Dear government agent who has to read this,
You're the only one who reads these (unless Google counts my view when it's been posted, which would be stupid, but whatever). I bet you have a bunch of other people you have to go through too, can't have just one agent for every person in the U.S. Unless we're talking outsourcing.... but that's a different matter entirely.
We have had another mass shooting, as you are no doubt aware. It's impossible to enjoy a scroll through Facebook without some form of vitriol from one side or the other. I'm not eloquent enough to actually argue my case in a comment section. This has lead me to say "screw the first amendment" and give up entirely on expressing my views. I can think whatever the hell I want if I don't say a damn thing.
However, what is the point of ideas if you can't express them? It's a big reason why this only gets updated when things like this happen. Both sides are hyper-focused on one side of the issue and fighting over what was the actual cause of this shooting.
The answer? Multiple things you idiots. There's glaring holes in logic on both sides, and they are both so blinded by their zealotry that they can't see it for themselves. So blinded are they that they have the right answer, despite those on the left saying they have open minds. They don't, they just use people's pointing out of their holes as invitations to bash gun by-backs and removing guns from the households of responsible gun owners.
Does gun control need to happen? Obviously, we can't keep going the way that we are going. Something needs to be done. However, there is a difference in supporting reasonable gun control, which would allow responsible gun owners to keep their guns, and straight repealing the 2nd Amendment. That's never going to happen, because that would need a new Amendment (27th I believe) to repeal that.
There's an argument being used by the left listing things that were the norm in 1791 (Bill of Rights ratified) and how things are different now. The issue with this is that it blurs the line between what is venerable and what is outdated. They do not see how that could be used to apply to all of the Bill of Rights, just because they are so focused on fucking over the second. We have never outlawed the use of the N-word in any of its forms, it's just become stigma to use them. There are no banned words, because they are protected under the first amendment. Guns are different from words, but if the core of some stupid meme is enough to validate comparing the NFL to slavery, then fuck it.
On the right I've seen a meme saying that they won't listen to anything about gun control from people alright with killing babies (abortion). That's just hypocritical to the extreme. It strengthens the argument on the left that the right loves guns more than children. I also just saw an argument that more people died from the plane crashes on 9/11 than killed by guns. That just made the poster sound amazingly ignorant. Though as I think about it I don't think that person has ever flown on a plane, and is in for a rude awakening when he does for the first time as an adult.
This is probably the last post I'm putting here for a long time. I'm tired of everyone just thinking that it's one thing or another. It's access to guns, toxic masculinity, and our culture in general. Gun control alone isn't going to do what needs doing, but neither is putting our heads in the sand.
A guy I knew once explained the difference between the mindset of a gamer, and the mindset of a jock. If you tell a gamer that they can't do something, they know that that something isn't possible; the rules of the game won't allow it. They accept it and move on to things that they can do. Tell a jock that, and they will fight to find a way to do it anyway. America is a jock, we tell our people they can't do something, and they say "fuck it, I'm gonna do that". It's a part of society that both sides are capitalizing on, so they aren't going to see it that way.
A final word to the right: Get your priorities in order. Just seriously, sort that shit out.
A final word to the left: There's a method/principle used in behavioral modification that states that if you want someone to do something they are not inclined to do, get them to do something small first. It doesn't have to be related to the thing that you truly want them to do, but that does work better. An example is if you want a child to clean their room, but the child doesn't want to, ask them to pick up just one thing (i.e. favorite toy) and put it in a specific place. Then ask them to do something slightly larger (in this example put just the toys away in a room that needs to be more than just picked up). Then ask them to do the thing that you want them to do. You could also break down the larger task (i.e. SENSIBLE gun control) into constituent parts that BOTH sides can agree to, and at the end you have SENSIBLE gun control. Once people start saying yes, it's harder to start saying no. Try that instead of just bashing things over people's heads.
A final word (I know, hypocrisy) to both: However you do it, do it quick. The way things are going, America is going to burn to the ground. We will not burn in a vacuum however. If we go down, the whole world goes with us. We'll be living in Fallout or something worse if we keep going the way we are going.
Thursday, February 22, 2018
Thursday, October 5, 2017
Guns, Terrorism, and Why I Hate Both Sides
THIS IS NOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM SAYING THAT THE VEGAS SHOOTING WAS A GOOD THING, NOT AN ACT OF TERRORISM, OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAN BE CONSTRUED AS IT NOT BEING THE TRAGEDY THAT IT IS.
This IS however, a vent/rant about how both sides are using the Vegas shooting to their own petty ends and only making things worse for the nation TOGETHER. Alright, let's get started.
To anyone reading this, yes, you random NSA worker who has nothing else to do but check inconsequential Blogger posts, you should know that I'm not putting this somewhere like Facebook, because I am friends with people on both sides. I like these people as people, even when I don't agree with their opinions. However, this means that posting these thoughts on Facebook would result in a mini-WWIII on my post. I won't have that. So it's here, for you poor NSA worker who has to read this to make sure I'm not some terrorist threat. You're welcome.
That out of the way, let's really start. I've been seeing a lot of stuff on Facebook about the Vegas shooter. A lot of it from the Liberal side is pointing out that he's an older white man who had something like 42 guns, and that that makes him a terrorist. He is, and 42 guns is a lot of guns for one man to own, I'll admit both of those points. However, they are putting it in a way that makes it seem like anyone who is an older, white man with a gun collection is a potential terrorist. This is in stark contrast to how they want us to view Muslims, Blacks, and other minority groups.
Newsflash Liberals: if you want people to not generalize people, DON'T FUCKING GENERALIZE PEOPLE. There are bad people of every damn stripe out there, and there are just as many, if not more, good people in those EXACT same stripes. YOU INVALIDATE YOUR ARGUMENT BY DOING THIS!
It's times like this where you actually see the humanitarian concern for people from the Conservative side of things. Sure, the way that they are saying it is by asking for prayers, but it's not just Christians who pray. Jews pray, Muslims pray several times a day, people of all religions pray. Though when not asking for prayers, or pointing out that there were POLICE doing their jobs of protecting people (Yes, Liberals, not ALL cops are power-tripping douche bags), they are freaking out over the whole kneeling during the Anthem thing.
Get the fuck over that people, respect is shown in different ways. There are many reasons why kneeling could be seen as MORE respectful than the hand-over-heart salute that we were taught in school. Sure, it's not the standard, but don't you kneel before images of God? The flag is a representation of our nation, just as a statue of Jesus is a representation of God.
One of the biggest reasons that I am writing this post today is because I saw a post saying that we should "re-think" the Second Amendment because guns are so much scarier today then they were in the 18th Century, posted by a Liberal. I get really angry with them when they start showing that they are NO FUCKING BETTER than the Conservatives. If they want to be something other than Conservatives with different ideals, then they should grow the fuck up and start acting the way they want other people to act. It only takes a few people ACTUALLY doing things different to spread that around, then it'll be the new norm. As Ghandi said: BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD. This isn't a hard quote to understand. Want to normalize LGBTQ+? Don't make a big deal about there being gay characters on shows/in movies. Be happy that they are there, but don't shove it EVERYONE'S faces.
Sorry, tangent. Liberal's have really got my goat today. If we were saying anything about altering/repealing/restricting the FIRST AMENDMENT like the Liberals want to do to the SECOND AMENDMENT, they would be crying that it was the end of the world. Sound familiar? It should, because that's what the Conservatives are doing right now. This also means that Liberals, and Conservatives on some level, have forgotten the actual point and meaning of the Second Amendment. Let's fix that for you, my captive NSA audience.
The Second Amendment reads thus: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Thank you Google and the Constitute Project. "A well regulated Militia" what is that? A militia is any informal military like group that is made up of normal men and women within a given community. At least, that's what it meant when I was taught in school. Typically, in the time that the Constitution was written, and the Bill of Rights, a militia was used for defense of a community in war time. These militia were regulated by the societal norms of the time, and a call to arms mobilized the entire town to various duties. This does indicate that the Founding Fathers weren't planning on society becoming focused around such large cities as we have today. THE FOUNDING FATHERS WEREN'T PERFECT, they weren't some form of Eldar Farseers from Warhammer 40K, they were just men. Militias can still be formed today, it would just take a different form to mobilize people.
Question: What is this well regulated Militia for? Answer "security of a free State". What does that mean? The most straight-forward answer to that question is that it is a way to legally coup the Federal Government. Everything in the Constitution is aimed at making America the best country that it can be, and not like England at the time. This means that there are checks and balances within the branches of government, and the PEOPLE for whom the government is supposed to work for, have to power to end governments that do not suit the needs of the PEOPLE.
That's right Liberals: YOU SHOULD BE WANTING THIS TOO, IT'S HOW WE KEEP FROM ENDING UP LIKE COUNTRIES IN AFRICA, OR SOUTH AMERICA, OR THE MIDDLE EAST WHERE IT'S JUST A REVOLVING DOOR OF DICTATORS.
