Religion, politics, sex .. and other taboo subjects

I'm not saying, "so what?" in the sense that I don't care or that I don't think that national politics affect me, I just feel very powerless in the face of it. I suspect manipulations of the game that, like even if we uncover them and point at them and demand change, somehow nothing gets done. They could PROVE voter fraud, but what will come of it if they do? I mean if utter absolute ironclad proof were found and presented to the American press, that our election was complete BS, what would happen? Would it be reported by the "credible" news sources? Would it be viewed by anyone who doesn't want to believe it, as simply more "fake news" from "whining crybaby liberal snowflakes?" Would anything HAPPEN? Would investigators be fired or vanished? Would the current holders of power just go right on holding it? So in the face of a system that can be manipulated by those far more powerful than I...I say...with a tired and resigned voice, "so what?" It sucks. I'd love to know the truth and to see just action follow it. But I don't have much hope of that really happening.

And now I'm afraid that "they" (they being the bigtime players) have another weapon in their arsenal. While it is my general policy to believe and support women who come forward with stories of sexual misconduct, assault, etc. it's a worry that people can be bought. And a woman who has strong leanings or connections to a group could be persuaded to "come forward" with something completely fabricated, just to take down an opponent. And no one would have any way of knowing the truth of it, because in legitimate cases proof is rare anyhow. Which only further muddies the waters of getting actual reckoning, safety, or justice for actual victims of sexual misconduct, so now what? Am I pointing to any particular case in the news and speculating that this is the case? NO. Am I saying that I would not put it past people to use this? YES. And I look at my own reactions...when the accused is a Republican, I feel like, well, these people are savages. Look at the President. They clearly have no idea how to behave civilly anyhow, and I feel a little vindicated. Easy, too easy, to believe when it confirms my own biases. Then this morning it was Matt Lauer and I don't know. I just don't know. If someone claimed that a woman was paid by some operative on Trumpo's side to take down a figure of a news org he hates, I would find it too easy to believe that. I will be very interested to see if any such story finds its way into my Facebook feed in the near future. And if it does, then I'll further second-guess if I'm just being told something that "they" know I want to hear!

It's a mess. Too much of a mess to even keep track of. So I'll just get my butt out of bed and get to work every day and go home and love my man and play with my cat and raise my sons and live my life because whatever is going on in the world doesn't change any of that. So. What.
 
The reality of politics.

There's an old meme that I find inspirational: "Think globally, act locally."

By all means, get involved in national elections!! Choose a candidate who represents your views will -- if there IS such a creature -- & do good stuff on her/his/their behalf.

...but realize its limits.
________________

First, the stark reality of party affiliation.

I was chatting (at a bar, naturally :D) with a guy I know who's about my late Dad's age. Harley is mostly a calm Republican (assuming that's still legal :rolleyes:), or at least believes he is.

I chuckled. "Harley, you're not a Republican, any more than I'm a Democrat."

He looked very baffled, so I explained. The following figures are based on the realities of small-town upper Midwest but can be readily tweaked for anywhere.

I said, "The main key is money.
"In the past year, of you haven't donated at least $100,000, you're NOT a national-level Republican.
"If you haven't donated at least $10,000, you're NOT a Midwest-level Republican.
"If you haven't donated at least $1,000, you're NOT a state-level Republican.
"If you haven't donated at least $100, you're NOT a county-level Republican.
"If you haven't donated at least $10, you're NOT a city-level Republican."

He admitted, somewhat sheepishly, he'd made no donation.

"Well, whatever," I said. "Let's go for the bonus round, with actual acts of activism. How much time have you spent
  • as a delegate?
  • staffing a campaign office?
  • making "get out to vote" phone calls?
  • putting mailings together?
  • delivering yard signs?
  • driving people to the polls?"

He admitted he'd done nothing.

"Neither have I. We don't belong to any party. At best, we are commodities -- or rather, we possess a commodity: one vote. That is all that we are worth. And nobody can verify what we actually do with it."
________________

My city has almost 8,000 residents. Through a fluke, I now live about 100 feet away from the mayor. I spent a couple hours chatting with him & his wife tonight (at a bar, naturally :D). I know his brothers well. He still considers my late Dad to have been a great friend.

