A Challenging Thought Experiment...bear with me, while I struggle through this...

Some minorities have the luxury of being able to commiserate publicly, while any attempt to unify by my ilk is met with raised eyebrows, news media coverage we never asked for and all the condemnation you might expect from a lynch mob or a firing squad.

Some minorities are met with bleeding hearts and open arms.

Some minorities write poetry, and are encouraged to find their voices, raise their spirits, and heaven forbid anyone threaten their freedom of speech.

But there are some thoughts you are not even allowed to whisper, except in vetted company.  Some jokes will even cost you your job.  Some ideas are so taboo you will be publicly vilified, mentally crucified, humiliated online, paraded and sullied and impossible to hire.

So there is deep-rooted anger, envy, rage, sadness, isolation for some minorities that cannot be assuaged or addressed or comforted...or even publicly allied...until recently...and even now it is unsafe to hold certain opinions or say certain things...

But now we have a very large, very public shield to hide behind.  And some of the members of this shield say and think things that are worse than what I think or say.  I can feel superior, since I would never mock a disabled person, while feeling a stealthy relief, and a quiet gathering hope that there are many more of us than I ever hoped or dreamed.  I see more than 60 million people voted with me, and I will never know if any of them agree with my specific brand of thoughts, or the taboo things our family taught me to keep away from "mixed" company.  (Pun intended.)

I can pretend in public, because the closet I am in protects me in such important ways, and the necessity of my closet has been bitterly woven in with our beliefs to fortify our anger and our hatred of whichever "others" have the public privilege, and government programs, and protections.

This secret can and must stay secret, unless we have established safety.  There are signals and code words, secret handshakes or phrases.  We are united online in new ways you cannot imagine, and now we have been validated.

We cannot seek refuge, so screw immigrants and refugees.  We cannot gather together in public, in protest, even peacefully, without being labeled a hate crime.  So we find each other, and we let off steam through private e-mails, private messages, secret groups, in person get-togethers.  We see hypocrisy all around us, and we are the unsung, unprotected, most misunderstood minority.

[I weep, because a part of me instantly celebrated when the West Virginian, Pamela Ramsey Taylor, and the Mayor, Beverly Whaling, both wound up losing their jobs or resigning after a tasteless racist joke exchange on Facebook.  In the aftermath, I tumbled through a series of mental gymnastics.  Ms Taylor and Ms Whaling were absolutely out of line, and now I begin my horrific gymnastics.  How would I feel if I had to resign after making a horrible joke about DT?  Did the punishment match the crime?  What sort of limitations are there on freedom of speech?  I disagree with their joke and banter, and I have every right to voice my concerns...but don't they also have the right to make their opinions known?  It is illegal to shout "Fire" in a crowded movie theater if there is not a fire, because it presents a public safety hazard, and would diminish the effectiveness of such an alarm in case of actual emergencies.  That is pretty straightforward.  I don't think anyone is protesting the limitations on freedom of speech in that case.  But if we want to rise above the times of internment camps, and McCarthy-ism, how can we create a safe space for the people to express themselves without fear of losing their jobs?  I want to make it Crystal Clear that I am not advocating for racism, sexism, xenophobia, anti-semitism, or anti-LGBTQ, or any other hateful speech.  This thought experiment is my attempt to imagine what it might feel like to hold certain beliefs - maybe because of a religious belief for example, and be blocked from safely saying those beliefs publicly.  I am still processing these thoughts and finding it very challenging.  There seems to be a swath of undefined territory between the "Fire" in a theater version of speech restriction, and the freedom we take for granted.  In that gray territory are statements that are considered politically incorrect, outright lies, and opinions that are highly charged.  I know people that are adamantly pro-choice, and people that are adamantly pro-life, and they can have a passionate debate, discussion, or choose to avoid the topic...but there is no shame in expressing either opinion.  One of the things that has happened during this opening of the floodgates is that it has come to light that there have been quite a few people who feel their opinion is unsafe to express, and this suppression has broken wide open, for better or for worse, and now we have to face it, learn from it, evolve.  (Best case scenario.)  I have learned more in the last 2 and a half weeks about pockets of privilege than I ever realized and it has been eye-opening, but this one...the one that I am trying to find empathy for above...has been the most challenging one to even consider.  Maybe it's because I am Jewish, and I find it extremely difficult to imagine anyone associated with neo-nazi/white nationalism as a fellow brother or sister in pain, hiding in plain sight, spending the last 60 years huddling in secret.  I do not want to call for empathy.  But my soul requires I consider it, because we must stop calling to squash entire races of "others" based on religion or skin color or sexual orientation or anything else.  And calling for Unity means considering this minority too...as painful as it might be.]

Why I'm with her

I think my grandmother might have wanted Bernie to be our nominee, he aligns with so many core-values I know she holds so very dear.  A lot of us still do love him and what he stands for.  But if we can't have Bernie as our nominee, I know that she would have been fiercely in Hillary's corner.  And now, for the first time publicly, so am I. 

