Saturday, December 29, 2012

A New Year's Resolution

When I was younger, I had no idea that I was attractive.  When people say "if I had known then what I know now, I'd be dangerous," I have to admit that I would have done things differently, but I'm not sure what.  I certainly wouldn't change the way I look for anyone.  In fact, there was a time when I was much younger that I tried desperately to "blend".  I am not one that blends well.  The experience was simply a rude eye opener that my Grams had tried to explain to me, "the harder you try to blend in, the more you stick out."  If I had understood those words as I do now, well, I'm not sure I'd have been "dangerous".  Still, I was always a bit of a soft heart, and dangerous wasn't and still isn't my style.  Once I was even accused of being a "heartbreaker", but in truth breaking hearts was not the reason I may have broken one or two, or possibly even several.  I was looking for something special, like almost every young woman is at that age.  I suspect I let some "special" go, and kept some "not so special" at the same time.  I can never claim to have not made mistakes, but none of them were ever because I was sure of my looks or from contriving ways to use my looks to my advantage.  I simply never thought of myself as pretty.  Pretty is skin deep, and the heart is more giving.  So when someone suggested that I make myself "less pretty", whatever that actually means, I didn't laugh.  But then, I did consider the source, and that got me to thinking.  While I don't really believe in New Year's resolutions since I believe when you want to change something you should just begin making a concerted effort regardless of the time of year, it is this time of year that most think about making changes--out with the old, in with the new, and this "advice" went through my mind as did the little mind that suggested it. 

Now don't get me wrong, I have no ill will towards a small mind, but it is not without experience that I know that you cannot change small people.  It will never happen.  I have over the years become accustomed to being "knocked down" by some women.  It is most certainly not all and it is not without pain that I admit this.  Women by nature are more cutting than men.  I have had a most beloved sorority sister sleep with a boyfriend, borrow the money for an abortion from me, and then tell another sister thinking it was funny that I paid for her abortion.  It was true; it was money that was never repaid.  It was a lesson in heartbreak, yes.  It was also a greater lesson in the fact that not all people value their friends or friendship.  It wasn't that he wouldn't have paid for it; he had stopped seeing her immediately and offered to pay for the abortion.  It was simply that she had been so jealous of me that it wasn't enough to hurt me in one way; it was an obsessive hate that she wanted to hurt me as much as she hurt.  The truth was for me much different than it was for her.  The truth was he wasn't worthy of me, and I certainly deserved better.  So although there was a sadness created by the truth and I did suffer, I recovered with new resolve.  Her hatred and anger and hurt didn't go away; she remained the bitter little mind that she had been when she started on this endeavor.  But I had nothing to do with her afterwards and there was no regaining the friendship she had so callously used.  Like one of my favorite characters says in a favorite movie, "my good opinion once lost is lost forever."  She, and as other friends that have wronged me, learned that I was simply done with her.  There is no reason to punish oneself with the failures of others, particularly when they have made you the object of their ire.

Still, it's not always women.  I've had guy friends that have simply been my friend because they hope to date me someday.  Most eventually get over it and either fade into the workwork or become genuine friends.  Of my friends that I have dated or the ones that have become friends after wanting to date me, there is always one that I think if I had it all to do over I might have made a different choice.  Then I snap back into reality that my life would be drastically different now.  The person that he loved was much more like him and would've followed that path.  The path I wanted was my own.  Other guys have become vindictive or angry because I don't know my place or have rejected them.  When they say "the world has no fury like a woman scorned", this is only partially true.  The world has no fury as a crazy person scorned--female or male.  I had an abusive ex-boyfriend that had hospitalized me as a parting gift when I finally broke up with him.  He had for some amount of time stalked me and is honestly the whole reason that I believe women should be able to legally arm themselves.  Nothing explains "leave me alone" like a 9 mm.  There unfortunately are some men out there that are more crazy than any certifiable female.  Some men simply think that they are superior to women.  I know in this day and age it sounds ludicrious.  Yet, I've met just as many, if not more, men with issues against women who are independent, self-sufficient or successful than women with anger, jealous or security issues.  The men are sometimes more incideous.  Men who don't really believe women belong, or at least only belong to an extent--whether military, workplace, or just in a group--act as a cancer.  It's really not hard for them to gain "support" from other men by making off the cuff comments.  Male friends are often the only ones that can contain them, if you're lucky enough to have true male friends.  I have observed over the years and these men genuinely have no real backbone.  A woman with a good husband or boyfriend makes it difficult for them to draw a negative picture of a good woman.  I had a friend who had married young, eventually divorced and re-entered the workforce.  She was dismayed that the person who was the most vicious at work was a man.  He had taken credit for her work, she had caught him "bad-mouthing" her to co-workers at the "water cooler", and he made fun of the way she looked.  She was even more dismayed at that fact that the other men seemed to be taking on the same attitude, albeit gradually--one by one they were all making her equally miserable.  This friend, a very good friend for over 20 years, is not a mean person, but is in fact, a smart, soft spoken, gentile, petite and attractive, very honest person.  His two issues with her:  that she was smart and honest.  Probably, more so with her honesty than anything else.  Petty men are really no different than petty women.  A small mind is still a small mind regardless of the body it is put in. 

