I got called a Social Justice Warrior, and not in a good way

Content warning: transgender issues, bathroom rights, possibly unpopular opinions.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Hello readers, as we wrap up 2019, I thought I’d write a short post (I can’t make long stories short, but I’ll try) about a series of unfortunate events that had taken place over the last twenty-four hours. While I won’t detail the exact nature of the events or reveal people’s names and genders to protect the privacy of those involved, and thus not risking libel, slander, or defammation of character, I will just write out some of my beliefs to set things straight.
As y’all probably know, I am pretty active in social justice causes, particularly relating to disability and LGBTQ2SIA+ rights. I am working hard to publish my debut novel which features a transgender person and an autistic person in a Latine family. Somebody told me that someone with a disability in a Hispanic family is often swept under the rug. I think saying that is a great eyecatcher when pitching or querying publishers and agents. I wrote these things out of the belief that we need more books about experiences of disability within marginalised communities. Also, I am really thankful that someone was able to articulate the circumstances so well that it inspired me to retitle my autobiography. It’ll now be called, Finding my Voice: A Memoir. before, it was just called My Autobiography. I wrote it in 2013 when I was at the transitional programme at the request of my former vision teacher. I think he wanted to show things about me to some people he was reaching out to after he had won his litigation against his employer.
Back in July of this year, on the fiftieth anniversary of the 1969 moon-landing, someone showed me a recording made by Neil Armstrong. I have actually been ramping up to this by watching the realtime player on Apollo XI’s web site. It was actually during the time that I was at the second Catalyst retreat when I was sent a Whatsapp message, so I played it. Actually, now that I think about it, I think this person and I had a conversation about that before they sent me the message. Anyway, I told this person that I although I liked the recording, I wish Neil Armstrong had used a more inclusive phrase to refer to everyone equally. That’s why I was delighted when I got an E-mail by Pete Buttigiege saying One giant leap for humanity. I thought about how it could be edited. We could splice out the word hue from Houston, take an instance of the word man, and find an instance of the word ity or nity, and then concatenate those phonemes together. Researchers did this recently to deliver JFK’s unspoken speech. I don’t know what Neil would say instead of saying One small step for man. Maybe One small step for me?
Anyway, I have been a little impatient and irritable towards this person, but I think this has been brewing for quite some time due to an unrelated thing, so my message to them might have sounded a little harsher than it was meant to be. Anyway, this person doesn’t have the intellectual capacity for their age, and their perception and reasoning were so flawed that, when they relayed the situation to one of their friends, that person’s perception of me became largely skewed, and it led them to jump to conclusions about me and saying that I was a selfish and demanding person. Interestingly, this person isn’t probably aware how demanding they can be as well. It may have been because I might’ve accidentally triggered a flashback of a previous experience they’ve had with me or someone else. I noticed some hypocracy on their part because they said that they supported Martin Luther King Jr’s speech, and they had no problems with my being transgender, although they were unsympathetic to my gender dysphoria, and they helped me come up with ways to help my brother, so it really didn’t make sense why they would be making such a big deal out of what a friend told them about me. I also didn’t like it how they talked about me behind my back, but when I threatened to take action against them, my other friend advised me not to because they most likely did it out of fear, and they needed somebody to vent. I felt extremely vindictive towards them when I found out that they had relayed that argument, plus another one, to their friend and only made them believe their version of the story.
So, a month later, after asking if I could be part of a Whatsapp group this person was in, I learned that their friend had developed a strong dislike for me because I was an SJW. I did the best I could to defend myself against these accusations, and even forwarded some of the messages to my friend to advise both me and the other person. I know some people won’t often give you the time of day to be put into the crossfire between two or more opposing parties and try to act as the go-between and remain diplomatic, so I am really thankful that so far, they kept standing up for me because things happened because my intentions were misunderstood a few times. One of the opposing parties even asked the other person to urge this person to ditch me, but it didn’t work, which I’ll explain later.
We have this norm in our transgender community choir, Transpose. It says Assume best intentions. It simply means that if you say or do something you think or feels right, but other people might not agree with it, or it gets construed in a totally different manner and leads to an undesired outcome you weren’t expecting, rather than argue about it and putting you on the spot, assume that you meant well because everyone has their own experiences and walks of life, and then try to edify you so that you can try and articulate what you were saying or doing better.