Dad was the cemetery's sexton (a position now held by my brother). After Dad died, among the well-wishers I shook hands with were a state Senator & a state Representative (who's since an airport commissioner & chairman of the public health commission).

And Mom used to babysit a guy who went on to become majority leader of the state Senate. When she was concerned about the possibility of me getting drafted, or if I was having problems (inevitable, really) with getting financial aid for college, she would send him letters & sometimes call him directly.

I don't have any actual "clout," but I certainly DO have a cordial relationship with local power.

And as much as I wish Bernie Sanders could've had a turn at leading this nation in a sane direction, the fact is that I can affect my "village" much more through direct personal connections than I possibly could through one measly vote.
________________

People who say they want to change the world ought to be carefully scrutinizing who is running for office within a small radius.

Skip the city council. Elect smart, open-minded people to the school board & the library board, because those people DIRECTLY affect the intelligence of children.

Worried about how local housing laws might be used against poly families? Learn how you can work to get someone sympathetic onto the zoning commission.

If there's no good candidate, then FIND one.

Better yet, run.
 
Skip the Mistletoe This Year

Scrolling through my FB page this morning, I saw an interesting meme that suggested that this may not be the best year to hang mistletoe in the office - safe to say that is probably excellent advice.

It did, however, bring to mind a quote from Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" - posted without further comment:

“The country and culture commonly known as "America" has had a badly split personality all through its history. Its overt laws were almost always puritanical for a people whose covert behavior tended to be Rabelaisian; its major religions were all Apollonian in varying degrees---its religious revivals were often hysterical in a fashion almost Dionysian.”
― Robert A. Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land
 
Last edited:
Ravenscroft wrote:
....the fact is that I can affect my "village" much more through direct personal connections than I possibly could through one measly vote.
________________

People who say they want to change the world ought to be carefully scrutinizing who is running for office within a small radius.

Skip the city council. Elect smart, open-minded people to the school board & the library board, because those people DIRECTLY affect the intelligence of children.

Worried about how local housing laws might be used against poly families? Learn how you can work to get someone sympathetic onto the zoning commission

If there's no good candidate, then FIND one.

Better yet, run.

I appreciate the perspective - my wife made it a point to get involved in the PTA just to "keep an eye on what is up at the school" our daughter attends - and soon found herself serving at the district level - where she has the opportunity to offer direct input to the local school board.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al99
my wife made it a point to get involved in the PTA just to "keep an eye on what is up at the school"
Karen replied -
I know it's not the point of your post, or of this thread, but isn't this the only reason to join the PTA?
__________________
~ Karen

Lol - I have discovered that to be true with almost everyone I've spoken with. In fairness though, I have met a couple of folks where the motivation was more about just "being involved and helping out as a service" - but definitely in the minority. :)
 
Okay, I raise the following issue NOT to stir up controversy, but rather because I believe it's reallyREALLY complicated, & ought to have room for discussion.

How do people feel about the #MeToo "movement"?
________________

First, having had happy bisexual experiences, & being close to the gay/lez community, I'm concerned that #MeToo is so heavily heterosexual. Are non-straights so pure that they've never made a misstep?

As well, it seems to be entirely overlooking a gender disparity. The very first time I heard of #MeToo, that evening I was hanging out at the VFW, & the wife of an old classmate was walking around, saying hi & squeezing guys' asses. (IMNSHO, mine is still quite squeezable. :D)

Nobody was freaked out; most found it flattering.

Next day on NPR, I heard someone say confidently that #MeToo wouldn't reveal many instances where women groped or otherwise sexually pressured others (male or female) "because women just aren't like that."

:confused:

And I've also had moments where I misinterpreted wide-eyed one-on-one attention from a woman, & tried to kiss her or maybe suggested we could make a date for further intimacy. That's on me, surely... but I have difficulty feeling as though I should "take responsibility" for damaging someone's life. (And I acknowledge that, having been raised straight & male & white, I might be blinded somewhat by inherent privilege/status.)