Yes, guns changed, they are scarier. However, we shouldn't be rethinking the Second Amendment, we should be working within it. Ending the Second Amendment really puts the entire Bill of Rights on the chopping block. This includes the First Amendment for anyone not remembering that the Bill of Rights is our first ten Amendments to the Constitution. The First Amendment, the one that allows me to write this post, Liberals to say that the Second Amendment needs to be changed, and Conservatives to ask for prayers for a community struck by tragedy.
The Vegas shooting, along with all other mass shootings, is a tragedy. We should be pulling together as a nation to move through this. Instead, Liberals and Conservatives are driving a wedge into society along partisan lines, keeping people away from the open and honest discussions that are needed in these times. To those who say that the war for gun control was lost when we "Decided that killing children was alright" in reference to Sandy Hook, that wasn't gun control that failed. That was access to appropriate mental health care, that failed that man. He didn't own that gun, his mother did, he killed her too. Saying that Conservatives view the killing of children as acceptable is a stain on the memories of those children who died, and the janitor and teacher who died defending those students who survived. You dishonor yourself when you say that, and you dishonor them.
Go educate yourselves people. Learn what the Amendments do, actually learn them, what they are for. It's not as simple as they make it seem in elementary school. That seems to be when we learn the Bill of Rights, and any expounding on it just gets tossed straight out the window, even when it's the nuance that holds the real meaning.
This IS however, a vent/rant about how both sides are using the Vegas shooting to their own petty ends and only making things worse for the nation TOGETHER. Alright, let's get started.
To anyone reading this, yes, you random NSA worker who has nothing else to do but check inconsequential Blogger posts, you should know that I'm not putting this somewhere like Facebook, because I am friends with people on both sides. I like these people as people, even when I don't agree with their opinions. However, this means that posting these thoughts on Facebook would result in a mini-WWIII on my post. I won't have that. So it's here, for you poor NSA worker who has to read this to make sure I'm not some terrorist threat. You're welcome.
That out of the way, let's really start. I've been seeing a lot of stuff on Facebook about the Vegas shooter. A lot of it from the Liberal side is pointing out that he's an older white man who had something like 42 guns, and that that makes him a terrorist. He is, and 42 guns is a lot of guns for one man to own, I'll admit both of those points. However, they are putting it in a way that makes it seem like anyone who is an older, white man with a gun collection is a potential terrorist. This is in stark contrast to how they want us to view Muslims, Blacks, and other minority groups.
Newsflash Liberals: if you want people to not generalize people, DON'T FUCKING GENERALIZE PEOPLE. There are bad people of every damn stripe out there, and there are just as many, if not more, good people in those EXACT same stripes. YOU INVALIDATE YOUR ARGUMENT BY DOING THIS!
It's times like this where you actually see the humanitarian concern for people from the Conservative side of things. Sure, the way that they are saying it is by asking for prayers, but it's not just Christians who pray. Jews pray, Muslims pray several times a day, people of all religions pray. Though when not asking for prayers, or pointing out that there were POLICE doing their jobs of protecting people (Yes, Liberals, not ALL cops are power-tripping douche bags), they are freaking out over the whole kneeling during the Anthem thing.
Get the fuck over that people, respect is shown in different ways. There are many reasons why kneeling could be seen as MORE respectful than the hand-over-heart salute that we were taught in school. Sure, it's not the standard, but don't you kneel before images of God? The flag is a representation of our nation, just as a statue of Jesus is a representation of God.
One of the biggest reasons that I am writing this post today is because I saw a post saying that we should "re-think" the Second Amendment because guns are so much scarier today then they were in the 18th Century, posted by a Liberal. I get really angry with them when they start showing that they are NO FUCKING BETTER than the Conservatives. If they want to be something other than Conservatives with different ideals, then they should grow the fuck up and start acting the way they want other people to act. It only takes a few people ACTUALLY doing things different to spread that around, then it'll be the new norm. As Ghandi said: BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD. This isn't a hard quote to understand. Want to normalize LGBTQ+? Don't make a big deal about there being gay characters on shows/in movies. Be happy that they are there, but don't shove it EVERYONE'S faces.
Sorry, tangent. Liberal's have really got my goat today. If we were saying anything about altering/repealing/restricting the FIRST AMENDMENT like the Liberals want to do to the SECOND AMENDMENT, they would be crying that it was the end of the world. Sound familiar? It should, because that's what the Conservatives are doing right now. This also means that Liberals, and Conservatives on some level, have forgotten the actual point and meaning of the Second Amendment. Let's fix that for you, my captive NSA audience.
The Second Amendment reads thus: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Thank you Google and the Constitute Project. "A well regulated Militia" what is that? A militia is any informal military like group that is made up of normal men and women within a given community. At least, that's what it meant when I was taught in school. Typically, in the time that the Constitution was written, and the Bill of Rights, a militia was used for defense of a community in war time. These militia were regulated by the societal norms of the time, and a call to arms mobilized the entire town to various duties. This does indicate that the Founding Fathers weren't planning on society becoming focused around such large cities as we have today. THE FOUNDING FATHERS WEREN'T PERFECT, they weren't some form of Eldar Farseers from Warhammer 40K, they were just men. Militias can still be formed today, it would just take a different form to mobilize people.
Question: What is this well regulated Militia for? Answer "security of a free State". What does that mean? The most straight-forward answer to that question is that it is a way to legally coup the Federal Government. Everything in the Constitution is aimed at making America the best country that it can be, and not like England at the time. This means that there are checks and balances within the branches of government, and the PEOPLE for whom the government is supposed to work for, have to power to end governments that do not suit the needs of the PEOPLE.
That's right Liberals: YOU SHOULD BE WANTING THIS TOO, IT'S HOW WE KEEP FROM ENDING UP LIKE COUNTRIES IN AFRICA, OR SOUTH AMERICA, OR THE MIDDLE EAST WHERE IT'S JUST A REVOLVING DOOR OF DICTATORS.
Yes, guns changed, they are scarier. However, we shouldn't be rethinking the Second Amendment, we should be working within it. Ending the Second Amendment really puts the entire Bill of Rights on the chopping block. This includes the First Amendment for anyone not remembering that the Bill of Rights is our first ten Amendments to the Constitution. The First Amendment, the one that allows me to write this post, Liberals to say that the Second Amendment needs to be changed, and Conservatives to ask for prayers for a community struck by tragedy.
The Vegas shooting, along with all other mass shootings, is a tragedy. We should be pulling together as a nation to move through this. Instead, Liberals and Conservatives are driving a wedge into society along partisan lines, keeping people away from the open and honest discussions that are needed in these times. To those who say that the war for gun control was lost when we "Decided that killing children was alright" in reference to Sandy Hook, that wasn't gun control that failed. That was access to appropriate mental health care, that failed that man. He didn't own that gun, his mother did, he killed her too. Saying that Conservatives view the killing of children as acceptable is a stain on the memories of those children who died, and the janitor and teacher who died defending those students who survived. You dishonor yourself when you say that, and you dishonor them.
Go educate yourselves people. Learn what the Amendments do, actually learn them, what they are for. It's not as simple as they make it seem in elementary school. That seems to be when we learn the Bill of Rights, and any expounding on it just gets tossed straight out the window, even when it's the nuance that holds the real meaning.
Thursday, August 10, 2017
The main issue with Communism/Socialism: We're only equal at the bottom
There is a lot of stuff I'm seeing on social media that is communistic/socialist leaning. I understand that there are people that are frustrated with our (America's) current economic set up. It's far from perfect and anyone saying otherwise is pretty well deluding themselves. That being said, there are no perfect economic systems, just like there aren't any perfect ANYTHINGS in the universe. Everything is flawed in some way, what we need is the way that least screws us over.
Communism/Socialism sounds great on paper, everyone working together to help each other. That's what we want for the world right? Not really. The issue is that people posting these things want their own lives to matter.
That leads to the biggest issue of all: we all want our lives to matter. We want to be important, we want to have a purpose, a meaning to our existence. We feel that it is our right to have more meaning in our lives.
To be truly equal we all have to be on the same level: the bottom. It can be the prettiest bottom we can make it, but it will be the bottom. We cannot have true equality without a base for society.
I'm currently reading a book that demonstrates just how hard it is to make the bottom a pretty place. It's called Faith of the Fallen written by Terry Goodkind. It's a whole society that believes that people are evil, sinful creatures that can do no good. They have committees and lines miles long to ensure that everyone who can work has some work, and that those who "can't" work are still able to "live". It makes things nearly impossible to do anything, and people are just accepting of it. They don't really help each other to make anything better. They just suffer through what is put in front of them every day.
That isn't what we want for our society, that isn't even what those people want for our society, yet it is the road they would try to lead us down. We need to remember that Communism only works in small numbers where everyone can find meaning in helping each other.
Communism/Socialism sounds great on paper, everyone working together to help each other. That's what we want for the world right? Not really. The issue is that people posting these things want their own lives to matter.
That leads to the biggest issue of all: we all want our lives to matter. We want to be important, we want to have a purpose, a meaning to our existence. We feel that it is our right to have more meaning in our lives.