Here’s a good example of this. A couple days ago, I was having a conversation with someone who is blind who ended up misgendering someone at a store by saying, ‘Thank you, sir’, and only using the person’s voice to cue them. That person pointed to their name tag, but they were probably not allowed to verbally contradict the customer, since the customer is always right. That brought up some rampant transphobic comments and a heated debate about how transgender people ought to conform to societal expectation of what is more male-like, more female-like, etc. Someone said that they went into a women’s bathroom, and they heard someone walk in, go standing up, which makes a different sound, and probably engaged in a deep vocal hygiene which made that person feel very uncomfortable. While I understood their concerns, I, as a transgender person myself, refuse to use the bathroom that does not match my gender identity. At the same time, I don’t want to make others feel uncomfortable by using a bathroom that I want to use, but for which my expression or functions don’t match what is expected. I said, in reply to that person, that some transgender people can’t afford to get all the medical procedures needed to pass, but there were some basic things that could be done to pass more reasonably, like shaving, sitting down, and talking in a higher voice. That person responded by saying that it wasn’t very nice for me to define how transgender people should conform, especially since not all of them choose to go through all those medical procedures even if they could afford it. So, it wasn’t just about whether they could help how they functioned. However, my reason for saying this was because I didn’t want more transgender people getting hurt by transphobic cisgender people. Sex segregation has always been prominent despite successful attempts at ending other types of segregation. So, when I use the bathroom, I put a sign covering up the men and women signs that has all gender written on it. Or, I will simply use a gender-neutral bathroom, if one exists. It is definitely a ligitimate concern that women are seeking protection from so-called transvestites and cross-dressers who may potentially be rapists, and I don’t blame them for that. So, what can be done so that we can find a middle ground?
Anyway, I recently published one of my books on Smashwords and KDP, which includes both paperback and Kindle editions. It is about what it is like to go on a plane for the first time, written from a blind and hard-of-hearing person’s point of view. It’ll also be available on ACX, Bookshare, and Learning Ally soon. I’m not sure about BARD, though. When I told the person who I’ve talked to before, they thought I was starting to shove social justice down their throat again, and the situation quickly escalated to its zenith. Then, through certain means which I will not detail here, I learned that the person’s friend has judged me unfairly and falsely concluded that I was like all SJWs and said that words like he, male, man, were pretty much bad words in SJW culture. Some of them even replaced words that naturally began with those prefixes with female versions of those words. For example, if you said history, they would replace the his with hers to make herstory. Others replaced the word dic with tit.
They thought that although social justice causes back then were important to stop black people from being lynched, and why laws exist against discriminating against people with disabilities, today’s SJWs are often viewed as victims or heroic fighters for causes that have already been dealt with, and then make up reasons for why things are sexist, genderist, racist, etc when they’re not. Well, I could just as turn that around and say that today’s anti-SJWs make up reasons for why something isn’t racist, genderist, sexist, etc. when it really is. However, I don’t have too much of a say on racism since I view everything scientifically.
They said that SJWs often viewed white men as being a sin. This person accused me of being tyrannical about how people talked, like why we said things such as oh man, oh boy, oh brother, ladies and gentleman, etc. I mean, yes, I do get offended by using male-default terms and gender-exclusive language, but it doesn’t necessarily mean what this person thinks it means. I also do my best to avoid wirds with gendered connotations, like actors and actresses. Of course, they couldn’t help thinking that because they didn’t know my backstory.
Another thing they said about SJW cults is that they have their own motto, The future is female. Imagine the outcry that would follow if people said The future is male. Ugh! I can’t stand hardcore feminism. It annoys me that people try and act like the lives of women and black people are more important than other peoples’. I mean, it’s important, yes, but it’s not more important. There is a difference. No one is above the law. That’s why I believe in the All lives matter movement. I remember a friend telling me back in 2015 that they almost couldn’t get through reading an article in English class written by a feminist. They said that feminists only did things to help white women, so it took another movement of black women to get them to care about them, as well. Anyway, they both essentially said the same thing, that they thought all men were evil, and that they wanted all men to die.