The second time that I was a supervisor, the company fell into problems. A few women were at (or slightly above) my level. Largely as a sign of solidarity, it wasn't unusual that one of us would walk up behind another & rub their shoulders for a moment. I took no offense, nor did I mean any, & it didn't seem to impact any of us negatively. Are those long-past incidents now damning? And have such displays of affection become not only reprehensible but actionable?

I have no insights here, rather various shadings of cognitive dissonance. Deep thoughts will be welcome.
 
Okay, I raise the following issue NOT to stir up controversy, but rather because I believe it's reallyREALLY complicated, & ought to have room for discussion.

How do people feel about the #MeToo "movement"?

I like it. I hate the patriarchy, I believe women should be men's equals and be able to walk the streets and go to work without being raped. Duh!
________________
First, having had happy bisexual experiences, & being close to the gay/lez community, I'm concerned that #MeToo is so heavily heterosexual. Are non-straights so pure that they've never made a misstep?

The other day I found a list online (put out by Glamour magasine of all things) of all celebrity men accused of sexual harassment, molestation and rape. Most were men taking advantage of women in a criminal or non ethical way. There were a few apparently gay men (a fashion photographer, a leader of a dance troupe, to name 2, not to mention a famous actor named Spacey), accused of attacking/harassing/raping/etc. other men or teens.

The list was so fucking long I ran out of time/got tired of tamping down my vomit, and had to stop reading it.
As well, it seems to be entirely overlooking a gender disparity. The very first time I heard of #MeToo, that evening I was hanging out at the VFW, & the wife of an old classmate was walking around, saying hi & squeezing guys' asses. (IMNSHO, mine is still quite squeezable. :D)

Nobody was freaked out; most found it flattering.

Another sign of the patriarchy. Men who have lots of sex are studs, women who have lots of sex are sluts. One is a compliment, one is a slur. A young teen boy who is approached for sex by a female teacher is supposed to be flattered and aroused. A young teen girl who is approached for sex by a male teacher is supposed to be horrified and feel abused. And so on.
Next day on NPR, I heard someone say confidently that #MeToo wouldn't reveal many instances where women groped or otherwise sexually pressured others (male or female) "because women just aren't like that."

:confused:

It is always dangerous to generalise across the board. #notallmen, after all. Some women are nasty power mongers/users too. Check out Fox News. Plenty of female Trump lovers there, for starters. There are also women who are proud non-feminists (even on this board, which is very weird), and women who are proud racists. Etc. In general women are more progressive than men. IN GENERAL. There are always exceptions. Your ass grabber seems to be one.

You feeling flattered and proud of your grab-ability, instead of feeling humiliated and threatened, is reflective of the patriarchy. Boom. Congratulations on your power. :rolleyes: :mad:
And I've also had moments where I misinterpreted wide-eyed one-on-one attention from a woman, & tried to kiss her or maybe suggested we could make a date for further intimacy. That's on me, surely... but I have difficulty feeling as though I should "take responsibility" for damaging someone's life. (And I acknowledge that, having been raised straight & male & white, I might be blinded somewhat by inherent privilege/status.)

I don't quite understand this one. You thought someone was flirting and she wasn't? So you hit on her and were... rejected? So what?
The second time that I was a supervisor, the company fell into problems. A few women were at (or slightly above) my level. Largely as a sign of solidarity, it wasn't unusual that one of us would walk up behind another & rub their shoulders for a moment. I took no offense, nor did I mean any, & it didn't seem to impact any of us negatively. Are those long-past incidents now damning? And have such displays of affection become not only reprehensible but actionable?

We have been dealing with the issues of "touch" in public education for some time. Adults in power and authority over children not their own blood. When I was young corporal punishment of students was still legal.

Now a 1st grade teacher has to think twice before hugging a crying 6 year old.

We are going down that road with adult/adult touching now. A hand briefly on a forearm or shoulder, or handshakes are... OK still? A grab around the waist, a hand on leg or ass are right out. Thank goddess.

