the “Reconquest.”

In its mission statement the group says the center “will be dedicated to pluralism, service, arts and culture, education and empowerment, appreciation for our city and a deep respect for our planet. [It] will join New York to the world, offering a welcoming community center with multiple points of entry. With world-class facilities, a global scope and strong local roots, [the center] will offer a friendly and accessible platform for conversations across our identities.”

It will be four big city blocks away from where the World Trade Center once stood (“Ground Zero”). But since there are already about eight mosques in Manhattan, and a significant Muslim population in that highly diverse section of New York City, there is nothing remarkable about the group’s application to tear down the old factory building and construct the center.

The key organizer, Kuwait-born Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an imam of the Sufi school of Islam, generally described as “moderate” and mystical. He holds a degree in physics from Columbia University, had been hired by the FBI to conduct sensitivity training among their agents, and had worked with the U.S. State Department. He had met New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg, who strongly supports the plan for the center.

In December 2009 the New York Times runs an article on the project. It is generally positive, citing two Jewish leaders and the mother of a 9-11 victim in support. In the same month conservative commentator Laura Ingraham, guest-hosting FOX News’ “The O’Reilly Factor,” interviews Rauf’s wife, Daisy Khan. The interview is as Salon’s Justin Elliot later notes “remarkable for its cordiality.” “I can’t find many people who really have a problem with [the project], declares Ingraham. “I like what you're trying to do.”

On May 6, 2010, after a public hearing in which New Yorkers express strong feelings pro and con, the New York City community board committee unanimously votes to approve the project. Enter Pamela Geller, who maintains a blog called Atlas Shrugs. She has written a book about Barack Obama in which she alleges his real father was Malcolm X. She leads an apparently tiny wacko group called Stop the Islamization of America. Seeing the opportunity to have her moment in the sun (and she is soon interviewed by FOX News and CNN), she lashes out at Cordoba House. She declares on her blog, “this is not about religious liberty. No one has suggested abridging the First Amendment to stop the mosque, and to oppose the Ground Zero mosque is not to oppose the First Amendment. There are hundreds of mosques in New York, thousands in America. This is not a religious issue. This is an issue of national dignity and respect for those who were murdered at that site in the name of Islam.” She begins to
organize a protest at the Park Place site.

Soon New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser references Geller’s group, falsely describing it as a “human rights group.” This brings the movement against the “Ground Zero mosque” out of the blogosphere and into the mainstream press. She sensationalizes the issue, falsely reporting that the center is to open on Sept. 11, 2011. A “controversy” erupts.

On July 16 Sarah Palin weighs in. Addressing not Muslims specifically but “Peaceful New Yorkers,” Sarah Palin twittered: “ pls refudiate [sic] the Ground Zero mosque plan if you believe catastrophic pain caused @ Twin Towers site is too raw, too real.” She adds two days later (after ammending “refudiate” to “refute”), “Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation; it stabs hearts. . .” Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich expresses outrage in multiple statements over the next month: “There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia.” “It’s not about religion,” he insists, “and is clearly an aggressive act that is offensive.” He says the center will be a symbol of Muslim “triumphalism,” and that building the mosque near the site of the 9/11 attacks “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.”

He writes, “‘Cordoba House’ is a deliberately insulting term. It refers to Cordoba, Spain–the capital of Muslim conquerors, who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world’s third-largest mosque complex... every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest.” In response to this absurb allegation the center organizers change the name to “Park51.”

(Gingrich who postures as an historian and scholar might have noted the Visigothic church was purchased by the conquering emir after 718 and that the Arabs during their rule in Spain pursued a policy of far greater religious tolerance than the Christians had before them. They allowed churches and synagogues to operate freely. When the Christians regained power, they expelled all Jews and Muslims, or forced them to convert, and conducted the Spanish Inquisition.)

Republican politicians smelling blood and opportunity continue to lash out. Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty says, “I think it’s inappropriate... From a patriotic standpoint, it’s hallowed ground, it’s sacred ground, and we should respect that. We shouldn’t have images or activities that degrade or disrespect that in any way.” Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee asks on his FOX program August 4, “Even if the Muslims have the right to build it, don’t they do more to serve the public interest by exercising the responsible judgment to not build it?” “The fact that someone has the right to do something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do,” echoed Ohio Rep. John Boehner.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s spokesman adds: “Governor Romney opposes the construction of the mosque at Ground Zero. The wishes of the families of the deceased and the potential for extremists to use the mosque for global recruiting and propaganda compel rejection of this site.”

On August 13 President Obama hosts representatives of the Muslim community at the White House. “As a citizen,” he tells them, “and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.”

A Republican running for Congress in Maryland, Andrew Harris, denounces the statement: “He is thinking like a lawyer and not an American, making declarations without America’s best interest in mind.” Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., also responds immediately: “President Obama is wrong. It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero.”

Bob Schieffer, CBS News’ chief Washington correspondent observes that Obama’s attention to the mosque issue “elevates it to a national issue. Clearly, Republicans are trying to take every advantage of this they can... every single Democratic candidate now running for office is going to be asked about it.”

Democratic Party leaders quickly distance themselves from the president’s remarks. . “The First Amendment protects freedom of religion,” says a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid adding that the senator “respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built someplace else.”

Obama himself, startled by the response to his comments, has to elaborate almost immediately. “I was not commenting, and I will not comment,” he said, “on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That’s what our country is about.”

A CNN poll published in August 11 shows 68% of Americans opposed to the center, and a FOX poll published August 13 shows that 61% of U.S. residents support the legal right to construct Park 51 but 64% don’t want the Muslim group to construct it. This becomes the mandatory position of all politicians: they’ve got a right to do it, but they shouldn’t. It would not be politically wise to suggest a general ban on mosques or Islamic community centers. But everyone has to say, this particular project is wrong because it shows insensitivity to the feelings of “Americans” particularly family members of the 9-11 victims. Justin Quinn, who maintains the “U.S. Conservative Politics Blog” for example, justifies his disapproval by suggesting the building will hurt “thousands of people who continue to mourn the loss of loved ones who were turned to dust in the attacks.”

But there is another issue as well. New York gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio, Gingrich, and Quinn all call for an investigation of the center’s funding, suggesting that some of it might come from “Islamic terrorists.” Lazio speaks ominously about the “the questionable backers of the Cordoba Mosque at Ground Zero” and calls for a public investigation. Quinn says, “let’s at least find out where the money is coming from to pay for this thing.” Soon House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is on board the program, although, alarmed at the backlash from Obama’s remarks, she suggests the “anti-mosque” movement should also be investigated.

By innuendo they assert that Rauf is linked to international terrorism. That seems unlikely since he’s been hired by the FBI since 2001 to offer sensitivity training to agents and has also just been asked by the State Department recently to tour the Middle East to “foster greater understanding” about the U.S. and its Muslims.

The charge seems based solely on the fact that in a June 2010 interview with Aaron Klein of New York’s WABC Radio, he declined to say whether he agreed with the listing of Hamas as a “terrorist organization.”

He declined to do, replying, “I’m not a politician. I try to avoid the issues. The issue of terrorism is a very complex question.... I’m a bridge builder. I define my work as a bridge builder. I do not want to be placed, nor do I accept to be placed in a position of being put in a position where I am the target of one side or another.”

(I see nothing damning here. Hamas, initially promoted by Israel as an alternative to secular Palestinian nationalism, has resisted Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands. It maintained long-term ceasefires with Israel ended due to Israeli action. It won a fair election in 2006. The U.S. State Department has considered it a “terrorist organization” since at least 1994 but the European Union only added it to its blacklist in 2003 under U.S. pressure. Many people including former President Jimmy Carter have asked that it be removed from that list, which is highly political and arbitrary and under no meaningful Congressional oversight. A U.S. Appeals Court recently ruled that the State Department must review its decision to list the People’s Mujahadeen Organization of Iran as “terrorist.” These things are very political, and no one should demand that Rauf endorse the listing. Certainly not those opposed to “Big Government” and its expectations of passive obedience from
the
citizenry.)

There are also wild accusations (aside from Gingrich’s cited above) that the center is designed to rub 9-11 in our noses. “The mosque at Ground Zero,” Quinn insists, “is being pursued to prove a simple political point -- that Islamic fundamentalists can knock our buildings down, murder our citizens and then use our own laws against us so they can laugh in our faces.”

There are also hateful, provocative comments. Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams blogs his followers: “The monument would consist of a Mosque for the worship of the terrorists’ monkey-god (repeat: ‘the terrorists’ monkey-god.” if you feel that fits a description of Allah then that is your own deep-seated emotional baggage not mine, talk to the terrorists who use Allah as their excuse and the Muslims who apologize for and rationalize them) and a ‘cultural center’ to propagandize for the extermination of all things not approved by their cult. It is a project of American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative, essentially the same group of apologists (but under 2 different names) for terrorists and the animals who use it as a terrorist ideology. They cloak their evil with new age gibberish that suggests Islam is just misunderstood.”

* * *

Thus by mid-August a modest project by a mainstream U.S. Muslim group backed by the New York City mayor and unanimously approved by the New York City community committee has been transformed into a general attack on Muslim rights in this country. The scary thing is that disapproval is so widespread, bipartisan, and driven by irrational fear if not hatred.

What does this tell us about this country? It tells us that nine years after 9-11 (and nice centuries after the First Crusade), Islamophobia is rampant and politically useful. Even though U.S. troops are supposedly fighting to help Muslims in two countries and both Bush and Obama have officially (for whatever reasons) emphasized that the U.S. is not against Islam, Islam is a religion of peace, we value our Muslim citizens, etc. the “us vs. them” mentality remains strong.

The prevalent argument against the center---that it may hurt people’s feelings---is an argument that people should be hurt by the mere existence of an Islamic site near “Ground Zero.” That they should feel hurt at the site of a Muslim establishment as they walk around Lower Manhattan, associating it with the 9-11 hijackers. That they should conflate Mohamed Atta and Rauf, or that at least if they do, their feelings should be respected. Of course Rauf’s hope is to counter precisely such feels by encouraging understanding and dialogue. (The fact in any case is that according to an August 10 Marist poll only 31% of Manhattan residents oppose the center!)

What about the feelings of U.S. Muslims, including those who had family members perish in the 9-11 bombing? They read about the plans of the “Dove World Outreach Center” in Gainesville, Florida---a “New Testament church, based on the Bible”---to promote an “International Burn a Quran Day” this September 11. They read about anti-mosque campaigns in Murfreesboro, Tennessee; Temecula, California; Sheboygan, Wisconsin. The Tea Party movement and mainstream politicians enthusiastically embrace the anti-mosque movement. I imagine there are some hurt feelings among people unfairly associated with terrorism just because a handful of Saudis attacked the U.S. nine years ago. To be told “this sacred ground---our American ground” so we don’t want your Muslim center here “degrading” and “disrespecting” it (Pawlenty’s terms) is to be told you’re not really a full citizen and your religion (as opposed to, say, Catholicism) isn’t an American one. It must be insulting
.

The notion that “they attacked us”---that the whole Muslim world attacked “us”---is so preposterous that only the simplest minds can believe it and the most devious exploit their ignorance for political gain. The U.S. has attacked Muslim countries, or intervened to impose regime change, repeatedly in the post-war period. Since 1967 it has provided nearly unconditional support to Israel, inevitably endorsing or accepting its grotesque mistreatment of the Palestinians. It cruelly maintained sanctions against Iraq throughout the 1990s, resulting in at least half a million children’s deaths. It provides massive aid to hated dictators like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak. It has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in its latest attack on Iraq. It maintains an increasingly unpopular occupation of Afghanistan and by its drone attacks on Pakistan has thoroughly alienated the Pakistani people. It is natural for Muslims globally to see themselves under U.S. attack. That a few have
responded with terrorist attacks is unsurprising; the CIA calls it “blowback.” It is also natural for most, like Rauf, to want to respond to all this with peaceful education and dialogue.

The problem isn’t limited to the U.S. Other western countries are also manifesting Islamophobia, placing Muslims on the defensive. In March 2005 the French parliament voted to ban Islamic head scarves in public schools. This has forced French Muslim schoolgirls to choose between following rules set down in the Qur’an and receiving public education. In 2005 the Danish right-wing newspaper Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten “invited members of the Danish editorial cartoonists union to draw Muhammad as they see him.” Since Muslim teaching forbids depiction of the prophet, and since it was assumed many cartoons would depict him a terrorist, this was a deliberate provocation. In December 2009 Swiss voters voted in a referendum to ban further construction of minarets in the country. There are only four.