To be truly equal we all have to be on the same level: the bottom. It can be the prettiest bottom we can make it, but it will be the bottom. We cannot have true equality without a base for society.
I'm currently reading a book that demonstrates just how hard it is to make the bottom a pretty place. It's called Faith of the Fallen written by Terry Goodkind. It's a whole society that believes that people are evil, sinful creatures that can do no good. They have committees and lines miles long to ensure that everyone who can work has some work, and that those who "can't" work are still able to "live". It makes things nearly impossible to do anything, and people are just accepting of it. They don't really help each other to make anything better. They just suffer through what is put in front of them every day.
That isn't what we want for our society, that isn't even what those people want for our society, yet it is the road they would try to lead us down. We need to remember that Communism only works in small numbers where everyone can find meaning in helping each other.
Friday, January 27, 2017
What to do now: #thelonggame
Donald Trump has been sworn in as President of the United States. A lot of people are very upset about it. One of my uncles is very vocal about his displeasure. At least one other friend is alright with sharing a post saying that Trump is a dictator just from his first week. I know that Trump is not going to be a good president, unless something really strange happens, however I think it's still a bit early to say that he is a dictator. I know that he has done some things that I don't agree with and can be seen as dictator-esque. However, there is nothing that can be done about it now. Some may say that we should impeach Trump, however that would make Pence the president. The new Vice President would be selected by Congress from the active members of Congress. This has multiple issues, starting with the impeachment itself. The House of Representatives needs to ratify Articles of Impeachment and then the Senate tries them. There is much legal debate as to what is actually an impeachable offense. With the Republican Party in control of Congress there is no way that an impeachment will happen.
What does this mean for the millions of Anti-Trump people? It means we need to start a long game. For Democrats at the least it is times to look towards the mid-term elections in 2018. It's only a year away, so viable candidates are going to need to be selected for states that have mid-term elections. If the Democrats can get Congress back it will stall much of what Trump might try.
For supporters of third party, and truly want change in the political landscape; the 2016 race really started in 2015. That means it's really only two years before we can expect the 2020 race to start. This means that grassroots movements need to start now so they can grow. Third party candidates need to have more attention going into the race to truly become viable presidential candidates to nose in on the scene that the Democrats and the Republicans have held for so long.
Also, liberals, could you please stop being like the conservatives were for the whole time that Obama was in office? It's driving away people that you need in order to bounce back from the loss in November. If you want to be seen as better than the conservatives, you need to actually act like it. At this point in time, there is nothing you can do about Trump that will actually solve anything. I know that we live in an instant gratification world, but sometimes the long game is the only way to achieve what is needed for the greater good.
#thelonggame starts now.
What does this mean for the millions of Anti-Trump people? It means we need to start a long game. For Democrats at the least it is times to look towards the mid-term elections in 2018. It's only a year away, so viable candidates are going to need to be selected for states that have mid-term elections. If the Democrats can get Congress back it will stall much of what Trump might try.
For supporters of third party, and truly want change in the political landscape; the 2016 race really started in 2015. That means it's really only two years before we can expect the 2020 race to start. This means that grassroots movements need to start now so they can grow. Third party candidates need to have more attention going into the race to truly become viable presidential candidates to nose in on the scene that the Democrats and the Republicans have held for so long.
Also, liberals, could you please stop being like the conservatives were for the whole time that Obama was in office? It's driving away people that you need in order to bounce back from the loss in November. If you want to be seen as better than the conservatives, you need to actually act like it. At this point in time, there is nothing you can do about Trump that will actually solve anything. I know that we live in an instant gratification world, but sometimes the long game is the only way to achieve what is needed for the greater good.
#thelonggame starts now.
Monday, November 14, 2016
A Quote on the Presidency
"... nothing you do in the White House matters. You know why not? Because as far as the mass of voting morons is concerned, while you're in office, you'll be the worst single president they've ever had. Until you stop. Then it's some other poor bastard's turn. And even that doesn't matter, because ten, twenty years later, they'll look back on you, and wonder why they didn't appreciate you when they had you. In hindsight even Warren Gamaliel Harding looks good. You, uh, following me? You don't get to make a difference. You don't get to do jack shit. You know what you get? You get an entry in the history book, and every 15 minutes, every day at Disney world, an animatronic puppet wearing your face will wave or nod when the spotlight hits it." ~ Neil Gaiman The Sandman, World's End, "The Golden Boy"
That seems like a very appropriate description of the presidency. I don't remember George H.W. Bush, but he only got one term. I know plenty of people who didn't like Bill Clinton. The number of people who disliked George W. Bush is sad, considering he lead us through some pretty tough stuff. Perhaps not correctly, but with firm belief that what he was doing was right for the long term. There are also plenty of people who have been vocal about their dislike of Barack Obama (if I remember right he had the lowest approval rating of any re-elected president, beating George W. Bush). And this is just the presidents that have served since I was born.
We need to change the manner of our discourse with each other when our opinions differ. This country is too divided to continue in the manner it is seems to be heading in. Perhaps it is not too late, I stated in my last post that in a way, we all lost this election, let's find a way to change that around so that everybody wins. Not just the white majority, but the minorities of every stripe, America should win the election, not a party, or a person.
That seems like a very appropriate description of the presidency. I don't remember George H.W. Bush, but he only got one term. I know plenty of people who didn't like Bill Clinton. The number of people who disliked George W. Bush is sad, considering he lead us through some pretty tough stuff. Perhaps not correctly, but with firm belief that what he was doing was right for the long term. There are also plenty of people who have been vocal about their dislike of Barack Obama (if I remember right he had the lowest approval rating of any re-elected president, beating George W. Bush). And this is just the presidents that have served since I was born.
We need to change the manner of our discourse with each other when our opinions differ. This country is too divided to continue in the manner it is seems to be heading in. Perhaps it is not too late, I stated in my last post that in a way, we all lost this election, let's find a way to change that around so that everybody wins. Not just the white majority, but the minorities of every stripe, America should win the election, not a party, or a person.
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
What Everyone is Talking About
Last night America, the country that I live in, elected a caricature of a human being. I find this quite saddening. Hopefully there will be no terrible or irreparable damage done to the global image of this nation. Fortunately there are systems set in place by the founding fathers of this nation that will hopefully prevent the worst things from getting through.
There are many who seem to believe that this is a step backwards, and that by electing Mr. Trump we have voted for oppression of minorities, women, and LGBTQ+. I do not think that this is entirely the case. It is not a step in the right direction, that much is given. However, it does not mean that they will become oppressed any more than they are now.
The best thing to do now is to look to the future and seek ways to prevent this type of election from ever happening again. We need to find honest, real people to run in 2020, not caricatures. I hope we can all agree that this election was arduous on us all, this cannot happen again. We must remember that a house divided against itself cannot stand. We have clearly seen, and have been seeing for far more than just this year, that we are a deeply divided nation, and social media is showing we are divided against ourselves.
I once stumbled upon a book called Unwind it was the first in a series of books. The set up of the book was that the debate on abortion escalated into a war called The Heartland War. It was basically Civil War round two. The government ended the war by saying that life began at conception and was protected until about the age of 15. At that time, if the parents chose, a person could be "retroactively aborted", but still had to remain "alive" in some sense. This process became known as "unwinding", and the various parts of the "unwound" would be grafted onto people with serious injuries. There were many people who were put up for unwinding, for several reasons. There were even some who were unwound without real cause, but as a "tithe" for status or something. At the end of the book there were several people who had been saved from unwinding and were starting to organize to try and fight for the losers of the Heartland War, which the book points out was everyone.
That is how this election has gone, and possibly would have gone either way. We, as a nation, have lost. Now we need to look to the future, and try to come together to set this right, for all of us.
There are many who seem to believe that this is a step backwards, and that by electing Mr. Trump we have voted for oppression of minorities, women, and LGBTQ+. I do not think that this is entirely the case. It is not a step in the right direction, that much is given. However, it does not mean that they will become oppressed any more than they are now.
The best thing to do now is to look to the future and seek ways to prevent this type of election from ever happening again. We need to find honest, real people to run in 2020, not caricatures. I hope we can all agree that this election was arduous on us all, this cannot happen again. We must remember that a house divided against itself cannot stand. We have clearly seen, and have been seeing for far more than just this year, that we are a deeply divided nation, and social media is showing we are divided against ourselves.
I once stumbled upon a book called Unwind it was the first in a series of books. The set up of the book was that the debate on abortion escalated into a war called The Heartland War. It was basically Civil War round two. The government ended the war by saying that life began at conception and was protected until about the age of 15. At that time, if the parents chose, a person could be "retroactively aborted", but still had to remain "alive" in some sense. This process became known as "unwinding", and the various parts of the "unwound" would be grafted onto people with serious injuries. There were many people who were put up for unwinding, for several reasons. There were even some who were unwound without real cause, but as a "tithe" for status or something. At the end of the book there were several people who had been saved from unwinding and were starting to organize to try and fight for the losers of the Heartland War, which the book points out was everyone.
That is how this election has gone, and possibly would have gone either way. We, as a nation, have lost. Now we need to look to the future, and try to come together to set this right, for all of us.