She is certainly flawed, no doubt about it.  Maybe she comes across school-marmy to some, or triggers mom-thoughts in others.  Maybe she's not relate-able enough.  Maybe she is kind of boring, or a stickler.  Maybe she smiles too wide, or not enough.  Maybe she tries too hard, or not hard enough.  A woman being scrutinized for showing too little emotion (cold-hearted b*tch) or too much (hormonal and hysterical) emotion.

Sound familiar?  Being measured not on our content but on our delivery is so frustrating, I wrote a whole blog about it.  In case you missed it, here's a link: Just a Little Uptalk(?) with a Side of Vocal Fryyyyy

And all the avoidance of the topic of gender, all the while hinting and strumming the patriarchy.  We haven't asked ourselves out loud in a long time, but the question of a woman's place in society, a woman's strengths and weaknesses, a woman's temperament, a woman's judgment is hovering around the outskirts of this whole campaign like some kind of toddler asking why who won't be silenced by "because that's how it's always been." 

Maybe she is boring.  And steady.  Willing to take calculated risks, such as the (from his perspective anyway) low-blow about DT looking for tax loop-holes, which so famously provoked his "such a nasty woman" comment, which has fired up - finally (and hopefully not too late) - a *lot* of women.  I did not watch the Benghazi hearings, but I understand they went on for many, many (11+) hours.  I did sit through 2.5 out of 3 of the Presidential Debates. 

Maybe she will compromise on something that makes me very unhappy sometime in the future during her term.  Maybe she will continue hemorrhaging money into our military, rather than education, veterans, social services programs, or building a stop-gap so that Obamacare does not increase the premiums as much as is being predicted.  I would hate that, for sure...but I don't think our newsrooms would be able to keep up with the daily back-pedaling or weekly gaffs and scandals.  DT has bragged about being predatory/inappropriate with women and taking advantage of his celebrity status.  Whether you believe he was egged on or not, no one forced him to say the words, and no one forced him to feel this way toward beautiful women...oh wait...it was their beauty, right?  He had no control their beauty - it's like a magnet...

My paranoid mind is thinking the predictions about increasing premiums for Obamacare were released at a suspiciously pivotal time in our election cycle - was it to create fear and influence the voters to choose DT?  Of course the audio of DT's unfortunate bragging about violating women's personal boundaries also was released at a pretty strategic time to influence voters to choose HRC.  So this paranoid mind of mine begins to wonder what is at stake and who stands to benefit and who is pulling the strings, whipping the media's nose this way and that?  Have we all seen Wag The Dog, a brilliant political satire?  If not I highly recommend it.  But who is producing this shit-show?

At the end of the day, I am a lot of things, but I am also a woman.  I went to a highly-intellectual college where I tried every day not to allow my gender to be a factor...but it was a factor more days than I care to admit.  It was a factor when the young men around me would debate each other and dismiss my question or contribution to the discussion, or ignore me altogether.  It was a factor when my emotions made my voice shake with passion and conviction but my peers heard that shaking as weakness.  It was a factor when I started to slowly swallow my own voice, and hope someone else would say my thoughts.  And not just in college, because there have been times in my career as a manager that I had to get creative in order to get results.  I found a male counterpart to speak to a male staff-member because at the end of the day I didn't need to be perceived as powerful, I needed to get a job done.  I had to be willing to be underestimated, undermined and side-lined sometimes, and swallow my pride to get a result.  I am still learning to control how my face shows my emotion, and electing to navigate waters that don't require me to fake a stone face.

By the way, I cannot imagine DT ever had to swallow his pride to get results.  Just saying.  And maybe some of you are voting for him because you believe his show of strength will get results...and maybe they would get short term reactions/responses because he is basically a bully.  But I also think he would burn too many bridges, and stuff it to too many foreign dignitaries and we would be left cleaning up the mess in 4 years...if it can even be repaired.  No.  I cannot allow for that possibility.  The risks are simply too high.  We need someone more moderate.

I have never been married, but I have been cheated on, and maybe a part of me resents the fact that she didn't choose to leave Bill during or after the harrowing humiliation and public proceedings of the mid-'90's.  Maybe I thought staying was a choice that showed some kind of weakness in her, or that she in some way sanctioned his behavior by not divorcing him, or separating from him.  On the other hand, maybe staying takes more strength of character than leaving does.  Maybe staying gave their marriage a new dynamic.  It is not my place to judge, really.  But in a way we are being asked to judge who might be best at leading this country, and aside from policy their lives are also sort of on trial.  But why oh why is her marriage on trial while he has had three marriages, two of which began as affairs??  Is it still high school where if a boy is promiscuous he is some kind of stud-muffin and a girl who gives it up is a slut? 

I know that any political figure will have gaffs, and need a spin room.  But electing a reality superstar like DT whose sole purpose seems to be to stay in the headlines as much as possible (for better or worse) would be a COLOSSAL MISTAKE.  He has demonstrated to us in the last year that he does not have self-control.  He does not keep his cool under pressure, and he takes pride in being unscripted, but the things that come out of his face unscripted are nearly always offensive to someone.  He has not demonstrated a willingness to admit wrong-doing or wrong-saying, has no desire to compromise because he is only interested in winning, or screwing his opponent.  And he certainly does not have a shred of humility.  He is the classic abuser, in the sense that he tells you what to expect and also tells you you're gonna like it, and then delivers, and then if you object he starts calling you weak or sensitive or whiny and suggests you're over-reacting.