So 2013, how do we deal with small and petty people?  I myself have been known to get petty.  We all have.  We get sucked into the supposed friendships and then realize that the small minded can spread their pettiness like a cancer over-running an otherwise healthy entity.  Honestly, from experience, there is nothing that we can do to ourselves to change others.  I cannot make someone happier by being less "pretty".  We have no control over their perceptions, judgements, or petty antics.  We cannot tell them to change, although like most people who haven't recognized the petty people around them, we may try to advise them to take care of their actions.  Unfortunately once that cancer has spread, it often takes the more than words of advice to remove the behavior.  I believe that many of us come to opinion the only way to deal with those that would behave this way is to cut them off--distance ourselves from them and keep that distance as great as possible.  Let in only a small few and if we are lucky, "have one true friend" in our lifetimes.  While this is the simplist solution, it is not the best.  I have made some wonderful friends over the years, and not ones that demand that I change anything.  I am pretty to them, not because they are worried about what I look like on the outside.  I am pretty to them because of who I am in the inside.  Of course, if I never took a risk of meeting new people because of petty individuals, then like Grams, I might only have one true friend.  Grams was right in the message to be cautious.  But Mr. Darcy's approach while making him possibly the object of undue ridicule is the safest way to not miss out on the wonderful people. Second chances are not for those who have betrayed or scorned you, but for those who have already earned a good opinion and who genuinely know the value of it.   Give your good opinion freely, but once lost, let it be lost forever. 

Thursday, December 20, 2012

the season is the reason...or is it?

Since Thanksgiving, I've received so many emails and seen so many Facebook posts about "Merry Christmas".  I know, it's the holiday season, and it's really nice to have all the cheer of friends and family alike.  I love this time of year.  Snow, the smell of fresh evergreen in the living room from a beautiful tree, buying stuff for my boys, having friends over for holiday cheer, celebrating another year, looking forward to the upcoming year, the lights that all the neighbors put up (I'm seriously too lazy, but I do love the way the look at night).  It's just "the most wonderful time of the year".  Christmas isn't just about "Christians".  It's about family and friends.  The end of a year and the beginning of a new one.  The hopes that never came to fruition overridden by the hopes that are only beginning.  Almost all people even seem to be nicer this time of the year.  They tend to remember to say excuse me in a polite way, rather than not at all or with sarcasm, as they try to get by in the Walmart, the grocery stores, heck, even in the mall.  It's wonderful and beautiful--nice people with a backdrop of the bright reds and greens and white imitating fresh snow.  We hear the bells of the Salvation Army ringing and see the trees and trimmings, and we can't help but be caught up in the spirit.  The teddy bears, the elves, the poinsettas, the smell of candy canes, and apple spice.  The smells, the lights, the beauty of it all radiates through the air and permeates almost the biggest of scrooges.  Like any other feeling, happiness and good spirit can take over a crowd.  It's the mob mentality without the mob. 

So why do so many people send out emails or post stuff that demand others refer to it as Merry Christmas?  They don't want to hear "Happy Holidays" or "Happy Kwanzaa" or even "Happy Hanukkah".  It's Christmas for crying out loud.  Well, ok, it's Christmas for you.  It's Christmas for a lot of us.  I still call it Christmas. I still celebrate "Christmas" the way I grew up.  Tree, trimmings, holiday lights, food, egg nog, Santa Claus, stockings hanging on the fireplace, but honestly I don't see what any of those things have to do with "Christmas" if we are talking about the birth of Christ--which by the way is what Christians are actually supposed to be celebrating.  There's nothing wrong with Christians celebrating the birth of Christ.  I think it's pretty cute when I see someone that has put a lot of work and energy into a little manger set up with donkeys and camels and three wise men.  It's all very touching when we think about the concept of all of these figures of the long gone past coming together for the birth of a child.  It's softening to the soul the hope that Christ represented for the Christian people of years gone by.  Christ taught tolerance and equality, do unto others as you would have done onto you.  Yet, I find it disheartening that it seems like some would disconnect themselves from the spirit of Christ's teachings as they celebrate his birth.  The father, the son and the holy spirit.  Would not the father of all be far more forgiving than arguing over "Merry Christmas" versus "Happy Holidays"?  Did not the son teach this?  Would the holiest of spirits not want us to be good to each other regardless of our own personal beliefs?  Do we truly believe that Christ meant for us to condemn others simply because they don't share our religious beliefs?  I find it very unlikely.

The argument is often made that Christ and the Bible teach that we are damned if we don't accept Jesus Christ as our savior.  My aunt was a Sunday School teacher.  I've read the entire Bible, all 3 accepted versions of it.  I don't remember it saying specifically we're damned if we don't accept Christ as our savior.  I do remember people making the argument that is how it is to be interpreted.  The word "damn" wasn't even a word during "biblical" times.  So, I think the assumption that is what the Bible means might be a stretch.  I also have heard all the arguments that we are supposed to spread the "good word".  Yes, I do remember those stanzas.  It didn't say anything about using intimidation, force, demand or by demeaning others.  In fact, his teachings were quite the opposite.  So when I recieve these demands to say "Merry Christmas", it does cause me to scratch my head a little and wonder if anyone has actually read their Bibles lately.  I'm not sure that the Bible should be taken so literally either--I'm not buying that God's one day is equal to one of ours.  There are planets where one day there is 1/10th of a day here.  Likewise, there are planets that one day there is a year here on good old planet earth.  God's seven days might be several of our lifetimes.  We might be like bugs that live only a single season to God.  If the literal interpretations are not accurate, then I'm not sure that God chose only "one" son or prophet to guide or save us either. 

The Westboro Church condemns even other Christians because they might be gay or soldiers.  Almost everyone agrees that they are a bit nauseating.  It's so rude of them to tell others that they cannot happily celebrate a marriage or a miltary homecoming.  It's rude for them to tell others that they are damned and they don't care about if they are human beings that possibly God, for whatever reason, made gay or lesbian.  They don't care if a family is just happy to be together after a long time apart.  While they are far more famous for their rhetoric at sadder times, they don't respect other people and the mass majority of us are completely mortified by it.  I know so many that are mortified by their behavior.  Yet, these same people, so nauseated by Westboro are often the ones screaming at the top of their lungs that the United States is a Christian country, founded in Christ, and shooting emails around about how "it's not Happy Holidays, it's "Merry CHRISTMAS!!!  You dumb mother-f***er." 