Somebody said, from my experience from working women and under female management, women DO NOT make good leaders. From my observations, women WILL do whatever it takes to get to the top, without actually doing any real work, including sleeping with their male colleagues. *I don’t know about those who are lesbians or whatever.* Many women can be just as aggressive, even more so than men. As a woman, you have to dress well, make yourself up to the nines, show off them curves, if you hav them to show off, as well as some cleavage. Yes? No. Not me. I am a hard worker, a ‘plain Jane’ warts and all type. What you see is what you get. I am a little more than overweight, which is commensurate with my age. My glasses and outfits say how I feel. And I do not care. I am big enough and ugly enough to know that face will not fit in many companies because I am not glamorous. I am attractive enough but not attractive enough to others. But again, I do not care. I would never be a leader in any given situation due to my honesty, frankness and temperament. I am vocal, too. The binary ‘in power’ do not like that. But I do not care. The gender binary will always compete against each other and both of them will use dangerous tactics to get to where they want to be. Men will indeed use their dicks; women, their breasts. So, a transgender person who has both a dick and breasts? Where do they fit in? Where leaders are concerned it takes a real human being – male, female, or two-spirit or whatever – to genuinely hav what it takes, to obtain the respect, love and trust of the people, rather than use and spit people out once they are done with them. Transgender folks should have the right to take hormones, and parents should not gender their child based on the genitalia they saw on the ultrasound. They should be supportive, not vindictive or unaccepting. What are these women comparing their idea of a glamourous image to? Obviously, they are measuring themselves up to something. Humans come in all forms, shapes, and sizes.
We need masculine, feminine, and neutral energy to run a society like this. That’s why Native Americans and Eastern cultures favoured two-spirits because they saw all sides of the world.
Anyhow, this person wondered if my being in social justice causes has made me disenchanted, like I have been brainwashed in some way, like how cults do using coersive power. I don’t think so, especially since I have pretty good reasons for doing what I do.
The problem is that each social justice movement is selfish in a way that rewards the people in it, and only focuses on them in the current moment rather than devise a plan to help future generations. In my case, though, I’m just helping those who are non-binary because it is a ligitimate concern. I believe that they should be fully integrated in all aspects of society, and that means respecting their language. The percent of nonbinary people having jobs is extremely low. I mean, can you imagine someone walking in, looking like a man, but wearing a skirt and a bra, and talking in a high voice?
This is the truth. I do not hate men. I hate men who think females and non-binary people are worthless. I’m actually advocating for Pete Buttigiege, because even if we didn’t elect a female president by 2020, at least he’d be a lot more caring and sympathetic about females, being gay himself. I know I said at one point that we should start a Female President Now campaign, which would be like the Deaf President Now campaign of 1987, but that was before I learned about Pete. Maybe what needs to happen is that we need more minorities to become president, such as those who are Hispanic or Latine, female, or even blind. I don’t believe in suppressing free speech unless it was really legitimate. Free speech does have it consequences. That’s why there are laws against hate crimes, as well, but unfortunately, I don’t think there aren’t any for people who make verbal and ableist, transphobic, racist, etc harassments towards someone. And yes, it’s true that I do hate people who disagree with me, but only if they disagree with me disrespectfully. If we simply agreed to disagree, then I wouldn’t hate them because they were still being respectful of my opinion.
I guess the reason SJWs have gained such a bad reputation was because of the whole thing with Brie Larson and Hiliary Clinton, and how the media kept forcing political correctness down people’s throats 24/7. They probably dislike me for being involved with social justice, but my reasons for being in it are different from the ones they despise. Here’s a question I asked on Quora. I thought the person’s answer sort of explained the reason for why this person probably disliked me so much. They have been misguided and misled by hearsay information, and probably because of past experience. Some of them told me that they didn’t bother watching the news because of all the bullshit that went on.
Also, the other reason I am very passionate about social justice is because, as a blind and hard-of-hearing person, I’ve found that you can often get support if you have one disability or the other, but not both. That’s why I said in my author biography that intersectionality is important. If you’ve read my posts about what my brother and I have gone through because of our father and mother, and what lengths I’ve gone to advocate for him, then it’ll probably show that I’m a great person. If I didn’t care about social justice, I probably wouldn’t have helped my brother as much as I had. If the people who bully me and criticise me for the stupidest things (like not advocating or speaking up for myself) knew my past, I’ll bet you they would’ve had thought twice about doing that. And, while I don’t wish this upon anyone, if that had happened to anybody, and they were D/deaf-blind and in a Spanish-speaking family, I don’t know how they would have learnt social customs.