There are a lot of hurt feelings about violent attacks, and Muslims in Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere frankly have more cause for them than the people of New York City. The loss of 2976 people on 9-11 was tragic. But more than that number of civilians were killed by U.S. bombing between October 2001 and March 2002, and the loss of life in Iraq due a war based on lies (including the Islamophobic conflation of al-Qaeda and Saddam) has been catastrophic. And there are lots of hurt feelings over discrimination, experienced throughout the western world.

The controversy over the Islamic center shows us that neither the politicians nor pundits nor people in general understand that, and so seem hell-bent on generating more Muslim resentment. Nothing good can come out of that.

Sadness - and Beyond

2010-08-17T12:24:00.001-07:00

Yesterday I attended the funeral of a 42 year old woman who died suddenly at home without an obvious cause. Her 13 year old son desperately tried CPR. I didn't know her. Her father was a teacher and coach were I grew up. It was important for me to be there in support of her family, given that most of us (from Indiana originally) were unable to be in suburban Seattle then to support them.

It is helpful for me to see seemingly "normal" Americans as this family obviously is who aren't "liberal-radical do-gooders" like I'm familiar with but are nice, loving, caring warm people.

In my younger life people were always: "hip" or "not cool" and similarly dichotomized into "with us" or "against us". As I get older I appreciate the opportunities to connect in limited ways with people that I otherwise might never know when they are open and accepting of my and others close to me.

It was a sad, but very moving funeral. I was very impressed with the father (I'd not seen in about 41+ years) as a 74 year old, grieving father and his son-in-law who towered physically over his short father-in-law.

Today - I felt a very opposite set of feelings in a most trivial way when a young man - roughly 17-20 years old - stopped me outside the gas station shop I was entering to ask me if I would buy cigarettes for him. He had no ID with him, and the store clerk wouldn't sell them to him.

Thanks!

Prop 8 - Gay/Lesbian Marriage - Interesting Perspective

2010-08-10T15:19:00.000-07:00

Today I listened to the end of a discussion about California's Proposition 8 - Court Decision and related issues with a panel on National Public Radio. I found the perspectives interesting.

Panelist 1: was a man who most recently lead a protest in North Carolina against Gay/Lesbian marriage.

Panelist 2: was a man representing a Catholic organization who was also opposed to Gay/Lesbian marriage.

Panelist 3: was a Gay man, married to another man, who clearly supported the general issue of Gay/Lesbian marriage.

Panelist 4: was a woman who strongly supported Gay/Lesbian marriage (she was only on the air once briefly so I understood less about her).

Panelist 1 - focused upon the importance of acting politically and publicly against Gay/Lesbian marriage. He seemed to focus largely on the need for organizing and stressing how the issue could be resolved with political action including if necessary an amendment to the constitution limiting marriages between women and men.

Panelist 2 - focused significantly upon his point that Gay-Lesbian marriage made sense where one focused upon equality for adults, but that it did not make sense in terms of equality concerning the rights of children (and adults). He mentioned a situation in Massachusetts where a church organization could not legally have an adoption agency, because they would Not allow Gay/Lesbian adoptions as a logical consequence of such "equality". Much of his focus stressed upon how one either needed to have marriage limited to men with women or have it open to all; e.g. that there is no middle ground. He seemed much less homophobic than Panelist 1, but his perspective was clearly defined by the Catholic Church's restrictions and laws.

Panelist 3 - talked both positively and negatively about Proposition 8. He was clear that on an ethical/moral level was strongly supportive. He was negative in that he thought that the decision was so immediate and radical that it could well bring a backlash which might end up restricting or ending his (and others) rights as Gay/Lesbian couples.

He indicated that California had domestic partner legislation and that it wasn't necessary for the changes to happen so fast and so directly. He thought that if things went slower, there was no reason why things shouldn't work out for the best for all. He was interesting in his cautiousness, not being "conservative" in any manner, but being concerned "politically".

This man talked of how many people had forgotten when in 1974 there was a split between President Gerald Ford and Governor (and future President) Ronald Reagan related to abortion rights. Ford indicated his support for individual states controlling the rights or lack thereof to abortions. Reagan wanted a constitutional amendment banning abortions. He seemed concerned that if things were handled in a manner which was too ahead of the times for the people with marital rights, that it could lead to actions that were more restrictive in the long-run.

At the end of the discussion he challenged panelists 1 and 2 to indicate how Gay/Lesbian marriage would in any way weaken heterosexual marriages. He talked of how marriages were a logical effective way for both heterosexual and non-het couples to raise children together. Panelists 1 and 2 in my mind couldn't answer the questions in a "logical" way.

Panelist 4 - talked of how the recent court decision was just and correct.

I found that this panel reflected some of the divides and issues that will be faced as Prop 8 heads to higher court levels as well as faces other challenges in the coming months and years. Panelist 3 was quite interesting and insightful! I hope that things will work out for the best!

Racism - What it Is ?

2010-07-30T21:10:00.000-07:00

"to rant this is not the 1800's on the frontier you are not cowboys if you have a racist, sexist, anti-semitic, homophobic BS thoughts in your head please do me the favor of not having it come out of your mouth as you drive by in your car I mean really it is 2010 and for the record if you are reading this and have those kind of thoughts feel free to un-friend me cause we need some serious toleration up in here"

We've just watched a serious play and have left the theater. We've waited several minutes for the light to change and have crossed the main street. We start across the side street and - a White Man - forced to turn around by his road blocked off by a roadblock, so he Needs to turn back in the direction he came from.

B - is a few feet ahead of me and she Has The Nerve to walk in front of the Man and His Car - he has a stop sign.

After he's made it through the intersection - he yells back at her: "more points ..."

I both can and can not at all understand! For me - another A-Hole - I can "understand" that B is pissed. It was an obvious blatantly racist statement and totally unnecessary!

At the same time, I can't really understand. I've not faced a lifetime of similar snippets of being treated like I didn't matter - I'm not Black, Female, large bodied, assertive - I've not been told by My Father in so many Deep Ways that I'm not "good enough" no matter how hard I try and how Well I do at What I do.

I can support and love and affirm - and learn a little snippet at a time.

We're in "liberal" Seattle! Perhaps Selma or Jackson or Florida where B spent her formative years aren't "worse".

It's sad for me. We have so many, many people who are in a sense well meaning, caring people, but they Don't Step out of their shoes and see - what is around them around the bend. We also have others Who Do really understand; mostly People of Color or Women Who've Been Assaulted, or Gay/Lesbians who've faced the worst of Our Wrath or Similar.

Really - we Say - that things have Changed, but really the World remains - life is still stuck in the S__t of yesterday.

I'm sad - can't say - "I'm hurt" - but I'm feeling a little of the Pain. I can't say that I really Do Feel it - in its Depths, but it does Affect Me and Hurt. Thanks!

Amazingly Understandable - from the Elect. Intif.

2010-07-30T10:46:00.000-07:00

Israel's racist policies toward Palestinians have worrying historical precedents. (Anne Paq/ActiveStills)

Names have always been political. Throughout history different regimes have used naming as a means of racial or religious identification. In Nazi Germany a 1938 law obliged Jews to add Sara or Israel to their names so as to eliminate ethnic confusion. And in my own country, Northern Ireland, even without a law, a name could determine one's success in life.

Until comparatively recently many Catholic families I know chose Protestant Anglicized names so as their children could have a chance of escaping the discrimination inherent in the sectarian state. It rarely worked however, as there were always other ways one could tell someone's background. Indeed, even today most of us immediately conduct a sort of scan upon meeting a new acquaintance. If we can't tell by name then we move on to other questions like, "Where do you live?" or the clincher -- in a society where schools are largely segregated -- "What school did you go to?" This approach is not always successful but most times we can quite quickly classify who we think our new acquaintance is and how much we can reveal of ourselves to them.

Sad though most of you must think this is, for people of my generation it is an automatic but unfortunate hangover from hundreds of years of mutual suspicion. Thankfully however, never did we have someone convicted for rape on the basis that the woman had mistaken her sexual partner as being of the same religious group as herself. This is what happened in an Israeli court last week.

For those unfamiliar with the case the story goes like this. A young Jewish Israeli woman and a young Palestinian Jerusalemite had consensual sex. Afterwards, the Jewish woman discovered that her partner was in fact not Jewish at all, but horror of horror, a Palestinian. But there was more, the Palestinian had called himself "Dudu," his nickname, but one most often used by Israeli Jews, and from this the young woman concluded she had been deliberately deceived and in fact raped.

In our society of course, refusal to contemplate a relationship with a person from another ethnic or religious background is described and denounced as racism or bigotry. In Israel it is now protected by law. The court found that indeed the young Jewish woman had in fact been raped, not by force of course, but by name. Finding the Palestinian guilty, district court Judge Zvi Segal stated, "The court is obliged to protect the public interest from sophisticated, smooth-tongued criminals who can deceive innocent victims at an unbearable price -- the sanctity of their bodies and souls."

Sadly, this all has very worrying historical echoes. It hints back to the Apartheid and Jim Crow Laws which presupposed dangerous Blacks waiting to pounce on virginal Whites. It also conjures up the notorious images from the Nazi publication Der Sturmer of supposedly lecherous Jews trying to seduce young Aryan Germans, no doubt also at the unbearable price of the sanctity of their bodies and souls. In part it also shares the Nazi obsession with racial mixing and the naming policy Germany introduced to eliminate any possible confusion in ethnicity. Except perhaps Nazi policy was more honest. In the Nuremberg Laws Germany explicitly outlawed sexual relations between Jews and non-Jews; Israel does no such thing, it merely makes it a crime if sex takes place without the actors being fully aware of each other's background. Perhaps then Israel should take a leaf of out of Germany's 1938 naming law: every Muslim to have the name Muhammad attached; every Christian, Jesus. But it won't do that, after all, that is racist.

Richard Irvine teaches a course at Queen's University Belfast entitled "The Battle for Palestine" which explores the entire history of the conflict. Irvine has also worked voluntarily in Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon and taken part in olive planting and harvesting in the West Bank.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11432.shtml

Excellent Writing on Healthcare Costs - Reform

2010-07-22T14:17:00.000-07:00

I just read an incredibly good article related to US healthcare costs and reform. It is from the June 1, 2009 New Yorker magazine. It pre-dates the recent passage of healthcare reform legislation, but shows rather clearly how what is passed will NOT help lower healthcare costs substantially and what is likely to be potentially successful.

See: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande

Thanks!

Republicans & Democrats - Different, Yet The Same

2010-07-22T09:58:00.001-07:00

Thomas Friedman had an excellent editorial in today's local paper about the short-sightedness and futility of the Senate Republicans being united now against energy reform legislation which apparently has roughly 53 Democratic votes and 0 Republican votes. It appears that the Republicans will require 60 votes for passage, and thus as of now the legislation is dead.

Friedman focused upon how the legislation would help the U.S. be more independent of Mideast ("Arab" - though Iran is not "Arab) nations' (oil) and do much of what Republicans profess they want, without requiring U.S. military intervention.

While I agree with much of what Friedman said, I think that his criticisms of the Republicans in some ways ignore the basic weaknesses and similar of our political system with both Democrats and Republicans at fault.

To pass major legislation there commonly needs to Either be No "enemy" or one needs to make Substantial compromises in the legislation to appease "the enemy", whoever that may be. For the State of Connecticut the insurance industry may be sacred. For various midwest states the interests of corn farmers such as Ethanol are usually sacred. For some Gulf Coast States oil industry interests have been sacred.

When healthcare reform legislation was finally passed, it was only possible because the hospital and drug industries were largely appeased. As a result, the "reforms" will Not control costs and healthcare costs will continue to rise significantly, barring significant further serious reforms which may control them.

While the Democrats may be "better" than the Republicans on most issues, they are hardly "progressive" or otherwise looking out for the concerns of most of us. They are beholden to the issues of keeping their political office (e.g. campaign finance reform as an issue) and their own "parochial" interests.

Friedman points out eloquently the parochial interests of Republicans in looking towards the short-term and what the perceived as their "political interests" (my words)rather than looking at the bigger picture (including their own interests).