Monday, July 11, 2016
Interacting with Police
I recently made a post, but this has to be shared. I also recently made the mistake of commenting on a political-leaning post on Facebook, reminding me why I use this as my outlet instead of Facebook. The post I commented on involved a Black couple talking to their child about how to interact with police. They essentially were telling him to be submissive to police, put his hands in the air and do as the officer says, even if the child (teen I would guess) does not understand what the officer wants and to not question if he becomes confused. I made the comment that the parents should be teaching their child to start with respect for police and that should help in most situations. While I understand this could sound naive, it feels more like a solutionist (if that wasn't a word before, I'm making it one) answer, than total submission EVEN IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND something the officer has said. I feel that is just as likely to lead to disaster than finding a way to politely ask the officer to repeat or clarify their statement. This does not invalidate, or deny that there are bad cops out there who are not worth their badge. If the officer is worth their badge they should be willing to work with people so that there are no shootings, there can be miscues from both sides though. Total submission without questions or even trying to stand up for your own rights is not going to change the situation, and more likely to put the officer on edge. I ask you, the reader (assuming you exist), to place yourself briefly in the shoes of the officer, the shoes that seem to me to be the most ignored. You are trained to read body language, and to look for threats because you need to be able to respond in a quick manner to protect yourself and/or others involved. You see a person, pulled over for broken tail light, place their hands up as if you are already pointing the gun at their head, or they remove themselves from the vehicle and lay on the ground with their hands on the back of their heads. What does this tell you? They aren't asking any questions, not even the standard "what seems to be the problem officer?" Do you try to reassure them? How do you go about it? Do you become suspicious because this person seems to be acting in a guilty manner? This is not saying that racial profiling isn't a thing, but does it only come from the officers? Does it come not just because the officers are biased, but because parents truly do have that type of conversation with their children and the person you have pulled over for a broken tail light believes that you are going to treat them unfairly, and possibly shoot them for something they probably didn't know about, and had no control over? Did this person's friends and family instill such a fear of officers that they immediately fear for their safety and are dong this in an attempt to get home alive? Cooperation is one thing, but submission seemed to be the message. I couldn't find a good wording to search for this picture, but I'm sure if you try you can find it. I'm sorry I don't have it in the post.
As stated in previous posts, I used to work in therapeutic group homes (I now work at a hospital), and the large majority of my group home kids were Native (I live in the Western US, this is our main minority group, followed by Hispanic/Latino). These children were taught practically from birth that police were bad, it caused them to be more defiant with officers, or to be terribly frightened of them. They would look to us the staff before interacting with the officers, as if they needed to know that it was alright for them to say anything.
What I want people to try is respect first. If the cop is worth his/her badge, that officer will work with you, regardless of race (I would hope, I understand this isn't always going to be the case), and if they are not worth their badge, they would probably have given you a hard time, no matter what you did. I hate to think that there are that many police officers who are not worth their badge, but we all know that the media is about the most biased thing outside of Congress. Spread respect, I know that it's slightly different for everyone, but try some general kindness like please/thank you, if you have to reach for something in your purse/wallet/glove compartment, state what you are retrieving and try to keep your hands as visible as possible. Also, for anyone, try to have that type of stuff out before the officer reaches your window, It can help you remain calm (or hide your fear as is more likely, cops are scary and getting pulled over is never fun) and helps to make the stop shorter so there is less time for a situation to escalate into violence for either side. Most officers are men and women just trying to do their jobs and keep people safe, this includes you.
I found the picture, here it is:
As stated in previous posts, I used to work in therapeutic group homes (I now work at a hospital), and the large majority of my group home kids were Native (I live in the Western US, this is our main minority group, followed by Hispanic/Latino). These children were taught practically from birth that police were bad, it caused them to be more defiant with officers, or to be terribly frightened of them. They would look to us the staff before interacting with the officers, as if they needed to know that it was alright for them to say anything.
What I want people to try is respect first. If the cop is worth his/her badge, that officer will work with you, regardless of race (I would hope, I understand this isn't always going to be the case), and if they are not worth their badge, they would probably have given you a hard time, no matter what you did. I hate to think that there are that many police officers who are not worth their badge, but we all know that the media is about the most biased thing outside of Congress. Spread respect, I know that it's slightly different for everyone, but try some general kindness like please/thank you, if you have to reach for something in your purse/wallet/glove compartment, state what you are retrieving and try to keep your hands as visible as possible. Also, for anyone, try to have that type of stuff out before the officer reaches your window, It can help you remain calm (or hide your fear as is more likely, cops are scary and getting pulled over is never fun) and helps to make the stop shorter so there is less time for a situation to escalate into violence for either side. Most officers are men and women just trying to do their jobs and keep people safe, this includes you.
I found the picture, here it is:
Friday, July 8, 2016
The Worth of Lives
Once again, I feel I have an opinion too controversial for posting on Facebook, so I will post it here. I post these things here because then they are out, but I don't have to deal with fighting in the comment sections of anything I post on Facebook. I don't think anyone actually reads this, but that's alright.
There has been a lot of fall out recently about police in Louisiana (most recently) fatally shooting an unarmed person (who appears to have been a convicted felon, so any firearm that he may have had would have been illegal). I am not saying that the officer who pulled the trigger was in the right, I am not familiar enough with the situation to make a determination on that front. It's possible that the situation was escalated that far, it's also possible that the officer misread the situation. And yes, it is possible that the officer involved was abusing his power as law enforcement. There are situations that an officer may find him/herself in that requires the use of lethal force in order to protect the community as a whole by ending a bad situation. That is not every time that someone gets non-compliant with an officer, but it can happen. It's possible that departments, especially ones with high officer involved shooting rates, need to re-evaluate their policies regarding the use of lethal force, and adjust the process by which that decision is made. However, there are always going to be issues with people who abuse the power of being an officer of the law. That is an unfortunate truth, and one that departments around the nation need to work on changing.
Now, part of the fall out has been citizens shooting officers, and some of these shootings have been fatal, or permanently damaging. To me at least, it is NEVER alright to shoot an officer, The only exception I can imagine would be the if the officer was abusing power, in an obvious manner against oneself, and that only if other methods have been exhausted. Less drastic intervention, though possibly still physical, can be used if another person is the victim. Still, lethal intervention should be avoided, on both sides.
I, as just about every other driver in the country, have had the occasional encounter with an officer in the form of a traffic stop. I have spoken with the police three separate times. The first to times I got off with warnings. The third I got a ticket, but I fully expected it, and was fully deserving of that ticket. The first time I cut off a person while making a lane change when I was getting off work, this was my fault and I had made an improper lane change without looking for other vehicles. I admitted that I had not checked for other vehicles and the officer let me off. The second time I was pulled over for tail-gating. I am still certain that the vehicle I was behind was not going the posted speed limit which caused part of the problem. I have no depth perception and judging my distance is difficult, especially at night, which was the case this time. I knew there was a car behind me, because I could see the head lights, but couldn't tell how far behind me they were, I was trying to increase my distance from the car in front of me without getting too close to the car behind me. I explained myself to the officer who had been behind me (and pulled me over), he asked if I had been going about the posted speed limit, and let me off with a warning when I told him that I was driving about the speed limit. The third time I had tried to make a U-Turn and failed to check properly causing me to bumper car a city bus. The bus was not really damaged, and no one was injured, but because it was a city vehicle I had to pay the price for my mistake. I was more freaked out by having just been in the first accident that was completely my fault. I paid the fine that was my punishment.
The biggest thing when dealing with police is to be polite, they are humans too. They are trying to do their jobs and keep people safe. We may need to seriously look at the way officers go about their interactions with people, but only to keep everyone involved safe, that means that officers are going to have to carry guns, tasers, or other devices/weapons in order to keep peace as best that they can. It does mean that there is the possibility for misinterpretation because the officer must make a decision quickly that might have several factors that are difficult to weigh properly in the seconds that an officer has to make the decision to use lethal force or some other intervention.
That is what needs to be remembered by people who are against the police in regards to officer involved fatal shootings .Every officer involved shooting is investigated, hopefully by non-biased people, but those are incredibly hard to find. Everyone's lives matter and need to be treated like humans, with respect. That needs to be remembered by EVERYONE, officers and citizens alike.
There has been a lot of fall out recently about police in Louisiana (most recently) fatally shooting an unarmed person (who appears to have been a convicted felon, so any firearm that he may have had would have been illegal). I am not saying that the officer who pulled the trigger was in the right, I am not familiar enough with the situation to make a determination on that front. It's possible that the situation was escalated that far, it's also possible that the officer misread the situation. And yes, it is possible that the officer involved was abusing his power as law enforcement. There are situations that an officer may find him/herself in that requires the use of lethal force in order to protect the community as a whole by ending a bad situation. That is not every time that someone gets non-compliant with an officer, but it can happen. It's possible that departments, especially ones with high officer involved shooting rates, need to re-evaluate their policies regarding the use of lethal force, and adjust the process by which that decision is made. However, there are always going to be issues with people who abuse the power of being an officer of the law. That is an unfortunate truth, and one that departments around the nation need to work on changing.