So anyway, this friend of mine has been extremely helpful. They were able to plead my case and use that as a basis to explain why they still remained my friend even after all that had happened. I need more friends who feel that mediation and arbitration come easily to them. I wish more people knew how to use peer counselling. We often hear about taking care of yourself in the transgender community, but we often get so lost in it that we forget that we also need community care as well. I once asked, what can a professional counsellor, psychologist, therapist, etc do that a friend cannot do? Friends often mean well, but often give you their unwise piece of advice. Of course, it would be unethical to require professionals to go through those experiences to relate, but it would at least help knowing from the patient’s perspective what they were going through.
So anyway, I recently read some books by Marilyn Reynolds in which one of the featured classes is Peer Communications. They say that the best way to communicate is to avoid saying things like You always or you never. No put-downs, and use I statements whenever possible. So, if you have to talk to someone and do it in a way that won’t fuel the fire to make it worse, then make it seem as though you are an ally to that person, so that the information you’ll be providing would be more tolerable. Then you can explain what you want afterword. The important thing is to emphasise things that’ll make the person feel so bad that they’ll realise that they’ve been being unfair and unsympathetic because they didn’t know about the circumstances. Like for instance, it is true that I never fought back when my brother bit me more than one time. I mostly struggled to run away from him. So, whenever he bumps into me, I quickly run away from him to avoid that happening to me. So, they are basically hurting a defenseless person, but I hate to think myself as one, because I’m constantly fighting to find my voice. My personality sort of fits that of Cinderella, who did not gripe. You can actually read about this on Broad Blogs.
So yeah, in the end, I don’t know if I’ll get back together or not, especially since I’ve been friends with this person since 2010. We did have a similar issue back in 2014, and we didn’t speak for almost two years, but we reconnected again. Deep down, I will always care about this person, because I have always stood up for them when no one else would. I don’t think they thought about that when they made the hasty decision to ditch me. I know that I have helped out this person quite a lot, even when they had been taking advantage of me many times and often not giving me things in return, but I did the best I could at the time. So, knowing that I won’t be their friend for a second time will leave me with a guilt so profound that I don’t know if I’ll ever get over. For the rest of my life, I’ll keep thinking about how I haven’t tried hard enough to explain my intentions. Maybe I should think about how I don’t have to worry about their constant haranguing, or the repetitive things they said and did on a daily basis. They told my friend that they just couldn’t be my friend anymore because we were just too different, and that we clashed on a lot of things. I somewhat agreed with them about that, but we also had common interests, and I tried to use that to leverage some of their excentricities so that they would stop pestering me into doing things I didn’t feel like doing. Still, they made me promise to be friends forever, but they thought it was perfectly fine to end the friendship. I don’t think that was very ethical.
However, I learned of something that might make me feel a little better. I heard long ago that sometimes doing a secret good deed to help someone might make you feel better, and it makes the person feel better, even if they didn’t know who was behind it, but knowing that it got good results is enough to be greatly rewarding. So, if my friend and I agree to do something, I’ll probably donate a small amount to begin with, because I don’t want this person to have a miserable life.
Anyhow, I hope y’all understand now where I’m coming from. I look forward to getting my memoir published!

More Issues That Seem to Keep Prevailing in This Country

I don’t know if I can make this post, or any post for that matter, short because I know how much we all find political stuff boring since it feels like we’re just repeating the same thing over and over. However, I’m going to outline some bad experiences I’ve had on several social media platforms and sometimes in person, and some remedies I came up with right on the spot to try and combat them.
About six or seven years ago, I was out and about late one week night in the down-town area of the metropolis. I had previously gotten left behind because I didn’t know that my group had evidently left, nor in which direction they had gone. So, not knowing how bad things could get, I eventually made my way (with some assistance) back to the dorms. On the way in, however, this rando stopped me and grabbed onto my left shoulder and spoke to me gruffly. I felt very vulnerable at that point because there were several of them just hanging out on the porch, probably beyond drunk, stoned, high, or whatever. I’ve heard horror stories about harassers and predators on the news, and, to my dismay, my phone had previously gotten wet, so I couldn’t use it for gathering evidence. Although I’ve only had one near miss, I sometimes tighten up inside every time I’m walking and hear guys shouting and swearing angrily, which hasn’t happened all too often fortunately. Still, being in the vicinity of guns and fireworks sometimes scare me and I end up getting paranoid.