I believe that Christ tried to guide us to a more tolerant and accepting society.  Yet, often the people that attend churches every Sunday, professing their love of "God's word" are are the most crass, judgemental, phony, backstabbing, prejudice, selfish, and/or debase human beings claiming they know exactly what "God's word" is.  Even if we truly believe Christ is the only way, how does bullying people with another belief actually make that point?   It's contridictory to Christ's teachings of tolerance and peace.

"The season is the reason," my Grams used to say.  We say the "season" for a reason.  The truth is Christ was born in the spring.  We celebrate around the end of December because Winter begins, the Winter solstace, and so many religions have their celebrations around this time of year--not just Christians.  The desire of each of those celebrations is to focus on peace, good will, family, friends and the many gifts that we have.  If the season is the reason, and Christians have chosen this time of the year to celebrate the birth of Christ, then perhaps it is because of its commonality with the other religions that Christmas is in December and not in March.  Perhaps, "Happy Holidays" truly is more important, not one religion over another, not one person over another, but in celebration of so much more, because "the Season is the Reason."  It's the Season that all of us can agree on one thing we want more than anything---Peace on Earth. 

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Inanimate objects are not crazy

Gun control in the United States is getting its "hey day"--which is kind of ironic when you consider "hey day" is originally supposed to mean a "happy, enthusiastic time".  It's not really a good time for guns in general.  Afterall, it's all the guns' faults that they are used improperly, and therefore, gun control should be a good thing.  We're all seeing the end effect as our nation begins to polarize on yet another issue.  Blastings on Facebook and Twitter about why guns are bad, how guns could prevent or deter bad things from happening, guns are the problem, guns are not the problem.  Guns are good; guns are bad.  Guns are inanimate objects.  Oh, right, that last one is mine.  Seriously, guns are not the problem.  They are neither good or bad.  They have no feelings, no response of their own--either reactionary or initiating, no understanding, comprehension or thoughts whatsoever. 

In the 1800s, a large majority of women and some men truly believed that if you struck out at alcohol, we would fix all of society's woes.  Many women made huge efforts to bring prohibition to fruition.  In fact, a large percentage of the suffragettes believed this.  Not all mind you, but many women fought for the right to vote because of a firm belief that society's woes were caused by alcohol.  Murderers only killed if sparked in anger with alcohol.  Bar fights were the real reason for all murders.  If alcohol were eliminated, they contended, then men wouldn't get drunk and come home to beat their wives and/or children.  If alcohol were eliminated, men would not be philanderers, and there would be no need for prostitution.  Alcohol would eliminate rapes, because only drunken men raped innocent women.  There would be no more "shotgun weddings" and no need for abortions (yes, they were performed, but that is a whole 'nother can of worms we are not opening today).  No one would have pre-marital sex if it wasn't for alcohol.  Without philanderers, prostitutes and pre-marital sex, there would be no sexually transmitted diseases.  Yes, these were actual arguments made against alcohol.  We now know that the abolition of alcohol, aka. prohibition, had nothing to do with any of this. People still commit murders.  In fact, many murders are very premediated.  Men are more likely to use guns, but women are just as crazy and more likely to use poisons.  Rapes still occur; they're not about alcohol either.  They're about power.  Wife beaters still exist too.  In fact, some of them never drink a drop and still beat the crap out of their wives.  Prostitution, philanderers, sexually transmitted diseases, none of this was stopped by the outcry against alcohol that finally resulted in the 18th Amendment to the Constitution illegalizing alcohol.  In fact, the illegalization of alcohol is now historically and permanently tied to creating the massive conglomeration of organized crime.  Organized crime ruled the roost for decades, even after the repeal of the 18th Amendment.  Striking out alcohol, which was only the scapegoat to the real societal issues, only resulted in much more drastic societal woes, because in fact, it turned ordinary law abiding citizens into criminals.  Everyone went to speak-easy's.  Everyone made alcohol or knew someone who did.  Even churches were known to make their own wine for various ceremonies.  Everyone, and I mean just about everyone, was now breaking the law.  Society became more debase, more murderous, more contrived than ever before. 

As we are now, people blamed the simple fix for a much more complicated issue.  It's much easier to point at alcohol as the "root of all evil" than to dissect and analyze the bigger picture.  The bigger picture should have a simple resolution, tied up in a nice bow, so that we have something to condemn.  However, the "bigger" picture is never so simple and therefore can never have a "simple" resolution.  We blame guns for gang related violence and deaths.  If the gangs couldn't get guns, there would be no gang related murders.  Of course there would be.  They've been killing since the start of this nation.  The James Gang, the Cowboys (OK Corral), Highwaymen (in Kansas in the 1800s nicknamed Jayhawkers), St. Valentine's Day Massacre...the list goes on and on and on.  We've gotten so bored with it as a society that it's barely a blip on any of our radars.  If an abusive husband couldn't have a gun, he wouldn't kill his wife.  Really?  Many of those types consider themselves above the law even with all the domestic violence laws that we have across the country today.  Are we really so niave to believe they wouldn't have a gun illegally if we struck down the 2nd Amendment?  There would be no robberies without guns.  Sure there would be--either without guns--machetes or some other weapons--or with guns illegally obtained.  People wouldn't commit suicide without guns.  The majority of suicides are not even committed with guns--hanging and pills are still the most common.  Mass shooters wouldn't kill and/or wound dozens if it weren't for guns--Colombine, the theater, the mall, the elementary school....none of this would happen if it weren't for guns.  The 1996 bombing of the Olympics in Atlanta killed 111 people.  The Oklahoma City Federal building bombing in 1995 killed 168 and wounded hundreds.  Both of which, as you can see, occurred within a year of each other.  Amazing how morons will commit a similar crime to others because they think it will make their point.  Regardless, taking guns from legitimate legal Americans won't stop anyone intent on killing, robbing, abusing, or otherwise.  In fact, it might be all the more gorier and devastating. 