Now, part of the fall out has been citizens shooting officers, and some of these shootings have been fatal, or permanently damaging. To me at least, it is NEVER alright to shoot an officer, The only exception I can imagine would be the if the officer was abusing power, in an obvious manner against oneself, and that only if other methods have been exhausted. Less drastic intervention, though possibly still physical, can be used if another person is the victim. Still, lethal intervention should be avoided, on both sides.
I, as just about every other driver in the country, have had the occasional encounter with an officer in the form of a traffic stop. I have spoken with the police three separate times. The first to times I got off with warnings. The third I got a ticket, but I fully expected it, and was fully deserving of that ticket. The first time I cut off a person while making a lane change when I was getting off work, this was my fault and I had made an improper lane change without looking for other vehicles. I admitted that I had not checked for other vehicles and the officer let me off. The second time I was pulled over for tail-gating. I am still certain that the vehicle I was behind was not going the posted speed limit which caused part of the problem. I have no depth perception and judging my distance is difficult, especially at night, which was the case this time. I knew there was a car behind me, because I could see the head lights, but couldn't tell how far behind me they were, I was trying to increase my distance from the car in front of me without getting too close to the car behind me. I explained myself to the officer who had been behind me (and pulled me over), he asked if I had been going about the posted speed limit, and let me off with a warning when I told him that I was driving about the speed limit. The third time I had tried to make a U-Turn and failed to check properly causing me to bumper car a city bus. The bus was not really damaged, and no one was injured, but because it was a city vehicle I had to pay the price for my mistake. I was more freaked out by having just been in the first accident that was completely my fault. I paid the fine that was my punishment.
The biggest thing when dealing with police is to be polite, they are humans too. They are trying to do their jobs and keep people safe. We may need to seriously look at the way officers go about their interactions with people, but only to keep everyone involved safe, that means that officers are going to have to carry guns, tasers, or other devices/weapons in order to keep peace as best that they can. It does mean that there is the possibility for misinterpretation because the officer must make a decision quickly that might have several factors that are difficult to weigh properly in the seconds that an officer has to make the decision to use lethal force or some other intervention.
That is what needs to be remembered by people who are against the police in regards to officer involved fatal shootings .Every officer involved shooting is investigated, hopefully by non-biased people, but those are incredibly hard to find. Everyone's lives matter and need to be treated like humans, with respect. That needs to be remembered by EVERYONE, officers and citizens alike.
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
The job of parenting
I had a conversation with one of the people I call my bosses (she technically isn't, but the structure at work isn't important, and also very confusing). We got into a discussion about how I need a better job, but no one has called me for an interview since before my husband got a job, he got hired in March, and started in April. This is frustrating because I literally live from one paycheck to another paycheck with NO wiggle room at all. By literally I mean I hadn't deposited my paycheck from this past week yet and had about $2.00 in my bank account and was having issues trying to order my new glasses. She mentioned my resume and how I perhaps need to change it up a bit. I told her there are only so many ways to spread out and professionally say that I'm a glorified baby sitter. I monitor youth, make sure they are behaving and eat. Then try to get them to do things like clean the house and clean themselves. That's basically what happens on a typical shift, it really is. She said there's more to it than that, and said something about am I just baby sitting my own kids. First off, I don't have my own kids, and sometimes I really want them, and sometimes I feel that it would be a terrible idea. Before this job I was always sure that I wanted at least one someday.
I was at Walmart trying to do my grocery shopping for the week so I had a bit of time to think about it. I did decide to look at what I had down for my resume and see if I could alter anything, or add other points. I went and added quite a bit of things that I hadn't put in before. Then, as I was starting this paragraph I remembered one that I meant to put down and forgot about. However, it still sounds to me like I'm just adding more levels to being a glorified baby sitter, maybe I've moved up to nanny instead of baby sitter. As I mentioned in a previous post I do sometimes try to provide life lessons, and am terrible at it. I'm trying to get a bit better about at least stopping the word flow once I get going. I sort of put that on my resume as "life skills". I also put how we are trying to teach them appropriate interactions with others. None of these kids play well with others, a big part of why most of them are there. When I ran out of things to put, I still wanted to put more. The problem was I don't know what else to put. I was trying to think of writing it as describing the job duties of a parent (as she said, there's more to it than watching the kids).
What does a parent do beyond monitoring, transporting, and teaching life skills? Life skills is also being used to mean basic tasks like cleaning, cooking, and laundry. A parent is supposed to offer their child things to do that the child likes to do. Since many of the things that the youth in the group home like to do are not accepted by society as a whole we have issues doing that, or because part of the job is created a structured environment for behavioral modification (another thing to add to the resume, better sounding than med administration). I did include that we try to teach responsibility for individual actions and ensuring that the consequences are appropriate to the actions. I made sure to put in there that consequences are positive or negative. These consequences are were we try our hardest to change behaviors. A parent is responsible for teaching appropriate behaviors in the first place so I don't have to try latter and do it.
These kids don't view me as a parent, nor do they view any of the staff that way as far as I can tell. They view us more as jailers, at best we are nothing more than baby sitters to them. So my argument, while not professional, and far from how we are supposed to view ourselves, so in the end we were both right, but from different sides of the coin. We are trying so hard to change these kids into something that society will accept that most of the time it fails.
The truth of the matter is I'm burned out from this job, have been for most of a year now, but I'm stuck. Mainly because I don't want to be unemployed. This boss has never seen me at my best, when I actually believed in the system that I was trying to work with, when I thought that the kids in the group home were there because they wanted to change. Most of them are there because there's no where for them to go and they want to be anywhere but where they are. Everything we do to try to get them to do the things they need to do to leave (because that's also our goal, we don't want them there forever) they just get angry and upset with us. It's saddening, and frustrating because they don't seem to understand that just because their behavior isn't necessarily illegal that it's still not right.
This reminds me of a lesson I learned really pretty awkwardly in about the 1st grade. It's not acceptable to lick people in public (even if your pretending to be a dog because your 6 and it's recess). It's not illegal to lick people in public, it's just weird and makes people uncomfortable. This means that society rejects it in the norms, not in the law. Norms are also important and one of the things that the group home kids don't get very well. Norms dictate our interactions with others, so that is also covered in a neat concise package on my resume. It's also part of a parent's job to teach norms as they are teaching what society accepts and doesn't accept.
This is the job of a parent, and in my more ungracious moments I can tell myself that I'm a fool and an idiot for thinking I can do it. However, these are kids who aren't quite right in their judgments, and I'm viewed as nothing more than a baby sitter. At least part of that is because I'm really too young to be given the respect I should be having from them. Maybe they view me as the big sister, but I don't know. The best I can do is model the behavior that we are trying to get these kids to use, but I'm not very good at it. However, no one else is very good at it either, so at least I'm in good company.
I was at Walmart trying to do my grocery shopping for the week so I had a bit of time to think about it. I did decide to look at what I had down for my resume and see if I could alter anything, or add other points. I went and added quite a bit of things that I hadn't put in before. Then, as I was starting this paragraph I remembered one that I meant to put down and forgot about. However, it still sounds to me like I'm just adding more levels to being a glorified baby sitter, maybe I've moved up to nanny instead of baby sitter. As I mentioned in a previous post I do sometimes try to provide life lessons, and am terrible at it. I'm trying to get a bit better about at least stopping the word flow once I get going. I sort of put that on my resume as "life skills". I also put how we are trying to teach them appropriate interactions with others. None of these kids play well with others, a big part of why most of them are there. When I ran out of things to put, I still wanted to put more. The problem was I don't know what else to put. I was trying to think of writing it as describing the job duties of a parent (as she said, there's more to it than watching the kids).
What does a parent do beyond monitoring, transporting, and teaching life skills? Life skills is also being used to mean basic tasks like cleaning, cooking, and laundry. A parent is supposed to offer their child things to do that the child likes to do. Since many of the things that the youth in the group home like to do are not accepted by society as a whole we have issues doing that, or because part of the job is created a structured environment for behavioral modification (another thing to add to the resume, better sounding than med administration). I did include that we try to teach responsibility for individual actions and ensuring that the consequences are appropriate to the actions. I made sure to put in there that consequences are positive or negative. These consequences are were we try our hardest to change behaviors. A parent is responsible for teaching appropriate behaviors in the first place so I don't have to try latter and do it.
These kids don't view me as a parent, nor do they view any of the staff that way as far as I can tell. They view us more as jailers, at best we are nothing more than baby sitters to them. So my argument, while not professional, and far from how we are supposed to view ourselves, so in the end we were both right, but from different sides of the coin. We are trying so hard to change these kids into something that society will accept that most of the time it fails.
The truth of the matter is I'm burned out from this job, have been for most of a year now, but I'm stuck. Mainly because I don't want to be unemployed. This boss has never seen me at my best, when I actually believed in the system that I was trying to work with, when I thought that the kids in the group home were there because they wanted to change. Most of them are there because there's no where for them to go and they want to be anywhere but where they are. Everything we do to try to get them to do the things they need to do to leave (because that's also our goal, we don't want them there forever) they just get angry and upset with us. It's saddening, and frustrating because they don't seem to understand that just because their behavior isn't necessarily illegal that it's still not right.