Until and unless campaign finance reform legislation passes Congress (unlikely) and the Supreme Court allows limitations upon lobbying and corporate power over Congress it seems unlikely that serious reforms of important things will be possible most of the time. Nearly always the powers of those being limited will have enough power to make changes either insubstantial or otherwise not sufficient for real, significant change.

It is, of course, difficult! Thanks!

Getting Over it, etc.

2010-07-16T14:42:00.001-07:00

Part I:

B's childhood was not the easiest. Both her mother and father were Not the best of parents. She is biracial. After her parents had messed things up, she moved in with her paternal grandparents who did their best raising her.

After high school she got pregnant. She's a single mother now with a teenage daughter. For much of the first part of her daughter's upbringing, they lived with her mother, who oft times took care of her granddaughter. More recently she moved away with her daughter. She moved near where she had lived with her grandparents as a teenager.

B never seems to get various things related to being a caring parent (or a thoughtful, responsible adult). Particularly difficult for her is recognizing the (commonly viewed) reality that her daughter's (emotional and related) needs should come first.

Perhaps Not surprisingly, when her grandmother recently moved from the general area they both lived in, she had No Time to help with the packing and similar. Other family members flew in to help out, but the only time she came over was to pick up some things her grandmother gave her.

Part II. Being Responsible and "Our Oppressions":

One could argue that B's behavior is at least understandable, given her childhood. Her parents said bad examples for her. As she nears age 40, she's seemingly never learned various important lessons of life.

At the same time, the excuses B makes get old very quickly!

It isn't always easy to separate the adult "victims" and those who are good people in some ways, yet help keep the S--t happening. As an upper-middle class, White Man I'm well aware of how despite my anti-racist beliefs, I've done things that certainly didn't help, while having done relatively little to help end racism. It seems rather lame to say that I didn't do more because of my immaturity over the years.

As a man, I am proud that I worked significantly in men's anti-rape organizing mostly from 1983-1987. I was very aware of sexism and did do some good work for a period in my life. Perhaps I could have done much more!

It seems most common for many of us that we remain within our safety zones regarding race, gender, class, sexual orientation and much more in our lives. A few men do remarkable work regarding sexism. A few White People do good work regarding racism. A few Heterosexual People do good work regarding gay, lesbian, or transgender issues. Others do good work helping others in "normal" ways such as working in soup kitchens, helping build houses with Habitat for Humanity and similar.

In general though it seems like people who are hurting and hurt need to lead the battles against oppressions that are incredibly real to them. A "minority" person (rather than a "non-minority person") is most commonly the one motivated to fight the battles they see in part because they are "minority". In general we others do "a little good" participating in fundraisers for good causes and similar.

It is difficult to see how serious change will occur when those lacking the power must fight the apathy of the rest of us as well as the forces in opposition.

Thanks!

Obama - and Hopes for the Future?

2010-07-06T15:10:00.000-07:00

Many of us have not been ecstatic over President Obama's leadership to date. We don't have to see John McCain as better to feel like things haven't worked out well.

I look at most of the major issues, and wonder How things are likely to improve before the 2012 elections:

1.) Afghanistan - one doesn't have to be a flaming radical to see that "counter-insurgency" isn't working there. The big unifying issue whenever there is one seems to be that we are hated as "outsiders" just as the Russians were in the 1980's. To succeed if that were even faintly possible, there would need to be a "good" government as an option to the "enemy" forces. It also remains unclear to me how what we do here is somehow going to stop international terrorism or that IF we leave - declare victory and take our troops out how this will strengthen terrorism directed at us.

2.) Iraq - now we are being told that it's too soon to take our troops out (as it will be soon with Afghanistan). While there is less violence than a few years ago, it still is unclear how things will go here,

3.) Health care and health care reform - compromise legislation will help millions more get coverage eventually, however nothing has been done to stem the increased costs of health care and it will continue to bankrupt us - if serious reform isn't initiated. IF Democrats lose decisively in November, 2010 elections this will be tough to accomplish,

4.) Israel-Palestine - perhaps I'm overly cynical and as soon as the November, 2010 elections are over Obama will get tough with Israel and start really pushing for a serious change in policy which may allow peace to evolve. I'll be pleasantly shocked if this happens,

5.) The economy - I don't know where to start here. Jobs and the housing industry seem likely places to start perhaps?

It should be obvious now that Obama is a politician and hardly a "real liberal" one at that. It should also seem obvious that his tendency to try to wait for consensus to emerge and then try to work with it isn't working too well. He's not a "master politician" and he's not done a very good job of reaching "mainstream America" on any issue to date since he was elected.

It's difficult now because we can't rely upon right-wing and Republican "mistakes" to fuel unity amongst Democrats. The weaknesses of the "big tent" Democrats are most apparent now. It's sad that at the same time Democrats generally can't build upon the problems the Republicans have with their internal splits between "normal Republicans" and the Teaites and others.

I'm not real optimistic! Thanks!

John Wooden - Sorry to Hear of His Death - at Age 99

2010-06-04T20:05:00.001-07:00

I'm saddened at the death of John Wooden! He was both an amazing person and basketball coach. Reading the respect so many, many, many people had for him as a coach and more importantly as a person is nice in this era of so much cynicism and pain.

I know how much meeting him meant to D.S., my high school classmate, as a high school student in the 1960's when UCLA played at Purdue University near to where we lived.

One could only wish that more of us could live to be 99 and active nearly til the end as he did with dignity and kindness.

Thanks!

90 Days of: "Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem" - Reflections

2010-05-30T14:38:00.000-07:00

I just finished watching Day 90 - Parts A and B - of Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem through You Tube.

The 90 days of daily videos were an incredible education for me in many ways. Seeing so many Palestinian people in so many settings has helped expand my understanding of so many different things related to Palestinians and Israelis and Americans as well as Moslems, Jews and various other religions that are in the West Bank and Gaza Areas as well as in Jerusalem.

While the series is/was seemingly not "political" in nature, inevitably the politics of life in Palestine and Israel was most important in the words and pictures I've taken in.

I return in my head over and over and over again to images - which link - Palestine with Apartheid and South Africa as well as Slavery and the oppressions which followed it in the United States. There are so, so many parallels - between how Palestinians are scapegoated and blamed for what has been done to them.

I have a mixture of emotions: sadness, anger and a general state of uneasiness. I do not expect that Most Americans will see the importance of a free and strong Palestine in their world(s).

It seems obvious to me that IF - a new and just peace were established through Israel and the United States either Honestly helping make possible or through international pressure forcing things to change that so many other things could more easily be dealt with. Obvious examples include: "International Terrorism" in general, the oppressive regimes of many, if not most other states in the Middle East, as well as Pakistan, a most dangerous place in today's world. Obviously Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Iran might either develop in alternate more accepting ways or at the very least be forced or able to deal with their own problems.

It is unfortunate that in the United States we both have a history of hurting others, while at the same time proclaiming our being "the best", better than others in the world. It is not enough to say that we are "better" than the worst of the rest of the world. We need to change our history (as it develops) so that the destruction of Native Americans, Slavery, as well as the many, many governments we've overthrown. In Iran - our efforts in the 1950's until the Shah was overthrown in the late 1970's - lead in so many ways to what is going on there now. Our actions in Cuba lead to Castro and his Cuban Revolution. We fail to see the good things that Castro did in Cuba such as creating a health care system for the people, which we still don't have in the U.S.

Understanding Palestinians through listening and caring is new to most of us. Hopefully we will start to see them as people, with needs and desires not that different from ours.

I hope that over time I will find other kindred spirits to communicate with related to Palestine. There is a US coalition of groups committed to peace through:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/ - The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. Locally there is: Jewish Voice for Peace - an excellent group of fellow concerned (mostly) Jewish people.

I would always welcome individuals who would like to share ideas and perspectives in a respectful, caring way! Thanks!

Respect and Coexistence - an Alternate Perspective

2010-05-26T10:12:00.000-07:00

Episode 85 of the excellent You Tube series: "Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enTbBx622-8 had a dramatically different, interesting perspective as a leader of Naturei Karta ( http://www.nkusa.org/ ) was interviewed in Jerusalem. From their website it states: "The name was given to a group of Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem who refused (and still refuse) to recognize the existence or authority of the so-called "State of Israel" and made (and still make) a point of publicly demonstrating their position, the position of the Torah and authentic unadulterated Judaism."

These people believe that the "State of Israel" can only be established when the Messiah returns. This traditional Jewish (religious) perspective had adherents in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel living peacefully with their Arab neighbors, though the growing tensions after World War I inevitably affected them. The rabbi and his wife were interviewed eloquently expressing their desires to live respecting the lives of their Palestinian neighbors and potentially within a Palestinian State.

As I've watched many episodes of the You Tube series I've learned quite a few new terms such as:

"martyr" which would translate into "terrorist who'd been killed by Israeli forces" in my good old days I grew up in and of course "settler", the Jewish residents of West Bank settlements.

As I watch more and more I increasingly have images both of traditional segregation and racism in the United States and of the former apartheid of South Africa.

The link between these was clearly shown in the recent Sleepless episode. The Orthodox Jews of Mea Shearim (in Naturei Karta) respect those they see as "different" such as Palestinians. They do Not see themselves as "better than" these people, allowing them to dictate how the others should live. They want the freedom to live their own lives in their religious community without interference. (I would note that their biggest difficulties and conflicts often are with Jewish and/or Israeli authorities who either support "secular Judiasm" or from their perspective distort their religious rules/lives.)

In contrast to this perspective The Settlers, Israeli military/political establishment, American political establishment and many others rarely see Palestinians as their/our equals. Palestinians are expected to leave where their families have lived for generations and "go with the Arabs" (e.g. in Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc.)

When we look at other issues, this issue of respect pushes forward so easily. Arizonans with "accents" when speaking English are somehow "wrong", despite both the facts that Arizona was originally in Mexico, a Spanish speaking country as well as the fact that we have: Southern accents, New York accents, Bostonian accents, "hillbilly" accents as well as British accents we hear frequently.

We are both a "Christian" and "English speaking" country in the U.S. according to the views of many. The Native Americans who were here before both the Christians and English speakers have no such rights to dictate how we live. We are "basically good" and the country that should be emulated by the rest of the world despite: the genocide Native Americans experience here, the history of slavery and segregation and inequality towards Black Americans, the nuclear explosions of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and other things that have been done in our name.

Palestinians will not find peace until or unless there is respect and acceptance of them. Iran and Iraq will not have peace until we and they find respect and acceptance of each other. North Korea and Pakistan and other countries face similar issues. Some of these issues are more complex than others, but they all require us to respect and support others.

Thanks!

Respect and Perhaps Pain

2010-05-24T06:09:00.000-07:00

If I respect others (Women, People of Color, Differently Abled People, Children, Iraqi's, Iranians, or even others whose political beliefs are different than mine) I must listen to their voices and really hear them as individual people. To respect them I Acknowledge that they have Feelings. To respect them I readily see that they are "important" just as my family and friends are "important".

When I am hurting, my pain may affect how I respond to others. IF I let this Pain excuse how I treat others in negative ways, I may Not Respect Others. To do this I also do Not Respect Myself.

There is a big difference between expressing our hurts, our pain, our anger and more and Not respecting Others. Feeling Angry or Hurt by the words and actions of Others does Not justify losing respect.

It can be difficult to respect Others (e.g. Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Americans such as Glenn Beck or for some Barack Obama). When we let our feelings related to our Perceptions of the actions of such people to allow us to lose Respect for them, they often are no longer "human" or even "real" to us as individual people.

I can not suggest that we "love" everyone! When we don't respect those we perceive as our "enemies", we can lose layers of our own humanity. Channeling our fears and anger is important. Confronting Racism, Sexism, Militarism and "rude behavior" is important. How we do it can affect others around us as well as how we are as individual people.

Thanks!

Confronting the Opposition

2010-05-22T18:35:00.001-07:00

While I can appreciate the discomfort of some Tea Partyites and others and resulting glee of those in opposition to the recent statements of Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul, I'm also reminded of the traps that we so easily fall into in such areas.

Yelling at and ridiculing those whose beliefs are much different than ours may raise our morale at times, but it rarely helps us bring about lasting change.

Bringing about change requires grassroots work with others, respecting them and helping them respect us. Oft times in political areas we much reach those "in the middle" as well as motivating others to work seriously with us. Such work is much slower than the sound bites of ridicule, but rarely does the ridicule help us more than momentarily.

Thanks!