The 21st Amendment repealed prohibition after 13 years.  As stated earlier, it made everyone a criminal.  Even churches in some cases.  People that I know are completely pacifists are now talking about going and buying guns.  Not because they needed one before, but because they are afraid that somewhere down the road they might need one and don't want to lose their rights.  They're afraid that someone might come into the convenience mart they're in and they want to be prepared.  They're afraid that our government might actually go against our precious Constitution and Bill of Rights and are making sure that they are getting the guns before that happens.  Gun sales are up.  A gun store owner was on television this morning saying that he normally sells 30 AK15s a month.  He's sold 30 in 3 days after the President blamed guns.  Honestly, I'm a little mortified.  I don't want you taking one conceal carry license class and going to the range twice and carrying a loaded weapon around.  But we should see their point.  They are now concerned that these tragedies could've been ended with less loss if someone had been able to shoot the assaliants.  Likewise, I know others that have hopped up on their soapboxes screaming for the 2nd Amendment to be abolished.  Already, this is polarizing, and the average joes that have never owned guns are choosing sides. 

So the real question then is will abolishment of the 2nd Amendment be as successful as the 18th Amendment was?  Will it turn every day, average American citizens into criminals?  We love our freedoms and we tie our ability to protect our freedoms with guns.  It's part of the American psyche.  I'm not going to turn over my weapons because the government states they're illegal.  Some states are taking more pro-active approaches--even challenging federal laws that illegalize some weapons or weapon modifications.  Other states have enacted laws that are more drastic than the federal laws to try and control various societal woes--gang violence primarily.  Data from California is not published anymore because so far their laws have been completely ineffective to prevent gang violence.  Gun control advocates often claim now it is not conclusive but still "believe" that it does.  There in fact is not direct correlation to the number of guns in a home versus the liklihood of gun violence involving a member of  that home.  An irony is that Connecticut has some of the strongest gun laws according to the Brady Campaign website.  The guns and the gun laws have nothing to do with the crimes that we wish to stop.  Therefore, like prohibition, changing the freedom of owning guns will have little to no effect on the actual crimes we want to prevent. 

Guns are not the problem, nor are they the solution.  They will have no effect on the behaviors that we are now observing.  The problem is that we no longer hold anyone accountable for their actions or their liability on society.  While that might sound like a simple statement, it really is a mouthful.  We tell kids that they are more important than adults, we blame inanimate objects for their bad behavior, it's the parents' faults, it's always someone else's fault.  We send mixed messages--no bullies allowed, but then relish in the bully behavior on shows like "Survivor", "The Celebrity Apprentice", or any other of a slew of those horrible shows.  We tell our kids that they are the most important thing in the world even when they're in the wrong and wonder why they have issues in recognizing their responsibilities in society.  We turn a blind eye when we see the neighbor throw his wife down the stairs of his patio.  We wimper and whine about whether the neighbor's tree is hanging over our yard, but we fail to do anything if the argument starts to escalate to calm it down.  We almost enjoy watching other people fight over the little stuff.  We blame people for shooting a burglar who came into their home in the middle of the night with ridiculous statements like "well, the burglar wasn't armed" but the fact that he assailed the homeowner, broke his jaw, is lost on us.  We whine like little babies over the small stuff and forget the big picture.  We cannot fix crazy.  We cannot fix the fact that society still has some very serious issues that cannot be legislated. 

Guns are the simplistic answer to a very complicated question, and small answers almost never resolve a large problem.  If that were the case, we'd all be geniuses and we'd have already resolved world hunger, war, religious arguments, and how to keep that pesky fruit fly from re-occuring every few years to ruin citrus crops.   As with war and religion, this is not a small problem.  It is our nature that is at issue.  Not the nature of all people on this planet.  People love to point out that other countries don't have guns.  They are not Americans.  This issue eats at the heart of our nature as Americans and also our nature as human beings.  Some of us are really just flat out crazy; that's a planet wide problem--the whole human race.  But, our American "nature" engrains ourselves with more freedom than in anyone in any other country.  We embrace, love and even sometimes hate our own freedoms, but we by our nature will not give it up.  We will even go so far as to jump to the defense of others (as a whole granted) because it is part of who we are.  Mix flat out crazy with our inherent independence and it damn well may be a recipe for disaster.  We can blame the inanimate objects all we want, but the simple solution will not resolve such a complex problem as the American psyche crossed with psychopath.  Sometimes, we just can't fix crazy. 

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Do you want some relish on your gore and dispair?

There's little to say about the shootings in the last week or so, and yet, everyone seems to have something to say.  The anti-2nd amendment types immediately start a barrage of placing blame squarely on guns.  This seems idiotic to me for the simple reason that a weapon, any weapon, is only as dangerous as the person wielding it.  There are always the types that mourn and cry the loudest--the tele-evangelist types that wish to capitalize on the notoriety.  Then there are stark discussions wondering about the motives of the individuals and what "caused" them to do such a horrific thing.  It's inevitable that we will see pictures and video snapshots of the police at their homes, conversations with people that they worked with or someone that was purposedly "friends" with the murderer, and finally, some picture that the police released or that some family member wanting them to be remembered as they were in their eyes (or for some cash from some media outfit) will be plastered for days on the cover page of Yahoo, the newspapers and their pages, and of course, the barrage of local news stations and the standard national news shows and channels--NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox, CNN, MSNBC....The conversation about the 2nd amendment will fade, although it might receive a blip in everyone's memory like Bob Costas' little agenda serving commentary in the middle of halftime of a football game.  We all remember the rant--how many of us remember which game (and it was only a couple of weeks ago)?  The tele-evangelists have themselves become like blips to most of us--less entertaining than the tabloids since Jim and Tammy Faye have faded from the spotlight.  But what happens to these morons that do this? 