This reminds me of a lesson I learned really pretty awkwardly in about the 1st grade. It's not acceptable to lick people in public (even if your pretending to be a dog because your 6 and it's recess). It's not illegal to lick people in public, it's just weird and makes people uncomfortable. This means that society rejects it in the norms, not in the law. Norms are also important and one of the things that the group home kids don't get very well. Norms dictate our interactions with others, so that is also covered in a neat concise package on my resume. It's also part of a parent's job to teach norms as they are teaching what society accepts and doesn't accept.
This is the job of a parent, and in my more ungracious moments I can tell myself that I'm a fool and an idiot for thinking I can do it. However, these are kids who aren't quite right in their judgments, and I'm viewed as nothing more than a baby sitter. At least part of that is because I'm really too young to be given the respect I should be having from them. Maybe they view me as the big sister, but I don't know. The best I can do is model the behavior that we are trying to get these kids to use, but I'm not very good at it. However, no one else is very good at it either, so at least I'm in good company.
Sunday, June 28, 2015
Gay marriage and Christianity
I have something I would like to say about gay marriage and religion. I'd put it on Facebook, but there are some pretty polarized people I'm friends with on Facebook and that could lead to some serious fighting that I don't want to have overshadow the original idea. This means that I'll put it here where no one will see it, even though anyone could see this if they wanted to.
First, let me put some history here, just in case this blog works out for me like Emily Dickinson's poems did for her. I am a Christian by most accepted definitions. I'm a member of the United Methodist Church which is popularly accepted as being more liberal than the Catholics or the Baptists, or other denominations. What most people don't know is that the official stance of the United Methodist Church is against gay marriage.
Now, I think that the strict Christian people need to relax on this decision. It does not affect our decisions as Christians whether gays can have a legally binding marriage or not. The Christian churches aren't being told that they have to cater to gays seeking to get married in religious settings. There is a separation of Church and State in this country and this is one of the reasons that it is the way it is.
I know that it makes you people uncomfortable, but it's not your life to live. If you want to know what happens to people who try to live their lives through other people, or control as much of their lives as possible, watch Toddlers and Tiaras, or any of those reality TV shows that follow people around who just try to control each other and throw tantrums like toddlers when they don't get their way. Let me give you a hint, it doesn't usually end well. Some of these children raised that way are unable to function in normal society. That's what's hurting our society, not gays getting the right to have legally binding marriages.
This is still America, it's not so different as when women got the right to vote, or inter-racial couples got the rights just now given to the gay community. We look back on those moments now, and see how obdurate the people were, but we do not get the full reflection showing us that we are just as obdurate about this change. We have come very far, but have not gone a long way.
First, let me put some history here, just in case this blog works out for me like Emily Dickinson's poems did for her. I am a Christian by most accepted definitions. I'm a member of the United Methodist Church which is popularly accepted as being more liberal than the Catholics or the Baptists, or other denominations. What most people don't know is that the official stance of the United Methodist Church is against gay marriage.
Now, I think that the strict Christian people need to relax on this decision. It does not affect our decisions as Christians whether gays can have a legally binding marriage or not. The Christian churches aren't being told that they have to cater to gays seeking to get married in religious settings. There is a separation of Church and State in this country and this is one of the reasons that it is the way it is.
I know that it makes you people uncomfortable, but it's not your life to live. If you want to know what happens to people who try to live their lives through other people, or control as much of their lives as possible, watch Toddlers and Tiaras, or any of those reality TV shows that follow people around who just try to control each other and throw tantrums like toddlers when they don't get their way. Let me give you a hint, it doesn't usually end well. Some of these children raised that way are unable to function in normal society. That's what's hurting our society, not gays getting the right to have legally binding marriages.
This is still America, it's not so different as when women got the right to vote, or inter-racial couples got the rights just now given to the gay community. We look back on those moments now, and see how obdurate the people were, but we do not get the full reflection showing us that we are just as obdurate about this change. We have come very far, but have not gone a long way.
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
I work in a therapeutic group home for teenagers. This leads to a lot of life lessons that are not always taught the way they should be taught. Several weeks ago I had a conversation with a youth, who I call Full Circle. She was annoyed that I had not intervened in a disagreement between her and another resident referred to under the name Butterfinger Bites. NOTE: The name Butterfinger Bites is not intended in anyway to be racist. It's based on initials and is not the only candy themed name I have assigned to a kid. The dispute was about who got to use the television. Now, both of these persons are legal adults. I pointed this out and stated that they should be able to work out something as adults. This displeased Full Circle who went to a different part of the house.
After dinner is when Full Circle asked me about the event from earlier in the day. She asked why I didn't become involved or stick up for her. I, am a devout conflict avoider, pretty much to a fault. It was also essentially a lesson: you can't always run to another person, sometimes you are going to have to sort out things on your own. We got into a bit of a heated discussion in which I told her that life sucks and there is always going to be a lot of pain for every bit of happiness.
Really, that was more pessimistic than I normally am. I am a jaded person, just like everyone else in the world who can drive a car legally. Some people live solely for the happy few minutes in life, and choose to essentially ignore the rest of life. I like the happy moments just like anyone else. However, I know that they are fleeting, which just makes them more precious.
I realized about a week ago that Full Circle was still miffed at me about this conversation that we had had. I was trying to find someway of explaining that it isn't always the pits, though life is a rollercoaster. I thought about it, and wasn't really able to come up with a way that would work to say out-loud. I'm not the best at imparting life lessons in verbal form. I almost never know how to go about them, or how to stop talking once the point is made. This is the solution I came up with, even though no one reads this blog.
Life is sort of like this blog. I know no one reads it, yet I post when I feel the urge, and am not stuck in some book or another. That is why there was a week delay in getting this. I don't really give up on it, though sometimes I forget it exists, but I keep plucking away at it when I do remember it.
Life is about the search for humanity, and it isn't found where most people think it'll be found. Humanity is found in people, in the way we interact with each other. it makes the difference in the world. Have you ever eaten a meal alone? Most of us have at some point, typically at home. However, have you ever done it in a restaurant? One where every table but yours has at least two people talking to each other? No matter how nice the food is, it isn't quite the same when there is no one to share it with. You are missing the component of humanity that makes a meal truly worth the eating, truly sustaining for someone.
We often believe that humanity is an internal trait, but it can't exist in the vacuum of a single person. How could you prove you were humane? Kindness to animals? That could just mean that you prefer animals to people, not humanity. Humanity is being able to deal with your fellow man and being able to interact with them. We hear about people who do heinous acts against others, and call them inhuman. It's true, we shouldn't treat each other with disrespect. However, respect is an internal trait. Respect is something that can be taught. Humanity is not. Humanity is bred from our interactions with others.
I feel that this would almost sound like a speech that some great orator would read in that it riles the crowd, but it does not necessarily impart much in the way of learning, even though that is the intention here. I feel that this is a lot of words, and hardly any substance. However, it isn't often that the person writing, or doing anything else gets the full impact of the thing they are doing. We have the perfection of our minds to mar what actually comes out to the rest of the world. Maybe, if someone reads this, they can learn something.
After dinner is when Full Circle asked me about the event from earlier in the day. She asked why I didn't become involved or stick up for her. I, am a devout conflict avoider, pretty much to a fault. It was also essentially a lesson: you can't always run to another person, sometimes you are going to have to sort out things on your own. We got into a bit of a heated discussion in which I told her that life sucks and there is always going to be a lot of pain for every bit of happiness.
Really, that was more pessimistic than I normally am. I am a jaded person, just like everyone else in the world who can drive a car legally. Some people live solely for the happy few minutes in life, and choose to essentially ignore the rest of life. I like the happy moments just like anyone else. However, I know that they are fleeting, which just makes them more precious.
I realized about a week ago that Full Circle was still miffed at me about this conversation that we had had. I was trying to find someway of explaining that it isn't always the pits, though life is a rollercoaster. I thought about it, and wasn't really able to come up with a way that would work to say out-loud. I'm not the best at imparting life lessons in verbal form. I almost never know how to go about them, or how to stop talking once the point is made. This is the solution I came up with, even though no one reads this blog.
Life is sort of like this blog. I know no one reads it, yet I post when I feel the urge, and am not stuck in some book or another. That is why there was a week delay in getting this. I don't really give up on it, though sometimes I forget it exists, but I keep plucking away at it when I do remember it.
Life is about the search for humanity, and it isn't found where most people think it'll be found. Humanity is found in people, in the way we interact with each other. it makes the difference in the world. Have you ever eaten a meal alone? Most of us have at some point, typically at home. However, have you ever done it in a restaurant? One where every table but yours has at least two people talking to each other? No matter how nice the food is, it isn't quite the same when there is no one to share it with. You are missing the component of humanity that makes a meal truly worth the eating, truly sustaining for someone.