I hear the Donald might get his own channel on television...and that would be perfect.  People can choose to tune in and watch All Trump all the time, let him rant and rave and rally on the telly.  Like the evangelicals, he'll probably have quite the following and they'll probably even open their wallets for him, and fund him.  Let them make a program where they address him as President Trump and he can afford to build his own little pretend Oval Office and be like a little critic jabbing at all the mistakes being made by the actual current administration.  He could get rich doing more of that for a very specific audience of neo-nazis, KKK members, and other white-supremacists.  Let them have their outlet, they clearly need one.  Let them voice their intolerance to each other.  Let it end there, safely, in a make-believe TV-land...there could even be a children's show called Mr. Trump's Neighborhood.  (I shudder to think, but let them have their slice of the universe...just leave the rest of us alone.)

Hillary is imperfect, as we all are.  And she is not pretending to be otherwise.  She does not claim infallibility, or make so many promises of greatness or winning.  She is not as exciting to watch, perhaps.  But I think we've had enough excitement.  She is capable, and she is steady, and I believe she will win this race, and more than that - I believe she will guide this nation through some treacherous waters, while keeping a few important priorities straight, not the least (nor the most) of which is Roe v Wade.

And though I do not know HRC any more than I know DT, I see in her a breadth and depth of experience and character.  I see in her self-control.  I see her ability to keep her cool under pressure.  I see in her the ability to rise above conflict.  I see in her the impulse and desire to reach across the aisle and compromise - to find common ground.   She has demonstrated a willingness to learn and evolve, a willingness to admit wrong-doing or wrong-saying (famously recently the basket of deplorables comment, which she has apologized for) and the steely determination to soldier on through the thick and thin.  She has the ability and humility to shoulder the awesome responsibility of being this great nation's leader.  And I'm with her - 100%.

Donald Trump: The Accidental Gadfly

My own political leanings aside, I have to encourage all my readers to look up Plato's Apology.  (I am linking to a browser version rather than a PDF, but you can find several available by searching, and I am not vouching for this particular translation.  Full disclosure, it is long, but worth reading...) Before sitting down to write this, I had several interesting conversations which made me think back to college days when we read and discussed Plato.  We had on our campus a college paper lovingly named after one of Socrates' most famous nicknames: The Gadfly.  For any who are unfamiliar with this name, it is both a literal flying bug that is a nuisance, and in intellectual circles represents a willingness to be disliked - a willingness to play devil's advocate - a willingness to go against the majority.

Here is the relevant quote by Socrates: "For if you kill me you will not easily find another like me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by the God; and the state is like a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has given the state and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. And as you will not easily find another like me, I would advise you to spare me. I dare say that you may feel irritated at being suddenly awakened when you are caught napping; and you may think that if you were to strike me dead, as Anytus advises, which you easily might, then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you gives you another gadfly."

I told one friend on the phone that Mr. Trump might be a gadfly to us all right now.  I caught myself off-guard loosely comparing this unpredictable man to Socrates - a man characterized as having both humility and wisdom.  So I started re-reading Plato's Apology, and I was immediately struck by the similarity of some of the language to that of our unlikely candidate for president.  The name Apology is a bit misleading by modern terms.  In ancient times, Apologia meant "reasoned defense," and that is appropriate since it is an account of Socrates' defense at the trial which ultimately resulted in his death sentence.

I don't intend a side-by-side comparison, I certainly don't think of Trump as an intellectual, and there is no way of knowing whether any of the similarities are even intentional, or if they are merely coincidental.  On the one hand it's hard to imagine there is a calculated agenda or plan, but on the other hand it is also dangerous to underestimate the man, as our recent history has proven.  One small and unimportant similarity is that they are both 70 years old.  Another is that Socrates talks off the cuff, not implementing rhetoric that would have been customary.  And yet another is that he claims to have many enemies because of his truth-telling.  (Telling it like it is since 399 BC!)

Now, I have some friends who have talked about unfriending Trump supporters from their social networks and I implore you do not limit your news feed in this way!  We must reach past the distasteful memes and articles and quotes into dialogue.  The danger of removing all those who disagree with us from our social circle (either virtual or literal) is real.  One danger is a false sense of security, feeling all the world agrees when it fiercely does not.

We cannot afford to surround ourselves with the comfort of only like-minded individuals.  This goes for Conservative and Liberal and Green and Independent parties alike.  We must talk to one another if we are ever going to find solutions to problems.  If nothing else we can all agree there are problems.  As uncomfortable as it is, it is healthy to entertain opposing views, and search for common ground.