Reflecting Forward and Backwards

2010-05-16T04:25:00.000-07:00

Today, on my 59th birthday, I went out and ran a little longer than the past few days. It was early (cooler) and I felt stronger and much better than on previous days when my legs felt heavy and immobile. While I'm a long way from being in good running shape, I can see that with a cooler, less humid climate and work I can get back into running shape. It won't be the shape I was in when younger, but...

It feels funny to say that I'm 59. It feels like 40-45 was a long time ago, but am I really "that old"? It feels like I'm in a transition, but it is unclear where I'm moving both from and to. Thankfully it feels relaxing and not pressured.

I feel happy to have others who are so kind to me, despite all my weaknesses and flaws.

I'm happy that today is also my son's 23rd birthday. He's running his first half-marathon in Chicago where he lives starting in a little less than half an hour. I'm proud of all that he's done, and hopeful that the economy based threats to his job will in the end dissipate. He's been very successful as a first year science teacher as well as coaching cross country and track. More importantly he's a good person growing into adulthood.

I wonder about the immediate future. My cell phone rang at 3:40 a.m. (12:40 a.m. West Coast Time) and I couldn't get it in time to answer it. "Restricted Number" Could it be my mother or even about my mother. My mother just turned 83, and my step-father's 88th birthday was last month. B's mother will turn 87 in a few days.

I've been lucky in so many ways, despite my miss-steps and questionable doings and not doings in my earlier life. I enjoy being retired very much! My duplicate bridge playing has grown. I'm no longer a so-so player, having moved to being a moderately good player. It feels good to place in not-high level competition at least 2/3 of the time. I enjoy reading and playing around on the computer. Exercising at the gym and elsewhere continues to be most enjoyable.

I hope, despite so much evidence to the contrary, that Peace in the Middle East will break out - with changing tides among increasing numbers of American Jews as well as others in Europe and elsewhere. It is sad to me that so many people don't read and understand history and realities of the present in more thoughtful, deep ways. While I can enjoy some movies and a little television I don't confuse the fantasies of escapism from some of the often simple realities we all face in our daily lives.

I hope that Barack Obama will grow as a leader and assert himself for some of the "liberal" causes that he espoused recently, despite the barrage of recent manure that has shown the racism and short-sightedness of so many. I also hope that more of us will see the need to reflect and grow: as men, learning how to better relate to the worlds of women, children and other men; as White People in a world that is increasingly multi-cultural; as Americans in a world where, despite being "so strong" we often are out-of-touch and at times irrelevant to the worlds around us.

Thank you!

"Anti-Semitism Here?" - I think NOT!

2010-05-05T10:23:00.001-07:00

At Berkeley, moral victory despite divestment vote loss
Dina Omar, The Electronic Intifada, 3 May 2010

On 28 April, University of California, Berkeley's Student Senate narrowly missed an historic opportunity to divest its funds from United Technologies and General Electric which manufacture F-16 jets and Apache helicopters -- weapons sold to the Israeli military and used against civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

More than a month earlier, on 18 March 2010, the Student Senate approved a bill (SB118A) to divest from companies that provide military support for the Israeli occupation of Palestine. UC Berkeley student body president Will Smelko vetoed SB118A a week later, and the bill was voted on again on 14 April and 28 April was the last debate considering the bill. However, the count was one vote short of the two-thirds majority (14 votes) needed to override the veto.

The battle at Berkeley -- part of a global movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions of apartheid Israel -- was closely watched. Speakers for the bill on 28 April and on 14 April included UC Berkeley faculty members Judith Butler, Daniel Boyarin, Hatem Bazian, law professor George Bisharat of UC Hastings and UN Special Rapporteur on human rights Richard Falk along with testimonies of Palestinian students living under Israeli occupation.

Notable personalities and dozens of activist groups on campus and around the world strongly supported the resolution. More than 40 student groups representing a variety of ethnic groups and political interests joined the call on the university to divest its funds from companies profiting from Israel's war crimes.

More than 100 UC faculty members, 45 from UC Berkeley, signed a statement supporting overriding the presidential veto. Prominent thinkers such as Naomi Klein, Alice Walker and five Nobel Peace Prize Laureates -- among them Archbishop Desmond Tutu -- supported UC Berkeley Students for Justice in Palestine in their efforts to uphold the divestment bill.

Nobel Women Peace Laureates Shirin Ebadi, Mairead Maguire, Rigoberta Menchu Tum and Jody Williams issued a Statement of Support reading: "We stand united in our belief that divesting from companies that provide significant support for the Israeli military provides moral and strategic stewardship of tuition and taxpayer-funded public education money."

However, the tremendous amount of support for SB118A was not enough to override the veto.

According to a report in the Jewish Daily Forward, the Berkeley chapter of Hillel organized closed meetings for the student senators with representatives of the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Jewish Community Relations Council, J Street and Akiva Tor, the Israeli consul general of San Francisco ("How To Beat Back Israel Divestment Bill: Get Organized," 21 April 2010).

Some senators received threatening e-mails and Senator Emily Carlton told the Forward: "'There were undertones of intimidation'" during the meeting organized by Hillel. Three student senators reversed their votes over the course of multiple senate meetings and extensive lobbying efforts.

Waseem Salahi, a UC Berkeley student and senator-elect, questioned the influence of powers that be: "The senators knew what was right, but decided instead to cow to political pressure and intimidation." After the bill missed passage by one vote, international students expressed their dismay about attending a university that continues to actively support the oppression of their family members and friends overseas.

In support of the bill UC Berkeley alum Basima Sisemore told the student senators a moving story about her two-year-old cousin who died at an Israeli checkpoint in the occupied West Bank because he was turned away while in need of medical attention.

The final speaker and visiting scholar from Palestine, Ibrahim Shikaki, drew a standing ovation from the audience by when he challenged the senators, saying: "the narrative that has captured you is the same that named Nelson Mandela and Malcom X terrorists. If that is the case, then I am a proud, indigenous, Palestinian freedom fighter, because that is what we are. Rethink your terminology, rethink your narrative, rethink injustice and rethink this veto."

Once it was clear the veto was going to be upheld, despite the wishes of the 700 students, educators and community members supporting the bill, the supporters exited the room with their mouths covered in tape in a gesture meant to convey that their voices had been silenced by the veto.

Senator Rahul Patel, who supported the bill from the beginning, invited student supporters to raise their left fist in the air and to walk out. Patel said their fists raised symbolized "The seeds of truth and freedom that we have sowed tonight."

Hundreds of students walked out of the meeting, and reconvened outside to share their feelings about the vote. UC Berkeley and SJP alum Sophia Ritchie said: "Something has shifted -- in the discourse, in the sheer numbers of people who are concerned, in the solidarity work and coalition building amongst a broad and truly diverse range of student and community groups, in the energy around Palestine -- that cannot be ignored. In this way, we are winning."

Dina Omar is a UC Berkeley graduate student in Middle Eastern Studies and Anthropology. The author is a member of SJP and a poet and currently works as the membership coordinator for the Arab Resource and Organizing Center.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8b-a6rHYl0

2010-05-01T15:18:00.000-07:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8b-a6rHYl0 - Episode 60 - of: "Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem" - The You Tube Video - Episode 61 is the latest of 90 daily videos as I write now.

In the first half of this episode a Palestinian man was interviewed at his house. The house has apparently been owned by his family since prior to his birth. The front porch and only entrance to the house is in Jerusalem. The inside of the house is in The West Bank.

This man and his family have been assigned "West Bank" identity cards. It is illegal for them to be in Jerusalem. At one point several busloads of people in their area were arrested and held for a good part of a day because it was alleged that they had to have violated the law in entering their houses (from Jerusalem).

The man's grown child has a Jerusalem identity card. Their spouse has a West Bank identity card. If the Jerusalem identified adult moves with their spouse to the West Bank they will lose their Jerusalem identity card and any rights to be in Jerusalem. Their young child has not been assigned an identity card at all.

This really makes a lot of sense! Thanks!

Being Honest - and Realistic

2010-04-21T08:02:00.000-07:00

My step-son was "30 seconds" late for school yesterday and the school had its usual response (email and phone call about the brutal deed). Yesterday he also did a "good deed" reporting to the office a car's turn signal being on along the school. Were these extenuating circumstances where a parent should intervene?

My partner and step-son are nearly always "on the edge" of being on time to school. The idea of leaving a few minutes early regularly so that he'd be there five minutes early is a totally foreign concept (e.g. a waste of precious time and an impossibility). He's been a few minutes late before.

Playing competitive bridge with a regular partner he told me that I shouldn't have corrected an opponent when s/he conceded the last trick of the hand to me. In fact s/he shouldn't have lost that trick (e.g. if s/he simply played their card they would win the trick). I told my partner that I wouldn't be dishonest in such situations (period).

We often face situations in life where we make choices as to how we view things. How we look at them shapes how we respond.

I find that I tend to look at situations and say to myself:

1.) Is there an issue of principle here in this moment?
2.) Does this really matter?
3.) Am I:
a. 100% right?
b. 100% wrong?
c. Mostly right?
d. Mostly wrong?
e. Partially at fault - unclear as to amount?
f. Is there no "right" or "wrong" here - but it matters to the other person?
g. Other - ?

I try to think of the situation and the other person and look at How important it is that I "win" or not. What lessons are here for me (and for the other person(s))?

Feelings certainly matter!

I also think of how we can work towards the future on the itsy bitsy issue and the larger issues that I see.

How can we move to both be assertive and to work at a micro level towards a better world of communication and compromises?

Thank you!

46 Days of Palestinian Videos

2010-04-17T09:24:00.000-07:00

I have now watched 46 days of videos on You Tube of “Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem” . Six days a week Palestinian women (primarily media producers) in Jerusalem, Gaza and Ramallah are videotaped talking with Palestinian people in various settings. While certainly the videos are “political” they also tell a story which a critical viewer can not readily ignore. They expose life in its complexities amongst Palestinians. They show the diversity of the people of the West Bank and Gaza.

The more that I watch the more that I feel a variety of things including shame, anger, admiration, sadness and much more.

Before I began watching the videos I was not aware that Gaza had an educated middle class population as well as people in poverty. I’ve also learned of different communities within the West Bank such as the Samaritans, whose religious faith seems closer to Judiasm than to Islam.

It seems increasingly obvious to me that the Israeli leadership unfortunately either does not want a peaceful permanent settlement with the Palestinians or is so scared of Palestinians per se, that nothing will convince them of genuine cooperation from “the other side”. In either case, it clearly is a situation where the status quo will not change for the better without increasing pressures to force serious negotiations on the part of the Israeli leadership.

It also seems obvious that “peace” is more than creating borders (which is most difficult in of itself). Peace is a recognition that the Palestinian people are the equals of the Jews of Israel. The situation seems clearly similar to how the dominant feelings were in the U.S. amongst White People in relation to Blacks in perhaps the late 1940’s. At that time talking of “freedom” for Black people did Not mean that a Black person would have the right to buy a house next door to a White person. That was “radical” and not realistic.

Today it is “radical” to deem Palestinian needs for water and other resources as being equal to those of the Israeli Jews.

Absent a radical shift in Israeli perspectives whereby Palestinians are miraculously turned into people who accept Palestinians as – “just like us”, building a future peace is in some ways much more complex.

There is a now a total paradox between two conflicting “realities”. With Israel so powerful and Palestinians in a weak position, seemingly Palestinians will need to compromise greatly on whatever is “reasonable” to achieve a true peace.

At the same time the combination of Israeli superiority complexes and their fears of Palestinians requires that Palestinians have a very secure, established state established where Israeli interference in internal affairs Can Not be carried out (as is done today).

It is often stated in the Israeli and American presses that the Palestinians and Arabs have repeatedly been shown to be “untrustworthy” and worse. What is not said is how the increasing apartheid or similar on the West Bank builds upon pre-existing feelings and makes peace more and more difficult to achieve.

Clearly any peace agreement will require that the West Bank be a single, contiguous Palestinian country, with No Israeli “islands” within it. IF there are to be any sites that Israelis maintain access to and partial control over they will need to be under the ultimate control of the Palestinian State. Israel’s recent track record has shown unfortunately that it can not be trusted to be fair and accepting and just to the Palestinians.