Even men do that bro hug thing now where the right hands, in handshake position, come in between their bodies when hugging. No groin to groin touches, bro! (Although that's more fear of looking gay than any sexual harassment issue.)

My partner works at a summer camp for youth aged 8-15. Counselors are encouraged to ask other counselors and campers alike if they'd LIKE a hug. "Do you do hugs?" "Are you a hugger?" before hugging. Consent consent consent.

Asking consent before touching, however can be brought to ridiculous extremes. (Since we now know rape in marriage exists...) Pixi and I were watching something about the #MeToo movement on TV, and reading up online, the other day. Then we were getting cuddly/sexy in the course of the evening, cracking each other up. May I touch your hand? May I kiss you? May I put my tongue in your mouth? At one point I gave her permission to kiss me, and her hand went down to touch my hand. I pulled back and exclaimed, I didn't say you could touch my HAND! We were really enjoying the humor caused by the discomfort around the whole touching/consent issue.

It can get kind of ridiculous, but this is new territory that is crucial in the breaking down of the patriarchy (in which is inherent racism, ageism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia and other issues).
 
I think there comes a point where it's a fine line. I mean if nobody hit on anybody our species would be extinct. But there is obvious harassment like Lewis CK and Weinstein. I'm not sure Franken wasn't more political than anything. Kevin Spacey hit on a guy in a bar and he's the devil. If I had a dollar for every guy that hit on me when I was 17-23 I would be a rich man.

But it's not all about power. I've heard stories about harassment in all sorts of situations. I hope the MeToo thing shows women they really do have power. They just need to use it. This is 2018, not 1918.

Why is it merely annoying when a woman makes unwanted advances on a guy, but borderline rape in the reverse? No idea. Thankfully I'm shy and don't hit on women very often. Also thankfully, they hit on me (or used to).

I was told I was delusional for hoping that men, women, everyone would be on equal footing some day. Now I'm not sure what the agenda is.
 
I think there comes a point where it's a fine line. I mean if nobody hit on anybody our species would be extinct. But there is obvious harassment like Lewis CK and Weinstein. I'm not sure Franken wasn't more political than anything. Kevin Spacey hit on a guy in a bar and he's the devil. If I had a dollar for every guy that hit on me when I was 17-23 I would be a rich man.

The Glamour list said Spacey is accused by not one man, but 5 men total, of sexual harassment/molestation. I hadn't been up to speed on that.
But it's not all about power. I've heard stories about harassment in all sorts of situations. I hope the MeToo thing shows women they really do have power. They just need to use it. This is 2018, not 1918.

I think the Ansari story published by babe.net brings this to light. The young woman (who was a starstruck and seemingly naive 22 year old) accusing Ansari (34 years, and used to his celebrity status bringing him willing sex partners) of molestation, imo, had all kinds of places where she could have clearly, verbally, not unclearly non-verbally, put a stop to the sexual aspect of the date. Or at least made it clearer non-verbally, by putting her freeking clothes back on, and not sitting naked on the floor by his feet, with him naked, and her at mouth level with his dick, and then sucking his dick when he asked her to! To me, sucking a naked guy's dick while naked myself is not a way to "slow down and chill." I'm sorry but it makes me lol
Why is it merely annoying when a woman makes unwanted advances on a guy, but borderline rape in the reverse? No idea.

I'm sorry my womansplaining was unclear. You're a stud, a woman is a slut, as I womansplained to Ravenscroft.
I was told I was delusional for hoping that men, women, everyone would be on equal footing some day. Now I'm not sure what the agenda is.

Equality with some reparations. As in the civil rights for people of color movement.
 
Keep in mind guys, harrassment and abuse largely hinge on a power differential.

Physically and socially men have more power whether they conscious of it or not. We don't hear as much about female harrassers and abusers probably because fewer women are in positions of power, not because such behavior does not exist.

Behavior in someone of roughly equal power, such as a friend going around grabbing butts, feels different to those grabbed than a boss, a social superior, or someone physically intimidating, doing the same thing. This also goes for a person coming on to another person. How safe does the recipient think it is to reject the unwanted attention?