About three or four years ago, I’ve read some books featuring fictional victims along with a connection to the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN). There were some things that I particularly found fascinating, especially after I read another series later on. If you remember from my earlier post about how babies slowly develop consciousness, and how they mostly operate on autopilot until that happens, sometimes I wonder if an abusive experience could be so traumatising to the point the brain would be able to suppress it completely. It’s absolutely true that when a person is traumatised, they can’t remember a lot of details except for the main ones, which suggests that the brain uses a network of neurones to store gross details and eliminate fine ones. By the way, the two books that I first read were Hopeless and Losing Hope, good choice of words! Then I later learned about a series that was set in my home state of Oregon, called The Programme. Sometimes, especially when our brains are capable of remembering everything as we get older, we let our experiences eat away at our inner core. Still, you might never be too old to suppress a bad experience. But, knowing what I went through nearly three years ago gives a perfect example of how dwelling on it can really change your brain chemistry. I’ve heard researchers trying to invent a prototype that was similar to the one used in The Programme, including using light-sensitive proteins to guide them in mapping out memory cells.
When I went to attend a festival over at Gala Choruses in Denver, Colorado, I came up with a brilliant idea that it was a wonder how it had slipped my mind when I could’ve done this a lot sooner. This was of course if I could make it work legally. Fortunately, many laws have this loophole. My idea was to keep a daily record of my activities in audio form, and sometimes video, if it were warranted. I call it the #RecordYourDay campaign. Now, in almost all states, you can say that at least one person must consent to the recording, which can be constrewed as the person making the recording. Unfortunately, Oregon is not one of them. Here’s why. I once read an article about how the military was concerned that Furbies had the ability of recording or eavesdropping on their conversations. That’s why I believe in recording police brutalities, especially when dealing with unarmed people of colour. Or, why victims of bullies should wear body cams and stuff when the bully turns around and pretends to be the victim to get the real victim in trouble.
Anyway, last year sparked a lot of high-profile controversies about whether famous cisgender heterosexual male celebrities had been taking advantage of certain minority groups in the entertainment and legal industries. This was probably caused by the aftermath of the 2016 election, though it could’ve just as well been caused by a completely unrelated incident. At any rate, a new trend started popping up on social media called the #MeToo movement. Although this is slightly extraneous, I came up with an idea for an invention back in 2015, but when I looked it up, I saw that it was already being considered. I was going to call it an anti-rape device, but surprisingly, someone else had beat me to it. So, for those on my Facebook who were in abject defeat following the approval of a new judge in late 2018, I knew I had to think fast on how best to respond. We should all have the right to be righteously angry. However, it always amazes me (and not in the good sort of amazed) that people truly think we want to make these things up, that we truly want to say that someone (or someones) said or did disgusting things to our body (which could prompt other people to say or do those things), and now they say that women and transgender people need mental help because we’re angry all the time. Screw that. They truly think we want to risk mockery at best, ongoing harassment, job loss, and physical violence at worst? They truly think this? Yeah, I think they do…because they believe the way the media has sensationalised narcissism and other personality disorders, and they’re more than ready to slap those labels on people who are saying things they don’t want to believe are true. I believe it is bottom-of-the-barrel despicable for the president of the United States to mock anyone at one or more of his disgusting ego-building rallies. His mockery is a symptom of the problems plaguing our country from the top down. Anger is important as it motivates us to keep fighting. I also dislike it when some women are like, ‘Oh, well just don’t bother him when he’s drunk’, or ‘If you had just kept your mouth shut, this wouldn’t have happened.’ Seriously! Why do they let these guys walk over them, and then blame you afterword? That is seriously demented, and if anybody says it was just nothing, that those guys were just paying you a compliment, screw that, too!
Some time in September 2018, a new supreme court justice was nominated. However, someone decided to hault the progress by testifying in front of the congressional committee. You can see the testimony for yourself.