Perhaps 15 years ago it might have been possible for some small areas to remain under Israeli control surrounded by a Palestinian State. Ironically now as Israel expands its settlements trying to create “new realities” it seals future possibilities. The choices are either a total Apartheid and a state of permanent near war if not low level combat or a very clearly separated two state solution. (One can only hope that with a two state solution that continued trade and commerce and other existing connections can be continued and developed in new non-exploitative ways.)

It is sad to look back and see how things could have and should have been done differently. Absent the corrupt and ignorant leadership of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Israel might well have come to be a much smaller state than it now is. Absent the poor leadership of the neighboring Arab countries, peace might have been possible before the 1967 War.

It is easy to see how some of the Arabs of the Middle East have made mistakes and helped, particularly going back many years, in helping allow things to get bad for the Palestinian cause. One can also readily criticize the leadership of Arafat in various ways and use him as an excuse for various failures.

It is more difficult to look back with criticism upon how Israel has become a world military power and the oppressor of an entire people. It is more difficult to see how we as Americans have developed into both the apologist for and the key force preventing peace from developing in the Middle East.

It is fortunate now that President Obama is seeing how Palestine-Israel is a prime impediment to stopping the growth of radical Islam in much of the Muslim world. I can only hope that his insights will lead to real change in U.S. policy, despite the intense pressures in the U.S. to maintain that status quo via Israel and the Palestinians.

Thank you!

Easter - Jerusalem - etc.

2010-04-04T16:02:00.000-07:00

Today is Easter. I am Jewish. In my past life Easter has had meanings limited to trivia – such as having commercially bought Easter chocolate eggs given by others. Pesach – Passover proximate to Easter always carried whatever feelings I had in my past life.

Today I watched several episodes of the You Tube videos: “Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem” (particularly episodes 34A and B) which showed Christian (including Greek Orthodox) attempts at prayers in Jerusalem, the West Bank and finally Gaza from yesterday.

Today I saw much which made me both sad and angry, as well as appreciative of how the spirits of people can continue while they are visibly oppressed by others.

In all the locations I saw Christians, a minority of the Palestinian community, trying to pray and appreciate their historic religious traditions.

In Jerusalem (particularly) the senseless harassment of religious people was most vivid! Christian people were unable to come from the West Bank to pray for Easter because they were “not Israeli citizens” (hardly an acceptance and tolerance of non-Jews).

Yesterday I had seen a Greek Orthodox service from Friday which was beautiful.

Today (yesterday when filmed) the host initially was unable to enter the Old City (of Jerusalem) through the New Gate because it was blocked by Israeli soldiers. She continued in her efforts to get to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a most important site in the history of Christianity. Hundreds of people were waiting and waiting and waiting for the gate to (hopefully) be opened.

The host successfully entered the Damascus Gate, but again her way was blocked as it was to all (who didn’t reside in the blocked area). She continued to try a third way of getting to the area of the Church and it too was blocked. Then a scout band came to the blocked spot. The Israeli authorities let the band go through, also letting the host and her camera person enter.

The host then witnessed the procession from the Church as she had hoped to do.

The other people shown on camera were routinely kept out of the area of the church, regardless of any mitigating factors. There were no stones, no angry words or yelling, no gatherings of young boys or youths who were “threatening”.

On the “other side” (where she was let in) the people were no different from those who were kept out (except those inside had arrived earlier). There was no “security screening” or other such actions.

This was simply (religious) harassment of Palestinians (who were harassed because they are Palestinians) as well as affecting some other pilgrims from outside.

It is obvious that Israeli leadership wants Jerusalem to be “Jewish” which it is not. Jerusalem is both Israeli and Palestinian as well as Jewish, Moslem, Catholic and Greek Orthodox (and other smaller religions).

It seems obvious to me that what has happened recently in the Old City of Jerusalem is a perfect example as to Why any lasting peace settlement can Not simply have Jerusalem as an Israeli (Jewish) City. The “benevolent” (current) leadership will not fairly oversee the needs of the non-Jewish faiths that are also in the Old City. There is no intifada. There is no major unrest.

Where unrest does occur it generally is instigated by Israelis or is in reaction to harsh, unfair measures of the Israelis.

It is unfortunate, but true, that Israel has become “the oppressor”. I can no longer say that it is “radicals” on both sides that prevents peace. That might have been true several decades ago.

I hope that things will change for the better! I can’t imagine this happening until the growing international movements seeking divestment and boycotts of Israel grow. I can’t imagine this happening until the U.S. Government becomes a real mediator, and not a cheerleader for the Israeli Government, occasionally slapping Israel’s hands.

Peace is possible! It isn’t easy and it won’t be easy! Thanks!

Health Reform - Interesting Week

2010-03-16T07:45:00.000-07:00

It will be interesting to see how the Democrats in the House of Representatives "perform" this week as the (potential) health care vote nears.

On the "left" we have some who are not willing to give any more and could vote against the bill if it is unduly (more) restrictive on abortion.

On the "right" we have the die hard opponents of abortion rights.

Other smaller issues similarly divide.

The drug companies and hospitals have been "bought off" to support a situation where seemingly they will do better than the status quo. The Chamber of Commerce interests merge with the Republican issues and matter only in how strongly they can lobby with the conservative Democrats.

If the Democrats win the vote this week it will be a moderately impressive success at allowing some to "duck and cover" and vote against the bill, while having enough votes to just barely win. Unless the Democrats can effectively get votes from both the right and left they will be doomed to a serious defeat.

One can hope that enough Democrats in the end will recognize the obvious paralysis of the party if the vote doesn't go through and vote for it. If the bill passes, the Democrats road will still be difficult. If the bill fails, the path will be pretty hopeless both for future legislation and the 2010 elections.

If the bill succeeds, it will obviously be necessary for future legislation to add to the "reform" so that cost savings actually occur. Otherwise, costs will continue to skyrocket with some more people potentially covered.

It is sad that Obama won't ask both houses to vote on a non-binding resolution in support of a public option to see if the votes are there to pass it. That clearly could either unite the Democrats or spell their doom (and the risk is probably too great to try that).

Perhaps some day I'll live long enough to see single payer - and a "destruction" of our current health care mess. That seems unlikely until and unless Congress passes serious legislation limiting the powers of "private interests" to own individual Congresspersons. That seems a long, long way away! Thanks!

Two Parables - Oppression - I Can't See (Fully) Inside

2010-02-25T09:11:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I wrote about - Wrong Place, Wrong Time, John Rich's fascinating book. (Now I'd like to say a little more related to what I read in this book.)

A. Parable One:

Roy Martin, as John Rich described him, is an admirable man who has struggled and moved from the inner city world of his youth to successfully working to help youths growing up as he grew up. He has moved, with serious struggle, to a middle class world, though it hasn't been and isn't easy for him.

At one time Roy Martin was just completing a period as an intern at Senator Kerry's Office when he totally disappeared from Senator Kerry's Staff and John Rich. While Rich could not reach Martin, he heard that he was "ok" but needed to take care of some things before he could be reachable and in contact again.

After being unreachable for close to a year, Rich was able to contact Martin and was together with him briefly. Martin was clearly stressed and scared. He disclosed little as to what was going on but indicated that he was doing what he needed to do and would be in touch when things were worked out.

Close to a year later Martin reappeared and began working for Senator Kerry again. John Rich then learned that Martin had been getting his hair cut when a young man from his past came into the barber shop, clearly being about to physically attack him.

Martin escaped and realized that he'd not gotten free of his past, He felt that he needed to resolve things (privately) before he could move forward in his life. He did not want to face a situation where he might be attacked while working for Senator Kerry or being with John Rich. He did not want to have his violent past thrust into the lives of his new mentors and supporters in his middle class, predominantly White worlds.

Rich evidently never learned details as to how Martin made peace with those who wanted to attack him. He was only clear that he'd not attacked or killed others in achieving what he had sought.

While I can understand the words and appreciate much here this is a totally foreign type of life experience in my White World.

B. Interlude:

I've lived mostly in a "safe White world". As a child I had no fears of "criminals" attacking me, burglars or robbers invading our home or other things that might have been more common in poorer, often minority, often urban communities.

As an adult my life has similarly been mostly "safe" and isolated from the complexities of worlds of murders, serious drug problems, and other such issues. I have had moments of drama such as the two times I was held up at gunpoint in Chicago (1970's) and Oakland (1990's), not living in isolation.

As a child there were, of course, things that happened. My father died of stomach cancer when I was 13 and my brother was 11. A boy I knew (part of the Jewish community of our town) died at a junior high school football practice after choking on his own vomit. Others faced serious obstacles in their lives.

Two stories I've recounted previously stick in my mind relating to oppressions:

1. During my men's anti-rape organizing period in the mid-1980's - I remember the quoted story (in a video I think) of a woman who was the majority leader of one of the legislative branches of the Wisconsin State Government at the time. She indicated that despite the power that she wielded at the state capitol, when she stepped into the nearby parking garage at night, she was just another woman trying to be careful that she not sexually assaulted by a man who might be hidden from her sight.

2. At a men's retreat I attended in California a little later in the 1980's I remember a man I talked with (who was Black). He'd co-hosted a major session on racism with a White ally/friend earlier. In that session he'd encountered much resistance to his statements regarding racism and oppression. Other men had talked of how he shouldn't talk at them in the tone/style he used, because they'd faced oppressions themselves - related to abuse and homophobia. Talking privately he confided to me that he'd chosen Not to respond to their words speaking of how he'd been physically attacked and similarly oppressed as a boy, on top of the racism that he'd faced.

C. Parable Two:

Someone I care about has just learned that she will soon have a new supervisor at work who will be between her and her boss. Previously, she was seemingly "number two" at her agency.

She was and is extremely upset that she's "not good enough" to be the one formally taking over the leadership position that is being created. She had previously suggested that the leadership logically could either involve a single deputy director as is seemingly happening now (hoping that it would be her), or involve two such leaders; herself and a new director.

The only answers which come forth all relate to her being assertive and "making others uncomfortable", including her boss. Being Non-White and assertive and "not like us" is threatening.

It doesn't matter what she says or does. "The Good Ole (White) Boy's Network" has morphed into a "Safe White Women's Network".

Racism - is Racism - is Racism.

Respect and cooperation and support is often in the eyes of the beholder! Competency and performance and other factors don't seemingly matter here.

I'm sad. I'm touched. While I can understand the words and appreciate much here this is a totally foreign type of life experience in my White World.

Thanks!

Great Book - on Poor Urban Black Men

2010-02-24T14:43:00.000-08:00

I just finished reading: "Wrong Place, Wrong Time" - by John A. Rich. It is by far the best book I've ever read at explaining inner city violence (as it relates to poor, Black young men).

p.57 - as per "Jimmy"

* If you want to avoid being a sucker, you have to have a rep.
* If you want to have a rep, you have to earn it.
* You earn a rep by putting in work.
* In Jimmy's world, work means doing violence.
* Have a rep, even if you got it by violence, makes you known.
* When you are known, you are somebody.
* You could get a rep for doing good, but people still come after you for disrespecting them in the past. Therefore violence is more effective.

"Violence worked in his world to accomplish something that all of us wanted- to be somebody- but that Jimmy could not find any other way to do."

John Rich is a Black, middle-class (raised and currently) physician whose worlds had shielded him from much of what he discovered (in 2006 he was awarded a MacArthur "genius" Fellowship).

Rich's best informant: Roy Martin tellingly answered him explaining: (p.60)
' "I bet this kid isn't the kind of kid who's gonna be a basketball star. Or a lady's man, a player, right?" Roy said, answering his own question. "He probably ain't no great brainiac who's going to college. If he was any one of those things, he would be doing that. He'd be about that kind of stuff. But he's not." '

p.63 - "If these young men were numb from all the violence that they had seen and if they, like Jimmy, were unable to see a clear future, then the whole concept of violence in the inner city was beginning to make sense."

Dr. Rich provides a brilliant expose of the humanity of poor, "tough" Black young men and their worlds. He talks of the traumas the violence creates (and often is ignored by others). His picture in no way romanticizes this life, but it really helps "outsiders" to understand a lot more.

This book isn't long. It isn't difficult to read, though much of what it talks of is scary. For anyone interested in such a subject, I highly recommend it!

Thanks!

Tales of "new" and "old"

2010-02-19T07:52:00.000-08:00

In looking at the failures of the Democrats and Obama to reform health care and to make other significant changes, it seems obvious to me that Money Talks. Until we have Serious Campaign Finance Reform and in general live in a world in the U.S. and the world as a whole where "people matter" we will face serious obstacles to both world peace and justice in general.