We often believe that humanity is an internal trait, but it can't exist in the vacuum of a single person. How could you prove you were humane? Kindness to animals? That could just mean that you prefer animals to people, not humanity. Humanity is being able to deal with your fellow man and being able to interact with them. We hear about people who do heinous acts against others, and call them inhuman. It's true, we shouldn't treat each other with disrespect. However, respect is an internal trait. Respect is something that can be taught. Humanity is not. Humanity is bred from our interactions with others.
I feel that this would almost sound like a speech that some great orator would read in that it riles the crowd, but it does not necessarily impart much in the way of learning, even though that is the intention here. I feel that this is a lot of words, and hardly any substance. However, it isn't often that the person writing, or doing anything else gets the full impact of the thing they are doing. We have the perfection of our minds to mar what actually comes out to the rest of the world. Maybe, if someone reads this, they can learn something.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Job Hunting
It's suddenly very cold here where I live. We went from about 60 degrees on Sunday to snow Monday and currently it is only 8 above Fahrenheit. It seems the weather finally got the memo that it's November and it should get with the end of the year program.
This is a random post, at least I'm in a good mood this time. I figure I should post sometimes when I'm not upset or mad or something like that. Currently I'm typing while my husband is watching Minecraft UFC videos on Youtube. We should both be working on job hunting, but neither of us really wants to.
You see, job hunting is not easy for either of us. He's only had one job and it's not helping him get anything new. I've had several jobs but only the last one really means anything in terms of a career. I won't go into my various jobs though.
Another issue that I have is my current job is the only one that I have stayed at for over a year. This is actually because most of my jobs have been tourist places that have a specific season and hire based on a contracted basis. Those kids of jobs usually last about a month, though the fair job I did once was only for eight days.
My current job is a really hard job to really stay in. If you stay in it you have to find some way to stay on the surface and not get in too deep. If you get in too deep it becomes really difficult to want to stay. Part of my issue is that I have no set schedule. I sort of have one currently but that is changing suddenly.
For example, while writing this post I got a phone call from a co-worker asking me to come in at 6 MST. I take this to mean that for whatever reason she doesn't want to finish her shift (possibly to go drinking). This particular place has been having an extra staff in the evening which is where my steady hours have been coming from. I don't think that what I'm coming in to do is part of that because she wants be to stay until her shift would end. It could be that it is the extra staff.
I work in therapeutic group homes as "relief" staff, that's basically like a substitute teacher. I go in when people need me, but I could say no. I didn't this time because there's some stuff I would like to learn about what's going on in that house. Working in mental health is very hard, especially since mine are all kids.
I'm trying to get out of this field, not really because of the kids, but because of the staff. The staff issues with this field are crazy. It's not fun and makes working with the kids difficult because of our own inconsistency between staff. It then makes it even harder for the relief staff who can come in in the middle of some crazy situation and make everything worse.
So much for the happy post. Maybe next time I can not be interrupted and not go astray.
This is a random post, at least I'm in a good mood this time. I figure I should post sometimes when I'm not upset or mad or something like that. Currently I'm typing while my husband is watching Minecraft UFC videos on Youtube. We should both be working on job hunting, but neither of us really wants to.
You see, job hunting is not easy for either of us. He's only had one job and it's not helping him get anything new. I've had several jobs but only the last one really means anything in terms of a career. I won't go into my various jobs though.
Another issue that I have is my current job is the only one that I have stayed at for over a year. This is actually because most of my jobs have been tourist places that have a specific season and hire based on a contracted basis. Those kids of jobs usually last about a month, though the fair job I did once was only for eight days.
My current job is a really hard job to really stay in. If you stay in it you have to find some way to stay on the surface and not get in too deep. If you get in too deep it becomes really difficult to want to stay. Part of my issue is that I have no set schedule. I sort of have one currently but that is changing suddenly.
For example, while writing this post I got a phone call from a co-worker asking me to come in at 6 MST. I take this to mean that for whatever reason she doesn't want to finish her shift (possibly to go drinking). This particular place has been having an extra staff in the evening which is where my steady hours have been coming from. I don't think that what I'm coming in to do is part of that because she wants be to stay until her shift would end. It could be that it is the extra staff.
I work in therapeutic group homes as "relief" staff, that's basically like a substitute teacher. I go in when people need me, but I could say no. I didn't this time because there's some stuff I would like to learn about what's going on in that house. Working in mental health is very hard, especially since mine are all kids.
I'm trying to get out of this field, not really because of the kids, but because of the staff. The staff issues with this field are crazy. It's not fun and makes working with the kids difficult because of our own inconsistency between staff. It then makes it even harder for the relief staff who can come in in the middle of some crazy situation and make everything worse.
So much for the happy post. Maybe next time I can not be interrupted and not go astray.
Monday, November 3, 2014
Writing
Isn't funny that we all have this obsession to write things for others to see? There are so many people out there who want to write books or even book series. We even have a whole month dedicated to those who want to try and write a novel. I'm sitting watching my husband try and get a job. He's been unemployed for just over a year now. I'm trying to get a new job myself, and not doing much better than he is. While watching him and thinking thoughts about how we'll possibly never move from this metaphorical point, I remembered that there is a file on my computer that is a short story thing I wrote in college based on what comes to my mind when I listen to the soundtrack from the 2009 Star Trek. Remembering that the story has always been the JK Rowling started Harry Potter on a napkin in a restaurant when she was completely broke.
I'm no good at writing much of anything. I can write a research paper pretty well so I think that I could do research reports. Most report things in companies are based on forms anyway. That makes it easier because you just do what the form says on it.
That's right any high schoolers and college students out there, you're ability to write papers is almost completely unnecessary once out of school. About the only people who write papers are reporters and scientists trying to get money.
Really the only writing that is important beyond school is a form of writing that is barely taught any more. Letter writing, specifically how to write a business letter or a cover letter/letter of interest. The only other letter that's important is a letter of recommendation. Those are easy because you just say what is good about a person and leave the bad stuff for people to learn later.
There might be another form of writing that is important, but we learn that through essay questions and not papers. This type of writing is the open answer question answers for applications. I just had to help my husband with his on the application he is working on. He has a hard time figuring out what to put. Thankfully we stated as co-workers so I know how he works and can help him sort through the stuff.
That above paragraph should be read as I wrote the answer I think he should give on a different sheet of paper and he now gets to copy it onto the application because I can't fake his handwriting.
Back to the topic of writing. I once read part of a book standing in a local Target store that was basically an autobiography with Internet Lazy Pictures in it. This person has had some interesting things to write about, but haven't we all? I had to write my life story once for a class in college. I think it was only supposed to be about ten pages. Mine ended up being 32. The professor wanted us to put every thing that had happened basically. I skipped some parts because it was supposed to be a positive theme. I did get major life events like living in a different country as a small child and moving schools several times. However, none of that was really book worthy was it? Maybe, but I doubt it will sell.
See my other problem is that I can 't think of titles either. It's one of the issues with my short story I mentioned earlier.
So, writing novels; harder than some people think. I have friends in college who are trying to write novels. The one is thinking of a book series. If it ever comes out I want a copy, it sounds amazing. She has about three different notebooks that she keeps story ideas in. Most of it is in her head as well. The largest of the notebooks has all of her stuff of the book series that she wants to do. The other two? Other ideas for books unrelated to her book series. These two friends are also both into writing fan-fiction, the great starting place of many people trying to write.
My friends make some great ideas for stories and spend years sorting the whole thing out. Almost none of it gets written or published. However, the characters they create seem almost real. I even got a Halloween costume out of one of the fan fiction ideas.
An example of the idea that everyone wants to write and share with the world, is blogging. It's even become so popular that Disney made a show with a dog having a blog. There are many tips to a successful blog. I doubt I'm following any of them, but it's fun to do this anyway when I remember I even have a blog. I actually started this one because of how much I liked blogging in a college class I took.
I think I've rambled enough for one blog post. Maybe I'll try and flush out my short story, or go back to Minesweeper. Maybe someone will get a kick out of this post, if they bother to read the whole thing.
I'm no good at writing much of anything. I can write a research paper pretty well so I think that I could do research reports. Most report things in companies are based on forms anyway. That makes it easier because you just do what the form says on it.
That's right any high schoolers and college students out there, you're ability to write papers is almost completely unnecessary once out of school. About the only people who write papers are reporters and scientists trying to get money.
Really the only writing that is important beyond school is a form of writing that is barely taught any more. Letter writing, specifically how to write a business letter or a cover letter/letter of interest. The only other letter that's important is a letter of recommendation. Those are easy because you just say what is good about a person and leave the bad stuff for people to learn later.
There might be another form of writing that is important, but we learn that through essay questions and not papers. This type of writing is the open answer question answers for applications. I just had to help my husband with his on the application he is working on. He has a hard time figuring out what to put. Thankfully we stated as co-workers so I know how he works and can help him sort through the stuff.
That above paragraph should be read as I wrote the answer I think he should give on a different sheet of paper and he now gets to copy it onto the application because I can't fake his handwriting.