People have a right to believe or to not believe, and that is fine. However, everyone was blaming her for coming forward after 30 plus years. But, nobody seemed to be blaming the males who came forward after 30 plus years regarding priests molesting them, like in the recent Catholic church scandal. So, if nothing else, it’s  a double standard. Some people think he’s lying and others think she’s lying. There is absolutely NO irrefutable evidence. All any of us have is her word and his word. It’s the same with Stormy. You probably don’t have any proof, it just rings true. The same goes for Roy Moore. I think one or two of those women had something happen to them by Moore. But then, all these cockroaches come out of the walls and dilute the real accusations. Cosby was found guilty, and I think that was the right verdict, but he had evidence presented in the court of law and was found guilty by his peers. Presumption of innocence is mandatory. It’s the constitution. RAINN has some pretty good information on the topic. Sometimes, this thing about treating people as innocent until proven guilty is so warped that you might as well be treated guilty until you were proven innocent. This has happened one too many times with framings and other things.
Since a lot of attention by the media is chiefly focused on the alleger, I think it is equally important to consider how the alleged person might be feeling, even if you don’t think they are worthy of consideration. If that is how you feel, then you are probably biased towards that person. Maybe you’ve had a similar experience and found it easier to sympathise. This is a huge problem in this country when one is attempting to select an equitable jury panel for a high-profile case. Although the media is free to impose upon such cases based on the first amendment, I believe there should be some restrictions to prevent the media from covering these things until a vertict has been reached and the case was at an end. Of course, no one can stop any juror from seeking information from outside sources. However, if you stopped for a minute and really thought about it, then why in the world would you expect Judge Kavanaugh not to be emotional and pissed? Just once, think of what it must be like to have someone lie about you to the world. The whole entire world. Because that’s where he’s coming from. Unless she had clear, concrete, and consistent evidence, that went all the way through, along with reliable witnesses, I cannot find any legal basis to accredit Ford’s testimony. That is not to say that I am invalidating her unsubstantiated and uncorroborated story; I just don’t see any way she could’ve won. She couldn’t tell you when it happened, where it happened, who was there, how she got there, how she got home, and who the people were at the party… well, except Kavanaugh. She could only tell you what happened, and of course, only fate knows why. So, we are to take this as the adequate burden of proof. This is America. Due process is a fundamental principle of our nation when the constitution was ratified. This witch hunt was orchestrated by the Democratic National Committee and nearly destroyed a man, his career and his family. Of course he was pissed. This stunt could’ve made him lose everything. You can say what you want about ford’s and Kavanaugh’s testimony–her story stinks to high heaven, he could’ve been pummeled with death threats, her accusations had no merit, and so on and so on. My point here is that I want to convince people to really think with an open mind and stop jumping to conclusions because of how the media portrayed a certain group of individuals.
I’ll give you another example that someone had expressed on the same platform. It was evident by this person’s demeanour towards Kavanaugh that they were influenced by information that could only be described as hearsay. What supposedly happened was that Kavanaugh had made some decisions regarding pregnant women with developmental disabilities, and how he encouraged their guardians to consider abortion. Of course, many disability rights advocates would argue that no matter how severe one’s mental capacity was, that person still had a right to speak their opinion in whatever way possible. Others would argue that it was medically necessary because the person was mentaly or developmentally unstable. My point here was that this person had gotten this story from a media source, and since they generally tend to be extremely biased, I suggested that said person call the courthouse directly and purchase an audio record of that case, so as to get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This article, as well as this second article do a pretty good job at explaining how we should choose our battles in life.
Now, here’s another perfect example of why we have such high standards in this country, and why it is further exacerbated by instant gratification. About a year ago, someone told me that they had read an article in which a female had consensual sex with a male, but for whatever reason, she disliked him to the point that she fabricated stories in order to slander and defame his character by claiming that he had raped her. Here is a similar story that describes that kind of situation.