The failures of the Democrats and Obama also have helped make the rise of the Tea Partyites and the pushes towards Facism and Fundamentalism and similar much scarier.

Recently I've been doing a lot of genealogical work and related studying of my father's family. My father's family includes a great-uncle who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in the 1960's, a noted psychotherapist who was the first wife of Erich Fromm as well as some serious scholars and many fascinating people in general. My great-grandfather was a successful and wealthy German (Jewish) banker. I was named after him.

Most recently hearing the sad story of my great-aunt Rahel (Rachel, as well as one of her sons and his wife, gives in some ways a "counter story" to some of what I hear and feel today as discussed above. Rahel's husband Sally owned or managed a most successful timber business in Koenigsberg (now Kaliningrad) after World War I. The business had offices in other parts of Europe and his sons managed some of these offices as the business grew.

In 1936 Rahel and Sally moved to Amsterdam and the Nazi's relieved the families' ties to their business because they were Jewish. Sally died of natural causes in 1940 as World War II began.

Soon after Sally's death, a family member living in Zurich unexpectedly received a large trunk from Rahel. Rahel hoped to escape to Switzerland with her family and have her possessions safe from the turmoil in The Netherlands. In 1942, after escaping detection in Holland, Rahel, a son and daughter-in-law fled to Paris. In Paris they moved constantly tried to avoid detection by the Nazis and desperately sought to escape to Switzerland, South America or some other safe haven.

Rahel - unlike many other desperate Jews - was wealthy. Despite having lost some of their wealth, she could afford to pay for whatever was necessary to escape.

Unfortunately - the contact (to escape) that they finally made was with a pathological French physician - who killed them with injections and then hacked their bodies to pieces and burned the remains, while taking their possessions. He was put to death in 1946 after a trial, having killed well over 100 people including some non-Jews as well. (Evidently his actions had nothing directly to do with any support of the Nazis.)

The sad story of Rahel and part of her family is a case where money didn't matter. Being Jewish was "the crime" and "the curse". Jews - had had some economic power, but that power was useless as Nazi ideology blamed Jews for all that had befallen the Germans after World War I.

Today in the U.S. we face the realities of how millions of Blacks were enslaved and exploited after 1865. Racism persists. Many have died because they were the wrong skin color and were seen as "the enemy" by jealous White Men (usually men anyway). The racism in the U.S. used economic exploitation.

Today in the U.S. we face problems as the Glenn Beck's of our country exploit the economic turmoil with its resultant fears and ignorance. Hopefully we will Not go further in the directions that lead to sad stories such as my relatives faced.

Thanks!

Howard Zinn, J.D. Salinger, and C.

2010-02-03T06:00:00.000-08:00

Last week saw the confluence of three things from my past which have no direct ties to each other:

1. Howard Zinn died,
2. J.D. Salinger died, and
3. My "old" friend C. - was incapacitated with major "replacement" surgery.

Generationally - the two deaths hit me hard - yet they seem not to have really hit some of the generation of bloggers who are younger than me as hard.

I grew up in a world which seemed to me at least much more "conformist" than things are today. There was a definite lack of alternative periodicals (though there were a few)as well as no internet - nor other simple means of being reached by others.

Howard Zinn was a giant in reaching out to those in my generation who were open to looking at the United States in an alternate way that was both critical and loving. He was different from some whose focus seemed to be on Marxism, though Marxism certainly must have influenced him. He was scholarly, but wasn't aloof from those outside of academia. The sources where I've had the most to read of online, since his death have largely been - Peace Seeking Jews opposed to the status quo re: Palestine-Israel - and this certainly wasn't his primary focus in his long and bountiful life.

Howard Zinn was clearly a "mensch" - one who gave and shared and loved.

J.D. Salinger wrote a few Great Novels - which were lovingly read by me as a teen. He chose a life apart from nearly all. I'm glad to have been touched by his writings and they will live on well beyond his death.

Salinger was a great writer who chose to be "apart". While he wasn't a "bad" person, he also wasn't "of this world" in many ways and certainly lacked greatness as a "person".

C. - my old buddy - is working hard at recovering from his surgery. He's my one friend who I could count on to know and appreciate both of them. If he'd not been of necessity focusing upon his surgery and subsequent recovery, I suspect he might have had significant feelings (different from mine no doubt) about both of them.

C. - has had some of the drive of Zinn and some of the creativity of Salinger.

May the memories of the first two live on in us and those who follow us and may C.'s recovery be smooth and as comfortable as is possible.

Thanks!

Haiti - Incredible Sadness

2010-01-13T15:08:00.000-08:00

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2010/01/12/GA2010011203712.html?sid=ST2010011302017

The images are horrific to see! I'm very sad! Haiti had so many problems related to being such a poor country and now...

Those Poor Democrats and the Big Mo

2010-01-07T09:53:00.000-08:00

Yesterday Senators Byron Dorgan, D, N. Dakota and Christopher Dodd, D, Connecticut announced that they would not seek new terms in 2010. The news media immediately talked of the perilous times for President Obama and Democrats as they might now lose their 60 vote - "super majority".

While first of all "duh"! Did anyone really believe given how bad the economy is and the 47% approval rating of President Obama that Democrats were likely to keep all their senate seats in 2010?

It also is questionable whether this 60 seat majority is that significant - as shown by healthcare reform legislation when one recognizes how - impotent the Democrats have proven to be at dealing with both the intransigence of the Republicans and the Democrats "moderate" members such as Senator Nelson who hold healthcare captive to their support.

Let's go back to the "landslide" election of President Obama. President Obama's election was won with about 41-42% of the White vote. People of Color elected Barack Obama with a lower percentage of White Voters than elected Reagan in 1980.

The "Democratic Mandate" of 2008 if there ever was such a thing was a reaction to the Republican failures and a statement of - "no - not this" - not "yes, we want Democrats".

Pundits earlier talked of the Big Momentum shown by governor losses by the Democrats in 2009 in Virginia and New Jersey. Few looked at the facts that Governor Corzine in New Jersey had alienated the populace and that in Virginia without a Strong Black Vote - the Democrat had little chance of winning.

Let's finally look at the candidates. Dorgan - might have been a slight favorite to win in 2010. Republicans are likely to win without him - in a heavily Republican State. Dodd was in big trouble and the Democratic candidate seemingly has a better chance at winning in 2010.

This is hardly - a landslide for the Republicans. The Democrats may well lose seats in 2010. This will though be a result of both their failures and the successes of the right-wing forces at fighting against Democratic leadership.

Thanks!

Swiss Healthcare System - a "Free Market" Option

2010-01-03T13:08:00.000-08:00

Swiss health-care system might serve as model for U.S.

By The Dallas Morning News Sunday, February 26, 2006

BERN, Switzerland -- Karl Zbinden's hospital room overlooked the snowy banks of the Aare River on a bleak January afternoon. The gaunt, 53-year-old biologist was in bed with pancreatitis, a serious condition that emerged after a kidney transplant.
Like all Swiss citizens, Zbinden has health insurance. And, like all Swiss, he pays for it himself with no help from his employer.

An American in his situation might face tens of thousands of dollars in expenses. But under the Swiss health-care system, individuals pay about a third less on health care than the average American, in part because of government-enforced price controls.
President Bush is pushing for health care reforms based on individual choice. The Swiss system offers some of those choices, and some health economists say their system works better.

"I think we're going to get there soon, not eventually," said Regina Herzlinger, a Harvard Business School professor who's studied the Swiss system. "The major reason is, most people agree that employer support for health insurance is just not going to continue."

Every resident of Switzerland is required to buy health insurance. If they don't, they pay stiff monetary penalties. Companies have no role. Health-care plans are chosen at the kitchen table, not through employee benefit departments.
And the plans can be costly. A family of four in Switzerland pays an average of $680 a month in premiums. Government assistance helps pay premiums for those less well off.

Health-care prices are set each year after negotiations between insurance companies and medical providers. The fee schedule has to be approved by the Swiss canton (or state) governments -- an approach Uwe Reinhardt of Princeton University compares to the doomed health-reform plan drafted by the Clinton administration.
Drug costs also are subject to price ceilings, but they still seem fairly expensive, at least in the minds of Swiss consumers.

"Within Europe, we are almost the only country left with a strong drug company sector," said Swiss congressman Felix Gutzwiller, a medical doctor who also heads the University of Zurich Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine.
"The public has a very peculiar attitude about that. They want a high level of innovation, but there is a permanent discussion about the cost of medications."
The Swiss approach insures everyone while eliminating the headaches and costs of health care for companies sensitive to global competition.
"People in Switzerland realize what these costs do to American business, and they don't want to add to the anti-competitive burden of Swiss businesses in the global economy," Gutzwiller said.

"Also, people do not want employers to get so much into their private life and lifestyle."

The Swiss think the quality of their medical care is among the best in the world. They spend more of their national income on health care, at 11.5 percent, than anyone except Americans, who spend 16 percent.

The Swiss have the freedom to see any doctor in their canton, and they don't have long waits. And Swiss health-care providers have much less paperwork than their U.S. counterparts.

In 2003, Switzerland spent an average of $3,781 per person on health care. The United States spent $5,635 per person, according to an October report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Herzlinger said consumer choice accounts for Switzerland's lower costs.
Bush and market-oriented health economists are all for consumer choice. They're urging Americans to start health savings accounts and buy high-deductible health care plans. Bush gave those ideas another push in his State of the Union Address. Critics call it health-care rationing by income, where only the wealthy have health savings accounts big enough to cover medical expenses.

While everyone in Switzerland is obliged to buy insurance, the 87 Swiss health insurance companies also have to offer a basic health-care plan priced without regard to risk.

The companies can't make a profit on this basic plan, and they compete for profits by offering high or low deductibles and supplemental benefits. A healthy 24-year-old living in Bern pays the same premium as someone like Zbinden (300 Swiss francs a month, or about $242).

Swiss insurers charge a premium for each family member. Children have a lower premium than adults, but for a family of four, insurance premiums for the basic coverage plan are about $8,167 a year. An American family with employer-provided health insurance pays an average of $2,713 a year in premiums, according to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Deductibles and co-pays are comparable to those paid in the United States.
Swiss cantons subsidize health insurance premiums based on income. With premiums climbing an average of 5 percent a year over the last decade, subsidies now go to nearly a third of Switzerland's 7.5 million residents.

Swiss health insurance premiums are lower than the U.S. average when employers' costs are added, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation survey. For an American family of four, employers contribute an average of $8,167, for a total of $10,880 a year. That's up 73 percent since 2000, according to the Kaiser survey.

And fewer American companies are offering health insurance. In 2000, 69 percent of workers got health insurance as a benefit. In 2004, that dropped to 60 percent.
Small companies in particular are finding the costs too high, and the number of uninsured Americans is climbing, said Drew Altman, chief executive and president of the Kaiser Family Foundation. More than 46 million Americans have no health insurance.

"Americans have a clear sense of what they are paying out of pocket, and they're really upset about it," he said. "But as health-care premiums have gone up sharply, employers have eaten a significant share."

Devon Harrick, a health economist with the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis, said employers got into the business of paying health insurance premiums when they couldn't compete for workers by offering higher wages.

"The only reason our current system exists the way it does is because of the tax laws in the 1940s. Price controls prohibited wage hikes, but you could attract employees with health insurance," he said. And, unlike payroll, health care benefits are not taxed.
"In the end, employees pay their own health-care costs," Harrick said. "A lot of employees don't understand that's really not a free benefit. It's part of their compensation."

In a consumer-driven health-care system such as Switzerland's, employers freed from health insurance obligations pay higher wages, said Herzlinger.

A health-care system based on choice would, in theory, also give consumers a way to compare the prices charged by doctors and hospitals. Those prices are hard to come by in the United States. But in Switzerland, they are all pretty much the same.

"Price (in the Swiss system) doesn't matter, because it's set by these negotiations," said Reinhardt, a professor of political economy at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.

U.S. health care providers fiercely oppose that approach, said Altman.
"Government regulation to control costs of a kind practiced in every other developed country is opposed by our health care providers," he said, "so we are stuck in a bunch of half-measures."

Not all Swiss citizens are happy with the system. They complain that prices are getting too high, that their system encourages patients to stay in hospitals longer than necessary and that the insurance companies, trying to find ways to make money in a regulated market, offer such a bewildering mix of plans that most consumers aren't making informed choices.