Back to the topic of writing. I once read part of a book standing in a local Target store that was basically an autobiography with Internet Lazy Pictures in it. This person has had some interesting things to write about, but haven't we all? I had to write my life story once for a class in college. I think it was only supposed to be about ten pages. Mine ended up being 32. The professor wanted us to put every thing that had happened basically. I skipped some parts because it was supposed to be a positive theme. I did get major life events like living in a different country as a small child and moving schools several times. However, none of that was really book worthy was it? Maybe, but I doubt it will sell.
See my other problem is that I can 't think of titles either. It's one of the issues with my short story I mentioned earlier.
So, writing novels; harder than some people think. I have friends in college who are trying to write novels. The one is thinking of a book series. If it ever comes out I want a copy, it sounds amazing. She has about three different notebooks that she keeps story ideas in. Most of it is in her head as well. The largest of the notebooks has all of her stuff of the book series that she wants to do. The other two? Other ideas for books unrelated to her book series. These two friends are also both into writing fan-fiction, the great starting place of many people trying to write.
My friends make some great ideas for stories and spend years sorting the whole thing out. Almost none of it gets written or published. However, the characters they create seem almost real. I even got a Halloween costume out of one of the fan fiction ideas.
An example of the idea that everyone wants to write and share with the world, is blogging. It's even become so popular that Disney made a show with a dog having a blog. There are many tips to a successful blog. I doubt I'm following any of them, but it's fun to do this anyway when I remember I even have a blog. I actually started this one because of how much I liked blogging in a college class I took.
I think I've rambled enough for one blog post. Maybe I'll try and flush out my short story, or go back to Minesweeper. Maybe someone will get a kick out of this post, if they bother to read the whole thing.
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Hey there world,
I didn't know there were people actually reading this. I was just on here on a whim, and saw 22 page views. That was quite impressive. So let's see what has been going on in my world:
I worked in Yellowstone National Park for the summer.
I got a boyfriend.
I entered my last year of college.
Actually the first two rather happened together, my boyfriend started as my co-worker, then friend, then boyfriend. The park was quite fun, lots of bison where I was which sometimes got in the way. I also had an encounter with a bear that I considered to be far to close.
Last year of college: lots of work and writing. Despite all of that the classwork isn't actually as intimidating as the idea of graduating and having to go out into the real world. That is the part that is really scaring me, the classwork is just annoying.
Christmas was wonderful, my boyfriend got to come out (we don't live in the same state). We went and saw The Hobbit, which we loved. He hadn't read the book so it was a different experience for him than for me.
All and all I'm looking forward to 2013 and heading into the real world (even though it scares me a bit), and maybe I'l remember this exists and post more often.
I didn't know there were people actually reading this. I was just on here on a whim, and saw 22 page views. That was quite impressive. So let's see what has been going on in my world:
I worked in Yellowstone National Park for the summer.
I got a boyfriend.
I entered my last year of college.
Actually the first two rather happened together, my boyfriend started as my co-worker, then friend, then boyfriend. The park was quite fun, lots of bison where I was which sometimes got in the way. I also had an encounter with a bear that I considered to be far to close.
Last year of college: lots of work and writing. Despite all of that the classwork isn't actually as intimidating as the idea of graduating and having to go out into the real world. That is the part that is really scaring me, the classwork is just annoying.
Christmas was wonderful, my boyfriend got to come out (we don't live in the same state). We went and saw The Hobbit, which we loved. He hadn't read the book so it was a different experience for him than for me.
All and all I'm looking forward to 2013 and heading into the real world (even though it scares me a bit), and maybe I'l remember this exists and post more often.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Obsessions
It's been awhile hasn't it? Sorry about that, but as the title suggests I've been obsessing lately.
One of my friends got me into the BBC Sherlock series. It's amazing, but not easy to find here in America. I was a Sherlockian (as we American fans are called) before watching the series, which made the series even better in my mind. The obsession this time came down to finding a coat similar to the one in the show (Benedict Cumberbatch's). I finally found one which really made my day. XD
I also did a nerd run to Hastings, and found Star Trek stuff, so overall this was a great weekend.
One of my friends got me into the BBC Sherlock series. It's amazing, but not easy to find here in America. I was a Sherlockian (as we American fans are called) before watching the series, which made the series even better in my mind. The obsession this time came down to finding a coat similar to the one in the show (Benedict Cumberbatch's). I finally found one which really made my day. XD
I also did a nerd run to Hastings, and found Star Trek stuff, so overall this was a great weekend.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Valentine's day
I got asked how my day was, and I said "I'm single on Valentine's day, what do you expect?" I know love will find me, and then Valentine's day won't suck so much, but it seems like love is taking too much "sweet time".
Then again this may come from the fact that all my valentines either came from my parents or other women, when I'm straight.
Then again this may come from the fact that all my valentines either came from my parents or other women, when I'm straight.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Experiencing music
I'm going to get this out of the way and say that I am NOT one of those people who tastes music instead of hearing it. My senses are wired normally, but I experience music on multiple levels including visually, and on occasion olifactory (smell). I was just listening to a piece on YouTube, and it made me think of the sea, including that salty smell. I live in a college dorm and am currently sitting in a lounge that has an oven in it. Some girl came in and made what smells to me like cookies. Turns out the smell of fresh cookies and sea salt do not really go together.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Knowledge
"knowledge is power." I don't remember who said that, but it can't always be that simple. Knowledge can also be painful, when you realize that the things your doing are hurtful to you. I'm not thinking about substance abuse, those people don't register that it hurts them. I'm talking psychological defense mechanisms. You fall into their trap when you're very young, and they are the only way to survive most of the time. It's so easy to get into them, but it takes someone else to help you break them. They become second nature, and you begin to anticipate the need for them because it's how life seems to work. When that happens you start poisoning any relationship you have with other people, and you realize that your defense mechanism doesn't actually work, but you keep coming to it time and again because it's the only way that you know.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Thoughts I shouldn't be thinking
I think I've mentioned that I people watch, if not then there it is. Around Valentine's day especially (I know, not until next month but the build up to it is already here) I note all the couples and wonder what those girls have that I'm missing.
It's family lore that it took divine intervention to bring my parents together, but I seem to be worse then they were. My total dating experience is very limited and extremely spread out. I'm putting this out there because it lets me vent, and hopefully avoid being overly emotional.
I'm just tired of being alone wondering what I'm missing, why I don't seem to even be getting asked out, let alone going out. It seems that I need divine intervention to get that far, but God seems to want me to suffer as well. The other thing about posting is that this blog seems to have as much presence in the world as I would appear to have.
It's family lore that it took divine intervention to bring my parents together, but I seem to be worse then they were. My total dating experience is very limited and extremely spread out. I'm putting this out there because it lets me vent, and hopefully avoid being overly emotional.
I'm just tired of being alone wondering what I'm missing, why I don't seem to even be getting asked out, let alone going out. It seems that I need divine intervention to get that far, but God seems to want me to suffer as well. The other thing about posting is that this blog seems to have as much presence in the world as I would appear to have.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Don't you hate it?
I had a great, inspired post to put up, and now I can't remember what it was about. I had it in my College Writing class, and we were talking about an article we read on "rewilding", or conservation efforts. I still have that great "warm and fuzzy" feeling about whatever it was I was going to write about. My mind however, is now a blank slate. Guess I'll move on to whatever comes to mind.
I was sent a link to an article about Sherlock Holmes (one of my fandoms) and it stated that Mr. Spock, and Commander Data (both of Star Trek fame, my biggest fandom) are off-shoots of Holmes. I find this to be hilarious because Data becomes obsesssed with Holmes during the run of Star Trek: the Next Generation. Now I'm trying to find the psychological implications surrounding Data being obsessed, and impersonating part of the inspiration for his character. Spock was of course the other big inspiration for the Data character. However this gives me a great excuse to include this:
Wow, that's tiny, sorry about that. This was created by my dad when he was bored at work one day. The Spocks (left) are Leonard Nimoy (front), and Zachary Quinto (back). The Holmes' (right) are Jeremy Brett (lower), and Basil Rathbone (upper). I think that's Rathbone, there are several actors who portrayed Holmes in black and white, so they all look kind of similar in profile, however, that picture doesn't match the ones I have of Rathbone.
I was sent a link to an article about Sherlock Holmes (one of my fandoms) and it stated that Mr. Spock, and Commander Data (both of Star Trek fame, my biggest fandom) are off-shoots of Holmes. I find this to be hilarious because Data becomes obsesssed with Holmes during the run of Star Trek: the Next Generation. Now I'm trying to find the psychological implications surrounding Data being obsessed, and impersonating part of the inspiration for his character. Spock was of course the other big inspiration for the Data character. However this gives me a great excuse to include this:
Wow, that's tiny, sorry about that. This was created by my dad when he was bored at work one day. The Spocks (left) are Leonard Nimoy (front), and Zachary Quinto (back). The Holmes' (right) are Jeremy Brett (lower), and Basil Rathbone (upper). I think that's Rathbone, there are several actors who portrayed Holmes in black and white, so they all look kind of similar in profile, however, that picture doesn't match the ones I have of Rathbone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)