I am finding myself ultimately challenged.  How is a person who preaches tolerance most intolerant?  When confronted with an intolerant person!  If I cannot tolerate intolerance, then am I a hypocrite?   I may struggle to tolerate certain belief systems.  But if I reject those belief systems and the people who hold them I am no better than those I judge to be intolerant.  So it is easy and virtuous (some might argue) to extend sympathy to refugees.  And at the same time I am disgusted by the thought that I might share my country with people who believe in white supremacy, or any number of other hate groups.  It is a physical revulsion I feel towards a person or group of people that might be Nazi sympathizers.  And yet part of what makes our country amazing is that one group is not superior to another, so I cannot advocate for expelling white supremacists in the same breath as I advocate for allowing well-vetted refugees into our country.  (At least not without calling myself a hypocrite.)

And as broken and imperfect as our legal system is, I appreciate that an accused person is innocent until proven guilty.  I want to live in a country that has freedom of speech, and the bile in my throat rises as I attempt to state maybe that includes hate-speech...?  We certainly need to continue to have freedom of the press.  I want to live in a country that won't lock up our journalists for reporting the truth, even if that truth is unflattering to our other imperfect candidate, Hillary Clinton.

But planned or unplanned, we cannot deny the result.  There is something irresistible, we cannot ignore Trump or his words (whether we agree or disagree) and so many of us are whipped into a frenzy of either agreement or disagreement.  Either way his controversial nature and devil-may-care delivery demands a response - so visceral.  If nothing else he has become a catalyst for erupting thoughts, and many who have been silent before are finding themselves compelled to speak up.  And that is a good thing.

It is messy, America.  But maybe we needed an atrocious series of unfathomable quotes to come from a popular (!?) culture icon to shake us awake, and make us bubble it all to the surface.  All kinds of previously unmentionable commentary has found a reason to shout - some I find abhorrent, but all needed to find the light of day.   In that way we owe a deep debt of gratitude to Donald Trump, our very own accidental gadfly.  At the end of the day if these discussions and conversations have the opportunity to enrich our point of view, increase our curiosity, allow for educational cross-pollination then it could be an enormous benefit.  Conversely if it merely validates and galvanizes racist sexist neo-nazi or KKK beliefs then we might be in a scary place - but even if that is the case, AT LEAST WE KNOW ABOUT IT NOW.  Let the healing begin.  Who knew there were so many oppressed white supremacists, sexists, and racists just hiding their voices?  I happen to disagree and feel threatened by some of their particular rhetoric, but if I "cleanse" my friend-lists and social media of all Trump supporters I am sticking my head in the sand...and maybe I would be guilty of a social media version of the very thing I'd like to condemn hate groups for - intolerance.

Fending for Ourselves

In all my meditative digging over the past year, I have been considering offense, defense and boundaries in general.  Boundaries are sometimes even fences, aren't they?  And people defend, or offend...and fence-sitters are condemned for wanting the best of both worlds.  Also there's that saying about good fences making good neighbors...

I'm reminded of one of my favorite quotes from the movie "10 things I hate about you" which happens near the beginning.  "I've heard of people being overwhelmed, and people being underwhelmed, but can you ever just be whelmed?"  (Her friend responds "I think you can in Europe.")  So here I re-formulate it:  I know people can play defense, and offense, but do we ever just fense?

This lead to me looking up the etymology of both offense and defense in hopes of learning the Latin root or something fancy, linguistic, and nerdy and fun...but I have to do some deeper digging to satisfy those urges, but since my reboot on this blog I am making an effort not to let red pens and research stop me from airing my thoughts.  (PS, I think offence is a legit alternate spelling...just sayin'.)

So I plunge onward sharing my unedited thoughts:

In order for me to get offended about something someone says or does, there has to be a receptor in me for that.  This was one of the teachings I received from Michael Barnett during my meditation immersion.  When I was in a state of being offended, it was easy to blame the other person, the circumstances, the "other," so it came to me almost like ice cold water in the face while still trying to wake up to be told that I had something to do with my own offended-ness.  It was not a welcome message at all.  But upon reflection it is true that there are times when offensive things are said or done and they do not touch me, rattle me, enrage me, engage me.

So two questions arise in me; is it possible to choose which things trigger or do not trigger these defenses in me, and if so how will I accomplish this?  I know that a series of such 'offenses' triggered a large response in me recently, inspiring me to write the piece about uptalk & vocal fry.  Which rattled something loose in me, and felt good to express.  Which raises a third question, having to do with whether offenses are undesirable in the first place, as one, ahem, meaning me  I might have originally thought.  Or perhaps offenses yield a lot of worthwhile engagement, which then makes me re-calibrate my position on offenses.  Maybe offenses are desirable after all?

But I feel like I'm jumping around.  Let me go back to the first question.  Can I choose the triggers to which I respond?  I think there are two realities.  First I want to acknowledge that responses that have become automatic will not disappear from wishing them to, or overnight.  So in that sense I think no, I cannot choose when it is still automatic.  What I can do is observe, reflect, and begin to recognize that those automatic responses happen in me.  And then my awareness can grow, perhaps large enough to recognize them from further away, or closer up.  And someday my former unconscious reflexes can become conscious ones, and ultimately perhaps even in the hot-trigger moment I can become a chooser rather than a reactor.  So in that sense, yes, I can eventually choose to become conscious, grow my awareness, and begin to celebrate the possibility.  What this leads to is not the kind of detachment that dis-engages me, but an inner wisdom about engagement in general.  And it allows me to engage in a way that my core self has no need to refract segments of shame, guilt, or regret over.  I don't aspire to be un-triggerable.  I do aspire to engage in meaningful ways, and in ways that foster healthy open communication, a free exchange of ideas, and the opportunity to learn even more.

There is an interesting worrisome phenomenon in the online world.  With the advent of google and twitter, facebook and instagram, like-minded people are finding each other.  Is that a bad thing?  On the one hand, no, not at all!  We gravitate toward things that resonate in us in a positive way.  Who would seek out opposing viewpoints?  They offend!  But there is an 'on the other hand,' to be wary of.  (I know, I know.  Ending this sentence in a preposition is making my inner red pen jitter, but I am forging ahead inspite of the red pen these days!)  On the other hand, if we are not confronted with alternate points of view that challenge our thinking, help us learn or grow, then we risk stagnation.  We also risk a false sense of feeling that 'everyone agrees with me.'  When I studied the Colosseum in school, it was explained that the structure was built to prevent any kind of riot or uprising, by segmenting the sections of the stadium.  In isolating by beliefs, we might be giving up more than we are gaining.  I may have read about the search engine version of this in a Gladwell book, or something similar, where based on your search history the machine will begin to show articles higher in the search that will agree with your political leanings, which might sound convenient, but also contributes to the narrow-minded convictions of whatever beliefs I might already hold.  It's slick and dangerous.  I hope we all have friends in our online and real life social circles with whom we can respectfully disagree, a gadfly or two, a devil's advocate, and the tolerance to hear another perspective than our own.  A willingness to be offended, and learn through that encounter one of at least two things...at the very least!  If nothing else, we can learn the courage of our own convictions, because nothing proves our belief better than being tested, prodded, and asked to justify that belief.  And the opportunity to grow and learn and expand our awareness is exponential when confronted with diverse and varied opinions.

Fight the urge to flock together!  Fight the urge to follow along with the visible trends!  Buck the system.  Friend an enemy on social media, and then actually try to understand their point of view.  Engage and enrage, watch and observe.  I am not suggesting that we go around trolling our enemies, blasting and shouting opposing views.  I am suggesting an online expansion, and inner expansion, and a true courage...the courage to let our convictions be tested, tried, and demolished when necessary, fortified when appropriate.

And so I guess I landed on yes...offenses are desirable.  Funny, not the conclusion I would have expected myself to come to - but there you have it.  Leave room to surprise yourself in this funny life!

The Gentle Giant Within

Tonight, squeezed in among the harried to and fro, a fellow dancer reached out for some advice, and it was truly my honor to extend to her the wisdom and kindness and gentle spirit I have been evolving into these last years, and especially this past year.

She asked in the quietest of tones if I had any advice for why she is letting this tiny thing (that shouldn't) bother her, why it gets to her, why it should upset her, why does she let it upset her?

She ran off to dance, giving me time to compose my thoughts, and when she came back I told her to first acknowledge herself for recognizing that she is allowing it to be a trigger.   And that she will eventually be able to breathe even more breath/space between the trigger and the response, and that she has taken the first step in even seeing that there is a trigger.  I told her to be gentle with herself, and that today the response might still bubble up first, but someday she will be able to zoom out even further and gain perspective on why it is a trigger.  Also that the response is valid, even if some part of her mind deems it out of proportion, but to embrace the whole experience.

I wish I could convey more clearly the depth of what we shared, the warmth, the kindness, the compassion that passed between us.  So much understanding, so much sisterhood, so much vulnerability and empathy.  It was humbling that she came to me to ask my advice in the first place, and that I could offer some comfort, some guidance, some encouragement, and link with her energetically was truly a gift tonight.

I feel so blessed in having become so much more stable myself, so much more grounded, so clear in myself...the teachings are still working in me, through me, and I celebrate and embrace each day's offerings.

Show me my path, I will not shy away.  I will walk this path in tandem with all who wish to join me...or perhaps our paths will weave a colorful tapestry as we intertwine for a time and then go on to engage or unwind or rewind or unravel or entangle somewhere new and unexpected...!!!

a life-changing taco

Somewhere along the line, I swallowed some lies.  Lies like 'I'm in the way,' or 'I'm too loud,' or 'I don't matter,' or 'I shouldn't ask for anything, I don't deserve to be.'  Well originally I was going to write happy...I don't deserve to be happy.  But then when I got to the word be, that might have been the lie I swallowed.  'I don't deserve to be.'

Children soak up the world in gulps and gobbles, un-discerning, unyielding, impatient to grow and become adult, eager to be treated as an equal and a whole human being.  As a child we might mis-read or misinterpret the heart of a message, or maybe we get the underlying meaning more clearly than intended...who knows.  The thing is that when I was young I believed the world reflecting me back to myself through how others treated me was an accurate mirror.  Now that I've grown older I can see that there are many fun-house mirrors mixed in with good reflectors.  The fun-house mirrors at a carnival are only fun because you know them to be distorting.  But if we took them as a real and accurate reflection, they'd be truly terrifying.  In life it becomes important to treat distorting mirrors differently, giving them less credence, and maybe even a little compassion, since we do not know their story of how they became their warped selves.  Maybe I'll write a short story about human fun-house mirrors wandering around unable to figure out which ones are warped the least...what a wonderful children's book that would make...!

In any case, the life changing taco was an experience at dinner last night, and I must try to convey into words the magic of the moment before it slips away into the minutia of today's magical learning opportunities!

After a day of darting around town hunting for items at stores, comparison shopping, weighing options, and getting things done, we navigated through the sea of food options and I finally found myself in line looking at a menu of food options.  For more context on my level of vulnerability after all the option-weighing, you can read about it in one of Malcolm Gladwell's books or find Sheena Iyengar's TEDtalk.  Basically, not only was I hungry, but I was mentally exhausted from all the weighing and choosing.  And I was just relieved to be done making decisions.  (Or so I thought...)

I had no trouble deciding on the burrito, but as hungry as I was I wanted a taco as well, either a pork in adobo or a mushroom and onion taco.  The thing is, I am avoiding four-legged foods at the moment, so as delicious as the pork in adobo is at this place, I was ordering a chicken burrito.  And I was thinking a pork taco might be a nice compromise (being small), but then the mushrooms sounded really good, and since I was having them hold the yummy mozzarella from my burrito I thought maybe I could substitute mushrooms (or something at least) since I was not having the cheese.  On the register I saw that my total had jumped up by $3 once I said to add mushrooms to the burrito, and in that moment I let go of ordering a side taco in addition because I wasn't interested in paying more, but she hadn't said 'by the way there is an additional charge of $3 for adding mushrooms to your burrito,' she had just assumed I wanted them at any price.  Also there was someone in line behind me, and they were typing in to go orders from the phone in between taking my order and the person who had gone before me...and I felt myself shrink.  I didn't want to slow things down.  I didn't want to be a nuisance.  I didn't want to make a fuss.  I didn't want to gum up the works or ask more questions.  The cost of adding those mushrooms was more than a side taco would have cost, but I couldn't bring myself in that moment to change my order, change my mind, say 'hey, that's not okay with me, you didn't give me a warning or an option!'

Flustered, hangry, irritated with myself for not standing up for what I wanted, I huffed my way to a table to wait.  Swirling accusations in my mind, what's the fucking big deal, it's only three dollars, why do you care if the mushrooms are in a taco shell or on your burrito, why are you even so upset over something so insignificant, and on and on the litany in my mind, mocking, deriding, unforgiving, relentless.  And then tears welled.  For god's sake, am I really crying about a taco?  Or three dollars?  Get a grip!  The inner judge and jury were having a field day.

And I let the storm roll over me, through me. 

And after a little while, glassy-eyed, but clear, I rose out of my inner meltdown, walked myself back up to the counter, and bravely asked 'Is it too late to switch my order?  Can I get the mushroom taco instead of the mushrooms in my burrito?'  And whoever I spoke with needed to know my order number, which I knew, and she made it happen, and I walked myself back to the table feeling worthy.  Feeling brave.  Feeling I had gone to bat for myself.  Feeling my request was totally reasonable, and knowing that my asking was all that was necessary.

Giving people credit for wanting to please me too is something I'm still working on.  I have a long habit of people-pleasing, but it's sort of like learning to take a compliment rather than brush it aside.  Or like allowing someone else the joy that giving generously can bring, by receiving too now and then. 

It may have been the most delicious mushroom taco I have ever eaten.  I earned that taco, in more ways than one. 

I am so grateful to myself for weathering the storm of inner insults, and rising above, beyond, and taking care of my desires in the moment, allowing me to celebrate, and rejoice.  I have a track record of not asking for what I want, and later being sad and that old pattern is (slowly but surely) dissolving!!  That old pattern of swallowing my true desires in favor of not rocking the boat, not being a pain, not being the squeaky wheel.  The thing is, all my life I guess I've secretly been jealous of squeaky wheels.  And the external and internal rewards of not being squeaky aren't that great, to be honest. 

Maybe I've been robbing other people of the opportunity to please me, all these years, by keeping my needs and wants to a whisper.  Or on mute.  How can anyone even try to please me if I don't share my thoughts, my dreams, my heart? 

Next time, perhaps I won't even have to go back to change my order.  But that too will come.  

Emotional Non-Judgment

I am a fan of positivity, and finding the silver lining, and the teachable moment.

I am a fan of affirmations.

Am I alone, however, in finding the constant pressure to be positive, harness the law of attraction, and in general try to manipulate my emotional state oppressive?

Since when is being positive a cure-all?  Last I checked, when something shitty happens the response I have in that moment doesn't define me as a person (positive or negative)

I find a creeping counter-culture within my closest circle of true friends.  In hiding, we still preface negative statements of honest emotional state with "I'm going to hell for saying this..." or "I know I should not feel this way..." or "It sucks that I feel this way..."

And I want to share this counter-culture...and demolish the inner and outer judgment walls being paraded around as superior.

It is not a superior state of mind or heart to inflict or enforce a positive spin on every shitty thing.

Nor is it superior or inferior to wallow in a negativity spiral.

Neither is better or worse.

A lot of meditation and a lot of heightened self-awareness have brought me to a realization worth sharing.

Some positive thinking exercises are worthwhile, don't get me wrong.  But it is equally delicious to indulge in a fantasy of negativity, to follow the train of thought to all the worst possible conclusions.  Why else is the world so in love with the entertainment in books, film, tv, binge watching or imagining a fantastic series of explosive and terrible life choices unfold?

My teacher and guide on a spiritual path, Michael Barnett, has helped me recognise the possibility in the universe of transcending the judgment, and the duality of right and wrong, better and worse, and so on. Many gifts came through to me during meditations and time spent both in Germany and in seminars here in Santa Fe sharing space and resonating with his incredible cosmic connective energy.  (Perhaps I will write more about those as it feels right, for now a lot of it is still so raw and personal, and writing about it doesn't feel right for me just yet.)

I am a fan of Jeff Foster, who is also a speaker, spiritual teacher, someone I have not met, yet has taught me through his facebook posts, and youtube videos.  I found him through friends also connected with Michael, and Jeff invites us to embrace the full spectrum of emotion in our lives.

If we manage to keep some perspective in the midst of the emotional roller-coaster, positive or negative, then we can begin to evolve.

So yes, we can begin by being aware of the tendencies, habits, knee-jerk responses.  We can observe whether we trend toward doomsday scenarios, and whether those serve us well.  We can learn to dance in and out of moods, rather than be enslaved by them unconsciously.

And I will make a renewed effort to cease my judgment of my own emotions...and those close to me.

This whole topic might also be part of why I loved the movie Inside Out so much, because all of our emotions serve functions worth validating, and if we can embrace each other through the process, and accept the full complex cornucopia of our human existence, maybe we can grow beyond our known limits.

Are you with me?  Do you have a similar ambivalence toward all the Think Positive preaching surrounding us?

Just a little Uptalk (?), with a side of Vocal Fryyyyy

In the midst of a social media crackdown on the most vapid sounding language trends, the last thing I ever thought I would do is defend their worth.  Nor do I wish to fall into the trap of defending women for what are admittedly irritating habits in speech.  But here I am.  And it isn’t only because men aren’t receiving the same language shaming these last few weeks, though that is in fact a big bone of contention.  It is also because these language trends enrich our social vocabulary in important ways!  Read on for the top 3 reasons I will continue to use mitigating language, uptalk and vocal fry when I speak.  (Though perhaps not all in one sentence.)

For three weeks, I have been reading articles about women, and directed only at women, about how our speech habits are holding us back in the professional world, and in some cases these articles were even written by successful women.  First I came across this article advising against using the word “just” too much.  Initially I supported the idea, because women in the business world probably do self-efface and apologize too much for everything, including their own success in an effort to come across as less threatening.  Here is another blog article supporting the idea that we as a gender overuse the word just.  And who better to give advice to women about how to be successful than a successful business woman, in fact a former google executive!?  But then I decided that removing the word ‘just’ altogether would probably be disastrous for society.  And then I got angry that no one counts words that men might overuse, and writes shaming articles to call men out on how they are standing in the way of their own success because of their gender-specific linguistic choices.  But I will (deep breaths) come back to the gender discussion, because there are many nuances to the topic.

The first topic at hand is the word ‘just,’ which is a form of mitigating language.  Mitigating language is designed to soften a blow, or make delivering bad news a little less harsh.  Also it is associated with a polite way to address a superior in many cases.  Notice that I am staying gender neutral.  Mitigating language can be extremely helpful in relating touchy, volatile or potentially offensive information.  Here are some popular catch phrases that I would consider mitigating language and some of their functions.

1.      Just in case, just so you know, just checking

a.       Implies deference, and also respect for the other person’s ability/capacity/intelligence

2.      Like, you know (alone or in combination)

a.       Serves primarily as a buffer before saying something that might be hard to hear.

b.      Gives the listener time to process or prepare for the shoe to drop.

3.      On the off chance

a.       Signals to the listener that the speaker already thought it unlikely, which can be self-preserving or help the listener save face depending on context.

Does it sometimes sound apologetic?  Probably.  Is it always appropriate?  No!  Mitigating language is, however, a form of social lubricant, without which we might too often find ourselves in confrontational situations.  This is useful for any person who has a boss.  So if we tell women to remove this word, thus is born a fun catch-22 – sound confident by eliminate mitigating language and see that promotion sooner, but at the risk of being chastised for sounding “bossy.”  This leaves us (women?) forever on the pendulum of over-correcting, never finding that porridge speech equivalent in the middle that’s juhhhst right.

I have my own reasons for thinking “just” is a four-letter-word, and for that matter so is “easy.”  When someone is in a teaching, parenting, or managing position those two words should be used maybe never because all they do is cause the learner to feel slow and stupid.  An evolved learner might recognize these words as crutches their teacher uses when he or she is frustrated and out of ideas how to rephrase the lesson, but most learners are feeling too vulnerable to be in touch with anything other than their own failure in that moment, so it falls to the teacher to be aware of their own use of language and its implications.

Then someone posted an article about uptalk, also known as valley-girl speak, upspeak, or rising terminal.  I might be a fan of the movie “Clueless,” but I don’t actually have conversations that sound like that.  So ‘Sure,’ I thought ‘get rid of it!’  And then I started hearing it among family members, and noticed my best friend using it, and oh the horror, I even heard myself doing it!  So I did some deep reflecting and found that there are some really worthwhile reasons to use uptalk.  In fact, a well placed bit of uptalk could save your relationship with a spouse or co-worker (or at least prevent a misunderstanding).

1.      Uptalk is a way of creating a conversational comma:

a.       Subtext “Don’t interrupt me, I’m not finished expressing my thought.”

                                                                          i.      Listener should not interject their own fully-formed thoughts, because what comes next could change their mind, or add vital information to the discussion at hand.

2.      Uptalk can be used by a speaker to be sure the audience is still engaged instead of daydreaming:

a.       Subtext “Are you with me?”

b.      Subtext “Do you understand?”

                                                                          i.      Listener on phone should usually respond “uhuh, uhmmm”, in person silent nodding or eye-contact might be enough.

3.      Uptalk can inject enthusiasm into an otherwise boring story:

a.       Lilting tones of voice keep your listener from wandering off mentally, since we have the attention span of a fruit fly and it seems to be getting shorter and shorter!  (Congratulations, by the way, on reading this far.  You must not yet be converted to the Twitter-esque character consumption limitations descending tragically on future generations.)

b.      No one ever complained (in my hearing) of an Australian or New Zealand accent, which is sing-song and riddled with delicious and sexy uptalk…

In conclusion, there are parts of the world where uptalk is a consistent part of the vocal sing-song and conversational vocabulary of expression and intonation, and the desire to label it as a sign of being vapid or even specific to a (female) gender is enraging me.  I know that boys and men use uptalk as well! 

The third article I came upon back in July, and perhaps the hardest vocal trend for me to defend is vocal fry, or vocal creak.  The article implored young women to give up the vocal fry.  It can happen with your first speaking of the day, pre-coffee, without any meaning behind it at all.  It can happen accidentally if you run out of breath at the end of a sentence.  As Jessica Grose commented in her recent NPR interview, it can happen as a result of over-correcting for uptalk.  (Another shining example of the porridge being too hot, or too cold.)  It can also happen because you’re tired.  But I’ve observed it can also have meaning in certain context:

1.      Vocal fry can convey exhaustion

a.       Seeks sympathy nods, signals a need for support on a rough day

2.      Can also convey boredom

a.       Signal to change the topic, or be more engaging

3.      Or can convey ennui, or world-weariness

a.       Feeling hopeless or helpless, seeks comforting, or a desire to be asked “What’s wrong?”

This glottal vibration doesn’t have to mean anything, and if we spend our time modulating our breath, intonation and word choice, we the speaker and we the listener can be completely thrown off and distracted.  I know I was when I did my YouTube hunt for examples of men using vocal fry and uptalk.  

And that would be the real shame.  The real shame would be if your listeners are so caught up in looking for uptalk, vocal fry, or counting the occurrence of the word “just” in your presentation that they are deaf to the content of your presentation.  There is a brain phenomenon called inattentional blindness which is a kind of temporary blindness.  This is illustrated brilliantly in this Smithsonian Magazine article, but of course you will all be brilliant instead of being tricked because I’ve prepared you in advance, so congratulations! 

In a fit of outrage on behalf of my gender in the last few weeks, I found myself trolling YouTube in search of footage of well-respected men giving speeches or being interviewed to illustrate that men use these same vocal trends as well, but are not scrutinized for the way their voice peaks (Mr. George Bush, Mr. William F. Buckley) or creaks (Mr. Clinton).  During this searching, I experienced the auditory version of inattentional blindness (perhaps it should be named inattentional deafness?) and realized that I had heard but not understood a single word.  In my effort to notice language styles, intonations or count words I could not have told you what they were trying to explain or express.  I long for an age when people can drop the filters relating to who is delivering the message and how, in favor of a respectful dialogue or dare I even dream – a discourse.

I do agree that it is annoying when voice and speech trends like this catch on like wildfire and lose their original purpose, hence my reluctance to champion them.  But I also caution against the total elimination of them.  Anything done to excess becomes irritating (even political correctness) but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet.  I for one am not ready to retire all signs of uptalk, mitigating language or even the occasional creak from my vocabulary.  While stripping the world of all of these language habits might make some folks really happy, I think removing them entirely would potentially diminish or hamper our nuanced communication.

I wrote most of this on August 2nd, 2015.  Then I wanted to tweak and edit, and my blog went dormant until today...There was yet another fantastic KQED radio show critiquing women for tentative speech, and I knew I had to put down my red pen and publish this post in all its imperfection.  I thoroughly enjoyed the Amy Schumer bit on women apologizing as well. 

I know I am not alone, and here is an article from December 2014 written by Marybeth Seitz-Brown stating many similar points, and stating them well and clearly, and strongly.  

Let's all put down our auditory red pens and start listening for content!