"Theoretically, it's consumer-driven. But practically, no," said Gaudenz Silberschmidt, head of the international affairs division of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health.

The complicated nature of the system is partly the fault of the insurers, he said. "They offer thousands of different premium plans, and when it's that many, it means it's not transparent."

"There is no best health-care system, no gold standard," he said.
There does seem to be a standard for what countries want to avoid, however.
"It's a sad thing, but when I go to international conferences, there's no question the U.S. health system is the bogeyman everywhere," said Reinhardt.
Zbinden's wife, Katharina, says the couple feels fortunate. "We are very grateful to have the Swiss system, even though it's expensive. We could not afford this in the United States."

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_427691.html

Avatar - some impressions

2010-01-01T11:05:00.000-08:00

We went to see Avatar at an Imax theater last night. Prior to seeing the movie I'd heard:

1.) It's an incredible movie, one of the best ever seen - great insight into racism, environmental issues and how we relate to them,
2.) 2 1/2 stars - local newspaper - spectacular visual effects - but weak, stereotypical plot,
3.) Blasphemous movie - which is strongly counter to "Good Christian Values".

In some ways the movie was all of these things and perhaps more. It certainly had an appeal to it as it portrayed the importance of us being "with" nature and respecting others. It strongly, strongly put down the Zenophobia and "might is right" mindsets that we can best see in our U.S. Government-Military-Corporate culture. It could be seen as empowering confronting "the establishment" and not feeling disempowered by the Powers one faces in activism.

The mythical planet and its people and animals were portrayed in an incredibly beautiful way. Watching the movie for its images alone could result in one feeling incredibly enriched. The "education" of the hero can show a viewer how our life realities are rigidly ethnocentric. We can see how important it is to understand others as they are and how they view themselves.

The movie also is "very Hollywood" in some of its worst ways. The "good" are stereotyped as "very good" and the "bad" are "very bad". While there are surprises and unexpected nuances much of the movie is Very predictable. Perhaps more troubling is the naive, limited view of how change is brought about.

A few allies of the "hero" join him in taking on the rest of the "bad guys" from whence they came. It is not difficult to see how well-meaning people could take from such a movie - if they viewed it "directly" how we can for example use technology to help "those poor people" in Africa or wherever. While the movie pushes an image of "respect" and understanding our ethnocentricity, it also has an underlying image of "we can use our knowledge for good" which is limited.

Building systemic change requires grassroot organizing and building support to avoid cooptation and insignificant change which doesn't help (much) and may hurt things in some instances. We need significant campaign finance reform in the U.S. and our failure to end corporate dominance infects us over and over again - as can readily be seen related to healthcare reform legislation. It is no coincident that Connecticut has major insurance company "strength" and that Joe Lieberman looks out for the insurance companies' interests.

The movie is certainly a nightmare for rightwing Christians who believe in "the Lord" and "the natural order" of both the environment and private enterprise. It does strongly confront these stereotypic views and indicate that we need to respect the environment and people who are different from us.

I'm glad I saw the movie! I'd recommend it to others. It can "help" in some ways. To me it isn't "the answer", though that is a next-to-impossible thing to have. To reach "the masses" the message can't be 'too deep' or in some ways 'too radical'. I'd give the movie either a B+ (if looking at it's weaknesses) or an A- or even an A - if looking at its strengths and beauty.

Thanks!

"Responsible" Corporate Leadership?

2009-12-22T18:51:00.000-08:00

It is interesting to listen to President Obama (and occasionally others) talk of "corporate responsibility". He talks as if bankers should be "socially responsible" and doing their best to help our economy. Companies selling health insurance are somehow expected by many to be "responsible".

It seems very strange to me! Corporate leaders have a responsibility to maximize profits and to minimize the possibilities of having financial losses. Where helping the "better good" is not perfectly congruent with maximizing profits, why would anyone expect that a CEO or corporate board would try to help you and me?

I can easily understand the perspective of the corporate leadership. It seems less clear to me why anyone else would either be naive or talk as if they were naive. It seems obvious to me that if we wish corporations to act in certain ways there need to be laws or regulations which force them to do so.

Thanks!

William Kunstler

2009-11-23T04:48:00.004-08:00

The new documentary of William Kunstler, directed by his two daughters from his second marriage, is an excellent movie. It tells the story of a remarkable, yet far from perfect man, who really came of age during the trial of the Chicago Seven circa 1970. His eyes had been awakened defending Freedom Riders in the South in 1961. Kunstler defended the unpopular - often of Color - defendants through much of his later life.

In general one could say that he notably defended "the underdog". This image contrasted minimally with his desire for being "Visible" and perhaps "notorious" - which was most notably vividly portrayed as defended and embraced the Mafia chief John Gotti - who could hardly be portrayed as a "working class hero".

Despite his faults, Kunstler clear was a great person and did a lot of good in his life. His daughters have done a great job of portraying him as the real person that he was.

Thanks!

Learning From History/Reality vs. Ideology Alone

2009-11-21T10:31:00.000-08:00

It is instructive to look at how we in the U.S "as a nation" act internationally. Recently I heard snippets of President Obama's words while in China. Listening to How he spoke I would have thought that the U.S. was repeatedly doing favors to China and that they were very much in our debt. We allow China to provide us with goods and services as well as to invest in our economy helping keep it from collapsing. It would seem to my naive self that we logically would be Thanking China and acknowledging that gradually China is becoming much more economically powerful and we are weakening greatly.

We can perhaps in part blame our most recent past president for foolishness in Iraq and Afghanistan. We loved Saddam Hussein as a strong opponent of the Fundamentalist regime in Iran in the 1980's and early 1990's, but Hussein refused to simply be our puppet and he became our enemy.

Our repeated naivete in not understanding that Al Qaeda is strongly Sunni means issues with countries like Saudi Arabia and Jordan, but not Iran which is Shiite. Though Saddam Hussein was Sunni, rather clearly his leadership was secular based. When we push (majority) Shiite leadership in Iraq, inevitably it helps tie Iraq to Iran - a Shiite nation - and to built up Iran. Now, we cry in our beer about Iran - well we asked for it.

We didn't read our history book right!

Afghanistan - has a strange history. It is a very decentralized country that strangely doesn't like "foreigners" to try to control its destiny. We helped build up the Fundamentalist Moslem forces in both Afghanistan and Pakistan - because we wanted to weaken The Soviet Union - who were trying to control their neighbor.

We don't seem to understand that just because Afghanis may dislike the Taliban does not mean that they will welcome the U.S. in Their Country. Thankfully our ambassador in Kabul seems to understand the dilemma. Oft times it seems that for every life or dollar we spend fighting in Afghanistan - multiple "militants" join the fight against us. It also seems farfetched at least to me that terrorist actions in the U.S. - are going to build up out of Afghanistan, an impoverished - decentralized nation.

Of course we don't see the powers that "Big Oil" and other business interests have in controlling U.S. foreign policy.

Perhaps - naively - I think and hope that more of us in the U.S. will understand how we can be friends and allies of the Moslem World and others who oft times seem to be our enemy. It requires a rather simple thing - Respect. It requires a more complex thing of us - introspection and "reality checking".

We could in a perfect world - work seriously at solving our internal problems - racism, poverty, healthcare - in "people positive" ways. At the same time we could be an active part of the rest of the world in new ways - listening to both our allies and "enemies" and working with others. It would be a radical change! It also might save us from being another fallen empire as well as more importantly making us into being "good people".

Thanks!

Afghanistan - Obama's options - What's Best?

2009-11-13T17:24:00.000-08:00

It is interesting that now the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, a former high level military leader there has spoken out against sending more troops there.

Juan Cole in his amazing book: Engaging the Muslim World - has a good relevant quote on page 190 of his book:

"Until the United States and NATO give up their counterproductive search-and destroy tactics and until they instead invest heavily in reconstruction, they will make no progress in winning Pushtun hearts and minds. There is even an increasing danger that the massive numbers of foreign troops in the country will make it a magnet for radical vigilantes; already foreign volunteers are being found among the neo-Taliban, from places such as Chechnya and the Arab world. That is, the immensity of the U.S. and NATO footprint in this fiercely proud tribal Muslim region may actually be creating the threat it ostensibly seeks to avoid: the reconstitution of al-Qaeda and the revival of the 1980’s discourse on holy war that proved so deadly to the Soviet Union."

Thanks!

Remembering

2009-11-13T10:41:00.000-08:00

Friday, November 13, 1964 – 45 years ago today – my brother and I were awakened about 6:30 a.m. by our mother saying: “Daddy’s dead”. I was an immature 13 year old. My father’s cancer and impending death had never been discussed with Dan and me as our parents tried to make our life “normal”. Strangely, perhaps, I had Never consciously thought of my father being terminally ill, but at the same time it also made perfect sense that he was dead.

I didn’t cry then – “being a man” – and in some ways became “the man of the house” in the coming months and years. In the early 1980’s when I discovered feminism I learned to cry. I then grieved the loss openly as well as discovered the anger that I felt towards him.

Now – a rainy Seattle day – it was rainy on my father’s funeral day also I think – I sit and feel a variety of emotions. I’m 58 years old. My father died at 46 and would be 91, if still alive.

I’ve been lucky so far in my life being healthy and not having major tragedies affecting me greatly. With an 87 year old step-father, an 82 year old mother and an 86 year old mother-in-law we will face losses together in the years to come.

I’m thankful that my brother’s chronic mental illness has been much milder in recent years so that he’s been able to be relatively happy. I feel lucky and happy at the successes and happiness of my 22 year old son teaching AP biology and freshman physics in an excellent Chicago public high school.

I’m sad for areas of my own immaturity and mistakes. I also feel happy that my life has become easier and more satisfying while being more challenging. My partner and her two sons push me to be a better person, which helps me, despite my resistance.

I wish that my father had had the opportunity to live a much longer life. I’m sad that his desperation to live pushed him to “fight death” and not accept the inevitable. I’m sad that in the world he knew death and illness were not discussed, so that his friends and allies witnessed his withering body, but were never were able to share with him and help him.

I’m sad – that we weren’t close – and didn’t have a deep bond, though thankful that I can now cry in this moment and simply be.

It's Amazing (and Annoying)

2009-11-12T16:52:00.000-08:00

Today - a "new comment" - on an old blog entry I wrote on Gaza:

"RX Pharmacy Online. Order Generic Medication In own Pharmacy. Buy Pills Central.
[url=http://buypillscentral.com/]Purchase Best Viagra, Cialis, Levitra, Tamiflu[/url]. prescription generic pills. Discount medications pharmacy"

I've written several times about my erectile dysfunction issues here. Spammers - latch onto - such writing -and perhaps will pick my words above up and do it again. I get an occasional response to my writings in general - I'd say on average one response for every 2-4 blog entries I write - but strange- the entries on ED- get like 13 responses - only 1-2 of which have anything to do with the topic!

That's life I guess - frustrating! It takes some Chutzpah - to write about ED - such responses aren't scary or unnerving - just annoying! Thanks!

Healthcare Reform - and President Obama's Future

2009-11-09T17:01:00.000-08:00

An anonymous reader wrote in response to my last blog entry:

"No, the "compromise" wasn't necessary. The same anti-choicers who insisted on the Stupak amendment voted "no" on the whole bill.

It'd be nice to see Democrats that stood up for women, rather than regarded our rights as expendable. "

I am aware that Most of the Democrats who pushed for the Stupak amendment, then voted against the bill. A few of them though voted for it. IF 3 additional Democrats had voted "no" (as easily could have happened), the bill wouldn't have passed. It is sad that standing up for women seemingly wasn't possible here - I'm not being facetious when I say that.

Passing healthcare reform legislation now - requires senate passage of a bill and then reconciliation between the two bills for a final law.

As of now Joe Lieberman has indicated that he'll block legislation coming to a vote as is now proposed which at best would give the Democrats 59 votes, assuming that they didn't lose any other "real" Democrats in the cloture vote.

I really hope that the Democrats will do their best to come up with the bill that has the best consensus opportunities. I then hope that they will meet privately and try to agree to a united cloture vote - and then at least 50 votes in favor of the final legislation. I hope that - IF - anyone including Lieberman - will not (eventually) agree to this, that they will be stripped of all seniority and/or other perks that they now get (Lieberman chairs a committee - which he could easily be stripped of for 2010 - for example).