Well, first, let's consider those conversations that are always all over the new stations and Oprah, Dr. Oz, blah, blah, blah.  (Can't tell I don't waste my time on that crap, can you?)  Well, they're always questioning what and why would this person, or persons, commit such a heinous crime.  I remember Colombine quite vividly thanks to the media outlets.  The parents of the perpetrators, the parents of the victims, the survivors and their parents, the ghastly sight of the high school kids with fear and terror on their faces.  Some people must just relish in this.  I mean afterall we, (ok, not me but we in general), spend a fortune in horror movies--the Saw series, Halloween, Freddie, etc.  The news media is out to make a buck too afterall, and "this sells papers" as an old movie quote comes to mind of the old newspaper man screaming that he wants everyone to emulate a reporter who managed to scoop the goriest pictures and murder details.  It's a fact.  We are somehow fascinated by that which disgusts us, or at least should disgust us, most.  But how does all this media rampage help us understand what happened? 

First of all, they always, always seem hell bent on blaming something.  Colombine was blamed on bullies.  Remember, these boys were so bullied that their parents were utterly clueless that there was even anything wrong with them.  The one mother in an interview at the 10 year anniversary coverage said that she didn't know, she just didn't know.  Other parents swear up and down someone should've known.  It's a trist that went over and over in that stupid coverage 10 years later.  Bullies did this.  These boys were victims too.  I remember what went through my mind when Colombine happened, and what went through my mind during that 10 years later coverage, and I know what runs through my mind every single time this happens.  Bullshit!  It wasn't the bullies.  The bullies didn't pick up guns and draft a plan and take several loaded weapons and rounds into the school.  Those boys did--JUST those boys.  Period.  We've made a whole anti-bullying rally over the last decade plus against bullies just because of these dumbass (yes, dumbass) boys.  Give me a break.  I went back to my 20th high school reunion.  The kid who was the shyest guy, bullied a little--ok, from his perspective probably a lot, and had been for lack of a better way of putting it, the "runt of the litter", turned out to be the brightest, best looking, most successful of the whole damn class.  And anyone over 35 remembers hearing stories growing up from their parents and grandparents about how the most popular guy and gal in high school--typically the bully and the super bitch--turned out to be the least successful of all.  Married and pregnant out of high school working some shit jobs just to make ends meet, or drug addicts because they couldn't live up to their own egos, or my personal favorite--working for their parents in the family business and doing little more than being a philanderer with little to no love in their lives and no personal success whatsoever.  The bullies and the super bitches dealt with something that we like to refer to as "karma".  Now we somehow relish in the idea that the "bullied" are invoking their own sense of justice?  All I can say is, WTF? 

Still, the more recent shootings are a football player and a couple of individual "nobodys".  Not bullies or bullied at all.  The football player is probably not the best example, because in reality, this was a domestic dispute that went horribly awry.  Domestic disputes almost never get to the national news--unless it's Sean Connery, Russell Crowe, or some low level NFL player.  But even a low level NFL player (come on seriously, have you seen the Chiefs record?), a NFL player is still a NFL player.  But what about the "nobodys"?  Shooting up a mall and shooting up an elementary school.  Who to blame?  What were their motivations?  Why? Why? Why?  Again, we seem to be more than willing to click on the link to the story, we are all too willing to watch the news for that day and the next couple to find out why, why, why.  As a Beatles song "A Day in the Life" bellows, "a crowd of people stood and stared"....we all stand and stare, mesmerized by the horrific. We have to count the holes, just to know how many holes this person or persons might have had.  We want it to be complicated, lots and lots of holes.  Misspent childhood, crazy abusive parent, drug induced, terrorist ties, drug ties, a prank phone call from radio DJs....there has to be some unusual, weird, out of the norm explanation that will explain it all. But just like the boys from Colombine--it wasn't some magic imaginary bullet like the bullies.  It was them.  It wasn't misspent childhoods or parents or drugs or terrorist ties or even a prank phone call.  It was just these individuals.  The answer is not complicated.  We want, we need, we must find, a more complicated answer, because the simple answer is much, much worse.

The simple answer is us.  We, with each click, each moment that our attention is capatured, we are the reason that these things are happening.  And worse yet, we all already know why.  Each of us understands wanting to be remembered.  Most of us get that need filled in the simplest (albeit sometimes the most complicated) way.  Family and friends.  We will be remembered by someone.  We will be missed by someone.  We won't have the notoriety or the fame, but all of us can understand that need.  Everyone of us fantasized as children of being Madonna or Kathrine Hepburn, Keith Richards or Henry Fonda, Ronald Reagan, FDR, Nelson Rockefeller, Mother Theresa or the Dalai Lama, or some other famous, successful person.  We've all had that one person--even maybe more than one--that we admire and would like to emulate.  But most of us, well, we know that the infamy that those people have comes with a cost and many of us don't want to spend the money.  I'll pass on the media chewing up and spitting out my terrible marriage or the fact that I've been single for as long as I have been.  Pass on my own personal odd habits being a punchline to a David Letterman joke, or my daughter making herself an odd note in history detracting from my own success, shot at, rumoured to be incapacitated, a mogul who's reputation is made on the backs of the downtrodden or the helper of the downtrodden who lives completely meager.  Oh, yes, it might have occurred to me that I wanted to be an actress and singer, a musician, or even a politician.  And honestly, I've never considered living as meagerly as the last two, although I do try to emulate their teachings.  So yes, we really do all get what the real reason this all happens is.  It's that simple.  These people want to be famous.  They want their 15 minutes in the spotlight, and they want everyone to remember their name.  Thanks to the internet, for basically eternity, their names will always come up with a random mall or school shooting.  Their faces will be right there for all to see.  Their notoriety far greater than yours or mine.  My pitiful little blog doesn't even pop if you type my name.  A list of search engines designed to find people does.  You might get my LinkedIn in the list, along with at least 8 other Facebook pages with my name or similar.  That's as infamous as I get.  It's as infamous as most of us get . 

But these people, they want all of us to remember them.  They don't have the talent, the brains or the know-how or just the phyical attributes to become famous, but even a complete dumbass can become notorious.  And that is who each and every one of these people are.  The theater shooting is the most heinous to date.  He wanted to live to relish his notoriety and that POS (piece of sh*t) got exactly what he wanted for a little bit.  The real reason most of these people that pull this crap kill themselves is what the theater shooter would probably change now if he could.  They kill themselves because they know the notoriety is only a flash in the pan.  The flash lasts no longer if you are alive or dead, but the questions go on and on and on--especially at the next shooting.  You might have a bigger impact--mislead people into turning you into some kind of sob story martyr for anti-bullying.  Don't get me wrong, bullying is wrong, but for the most part, most of the bullied--a large majority--are the most successful people in the world.  "The flower that blooms in adversity is the most beautiful of all."  These people have only one motivation to be remembered whether for creating the adversity or not, they simply want to be notorious.  And, we have been all to happy to oblige. 

Next time this happens, and yes, unfortunately there will be a next time, but next time don't click on the Yahoo new links.  Don't go watch the feed on your favorite news media outlet while you are sitting eating your lunch at your desk.  Don't talk about it.  Turn off your television, change channels, and do not buy a newspaper that day or the next--especially if you never buy one anyway!!!  The media makes them notorious, we eat it up, the media makes money, and the next shooter is far more shocking than the last.  The vicious circle continues.  The media and the need to one up the last guy means there will be more grief, more lost lives, just for one individual to gain the notoriety they crave.  Don't stop and stare.  Don't try to capitalize on your own agenda of gun control or religious recruiting.  Just click on the comics.  Talk about the upcoming BCS championship, the Sweet Sixteen, whether Tide is better than Era.  Make what is going on in your day more important, mourn quietly for those that were devatated.   Don't post it all over Facebook how much grief and sympathy you feel for the families.  It's touching yes.  It's also encouragement to the next asshole, and a guarantee that you will be posting something similar again.  Shut up about it.  Don't give the media a click count and the dollar signs that accompany it.  Or, simply relish in the fact, that you are a contributor to the frenzy that these assholes create and accept some of the responsibility for the deaths of the next grusome scene. 










Monday, December 10, 2012

Sheep or wolves

I hear stupid sayings all the time.  I mean, come on, who hasn't heard someone complain at how drastically different two siblings are, particularly if one has landed in jail and the other is a rocket scientist, and that they just can't understand how the two are so different?  Well, we can obviously consider the source.  Most of the time it's someone who hasn't had kids or has one.  It's a stupid saying nonetheless.  I mean most of these people have siblings themselves, and please, no two siblings are completely alike.  Of course, stupid sayings aside, people in general seem to be more and more likely to say stupid things like they are facts.  Another stupid saying is "people are like sheep".  First of all, people that say it are usually insinuating that people are stupid, and sheep are not actually stupid.  Recent studies have proven that sheep are extremely emotional and intelligent creatures.  Yet, because of their extreme herding instinct, they tend to follow each other around regardless of whether it's the smart thing to do or not.  Their failure to act independently is what makes people assume they are stupid.

Still, you've got to be scratching your head at this point, why is their herding instinct that strong?  Well, sheep have figured out that if the herd squishes together (yes, squishes) that the majority of the herd will be safe against predators.  A pack of wolves will only be able to pick off the outer edges of the herd and the predators will only take what they need to survive, not the whole herd.  Yes, sounds a little stupid as a human being who has the capability to think for ourselves.  I mean afterall, why don't they protect themselves and fight back?  Then consider what would they fight back with?  Their wool?!?!  They don't have hands, guns, knives, or any other way a human being might ward off such an attack.  They don't have teeth, claws or even the body frame to ward off a predator like a wolf or mountain lion.  So, instinct might have nothing to do with it.  It might simply be common sense.  If you have no way to protect yourself, the mass should circle and tighten its ranks in hopes that only a couple will be picked off from the outside.  Doesn't sound so stupid now, does it? 

In fact, in England they've created metal grids that hurt hoofs to prevent sheep from entering the Yorkshire Moors.  Apparently the sheep can do damage to the Moors and so some smart human thought this up to keep the stupid sheep out.  Turns out people have witnessed sheep laying on the ground and rolling over 8 feet over the metal grid to the Moors.  Turns out the stupid sheep figured out that they could use their wooly blankets on their bodies to protect themselves from the grid and roll over to the finer grasses of the Moors.  They've also proven that sheep can recognize about 50 different sheep from each other (don't ask me how--some scientist has a lot of time on his/her hands).  These stupid sheep can also "remember" things from 2 years earlier.  Go figure, although frankly I'd be more impressed if the scientists told us they could remember a decade.  But hey, two years definately proves that sheep aren't entirely "stupid".  In addition, they've proven that most sheep recognize a leader in their group and there are now overtures that sheep may breed the "leaders" of the group (studies are inconclusive and only on one breed so far that I could find).  So, turns out that stupid sheep aren't so stupid afterall. 

Ok, well, then is it fair to say "people are like sheep"?  I mean we use the term in a derogatory frame to insult the masses of people that seem to follow "like sheep".  In honesty, we may be insulting the sheep.  People that follow whatever they hear from other people and that are easily led may not be like sheep at all.  The sheep do the herding thing for survival and self-preservation.  Human beings certainly don't have to be following blindly what they hear without verifying the information that they have heard.  Sheep don't actually follow blindly either.  They have "leaders", but either by grooming or breeding, or both for that matter, they choose who they follow.  So the idea that someone follows someone for only what they've heard from others may not be fair to the sheep.  Sheep may or may not be able to communicate, but they're smart enough to think on their own and get over a metal grid designed to keep them out.  Was it one sheep that figured it out and the rest saw and just followed?  Perhaps, and in that case, well, then yes, people could be like sheep.  One is smarter than the rest and the rest of the sheep follow.  However, again, we don't mean it like that when we say it.  We assume all the sheep are stupid.  Therefore the leadersheep (hahaha...) is assumed to be as dumb as the rest of the sheep.  Again, it's an insult to the sheep.  An average sheep herd apparently is 70.  Seventy is like a commune--not a country or planet of human beings.  Seventy could be compared to Ruby Ridge, Waco, and the Jim Jones group.  One leader and a bunch of stupid "sheep".  But the reality is that the sheep will not likely follow another sheep off a cliff as eluded to in old Bugs Bunny cartoons.  Even the sheep seem to think about whether that other sheep is stupid or not.  So comparing the Waco or Jim Jones groups to sheep would be unfair. 