#MeToo is not about missed social signals at a party that result in someone saying "Hey! I don't want that!". Think of it as the sexual side of bullying. The bullies are given a pass or even encouragement by their social group. They feel free to keep doing what they want to people in weaker positions because the weaker people feel isolated and defenseless.

Someone who does not acknowledge that they have power that is clear to others may think "If I didn't want someone to do this to me I would feel free say so. This person is not saying no emphatically so they must be OK with it." If they insist on continuing their unwanted behaviors they are still abusing their power.

I'm sure others will explain this better so I will not belabor this point.

Leetah
 
I'm sorry my womansplaining was unclear. You're a stud, a woman is a slut, as I womansplained to Ravenscroft.

I think that answers a question, just not the one I'm asking...lol
Equality with some reparations. As in the civil rights for people of color movement.

Not sure what reparations would look like in either case, but we are on the same page with equality. I'm beginning to think that group was more into conflict than resolution, if that makes sense.
 
I think that answers a question, just not the one I'm asking...lol-/

A woman making moves on a guy is generally not threatening. Most likely she won't be too aggressive, she won't persist, she won't become a stalker. There are far more male criminals than female ones.

Not sure what reparations would look like in either case, but we are on the same page with equality. I'm beginning to think that group was more into conflict than resolution, if that makes sense.

What group?
 
I was going to respond to the question vinsanity posted on why it's so different (annoying versus threatening) when women or men go too far with touch.

This could come to an exercise in empathy. Imagine you are around people you know well and you're comfortable with, and you have a fairly reasonable notion of their motives. Someone touches you in a friendly way. You think nothing of it.

Now imagine you, a man, are in line at a store, or pumping gas, or something. From behind you, someone touches you. You, startled, turn around, and it's a leering woman with huge eyes and messy hair who seems like she's probably on some really wacky drugs. You have no idea what she will do next, but you are INTENSELY uncomfortable.

Now imagine you are completely deprived of your power to defend yourself physically, no matter what she does.

And you're wondering what she wants and how to get away from her.

See for women, when a man touches us in a way we aren't expecting, prepared for, or comfortable with, we are suddenly confronted with the possibility that this man we thought we knew might have an entirely different set of motives toward us than what we thought. And plenty of times, we're in positions of disparate power where there isn't much we can do about it.

The sad thing, for men, is that many of us have learned by experience that we can't really trust men. Even men we should be able to, because we think we know them. I've told the story before about how some boys in high school, including two I considered very good friends and had actually had sex with before, basically gang raped a semi-conscious girl at a party. I was so filled with impotent rage, and carry lasting psychological effects from that whole thing. Far, far more than the one assault incident I was party and "survivor" of myself, way vastly more damaging, was the realization that it doesn't matter how well you know someone, they can still be a monster. And the realization that all the righteous rage in the world only makes you helpless, impotent, and a joke, because there was NOTHING I could do.

So my point is that a big difference between women crossing social lines and touching when they shouldn't (and it's still inappropriate and should be addressed) and men doing so, is often how threatened the person being touched felt. And the latter part of my comment is meant to illustrate that "well, she knows me! She should know I would never..." ah, bullshit. We don't know that anyone would never anything.

Mags: Regarding proud non-feminists: You might have recalled conversation I participated in, as I'm one who won't use the f-word. I only find certain WORDS problematic, as I've said before, mostly because they shut down dialogue and make certain people defensive, and I want to REACH these people and get them thinking. I can't do that if I wear a label on my forehead that automatically makes them not listen. So I get around that, because if a word, or a few words, cause me difficulty, I'll go without those words...I'll use different words...I'll MAKE UP words...but I will get my message across. And many/most of the ideas and beliefs are the same no matter what we call them.

This is behavior, sneaky behavior, that I've adopted after years in far more hostile and argumentative forums than this one. And believe it or not, in some isolated instances, I do think I have reached people and made a difference. Got them seeing things from different perspectives, accepting ideas they'd rejected before. That has value for me. So I'm not ashamed to play dirty and sidestep certain language to get the job done.
 
Back
Top