IF - healthcare reform legislation - is Not passed, I fear that:

1.) The Democrats will not succeed in most areas in passing controversial legislation that the Republicans don't support and
2.) In 2010 - the Democrats will take huge hits in the elections and

Again - the Democrats will have shown us all how they can "have it all" - but not do anything with it.

Obama - will then - obviously be greatly weakened and 2012 - may well be another bad year for the Democrats.

Healthcare reform is important now - in making a Start. It will Not be "good legislation". It will need improvements in future sessions of Congress. IF we insist on "good legislation" now - the Now will keep disappearing over the horizon. I think Single Payer is the answer - but obviously we aren't at its time yet!

Those who want to "stand on principle" - and "make a stand" now - are generally not those who lack healthcare coverage now and will really be hurt without such legislation. Personally I think that the Democratic Party is spineless and "not the answer" - but right now it's all that we've got. I'm more concerned that we now end up with the Republicans again either "in power" or able to block Anything from changing. They still are plenty Scary to me!

Thanks!

Healthcare Reform - Maybe - Thank You!

2009-11-07T21:13:00.000-08:00

I'm very glad to hear that the House of Representatives passed their healthcare reform bill! While the compromise related to abortions being covered is bad, obviously it was necessary to get the bill passed.

I can only hope now that the Democrats in the Senate will have 60 votes - to get their plan to a vote - and then at least 50 votes to then pass it. IF- opponents of reform - such as Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu and our "dear independent friend" from Connecticut (Joe L.) - won't allow the legislation to get to a vote, I hope that they will be stripped of All Seniority - and similar by the Democratic Leadership.

Besides Healthcare Reform being very important, it also is necessary for the Democrats to recover from their woes, and move towards positive 2010 and then 2012 elections.

Healthcare reform - can be reformed in coming years. IF it isn't passed and put into law, it likely won't happen for another long period of time.

Thanks!

Have a Nice Day !

2009-11-07T07:40:00.000-08:00

One thing which puzzles me at times is how we are and are Not "nice" to others (generally strangers) in odd common life situations.

Do we let the driver into our lane ahead of us? Do we do so if s/he signals their intentions, but not otherwise? These are simple examples.

I know that I am annoyed with people who encounter road signs telling them to get out of their driving lane (because it's ending) and wait until the absolute last second and then try to force themselves in front of others who have commonly already "waited their turn" in the slower lane (rather than doing what the latter people are doing). Others no doubt look at this situation differently!

I find that when I'm in a good mood and relaxed I tend to be "generous" looking out for situations where I perceive that I can minimally help another person or simply "be nice" with a smile or similar. I also find that when I feel rushed or put upon, I'm much less likely to do so. At times I embarrass myself or worse, when I don't yield to a pedestrian that I didn't see in my haste.

In some life situations I recognize how I was taught as a child to "be nice" and how "respect" and being a caring person for me often is superficial - but deep in these areas. Part of "being nice" is a desire to fit in - an inferiority complex - for me. It also can be partially the opposite - sharing - without desiring acknowledgment - simply being "good people".

Thanks!

Peace in the Middle East ??

2009-11-04T12:48:00.000-08:00

Yesterday -I'm glad that our Congressperson - Jim McDermott - was one of 36 who voted against House Resolution 867 - which condemned the Goldstone Report's condemnations of both Israel and Hamas for War Crimes related to the Israel-Gaza War.

It is sad that when Hamas - rocket launchings - killed roughly 12-13 people over several years, a ceasefire was in effect stopping the rocket launchings, which was then broken by Israel, not Hamas and then the Israeli invasion of Gaza killed Gazan's 100-1 vs. Israelis killed, much of Gaza has been destroyed and an Israeli blockade of Gaza continues to the present and Israel refused to cooperate with the Goldstone Commision - lead by a Jewish Man who is hardly "anti-Israel", that we in the U.S. can not and will not accept that Israel - was the aggressor - and was the one who did "most of the bad stuff".

So sad!

Good Hair - Some Feelings

2009-10-25T07:02:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I went with my partner to see "Good Hair", Chris Rock's new film about Black Women and their hair. As I expected the relatively small audience was predominantly Black and mixed race couples (such as we are). A "Black Movie" rarely draws an audience of more than token White People (while "White Movies" draw Blacks, Whites and others.

Blacks are forced to live in a "White World" much of their lives, but we, White People, when rarely aware of "Black (and other) Worlds", even less commonly choose to learn of and be a part of these "different" worlds.

Summarizing the movie is both easy and difficult. Blacks, with 12% of the population, are 80% of the U.S. hair products market. Korean-Americans own much of the basic market where giant companies like Revlon do not dominate - besides the Black owned hair salons (and for Black men the barber shops) which are a very important social (and significant) part of Black America.

The movie focused significantly on "relaxers" which straighten Black hair and hair extenders, which are sewn and otherwise connected into many Black women's hair. The natural hair added comes predominantly from India. Women spend a minimum of $1000 and sometimes much more for the extenders. Where women have extenders they require significant maintenance in salons and keeping one's hair dry (e.g. no swimming with one's head under water or carefree "sexy" showers with men or even having one's hair touched by one's lover or others - as it may damage either the extender or how one's head looks.)

The movie was both humorous and sobering! My partner focuses significantly energy on her hair and her general appearance as most Black women do. This has been an education for me since we met nearly 7 1/2 years ago. I think of the $80 - every 4-6 weeks and time spent as "different" at best. Her involvement in this culture is far, far less than many women's involvement.

For me the deeper issues brought up in the movie are far more important! It is so sad that "kinky" - "natural" hair is to Be Avoided and "Ugly"(except where fashionably kept in braids and similar) and Straight (e.g. "White") hair is "Beautiful". It is tragic that this is both a historic fact and Very Important today!

It is sad to me that Hair and general appearance can be So Important to so many people. Oft times hair can be equally or even (in a few instances) be more important than food, shelter, education and other things that seem Much More Important to me. I seriously wonder how we can possibly conquer serious ills in our world such as: Poverty, Militarism, Domestic Violence, Homophobia. Such issues often are seen (or hidden) in contrast to the more steady, visible importance of the surface perspectives put forth by popular musicians, actors/actresses, models and others around us.

I feel "alone" and "different" in finding things such as the beautiful fall colors of the trees and our nearby creek's bubbly nature far more beautiful and important than much of popular culture. I Know that I am a dinosaur lost in a world where I-Phones and Video Games are a foreign, distant mirage and the Lindsay Lohans/Johnny Depps/Beyonces/Michael Jacksons are generally mere names I hear or don't hear.

Thanks!

Recession - Recovery ??

2009-10-19T09:31:00.000-07:00

Massive amounts of money have been poured into the US Banking and other Financial sectors to "save" us from "disaster". As a result of the actions of the end of the Bush Administration and the first almost year of President Obama's leadership, we now seemingly have two distinct "results" or from my perspective "economies".

Large investors and those with a Lot of Money seem to have been helped by the economic policies. We are told, based upon supposed economic activity, that "the recession is over". The Dow Jones Industrial Average is at 10,000, not a "high", but a recent high.

Strangely though there seems to be another "economy" which is that of the "working class" - which increasingly seems to draw in formerly "upper-middle class" and other middle class people. If they are still employed, their overtime is gone. They may be working part-time now, instead of full-time. Their wages are not going up and may even be going down. More and more are laid off and there are many applicants for each job opening.

It is somewhat unclear what exactly is going on. It is apparent that major industries are not borrowing money to hire more workers. What investment is going on seems to be borrowing at low interest rates to get a good rate of return, not to invest in building our economy.

It is unclear how 10+% unemployment rates continuing for another 1-2+ years will allow people who are not "investment class" to spend money helping to build the economy. It is similarly unclear Why producers of products and other commercial enterprises are going to look at "the bigger picture" and invest in our people and economy in general, when they see a lack of short-term profits being possible and other ways to "make money" now.

In the end it seems obvious to me that Until and Unless Obama and other political leaders see the need to actually Help - those who are losing their jobs and homes, rather than helping the Banks, that little will change for the better. Perhaps it was necessary to save the financial system, however now that it is "saved", helping our People and building from "the bottom up", rather than "top down" seems obviously necessary.

Thanks!

Some of the Chickens are Coming Home to Roost

2009-10-16T08:29:00.001-07:00

In the news this morning, the Government of Pakistan is apparently not quite as stable as we had previously thought it was. The Taliban and Al Qaida are of course prime among the "suspects". Terrorist attacks are increasing and U.S. worry is obviously growing.

We, in the U.S.A., of course Fail to go back at least as far back as the 1980's - in our trying to look at what has and is happening in Pakistan and elsewhere. We forget that then "anti-communism" were the Important buzz words and "Muslim fanatics" and similar weren't in our vernacular except perhaps in some of the games we played between Iraq and Iran in helping to keep them at War with each other.

In the 1980's the Russians were the "bad guys" and the Muslim "Nationalists" were our allies. It seems strange how - Saddam Hussein - was "our man" - against Iran - but then became "Mr. Bad Guy" - when he no longer took orders from the U.S.A. Strangely in Afghanistan and Pakistan those "Muslim Fundamentalists" took root and now we can't stop them like we used to do with "our leader" in Pakistan.

We never seem to see the patterns in our meddling in World Affairs. We translate issues in other parts of the World into what suits our political purposes and then always have others to blame and "enemies" to keep arming and fighting with and against.

Very strange! Thanks!

Afghanistan - Obama and Us

2009-10-08T17:03:00.000-07:00

An interesting summary of the history of Afghanistan can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan#History.

I get a little confused with terms which come up repeatedly justifying U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan (and elsewhere) related to:

1. 911
2. Al Qaeda and
3. The Taliban

To the best of my knowledge Afghanistan itself had little (if anything) to do with 911. Al-Qaeda is described frequently as if it is a "worldwide conspiracy" much as "Communism" was viewed during the 1940's-1980's.

"Al-Qaeda (pronounced /ælˈkaɪdə/ or /ælˈkeɪdə/; Arabic: القاعدة‎, al-qāʿidah, "the base"), alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa'ida, is an Islamist group founded sometime between August 1988^[5] and late 1989 and early 1990.^[6] It operates as a network comprising both a multinational, stateless arm^[7] and a fundamentalist Sunni movement calling for global jihad.

Al-Qaeda has attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, the most notable being the September 11 attacks in 2001. These actions were followed by the US government launching the War on Terrorism. Between three thousand and four thousand members of the network have been captured, and many thousands more killed on the front in Afghanistan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

The section describing Al-Qaeda seems as reasonable a "popular" definition as is available.

The Taliban (Pashto: طالبان ṭālibān, meaning "students"), also Taleban, is a Sunni Islamist, predominantly Pashtun radical religious and political movement that governed Afghanistan from 1996 until 2001, when its leaders were removed from power by NATO forces. It has regrouped and since 2004 revived as a strong insurgency movement governing at the local level and fighting a guerrilla war against the governments of Afghanistan, Pakistan, allied NATO forces participating in Operation Enduring Freedom, and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).^[4] It operates in Afghanistan and the Frontier Tribal Areas of Pakistan.^{[5]

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

I am somewhat confused about the War conducted purportedly against both Al-Qaeda and The Taliban in Afghanistan as well as related actions in Pakistan. It is unclear to me What we are trying to accomplish and How we can Possibly "succeed" in such an endeavor. It has been alleged by various people that we are fighting a "War Against Terrorism" and are trying to prevent future "911's".

It is unclear to me how U.S. and a few other "allied" troops in Afghanistan are preventing future 911's? It seems to me that many, if not a majority of the population of Afghanistan dislike Both The Taliban and the U.S. Government Forces in their country. It seems that what we are fighting is a continuation of many hundreds of years of wars of outsiders invading an area which rarely has been unified as "a country".

It would seem perhaps naively to me that we could do a lot more to prevent terrorism and future wars and similar by:

1. Seriously resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict,
2. Working to support "mainstream" people in many countries in the Middle East and elsewhere economically and socially, but not militarily,
3. Seriously Changing the Perspective and Image of the U.S.- becoming a "friend" and an "ally" and a "good neighbor" - unlike the images put forth in such areas as: a. "Banana Republics", or b. The Phillipines - in the past,
4. Seriously working to deal with our Own Local Problems - such as Racism, Sexism, Classism, etc.

Silly Me! Thanks!}