Of course, you’d expect everybody to immediately sympathise with her. Still, there are no words to express how the behaviour of so many is causing such anguish. There was a time when we all depended on our fathers and forefathers, our grandfathers, our husbands, boyfriends, or any other male-identified figure to fight for our freedom. A freedom to love, to work and worship as we please. Now to hear that our own disgusting leader flagrantly mock a somebody who had the courage to tell their story, to listen to a contemptuous crowd egg the mocker on, to basically be told that women don’t seem to matter? As you say, to daily see the way the disabled are disregarded? I just cannot fathom this.  I am not a cynic, (or I try not to be), but there are just times that sicken me.  I know that the higher power will make things right in the end, but being patient is so hard. I completely and totally agree, which is partly why I bothered writing a post about it. It’s to raise awareness. It’s to call out bullshit. It’s to let people know that this ugliness happens, and women–or at least anyone who identifies as female–aren’t going to take it silently any more. But You know what, some conservatives label liberals as entitled. The truth is, it’s the conservatives who are entitled, especially the white, straight, cisgender men. They are entitled to act and speak as they please with impunity. They have been taught from day 1 that no matter what they do, they’re at the top of the food chain, even now when they are the minority. It’s no wonder why they are feeling threatened. This country, not to mention the majority of our societies, are extremely patriarchal and male-dominated. And, part of the reason I don’t really like feminism is because although they claim to advocate for equality, the truth is that they really want to advocate for female domination, so they end up turning misandristic. So, what would happen if we had the same male gender, but of a different type? What if we had more gay men lead the nation?

Before I conclude this post, I’d love for you to all head over to Pete’s campaign and sign up to become a volunteer and a donor. We need all the support we can get if we are to help him reach the next level.
Stay safe and until next time!

Some thought-provoking thoughts on our political system

Hello, my faithful readers.
Today I thought I’d give you all a quick reality check regarding our current political dilemma by sharing something I saw on Facebook a couple months back. After you read this, feel free to watch the supplemental video.

Civil rights, women’s rights, LGBTQIA+ rights, ADA, social security, it’s all a hustle. They happened because lawyers insisted the LETTER OF THE LAW be followed, and judges and congress went along. 
Word, the constitution, bill of rights, and the declaration our republic was founded on were not built for all y’all. The words written were of, by, and for the people who wrote them. They were the elite white, Christian cisgender heterosexual males with money, status, and power. They looked around the room at all the other household names, people with servants and concubines, people who could sign for anything they wanted, people with so much land they’d likely never seen it all in some cases, and they built a country for themselves. 
That they ended up hoisted by their own petard, their descendants forced to share a little of the great bounty of a continent was not what they expected.  It was a clever game taking advantage of the rule of law. 
They didn’t build it for us. They built it for themselves, and their natural heirs, names you know, people with jets and metric shit tons of money.  Insisting on equality against such a backdrop  is as foolish as the child who insists on having their own money. They pat ’em on the head and give them a quarter to make their bed, something they made them do anyway, then charge them thirty cents for lunch. 
Until and unless we confront the very nature of the republic, we are still playing a game, running a con, hustling the hustlers who set the whole thing up. 
If we are to have equality of opportunity and equitable allocation of resources, we must first call the game what it is, then rewrite the rules. Otherwise we make our beds and go in debt for lunch, and the adults snicker behind our backs and pat us on the head.
I hear you.  The more I peel this onion, the more I realize it is, like an onion, the same all the way to the core. 
Western and middle eastern cultures, those based on abrahamic traditions, are sorting systems through and through. I don’t know enough about eastern religion to comment too much on those. 
When your culture is based on a sorting of “us vs them”, damned vs saved, when that is a basic tenet, you’re pretty screwed to build an inclusive society in anything more than name only. 
I’m kinda an oddball. I was 11 years old when I questioned the catholic dogma of salvation through baptism and confession. It was 1967, and I’d seen the iconic photographs of Buddhist monks setting themselves on fire in protest of the war. I asked how it was that obvious martyrs very like those I’d learned about in my catholic school were not going to heaven because they were not catholic. That seemed so arbitrary and immoral to my 11 year old self I couldn’t accept it. I
Left the church soon after, convinced that arbitrary sorting based on the luck of birthplace and what church your parents take you to was nothing I could honor. 
Though a working class kid, first in a small town then out in farm country, I learned the redneck code, and the ethnic sorting of the mill town, where Italians and polish  and Puerto Rican’s and blacks had their own neighborhoods, yet a half Irish, half French Canadian and Mohawk kid didn’t really belong in any of them. In the rural area I learned the Methodist and baptist churches looked down on one another, and both derided Catholics. They only all agreed on one thing, those who were not members in good standing of one of the above were “lowlifes”, to be avoided. Hello, present and accounted for. Now watch me dust your asses on the regents exam. But I didn’t get many party invites, don’t ya know. 