More recently, the media has been leading most of us around by our noses.  People in the middle, well, we're becoming an oddity rather than the norm.  Polarization of the United States population over politics has reached an all time high.  Really.  The last time the country was this polarized ironically was when Lincoln was President.  The middle of the road really wasn't interested in freeing the slaves.  It's a fact that only wealthy country club types were interested in freeing the slaves.  It's amazing how much easier it is in a human society to be outside of the norm if you are on top financially.  Seriously.  Most suffragettes were in fact from extremely well to do families.  Who else could afford to be arrested and be bailed out?  Have an attorney to represent them?  Who else could speak their minds a little more freely than "spoiled" little daddys' girls?  The "sheep"?  Even sheep would probably recognize that we have an obligation to protect the whole, but in that day and age, only the priviledged had the ability to change anything. 

So, the real question is now who is protecting our interests?  If we take on that herd mentality, then the middle, the majority is protected by the outskirts of our populace.  The problem is that we are not sheep.  We aren't a small herd that has no way to defend ourselves or our thoughts.  We are a large masse of various types--millions of people are in a conglomeration of one.  All alike and yet all very different.  We are not a herd.  We are capable of picking up a book and reading, expanding our minds, and in that alone, each and everyone of us is capable of figuring out how to roll across the metal grid.  We can decide to be different, because in reality in the big picture, we are all one.  Like sheep, we used to have families of leaders and leadership.  Kings and Queens, then families that were bound by their forefathers to service and leadership.  The Adams were one of the first families to be bound to service of this great nation.  The Gores and Bushes are a very keen example of that today.  It is not uncommon for families to have generation after generation to have served in the military.  The pride of service expands to our young.  It is not that our children are "sheep", but that we are thinking and contemplating which leads us to wish to emulate that which we most respect.  Yet, many of us don't consider how to not be this term used so incorrectly:  "sheep".  It is our responsibility given the great and wonderful gifts of thinking minds that can accumulate knowledge over decades and still remember and use it years later to think of ourselves as individuals that have the ability, the gifts and talents to exact knowledge that will benefit the whole. 

I've heard people say over and over that they don't talk religion or politics.  There's a slew of reasons that they give-- they don't want to argue or get into it.  How far have we devolved?  We are not "sheep".  The only way that we expand is by learning and no single one of us could possibly take in everything--every newspaper article, every news reel, every book, every subject known to man--and then crunch it out for the perfect answer.  Yet, when we start a conversation with someone we disagree with, many will start attacking the person for simply disagreeing.  This isn't even sheep-like behavior.  Sheep don't growl at each other and attack.  That is not human behavior either.  It's predatory, wolf like.  If you can't listen to another opinion without cutting down the "opposition" with predatory behavior, then you've left the human race.  Wolves live in a pack like mentality where only the alpha dog has any say.  It is not sheep behavior, and it's unfair to call it "following like sheep".  It's a violent nature and it's not what we are--or at least shouldn't be. 

Human beings, we like to think we are on the top of the heap--whether we want to place the appreciation for this on a God or supreme being or just by our own egos.  We like to insult the sheep, but it's not the sheep that we are acting like.  It's the wolves.  Ask yourself next time you assume that you are right, are you?  Are you acting like a sheep?  Seems like they're a gentle nature animal that apparently is capable of thinking.  Or are you in fact acting like you joined the "popular" pack and as a wolf in the larger pack are thereby obsolved of all bad behavior--more like a "dog eat dog"?  I don't like that one either...Dogs don't actually eat their own.  They're not cannibals, but we "sheep" might be. 

Monday, December 3, 2012

WTF?!?! *ssholes and other misnomers...

Yesterday, I was watching CBS Sunday Morning, and there was an expose on "*ssholes".  Yes, seriously.  First, technically, you can't actually say "asshole" on television in the United States.  It's one of those "4-letter words" that the FCC doesn't allow.  But, boy, doesn't it get used a LOT?!?!  They showed it on "South Park" and several movies clips.  It's the big word nowadays.  They went into the fact that we seem to revere some *ssholes now--Donald Trump, Mel Gibson, etc.  Lots of celebrities seem to get the "asshole" tag and really almost seem to relish in it.  They even talked to college professors, one from the University of California Berkeley, that have written whole books and teach classes on "assholes".  Oh, yes, I'm quite serious.  They pointed out that it seems like a lot of us, even more than ever, seem to think that being an asshole is perfectly acceptable behavior.  And, well, that got me to thinking...

First of all, most of us know, at least by now, the sad story of the KC Chief that shot and killed his girlfriend and then turned around went by the stadium and killed himself.  Ok, Bob Costas last night was on the television talking about how guns readily available to this former football star (ok, star for the Chiefs, stay with me here) and others can result in this tragedy.  Well, yes, in some fashion, let's admit that if this idiot (yes, idiot--who else goes and shoots someone for going out on the town with her girlfriends because he couldn't because he "had a game"--hasn't got a game now, has he?--right, back on point), let's admit that if this idiot had not had a weapon in his reach, she might still be alive.  He most certainly would be.  Afterall, he only killed himself because he didn't want to live with the consequences of his own actions.  Oooo, yes, I said it, his own actions.  He might have been on medications or steroids that could have escalated his behavior, but I suspect weapon or not, he might have killed his girlfriend.  If he was upset enough to shoot her, he was definately upset enough to beat the crap out of her where her neck could've been snapped, beat her senseless, or otherwise.  We'll never know.  What we do know is that he killed her.  And, even if we have a gun in reach, normal people don't grab a gun and point it at someone.  Severely abused people might.  Abusers definately might.  But everyday people don't.  Think about it.  The thoughts might run through your mind, but you don't actually act on it, do you?  (Yes, I am one of the train of thought that people kill people, guns are just one of many potential weapons.)

Let's be honest.  People, yes even you and I, nowadays seem to be more and more complacent when we hear about death--particularly murder.  It's fascinating.  One of the most popular televisions shows ever is "The Walking Dead".  Seriously, about f'n zombies.  How much more predicated is that?  Some of us have become so desensitized to reality that we find walking dead people interesting enough to watch it weekly.  We've gone from cartoon comic book style horror to sheer delight over the potential reality of a zombie apocalypse.  So, an asshole or hundreds or thousands of assholes?  Geez, really?  Why would we give that a second thought?  Especially, when we can blame it on the other person or the weapon we used. 

I've recently been reading a lot about people that have suffered immense harm, even death, thanks to some idiots putting eye drops or antifreeze in their drinks or food.  One woman's boyfriend poisoned her over several months.  He's now in jail, because just by the grace of God, her doctor figured out something was seriously wrong.  Thanks to this asshole she now suffers from blackouts and severe headaches.  A couple of assholes are doing time because the people they chose to poison had stomach ulcers.  Hahaha, right!?!?!  One went into a coma and died and the other died on the spot within a couple of hours.  Another suffers the headaches and severe damage to their bowel system.  All because some assholes thought this was funny.  I bet the assholes sitting in jail aren't as amused by their shananagins.  Probably wondering what the hell they were thinking.  Or in typical asshole fashion, figure that it is still the fault of the person they poisoned that they went to such extremes.  How many assholes in this world think that is funny?  Someone suffering for months or years because of eye drops or antifreeze?  All because, well, they're assholes.  But hey, being an asshole is popular right now, right?

There's never been a time better to be an asshole after all.  The internet has people in chat rooms and in blogs making accusations.  Teenagers are posting things about other kids in their schools on their own pages--derogatory remarks about weight, sexual preferences, even photos and videos of them fornacating with unwilling participants.  It's the internet after all and all the depravity of the world comes out feeling, even with their names tattooed on it sometimes, that they are somehow safely hidden behind that computer.  I've even had one of my best friends (yes, she's still one of my best friends--well, I think so anyway) tell me I'm an "idiot" because I disagreed with her politics.  This is a highly intelligent, wonderful woman, well-educated, brought up "right", and used to be one of the most open-minded individuals I've ever known.  She's not perfect by any means, and all of us have the ability to be an asshole once in a while.  But, it's not of her character to be so asinine.  Yet, over the internet and in a moment of something that she feels so adamant about--a complete asshole about her view.  I'm no better; I believe I was a bit asinine back.  But seriously, what made her or I think that was ok?  What makes someone believe that poisoning someone is funny or acceptable behavior?  What makes someone think reaching for a gun is ok in a dispute? 

For one, I believe that we've reached a point where it's acceptable in the back of our pea brains.  We see it constantly in the media--jerks getting not their just desserts, but rewarded for being assholes.  Kanye West, Mel Gibson, Donald Trump...we relish in watching stupid reality shows that make the assholes even bigger assholes for ratings.  We see in the media, both online and on television, constant asshole jokes.  It makes people famous, being an asshole.  I mean, seriously, why should some jerk that makes idle threats and teases a handicapped child be in the mass media at all?  (Refer to previous blog if needed.)  We treat assholes like celebrities--nothing gets you your 15 minutes of fame faster than killing someone with eye drops or bullying a handicapped kid.  Heck, I've worked with people that I would describe as assholes, and I don't believe any of them would stoop so low.  We almost seem to be trying to create a new breed of asshole--one that is a cross between zombie and super jerk.  Almost a dead human being with no sense of right or wrong, no real feelings, and someone that, at least sort of, used to be a real human being. 

We have no apologies for people that we've wronged.  Yes, I know in friendship, like my friend that got all sideways about her political beliefs, we can and should overlook the occassional indiscreet indiscretion.  She and I have been friends for over 25 years.  An indiscretion here or there over the past two decades plus, well, that's nothing compared to the friendship that has endured.  On the other hand, I seriously doubt that that young woman that now suffers from blackouts and headaches has any love loss for that jerk of an ex-boyfriend now sitting in prison for poisioning her over several months.  I bet the families of those two people that I cited that died because of assholes have no love loss for those two idiots that killed them.  I'd bet they even thought about killing them themselves.  But that's the real difference between true assholes and the rest of us.  Assholes have no apologies for anyone they've ever hurt.  Just sorry ass excuses why their actions were "ok" or justified.  When that football player realized he'd taken being an asshole too far, he saw no way out.  Or the only way at that point he saw how to redeem himself for taking asshole behavior too far, was taking his own life.  What a sad end to finding out that you are that big of an asshole...

We've become intoxicated by the idea of assholes.  We watch Donald Trump fire someone on television.  It's soooo funny when he does it (ok, not my words, actually a friend that professed to love that show).  I personally find it demeaning and sad.  But, what the rest of the non-famous assholes have forgotten, and I suspect even the rest of us a little since the asshole in each of us seems to come out more often now than ever, is that those people standing on the other side of the room asked to be there, are compensated for being there, and know going in that they might or most definately will be humiliated by one of the biggest assholes of all time.  Most of us used to have a momentary lapse in reason and get upset at the kid at the McDonald's counter.  Generally, we felt bad afterwards--like maybe we overstepped a boundary.  Now instead a lot of us tell ourselves the sorriest ass excuses to write off our own poor behavior.  We are letting the assholes of the world turn us into the same zombiefied morons that they are.  The question we might want to ask ourselves isn't whether or not it's worth the 15 minutes of fame, but are we really little more than zombies just waiting to burst out of our little shells and eat other people alive?  All I can say is I hope not.