Military service and college and living in different parts of the country and later in the Caribbean, exposure to cultures from around the world, working in industries as varied as teaching “educable retarded” to running a literacy agency, to my own shooting sports accessories business, to working as a contractor, I’ve worn all the shirts and hats, spoken the lingo, and followed the party lines, all the while aware that I was an imposter, a chameleon, the devil walking among them. 
In my quiet times I wrote a fair bit, never too deep, lest I blow through the veneer. 
What I learned is this. If you’re looking for GOOD people, there is no magic formula. You can get stabbed in the back in a sanctuary or university conference room as easily as in an alley. They just use different tools. 
I’ve learned to live my life loyal only to one race, the human race, without regard to anybody’s version of who the cool kids are. I’ve been treated well and badly by about every stripe of people you can pigeonhole. If they’re consuming energy and oxygen, they’re somebody, and have value. Some do terrible things they get locked up for. Some get to live in houses on top of hills after committing atrocities. Good people are where you find them. Any effort to stratify and exclude based on unearned characteristics is bullshit, only works for the chosen as long as they can keep it, and is unfair on its face.
For those of us by definition less able than the fully fit, understanding  where we fit in the mindsets of the dominant culture is a survival skill. If you don’t know what they’re thinking, how they allocate resources when it gets tight, you better be good looking, talented, and lucky.
Words are stunningly versatile things.
They have the ability either to create or to destroy, to lift us or to level us, to give us wings to crush us beneath their weight, to inspire us to reach
the loftiness parts of our nature or to drive us to the depths of our blackest darkness.
We know this from the way other’s voices have shaped us in both redemptive and debilitating ways.
The words of others can become for us the language for all we harbour unspoken in our hearts; every unfulfilled longing, each unhealed wound, every beautiful
aspiration, all the catalogued defeats, each perceived wrongdoing.
And the words of powerful people become catalysts for revolutions; hubs around which multitudes gather in tribes of affinity to create the world they dream
of, whether hopeful or horrific. Religious prophets and pop stars and political leaders all tap into the hearts of people in order to move those people’s
convictions from heart to hand—to move them.
Cesar Sayoc is the logical manifestation of the language of this President.
He is the sum total of his every reckless insult, irresponsible untruth, and calculated attack; the disfigured Frankensteined monster, made from every
factless conspiracy theory and incendiary rally rant, each corrosive verbal attack on people of color and immigrants and women (cisgender and transgender) and the media.
Cesar Sayoc is the clear accumulation of a seemingly endless Presidential Twitter feed, filled with nonsensical ramblings, spewed from the head of a man
who feels no accountability for the collateral damage of his words—either on those who are his targets—or those weaponised by him against them.
The words of a President weigh more than perhaps anyone else’s. There is a gravity to the voices of our leaders that corporately shape us in ways few things
do. They have always determined the trajectory of our nation, carried us through unthinkable tragedy, clarified who we are as a people, driven us to reach
for dreams that we believed were beyond us.
The words of a President, when wielded responsibly and with decency, help us to tap into our shared humanity; to remind us of our interdependence, of our
commonalities, of the responsibility we have toward one another.
But when tossed around carelessly, the words of a President (like this President), ratify people’s phobias, stoke the fires of their bitterness, sanction
the violence they cultivate in their heads, legitimise their irrational bigotry toward their neighbours.
Cesar Sayoc isn’t a surprise.
He may be an terrifyingly extreme extension of this President’s words, but he finds himself on a long and growing continuum of millions of angry, scared,
unloved, people who believe the world has wronged them—and now have someone (the most powerful someone), to tell them that they are right.
Whether it’s in racial epithets screamed at strangers in traffic, xenophobic signs posted near voting booths, venomous racists social media diatribes from
grandmothers, xenophobic outbursts at holiday meals, or vans plastered with anti-media propaganda—monsters are being made by this President’s words.
Yes, words make things and they kill things.
Cesar Sayoc is the kind of monster this President has helped create in unhinged campaign rants and social media tantrums and “lock her up” chants” and
dehumanising rhetoric—and the worst of it all, is that he seems oblivious to his culpability, defiant in his outrage, and determined to double down, no
matter how many people he places in harm’s way.
He refuses to use his words for anything but division and injury and enmity, and so those so desiring war, those seeking consent, those who share his heart—find
licence to be horrible.
 This President is a monster-maker.
It’s time we admitted it.

%d bloggers like this: