#if the (male) professor calls us ‘those who might identify as female’ one more time i’m going to bite him

[cats-in-the-clouds]

i keep getting stuck being forced to take classes i despise and that have no relevance to me so i’m going to go all malicious compliance on every single assignment and subtly insult the class material and/or professor

#i’ve taken other sociology classes here that didn’t completely suck because they were about economic equality and such #but now i’m stuck in the intro 101 class as an upperclassman who’s taken higher courses and also doesn’t care? #why. #not to sound like a 70 year old far right man but. this is just a forcefeeding of the liberal agenda #if the (male) professor calls us ‘those who might identify as female’ one more time i’m going to bite him #magic how he doesn’t say that about the men… #’how did your culture shape you’ first of all it didn’t actually. not very much. and if it did i don’t care #you wouldn’t believe it but being raised catholic made me hate the faith. my own discovery and actions made me love it #what you see is ‘raised catholic and is currently catholic’. what you don’t see is the anguish in between. that was all me not society #i am quite conscious of the circumstances of my life i don’t need to be enlightened i’ve been reflecting on this myself for 6 years now #’humans are not born with any instincts!’ yes yes the nurture vs nature debate that sounds like your personal opinion of it that’s not fact #i’ve heard all this ten thousand times in every class even non-soc classes #i understand the material. i just don’t agree with it and never will. deal

[comrade-meow]

Why a hand gesture has South Korean companies on edge 👌

It took three years for players to notice the "offensive" hand gesture lurking in one of South Korea's most popular multiplayer games.

When players made their avatars laugh, talk or give the "OK" sign in "Lost Ark," they clicked an icon featuring a gesture that might have appeared benign to many: an index finger nearly touching a thumb.

But some of "Lost Ark's" users began claiming in August that the gesture was a sexist insult against men, and they demanded its removal.

What happened next underscores a trend in South Korea among anti-feminists, who have been increasingly pushing companies to repent for what they see as a conspiracy within the government and private companies to promote a feminist agenda.

Smilegate — the creator of "Lost Ark" and one of South Korea's biggest video game developers — quickly complied with the requests for removal. The company removed the icon from the game, and vowed to be more vigilant about policing "game-unrelated controversies" in their products.

A gender war has been unfolding in South Korea for years, pitting feminists against angry young men who feel they're being left behind as the country seeks to address gender inequality. 

Now, though, the latest development in this war is reaching a fever pitch. Since May, more than 20 brands and government organizations have removed what some see as feminist symbols from their products, after mounting pressure. At least 12 of those brands or organizations have issued an apology to placate male customers.

Anti-feminism has a years-long history in South Korea, and research suggests that such sentiments are taking hold among the country's young men. In May, the Korean marketing and research firm Hankook Research said it found that more than 77% of men in their twenties and more than 73% of men in their 30s were "repulsed by feminists or feminism," according to a survey. (The firm surveyed 3,000 adults, half of whom were men.)

The fact that corporations are responding to pressure to modify their products suggests that these anti-feminists are gaining influence in a country that is already struggling with gender issues. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says that South Korea has by far the largest gender wage gap among OECD countries. And roughly 5% of board members at publicly listed companies in the country are women compared to the OECD average of nearly 27%.

A suspicious sausage

The online firestorm that has spread across South Korea's corporate landscape kicked off in May with a simple camping advertisement.

GS25, one of the country's biggest convenience store chains, released an ad that month enticing customers to order camping food on their app, promising free items as a reward. The ad showed an index finger and a thumb appearing to pinch a sausage. The finger-pinching motif is frequently used in advertising as a way to hold an item without obscuring the product.

Critics, though, saw something different in that hand signal. They accused it of being a code for feminist sympathies, tracing the use of the finger-pinching motif to 2015, when the symbol was co-opted by Megalia, a now-defunct feminist online community, to ridicule the size of Korean men's genitals.

Megalia has since shut down, but its logo has outlived the group. Now anti-feminists are trying to purge South Korea of its existence.

Source: Megalia, @starbucksrtd/Instagram, @gs25_official/Instagram

GS25 removed the hand symbol from the poster. But critics still weren't satisfied, and began trawling the advertisement for other feminist clues. One person pointed out that the last letter of each word featured on the poster — "Emotional Camping Must-have Item" — spelled "Megal," a shorthand for "Megalia," when read backward.

GS25 removed the text from the poster, but that still wasn't enough. People theorized that even the moon in the background of the poster was a feminist symbol, because a moon is used as the logo of a feminist scholar organization in South Korea.

After revising the poster multiple times, GS eventually pulled it entirely, just a day after the campaign launched. The company apologized and promised a better editorial process. It also said it reprimanded the staff responsible for the ad, and removed the marketing team leader.

The online mob had tasted success, and it wanted more.

Other companies and government organizations soon became targets. The online fashion retailer Musinsa was criticized for offering women-only discounts, as well as using the finger-pinching motif in an ad for a credit card. The company defended the use of that motif as a neutral element regularly used in advertising, and said its discount program was meant to help expand its small female customer base. Still, founder and CEO Cho Man-ho stepped down after the backlash.

South Korean demonstrators hold banners during a rally to mark International Women's Day as part of the country's #MeToo movement in Seoul on March 8, 2018. Dongsuh, the Korean company that licenses a Starbucks ready-to-drink line in the country, was attacked in July after one of its Korean Instagram accounts published an image of fingers pinching a can of coffee. The company pulled the ad and apologized, saying that it "considers these matters seriously." The firm also said the image had no hidden intent.

Even local governments have been caught up in the pressure campaign. The Pyeongtaek city government was criticized in August after uploading an image to its Instagram account that warned residents of a heatwave. It used an illustration of a farmer wiping his forehead — and critics noticed that the farmer's hand was shaped similarly to the finger pinch.

"How deeply did [feminists] infiltrate?" one person wrote on MLB Park, an internet forum used primarily by men. Another person shared contact information for the city government, encouraging people to flood their channels with complaints. The image was later removed from the Instagram account.

Gender wars

At the core of the anti-feminist campaign is a widespread fear among young men that they are falling behind their female peers, according to Professor Park Ju-yeon, professor of sociology at Yonsei University.

The sentiment has grown because of a hyper competitive job market and skyrocketing housing prices. The government has also rolled out programs in recent years to bring more women into the workforce. Proponents of those programs have said they're necessary for closing gender gaps, but some men have worried they give women an unfair advantage.

Another compounding factor: Unlike women, men in South Korea have to complete up to 21 months of military service before they're 28 years old — a sore point for some men who feel unfairly burdened.

Anti-feminists have also taken umbrage with President Moon Jae-in, who, when elected in 2017, promised to be a "feminist president." Moon pledged to fix the systemic and cultural barriers that prevented women from participating more in the workforce. He also vowed to address sexual crimes in the wake of the global #MeToo movement.

This year's corporate pressure campaign adds another complication, as brands weigh the possible fallout.

Young men are "big spenders," said Professor Choi Jae-seob, a marketing professor at Namseoul University in Seoul. He added that many young people today are driven by personal political values when they buy things.

Ha, a 23-year-old university student, said he pays attention to what companies say about gender issues before making a purchase.

"Between two stores, I would use the one that doesn't support [feminism]," said Ha, who declined to give his full name because he said that gender is a thorny topic among his peers.

Ha said he's far from alone. When his friends were discussing the GS25 camping poster, for example, he was surprised to find that many of them felt the way he did: "I realized that many men were silently seething."

"I realized that many men were silently seething."Ha, a 23-year-old university student

The gender war leaves companies in a tough spot, according to Noh Yeong-woo, a consultant at the public relations agency PR One.

By not responding to allegations that they are taking a stance on gender issues, that could lead to what Noh called a "constant barrage of accusation" and the creation of a stigma. It also means that companies are actively monitoring online groups and studying what their users have designated as hidden codes or associations, to avoid being called out.

"They are continuously checking for the next problematic symbols," Noh said of brands in South Korea.

Stigmas and fighting back

Some women, though, say that the corporate apologies are also creating a climate where some people are afraid to identify as feminist.

"It's the new Red Scare. Like McCarthyism," said Yonsei University's Park, referring to the mass hysteria to root out communists in the United States in the 1950s.

Lee Ye-rin, a college student, said she has been a feminist since middle school. But in recent years she has found it impossible to be open about her stance.

"It's the new Red Scare. Like McCarthyism."Professor Park Ju-yeon, professor of sociology at Yonsei University

She recalled an incident in high school, when some boys openly heckled a feminist friend of hers while that friend was giving a class presentation on the depiction of women in the media. Lee and her classmates were too scared to defend the friend.

"We all knew that a person who would step up and say that feminism is not some weird thing would be stigmatized, too," Lee said.

In response to this year's anti-feminist pressure campaigns, though, some feminists have been fighting back. The apology over the camping poster from GS25, for example, prompted feminists to call for boycotts against the company. Some people shared images online of themselves shopping at rival stores, using hashtags that called on people to avoid shopping at GS25.

Balancing act

As there doesn't seem to be much hope of finding middle ground for those waging South Korea's gender war, experts say companies have to figure out ways to avoid being dragged into a brand-damaging fight.

Noh, from PR One, encouraged companies and organizations to educate their employees on gender sensitivity — and even reconsider the use of symbols that have become heavily politicized.

Finger-pinching motifs "are images with complex metaphors and symbols and they already carry a social stigma," he said. "So, once you get involved in it, it's hard to explain them away ... the issue keeps spreading until they are removed as demanded."

Park, the Yonsei University professor, said that part of the problem is that many South Korean companies are led by older men who don't have a firm grasp of present-day gender issues. The average age of an executive-level employee at the country's top 30 publicly traded companies is 53, according to a 2020 analysis by JobKorea, a Korean version of LinkedIn.

That suggests a level of irony. Maybe it's not that some of these companies have a specific agenda, as online critics are accusing them. Perhaps for some of them, high levels of leadership are just not in tune with the debate.

To Park, the vitriol directed at companies has also buried some of the underlying, systemic issues that contribute to gender inequality, along with debates about how best to crack the glass ceiling or address the division of labor at home, among other concerns.

"Some very important debates are being buried," Park said, adding that today's gender war is being fought on the tip of the "iceberg." "It's not a fight about the fingers."

#Anglo.txt #lmao it's this again #👌

[sometimes-men-need-help-too]

What does modern feminism do that you don't agree with? This is genuine btw

A couple things before I start: 

- This is not meant to bash all the feminists out there unless they fit into what I’m saying. I know there are good feminists out there 

- When I say ‘you’ I’m not meaning you, I’m saying it in a general way 

-I hope I get my point across and it’s clear. I sometimes struggle with that 

Also I’m sorry this is so long and it’s in no particular order and I hope none of this comes across as being aggressive or anything

~~ 

A lot of my issues with the movement boils down to attitudes. To me, that is very telling of its true colors. And I do try not to necessarily judge an entire movement from just the bad people because I know that isn’t fair, although I do feel like the bad feminists have taken over the movement and end up drowning out the good voices and that’s why we hear more negativity than positivity. 

One thing that I have issue with the lack of respect towards those that disagree whether it’s with the movement itself or it’s a particular thing. For a movement that preaches about a woman’s choice, I don’t feel that really happens like it should. I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong here but depending on what the topic is I get a general impression like you’re not really supposed to disagree with what’s being side. You do and you might have someone lash out at you (that’s another point I have). Or if you say you’re anti feminist, you have people coming up with these reasons why they think you are; one being internalized misogyny  and you get called a pick-me which I find a bit insulting.  I should be able to have an opinion without someone assuming I’m trying to get a man’s attention or I can’t think for myself or I hate other girls. That isn’t it! Wouldn’t you think that is misogynistic? 

And if it’s not  internalized misogyny, then there are other factors; her being white (which usually then goes on to sound racist)  or it’s because she has money or  internalized racism or whatever they come up with. And it sounds condescending and that just bugs me. Hey, maybe instead of some underlying reason, we just don’t agree. 

or you have people try to stick the label on anyway. 

‘If you believe in equality you’re a feminist’

The label means nothing. I don’t understand why some will focus on this so much. I don’t want to be called a feminist. I don’t need to. In the same way, it’s not necessary for me to refer to myself as an MRA (men’s rights activist). And yeah, I know this says it’s an “MRA blog” that’s what I had when I started. But ultimately, the label isn’t important. I’m all for equality. It’s cool, it’s great. But I see this sort of thing (online that is) being forced on people and the thing is, with that wording it makes it sound like the movement is all inclusive when it’s not. You have to have certain politics and for the most part (unless you’re a religious feminist) you have to be pro choice otherwise you’re not a ‘real’ feminist. 

My next issue is all the aggression. You can just tell sometimes with how people respond online or if you catch a video that someone posted. And not only that, but how quickly people fall into name-calling or just all around acting like a child. And for the most it seems pretty acceptable to some because it keeps happening. It’s not hard to find on this site or otherwise. If you can’t communicate your opinions about something without having a fit or blocking someone (excluding if they just keep harassing you) then you’re not mature enough. That shows me you don’t really care about having a real discussion. And some can say that it happening on here is probably done by teenagers and to an extent they’re probably right. But it happens on other sites and in real life as well and it’s more than just teens. It’s people my age and older and that’s not cool. 

And then we have  how some like to ignore the differences between men and women. Sure, yes, there are many things a woman can do just like a man but we also have to acknowledge our differences.  I don’t see a lot of that with some forms of feminism. STEM, for example, is something I would attribute the differences more to just how men and women tend to be rather than sexism. Could there be certain circumstances where it is sexism? Sure, I suppose you can’t rule it out entirely. Otherwise I would say it’s just what they’re happy doing. I know girls who are doing science stuff or business things but I also know girls who are going to be teachers or psychologists or nurses. It’s not that they're actively being told by everyone that they can’t do it(I suppose unless they live in some other country like that). That’s just what they want to do, you know, their choice. Just like how some men go towards a job like with computers or farming or they’re pre-school teachers or gynecologists.

 I found an interesting fact (source will be posted below) that said women are actually preferred over men two-to-one for faculty positions. The study was done by psychologists from Cornell University with professors from 371 colleges/universities in the US. It also noted that: “recent national census-type studies showing that female Ph.D.s are disproportionately less likely to apply for tenure-track positions, yet when they do they are more likely to be hired, in some science fields approaching the two-to-one ratio revealed by Williams and Ceci.” 

Yet, we need to ask ourselves honestly, how often do facts like these get passed around vs the idea that women are suffering from misogyny and therefore are unable to fully represent in STEM jobs? 

The next thing I want to address is misandry. Now there are a good portion of people who don't think it exists or if it does, it's really not much of an issue because of the "power" and the "privilege" men have within society. And to me, I have a problem with that. If feminism is supposed to be for men as well, I would think they would want to combat misandry as well as misogyny. If someone really doesn't think it exists, I would suggest that the person really take a look at what goes on in real life and online that's directed towards men.

There's the whole "male tears" thing which is on coffee mugs and t-shirts. There's the kill all men/yes all men thing. All of which are supposed to be jokes and if a man says something about it he gets mocked for his "fragile masculinity"

That's just not okay. They're being immature and a bully which they usually try to justify (men have done this and that throughout history to women) but you just can't.

I found this article, this really really atrocious article. It's one of those open letter things and found on this feminist website (feminisminindia) and I almost believed it to be satire with how.... stereotypically Tumblr it was. I did research and looked at the info regarding the site and nope, it's a serious site. I'll post the article below but I'll also summarize it:

Basically this woman is telling the men in her life that she will not stop saying "men are trash or other radical feminist opinions." She's saying it because women and others have suffered so much at the hands of the patriarchy because they're not straight white men. She goes on to say:

So let’s establish: misandry isn’t real. Just like unicorns and heterophobia, misandry is a myth because it isn’t systematic or systemic. Unlike misogyny, cis men don’t face oppression purely based on their gender. While they may encounter instances of racism, homophobia and ableism, they are not dehumanised as a function of their gender identity (read: cis privilege).

That is wrong. Absolutely wrong. Misandry is real. "Cis" people do face oppression purely based on their gender. Anyone can. To deny that lacks understanding.

And the rest is just saying that: It is time to start hating on men-as-a-whole and starting celebrating the men that you are.

And: Because at the end of the day, feminists need men. Whether it’s because you wield structural power or because we genuinely value your existence, we need to band together to destroy ‘men’ because men are trash, but you, if you made it to the end of this, are probably not. Prove me right.

I would imagine this is a common viewpoint. And it's not a good one. If you genuinely think a whole group as a whole is bad you need to reexamine your thoughts. It's not "men" that are bad, it's the sexist people.

To wrap this up (I'm sure you might be tired of reading this lol); like I said, the attitudes play a huge part of it. Modern feminism, in my opinion, is just not good enough for me to say I agree with it and want to identify as one. I just can't

Here is the link to the feminist article: https://www.google.com/amp/s/feminisminindia.com/2020/09/23/men-are-trash-and-other-radical-feminist-opinions/%3famp

And here is the link for the STEM thing: https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2015/04/women-preferred-21-over-men-stem-faculty-positions

#mens rights #answered asks #i might have overdid this a bit....

[adoredconnor]

Hunter, Profiled

Chapter One - Beginnings

Summary: Sam and Spencer meet on a case where a serial arsonist terrorizes a college campus. Sam and Dean think it may be a phoenix. Takes place during the events Criminal Minds 1x02

Ship: Sam Winchester x Spencer Reid

Word Count: 3.8k

CW: Canon typical violence, heavy out of canon, monsters are still real

Spencer leaned forward in his seat, placing pawns on the chess board in front of him. The plane rides usually took long enough for Gideon and himself to fit at least one match in before arriving.

“Hey Reid, you got a statistic on arsonists?” Morgan asks, not once glancing over his shoulder.

“82% are white males between 17 and 27. Female arsonists are far less likely, their motive typically being revenge.”

“Sounds like our boy’s a student.”

The Behavioral Analysis Unit had been called out to identify and detain a serial arsonist who had been terrorizing Bradshaw College in Tempe, Arizona. The unknown subject, Unsub, had set multiple fires within a few weeks, and was escalating rapidly. As far as Morgan was concerned, the Unsub was a student on campus. Gideon, however, believed that the unit shouldn’t attempt to categorize the arsonist so early in the case.

The jet landed only a few hours later in sunny Arizona, though its beauty was darkened by the woes and depression of the students and faculty on campus. Aaron “Hotch” Hotchner and Gideon hit the ground running, immediately going to talk with the Dean of Students, Ellen Turner.

The Dean offered what little information that she knew, that diesel fuel had been stolen a day before a fire was set and chemicals from a chemistry lab. Hotch was worried, though his stoic expression never wavered, and expressed his concerns to Gideon.

Spencer went to investigate the scene of the first fire alongside Hotch. They approached the room, only to find it occupied by another man facing away from them. Spencer spared a glance towards the man before turning to Hotch, raising an eyebrow in concern. Agent Hotchner raised his eyebrows and cleared his throat, grabbing the young man’s attention in front of him. He turned around, slightly shaking the brown bangs across his head.

“I’m SSA Aaron Hotchner with the FBI, who are you and what are you doing on my crime scene?”

“Oh, uh… I’m Detective Sam Winchester, with Smith Detective Services. I was called on this case by the first victim’s mother.” Sam reaches a hand out to Hotch, who grudgingly shakes it. Sam turns to Spencer, seemingly noticing him for the first time, and offers his hand.

“O-oh, actually the number of germs passed through handshakes is alarmingly high. It would actually be safer to kiss,” Spencer stutters over his words, looking down at his feet as he finishes his sentence. Hotch glances at Spencer before moving into the dormitory to assess and analyze the damage and possible causes.

Sam peers down at the man standing in front of him, “As nice as that would be, I think Agent Hotchner might kick my ass if we kissed on a crime scene.” Sam admired Spencer’s red tie and beige shirt combination before turning to Hotch.

“The door was locked,” Hotch says.

“Matthew Rowland and his roommate watched as the doorknob turned against the lock,” Spencer states.

“But the unsub couldn’t get in.”

“So he pours the accelerant into the room from the hallway.”

“Wait,” Sam cuts in, “He wouldn’t have been able to see the fire.”

Spencer nods along and adds, “But he could hear Matthew Rowland screaming.”

Hotch looks at Sam again, “What’re you thinking Winchester?”

Sam takes a deep breath, “I believe he left quickly to avoid being spotted.”

Hotch shakes his head, “It doesn’t make sense.” He moves over to Spencer’s side.

“Pyromania as a mental disorder may just be a simple myth, but we do know from precedent that serial arsonists derive pleasure,” Spencer blushes ever-so slightly and moves his gaze away from Sam, “from pathological fire setting.”

“Sex and power,” Hotch agrees. Sam chokes down a cough.

“Why would he set a fire he couldn’t watch?” Spencer seems puzzled for the first time that day.

Sam quickly looks him up and down, “Well if that isn’t the question of the hour.”

Hotch heads out of the dorm and heads down to Elle and Gideon. “There was no device used on Matthew Rowland,” Gideon says, explaining the simultaneous ignition devices to an arriving Agent Hotchner. Gideon analyzes the third device in the box, “The unsub set that one manually?”

“He wanted to be there to enjoy the kid’s death,” Morgan inputs, only glancing up when he hears a knock at the door.

A man, roughly in his mid-twenties with short and slicked brown hair, strolls in with a light air of arrogance. “I don’t think so.”

“Who the hell are you?” Morgan questions, moving a hand towards his holster.

“Dean Winchester, private investigator, and you are?”

“That’s SSA Derek Morgan. Spencer, I mean Dr. Reid was just telling me about him.” Dean spins around to see his brother walking just slightly too close to Spencer for it to be casual. Sam notices his brother’s look and shuffles away from Spencer’s side. “Sorry, I’ve only been introduced to Agent Hotchner and Dr. Reid, and perhaps Agent Morgan.”

Hotch nods towards Morgan, who then moves his hand away from his holster. He gestures around the table, “This is SSA Gideon and SSA Greenaway. Now that introductions are done, let’s focus on the case.”

Elle nods, “Well if the target was Matthew Rowland, then why set the other two fires?”

The BAU debates for a while, attempting to figure out the motive behind the fires. Dean moves towards Sam, gesturing with his head to the other side of the room where they wouldn’t be heard. Sam speaks first, “So get this, the diesel fuel was stolen from the grounds shed before the fire that killed Matthew Rowlands was set. Those FBI agents are thinking pyromaniac with his heart set on revenge.”

“And what are you thinking?”

“I’m not sure if it’s entirely possible, but Dean, what if we’re dealing with a phoenix?”

“Why would a phoenix need to use gasoline to create a fire? It could’ve incinerated the kid in a heartbeat.”

“For the dramatics, and to see him suffer? I’m not sure yet, but there’s something more here than just some college student that’s a little too happy with a lighter.”

Hotch looks back towards the brothers, narrowing his eyes before turning back towards his team.

“You say ‘college student’ as if you weren’t one not that long ago.” Dean quips before flinching slightly. He knew that would bring Sam’s recent loss of his girlfriend. Sam glared down at his brother with tears in his eyes before moving back towards Spencer’s side.

Spencer turned and motioned for Sam to join him and Elle in their makeshift office space. They grabbed coffees and sat down, throwing theories and ideas at one another again.

“The timer sets the road flare, which then lights the chemical mixture inside the canister. Simple,” Elle states before taking a long drink of her coffee. Sam snorts.

“I mean, there’s a meticulous construction to it,” Spencer rambles on about the construction of the explosive.

“What if it’s a chemistry student or professor?” Sam interjects, sweeping his hair out of his eyes.

“Mmm… I say student. You need self-confidence to lecture in front of a classroom full of 30 college kids. Arsonists are socially incompetent. This guy, he doesn’t go on dates. He doesn’t go to parties. He doesn’t feel comfortable in front of groups.” Elle goes on. Spencer looks up towards her with an offended and sad look in his eye. “And of course he’s a total psychopath.”

Spencer shrugs and looks back down at the device he was fiddling with. Elle walks out of the room to get some air. Sam slides over towards Spencer. “Hey, I’m sorry about what she said. I’m sure she means well.”

“It’s fine, I’m used to it. She’s not wrong anyways, 23 years and I haven’t been on a date in my life.”

“I’m sure there’s plenty of guys and girls who’d love to go on a date with you. I mean, why wouldn’t they? You’re smart, handsome, and a FBI agent.” Sam’s eyes widen a fraction before he clears his throat. Within a second, he hears a fire alarm going off. Spencer looks towards Sam in alarm before taking off, Sam only a step behind him.

Derek and Dean find Elle walking down the stairs, and turn to the now smoking building in alarm. They sprint towards the building, only to find Gideon in there attempting to rescue the latest victim. Derek pulls Gideon away from the scene as Elle and Dean back out, clearing the rest of the students off the stairs and out of the building.

Sam and Spencer reach the building, looking up in disdain. Hotch reaches them and Elle, whom he tells to take photos of the crowd. Dean moves over to Elle’s side and begins taking photos alongside her, “Hey hot stuff.” He winks and she rolls her eyes, “What? Too soon?”

Hotch, Spencer, and Sam stand in the chemistry lab, watching the students closely. “Reid, since you’re more their age, why don’t you do the talking?” Hotch demands, rather than truly asking. Spencer looks at him with apprehension.

“Why can’t Sam do it? He’s around my age, at least from what I can tell. He’s better with talking and connecting with them.”

“Winchester. I need you to talk to the students.”

Sam turns towards the older man, narrowing his eyes before nodding, “Only if Reid comes with.” Another raised eyebrow from Hotch. “I get jittery sometimes, and it’s nice to have backup.” Spencer’s lips quirk up in a small smile.

Sam clears his throat, “Hi, guys. I’m Detective Sam Winchester and this is Dr. Spencer Reid. I’m a private investigator.”

“I’m a, uh, agent with the- the BAU, the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI. Which, um, it used to be called the BSU, the Behavioral Science Unit, but not anymore.” Spencer rambles.

“What he’s trying to say is we’d love to know how you can help us,” Hotch smoothly cuts in, earning a stern glare from Sam. Sam turns to Spencer and gives him an encouraging smile before turning back to the students.

One of the male students gets up and walks over towards them holding a hand out and asking, “May I please?” He grabs the lightbulb from Spencer, “See this? Drill a hole in the side, fill it with gasoline or whatever’s good and flammable. Turn the light on. Boom.” After a quick judging look from Spencer, he continues on, “That is what went down, didn’t it?”

“The stuff’s all over the net,” a girl from the back chimes in.

“You wanna know what I think? I think it would be a good time to take a semester off.” The male student pushes the lightbulb into Spencer’s chest.

Sam moves towards Spencer, almost pushing him behind. “Don’t touch him.” Hotch looks at the men and the student before heading to the elevator. They all follow him in.

“Hold on. You need a key to get it movin’ after 10 PM.” The male student says, almost smugly.

“So what are you still doin’ here?” Hotch asks.

“I can’t leave. We’ve all got projects. You know how to solve the three-body problem? Computing the mutual gravitational interaction between the Earth, Sun, and Moon?”

Sam watches Spencer nod his head along to the student’s words. “You actually know how to solve that?” Spencer nods. “I figured that you were a genius for being a doctor at the age of… Wait, hold old even are you?”

“I’m 23.”

“You’re 23 and you already have a doctorate? I’m 22 and I don’t even have a degree.”

“Yes, as well as multiple other bachelor’s degrees. I’m working towards earning another PhD.”

Sam lets out a low whistle that has Hotch turning towards them, assessing. Sam meets his gaze and cocks his head a little before turning back to Spencer. He smiles down at Spencer for a moment before the elevator opens.

The BAU gathers around a table, listening to the Unsub’s message that was left on the hotline. Dean stood next to Elle, actually paying attention to the case instead of flirting with her. He glanced over to where Sam was standing. Sam was behind Spencer, who was perched on a desk. Sam’s hand rested gently on Spencer’s back as he leaned in to hear the tape better.

Gideon replayed the track again and again, something nagging at him. Dean turned towards Elle with a roll of his eyes after Gideon turned up the volume yet again. Gideon headed outside, Spencer and Sam following not too far behind. Spencer sits down at the base of a tree, watching Gideon pace around, “What if the Unsub is one of the students leaving?”

“No, he’s not done yet. He’s not going anywhere. Keep thinkin’,” Gideon says.

“You mean out--outside the box? That’s what Morgan is always telling me. He says that’s why I’ll never beat you at chess.”

“He’s probably right.”

Spencer chuckles and smiles before looking up at Sam, who was running his fingers through his hair, “Do you want to go get a coffee? You look like you could use one.” At Sam’s offended look, Spencer amended, “Not that you look bad, you look really good-- I mean you look fine.” Spencer blushed. Sam’s mouth quirked up for a second as he nodded. Sam offered a hand out to Spencer, who happily took it, and pulled him up. Spencer stumbled over a root and ended up crashing into Sam. Sam laughed whole-heartedly as he steadied the doctor. They set off, going towards one of the coffee shops right next to campus.

“So, this Morgan guy, he’s always telling you to think outside the box? How do you apply that to a case?”

“In this situation, what exactly is the box?”

“Wouldn’t it be the standard profile of a serial arsonist? If everything you know is already in the box, what’s left?”

“What you don’t know. The unknown.”

They approached the coffee shop, heavily decorated with photos of the sports teams from the college across the street. Sam pats his pockets for a moment before groaning, drawing the attention of the profiler next to him. “I forgot my wallet in my car earlier,” Sam explains. Spencer turns, ready to leave, when Sam stops him. “You can still get your coffee, I can tell you really want one right now. Go order and I’ll get us a table.” Spencer smiles at that and waits.

After receiving his concernedly cheap coffee, Spencer makes his way over to the table where Sam sits. Sam had taken off his jacket at some point and rolled up his sleeves, drawing Spencer’s gaze to the muscles there. His eyes flick up to Sam’s. Sam smiles gently as he analyzes Spencer’s eyes.

“You don’t mind sharing with me, right?” Sam says, glancing down from Spencer’s eyes to the warm coffee cup in his hands. Spencer shakes his head and holds the cup out to Sam. Sam takes a quick sip from the cup and thrusts it back towards the other brunet. “How much sugar did you put in this?”

Spencer chokes out a laugh. They sit in an amicable silence, broken only by the conversations of the people around them. Spencer’s knees bump into Sam’s under the table. Sadly, the coffee has run out and they have a serial arsonist to capture. Sam grabs his jacket and tosses it back on. Spencer can’t help the flood of disappointment in him as the strong arms of the man across from him disappear under the fabric.

They walk towards the campus once more and catch up with Morgan in their meeting area. Morgan finishes his phone call with Garcia and turns towards the two young men walking through the door, “Hey Reid, Garcia says it’s not ‘Karen’. It’s something more like-”

“Charown!” Gideon interrupts, speeding through the open doorway.

“Charown?” Spencer questions.

“Charown. I do it because of Charown.”

“It’s Hebrew.”

“Isn’t that god’s burning anger?” Sam interjects.

Dean, Elle, and Hotch enter the room to join the rest of the BAU. Elle and Hotch move towards where Gideon is. Dean hangs back near the other end of the room.

“The motive is now religious?” Elle asks.

“Well, you know, in a lot of religions God is related to fire.” Spencer spouts off.

Sam moves towards Dean, who gives him the look that says “what the hell are we still doing here”. Sam cuts a look towards Spencer and another to Hotch. They both turn towards the BAU members as voices rise higher and arguments start. Spencer turns away from them, seemingly overstimulated by the argument, before looking directly at Sam.

“Compulsion,” Spencer whispers. He nods to Sam and moves to the computer and video area. Dean gives Sam an odd look, which he shrugs off. He follows Spencer to the computer area, where Spencer sits intensely watching the tapes of the first fire. The screams of the first victim surround them and Sam turns away for a moment before steeling himself. Spencer taps the computer desk in deep thought before rewinding the video. He brings a hand up to his forehead to lean on as he intently watches the video. Sam stands directly behind him, pondering. He gets up from the chair and moves over to the whiteboard, where he erases everything.

“What’re you thinking Spence?” Sam asks, leaning against the desk that Spencer had just been at. He notices Gideon watching through the door and turns back to the computer with he recording on it. Gideon encourages Spencer to think outside the box, then leaves both the men to their thoughts. Spencer rushes over to the laptop again, replaying the same clip of where gasoline pours inside the first victim’s room.

“Three times,” Spencer says. Sam looks at the man next to him and then at the footage. The doorknob to the victim’s dorm turned three times in a row. Spencer quickly gets up and moves to where the professor’s burned office is. Sam follows behind, easily catching up to Spencer with his long strides. Spencer wipes the soot off the professor’s door plate, revealing the number three. Once more he turns and walks hurriedly to the first victim’s dormitory. Sam and Spencer move the caution tape out of the way and enter. Spencer opens the drawers in the victim’s desk, searching for something important. Sam stands back, watching with a mixture of unease and curiosity. He finds the victim’s schedule, “Professor Wallace, Tuesday, three o’clock.” He gestures for Sam to follow him as they head back to the rest of the BAU.

“I know why the profiles never fit,” Spencer states confidently, “You were right to tell Morgan to not rely on precedent. The fires thus far have been completely task oriented.”

“So once they’re set the Unsub is done?” Sam asks. Hotch nods.

“Exactly. The Unsub is not a classical serial arsonist. He’s someone who uses fire because of a completely different disorder!”

“Which is?” Gideon questions.

“An extreme manifestation of OCD, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. He does everything in threes. And if I’m right, he’ll have to kill again. There’s a form of OCD called scrupulosity.”

Sam makes a confused face and turns to Hotch. “Religious obsession and compulsion,” the unit chief explains. Sam nods in understanding.

“So he has an obsessive fear of committing sin?” Sam ponders aloud.

Spencer nods, “It creates so much anxiety that he’s compelled to do something to ease that anxiety.”

Spencer presents all of the evidence he’s found so far and explains all the behavioral evidence connecting the Unsub to a pattern of threes and the fires.

“I think I know who it is. And it’s not a he, it’s a she.” Hotch states before calling the dean of the school.

While the dean sends over Clara Hayes’s file, they go over all the evidence leading them to Clara. “They were working on the three body problem,” Sam remembers.

Dean, Elle, and Morgan head to Clara’s room with a S.W.A.T. unit. They find the walls plastered with papers and the room filled with candles. “OCD? I’m thinking more like OMG,” Morgan says, earning a hearty chuckle out of Dean.

“OMG?” Elle asks.

“Oh, my God,” Dean and Morgan answer.

They read off the fire related biblical quotes on Clara’s walls and gaze at the pictures on her desk.

“Moloch was the demon sun god of the Canaanites. In order to keep from incurring his wrath the people would sacrifice their children to them by burning them alive,” Spencer tells the group in Clara’s room.

Hotch and Gideon give the order to the local officers to run into each building and pull the fire alarms to get the students out. Elle, Dean, and Morgan had found at least 30 homemade bombs in the building. What they didn’t know, however, was that the chemistry students working late at night were stuck in the elevator.

Clara finds the three students in the elevator and sprays them with gasoline, enjoying the sound of their screams. She pulls out a stick and lights it on fire, staring at it for a moment.

“Put it down Clara!” the male student yells.

Hotch attempts to talk her down, but she keeps telling him that they need to be tested or they’ll face God’s wrath. She mutters about Charown, Charon, Moloch, and other religious deities. Dean sprints up the stairs with Gideon, hearing a gunshot. Gideon stomps out the fire starter while Dean and Hotch hold their guns on Clara. She was helped downstairs and taken to medical care. Dean worked with the campus security to help the students out of the elevator.

The BAU had decided to stay the night and fly early in the morning the next day. Sam and Dean drove over to the hotel the agents had been staying at. Morgan walked over to the Impala, striking up a conversation with Dean on the car. Sam headed towards Spencer, walking with purpose to get to the man. “Hey Spencer. I was wondering if I could get your phone number? I’d hate to lose touch with a genius,” Sam smiled as he spoke. Spencer nodded and spouted off his phone number, watching Sam punch it into his contacts.

“I sent you a text so you can put me in your contacts. Don’t be a stranger, okay? It was nice finding someone so easy to work with.”

“I-I’ll see you around Sam.”

“Yeah, I hope so.”

Sam walked over to the Impala and got in, waving goodbye to Spencer as the brothers sped off to whatever case they had next in line.

Spencer watched until they were completely out of view before entering the SUV next to him, grab bag in hand. He had a feeling he’d see Sam again.

#spencer reid x reader #Spencer Reid #Sam Winchester #Sam x Spencer #supernatural #supernatural fanfiction #spn fanfic series #criminal minds #criminal minds fanfiction #cm fanfic #angst #fluff #pining #mlm

[hellomynameisbisexual]

SOME 2 PERCENT of men in the U.S. identify as bisexual. But, for decades, some sexuality researchers have questioned whether true bisexual orientation exists in men.

In 2005, J. Michael Bailey, a sexuality researcher at Northwestern University, and two colleagues showed men who identify as bisexual brief pornographic clips featuring men or women, while measuring their subjects’ self-reported arousal and change in penis circumference. The results, when compared to men who identified as straight or gay, led them to conclude that the men identifying as bisexual did not actually have “strong genital arousal to both male and female sexual stimuli.” This was in contrast to work on sexual arousal in women, which showed that they — whether identifying as straight or gay — were physically aroused by both male and female stimuli.

A New York Times headline covering Bailey’s 2005 study on men declared: “Straight, Gay, or Lying? Bisexuality Revisited.”

But the paper also spurred more research into the subject — some of which has now led Bailey to revise his conclusions. In a paper published last month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Bailey and 12 colleagues reanalyzed data from eight previously published studies of bisexual-identified men, including the 2005 paper. The new review finds that men who reported attraction to both men and women do in fact show genital arousal towards both male and female stimuli. The data, the authors conclude, offers “robust evidence for bisexual orientation among men.”

The PNAS study has drawn positive coverage and received praise from some activists, who see it as valuable confirmation for an often-marginalized sexual identity. But it has also received backlash from other scientists and many bisexual people, some of whom argue that in attempting to prove, based on genital arousal, that bisexuality exists, researchers are discounting bisexual people’s lived experiences. It has also reignited a broader debate over the ethics of human sexuality research — and about what role, if any, scientists should play in validating the experiences of queer people.

For his part, Bailey defended the research, arguing that the phenomenon of bisexuality ought to be studied in order to be understood. “If we let the possibility that somebody is offended — particularly some identity group is offended — guide us in terms of what research we do,” he said, “we just won’t learn things, including about very interesting and important topics.”

John Sylla, an co-author on the paper and the president of the American Institute of Bisexuality (AIB), a private foundation that funded some of the research covered in the re-analysis, said it was simply part of the process of science self-correcting. “It’s frankly one more step towards making bisexuality cool, assumed, and normal,” Sylla told Undark.

But others don’t find the study so benign. “The word that immediately sprang to my mind was condescending — and unnecessary,” said Greg Albery, a disease ecologist at Georgetown University who identifies as bisexual.

“I worry most about establishing the premise that in order for people’s sexualities or identities of any sort to be valid,” he added, “they need to be first scientifically proven.”

FOR YEARS, SEX researchers have held differing opinions those who report strong attraction to people of multiple genders. “Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual,” the pioneering sex researcher Alfred Kinsey wrote in 1948. “The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats.”

But some researchers questioned whether bisexual men actually had substantial arousal to both male and female erotic stimuli, hypothesizing that bisexual-identified men were actually homosexual, and only claiming to be bisexual because it hewed closer to heterosexuality and, as a result, felt more socially acceptable. Starting in the 1970s, some researchers tried to bring concrete data to the question through a technique called plethysmography, which measures the change in volume or circumference of an organ or other part of the body.

In penile plethysmography, researchers typically use a circular strain gauge — essentially a small circle of rubber tubing, filled with a liquid conductor and connected to sensors — to measure changes in circumference of the penis. In the studies included in the new PNAS review, researchers instructed men on how to hook their penises up to a plethysmography device, then showed them pornographic videos and measured their genital arousal.

Critics of this method argue that it produces a highly artificial scenario: A participant is in an unfamiliar setting, with a strain gauge fastened around his penis, watching brief clips of porn that have been selected by someone else. They question how much this setup can tell researchers about real-world sexuality.

“It’s frankly one more step towards making bisexuality cool, assumed, and normal,” Sylla said.

Penile plethysmography also has a fraught history. Immigration officials in some countries have used it to test if gay-identified asylum seekers really were gay, and it’s still used by some U.S. courts to assess sex offenders’ attraction to children.

Nevertheless, some researchers have argued that the technique is useful for quantifying sexual arousal. And some early attempts to apply it to bisexual men suggested that their genital arousal diverged from their reported experiences. In Bailey’s influential 2005 study, for example, even though men reported being aroused by both male and female stimuli, their genitals seemed to prefer one or the other.

The study included just 33 men who identified as bisexual, and among these, only 22 produced sufficient arousal to any erotic stimuli to be included in the final result. Later studies would produce conflicting findings, and Lauren Beach, a research assistant professor studying stigma and LGBT health at Northwestern University and a founding member of the Bisexual Research Collective on Health, said that in making such a strong conclusion from a study with so few participants, the 2005 analysis amounted to “shoddy science.”

By drawing on a bigger dataset than in previous research, the new PNAS paper aimed to offer more definitive evidence than those individual studies. Nevertheless, it almost immediately ran into criticism from other researchers. In particular, many argued that the paper blurred the lines between genital arousal and sexual orientation — a concept that, many experts say, is more complex than a physical response. Sexual orientation “has multiple facets,” said Corey Flanders, an assistant professor at Mount Holyoke College who studies health disparities in gender and sexual minority individuals. “It’s not just this physiological arousal measured by pupil dilation or genital arousal,” she said.

“Sexual orientation is a really broad and rich construct,” she added.

Jeremy Jabbour, a Ph.D. student in clinical psychology at Northwestern University and a lead author on the paper, said that he sympathizes with those criticisms. Jabbour, who himself identifies as queer, said that there was some disagreement between himself and the more senior authors about how the data should be presented. “There was a little back-and-forth about how we wanted to frame the paper, what the title should be, what kind of terminology we should use,” he told Undark. “I lost that battle.”

The use of the term “sexual orientation” in the paper, Jabbour said, was meant only to indicate patterns of genital arousal, and he thought it would be “very clear that we’re not talking about sexual orientation as a broader phenomenon.” But, he acknowledged, “that very clearly wasn’t the case.”

Bailey, who is no stranger to controversy, defended the team’s choice of terminology. “If a man produces a clear arousal pattern in our procedure, I trust that result more than I trust what that man says about his feelings,” he said, adding that he believes “that for men, the best understanding of sexual orientation is a sexual arousal pattern.”

To explain the rationale for physiological studies of arousal in bisexual men, Bailey invoked an old saying about bisexual men. “My gay friends, some of them, would say that you’re either gay, straight, or lying,” Bailey said. “I think that they often said this because they themselves went through a stage where they said they were bisexual, and they weren’t really.”

Other sex researchers, however, questioned whether measuring arousal can be used to confirm a person’s sexual orientation, noting that sexual orientation is complex and multidimensional. “We know that peoples’ attractions aren’t always conventional, and different things pique different peoples’ interests,” said Brian Feinstein, another sexuality researcher at Northwestern.

Beach, who uses they/them pronouns, agreed. “Who decides what is arousing?” they asked. “Like ‘you must be turned on by this video and if you’re not, you must be gay?’”

THE BACKLASH reflects a long history of debate over the role that scientific research should play in advocacy for queer communities.

Historically, advocates have drawn on the idea that an LGBT identity is innate to argue for marriage equality and against conversion therapies that claim to change sexual orientation — and that, experts say, are both fraudulent and deeply harmful. Surveys have suggested that people who believe sexual orientation is biologically determined are more supportive of gay rights than those who believe it is a choice.

Sylla and the American Institute of Bisexuality, which was founded by the human sexuality researcher Fritz Klein in 1998, have embraced that approach. The foundation focuses on research, education, and community building, and it runs websites such as Bi.org and Queer Majority. Sylla first reached out to Bailey after the 2005 study, and he told Bailey that AIB might be interested in funding further research. Six of the eight studies in the new PNAS analysis received funding from the organization.

“Who decides what is arousing?,”Beach asked. “Like ‘you must be turned on by this video and if you’re not, you must be gay?’”

“Sexuality has had such a bumpy ride with politics and morality,” Sylla said. “And some people thinking that orientation is a choice. It can perhaps be helpful to show people non-judgmental evidence that, in terms of science, people just have different appetites.”

In recent years, though, as LGBT people have gained wider rights in American society, more advocates and researchers have questioned why they need scientific evidence to validate their experiences of attraction and arousal. “I can understand the desire for AIB and for other bisexual people broadly to want to correct that narrative, to be like, ‘Oh, this research exists and I think it’s wrong, and I have the means and resources to try to step in and help generate a different narrative that more accurately reflects my existence, my truth,’” said Flanders of the AIB response to the 2005 study.

But Flanders is skeptical of the value that the research has for the bisexual community in 2020. “I think I feel similarly to a lot of other bisexual people and bisexual activists around the idea of: Is this a question that we actually need to ask in this way?” she said. “Can’t we take people’s word for it that an individual who identifies as bisexual is bisexual, and therefore bisexual men exist? It’s pretty simple and straightforward.”

Even though the study concluded that male bisexuality existed, “just by deeming it a necessary question, you’re immediately undermining the status of a massive group of people,” said Albery, the Georgetown researcher. Increasingly, Beach, Flanders, and Feinstein all said, human sexuality researchers take it as an accepted premise that bisexuality is a sexual orientation.

And, Beach argues, research questions that seem to doubt bisexual experience can themselves be harmful. “There are psychological studies that show denial and erasure of bisexual people’s sexual orientation,” they said, “causes direct psychological harm to bisexual people.”

“Can’t we take people’s word for it that an individual who identifies as bisexual is bisexual, and therefore bisexual men exist? It’s pretty simple and straightforward.”

Bailey, who has faced such criticisms before, continues to defend his research. “I inhabit a different world. And my world is the world that knowledge is good,” he said.

His research, he added, “has done a lot to de-stigmatize various groups over the years.” Groups expressing offense, he argues, have harmed the field: “I’ve been an academic since 1989. This is the worst time I have ever experienced as a scientist.”

Other researchers think the picture is less bleak. In a follow-up email to Undark, Flanders argued that, when people express offense at research, it can actually make science better, by pushing scientists to account for “a greater array of experience and perspectives.” Some sexuality research, she argued, seems mostly concerned with questioning whether some fundamental part of a person’s identity is real — an approach, she said, that forces queer people “to engage in an academic debate about their personhood.”

Instead, Flanders said scientists should question traditional assumptions about sexuality and center the lived experiences of marginalized people. “I do not believe that people being offended has made the world worse,” she wrote. “I believe people speaking out against systems of oppression is, again, essential to scientific progress.”

#bi tumblr #bisexuality is valid #support bisexuality #bisexuality #bi pride #bi #lgbtq community #lgbtq #lgbtq pride #pride #bisexual education #biseuxal #bisexual nation #bisexual advocator #bisexual activism #bisexual community #bisexual representation #bisexual research #male bisexuality #bisexual injustice #bisexual rights #bisexual pride #support bisexual people #respect bisexual people #bisexual men #bisexual men exist #bisexual men are valid #bisexual youth #still bisexual #bisexual struggle

[the-real-slim-shady]

Transgender and Non-Binary People: The Facts and Science Behind Them

I wrote this essay a while ago, after I had an argument with my mom about transgender people, and I figured I'd share it, it’s really long, so feel free to just skim it and find the important parts lol.

    In recent years, gender issues have become much more prevalent in our society. People who are transgender and non-binary finally feel comfortable being who they are, but there are still people who think transgender and non-binary people don’t exist. Some believe that they’re just seeking attention, or that all of their problems could be solved with therapy. This is a tricky topic because it is hard to scientifically prove how a person feels in their body.

    People usually think of the words “sex” and “gender” as interchangable, but this is in fact incorrect. In general terms, the word “sex” refers to the biological differences between men and women, such as the genitalia and genetic differences. “Gender” is more ambiguous, and harder to define. Gender usually refers to the role of a man and woman in society or an individual’s concept of themselves. To put it simply, sex is in the body, gender is in the mind. Sometimes a person’s genetically assigned sex does not line up with their gender. These individuals usually refer to themselves as transgender, non-binary, or genderfluid.

    We all learn in middle school that the last pair of chromosomes we have determines our sex. XX for a woman and XY for a man. Sex, however, is not that simple. The male/female split is often seen as a man-or-woman binary, but this is not entirely true. Some men are born with two or three X chromosomes as well as a Y, and some women are born with a Y chromosome. In some cases, a child is born with a mix between male and female genitalia. This is sometimes deemed intersex, and parents can decide which gender to assign to the child, but sometimes the child feels neither male nor female or disagrees with their parents’ decision. A person can be female if they have an X and Y chromosome but they are insensitive to androgens, so they have a female body. A person can have an X and Y chromosome and have a female body because their Y is missing the SRY gene. A person can have two X chromosomes and have a male body because one of their X’s has a SRY gene. A person can be female because they only have one X chromosome. A person can be male because they have two X chromosomes and one Y. A person can be male because you have two X chromosomes but your heart and brain are male and a person can be female with an X and a Y because their heart and mind feel stuck inside the wrong body.

    Most people’s sex and gender line up. The expectation that if you’re assigned a male at birth, you’re a man, and you’re assigned female at birth you’re a woman, lines up for people who are cisgender. But for people who are transgender or non-binary, the sex they’re assigned at birth may not align with the gender they know themselves to be. The concepts of gender and sex are socially constructed. We as a society assign gender and sex based on socially agreed upon characteristics. Dresses, the color pink, makeup, long hair, painted nails, and high heels belong to women, but we have seen in the past that this wasn’t always true, and as time goes on, the gendering of the aforementioned products is fading. This doesn’t mean that body parts and functions are “made up”, it just means that we categorize and define things in ways that could actually be different.

    The transgender and non-binary identity has long been associated with poor mental health and trauma that can be “cured” by therapy. Science however, says otherwise. Transgender women tend to have brain structures that resemble cisgender women rather than cisgender men. The bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc) in transgender women is more similar to cisgender women than cisgender men, and the BSTc in transgender men more closely resembles that of a cisgender man. Science tells us that gender is not binary, it may even be a linear spectrum. Like other facets of identity, it can operate on a large range of levels and operate outside of many definitions. Transgender and non binary individuals are not suffering from a mental illness or carefully “choosing” a different identity. The transgender and non-binary identity is multi dimensional, but it deserves no less respect or recognition than any other facet of humankind.

    It is essential to understand the difference between transgender people and non binary people. Transgender people feel like their assigned sex is wrong, and therefore change their gender and sometimes undergo surgery. Non-binary and genderqueer people identify themselves with neither an exclusively male or female gender, their gender identity is beyond the gender binary, sometimes fluctuates between genders, or rejects the gender binary. People who are genderqueer or genderfluid alternate between genders. Kind of like a craving for food, one day they will feel like one gender and wish to be addressed as such, and maybe in a day or a week they’ll feel like another gender and some days they will feel like no gender at all. This may seem to some people like they should just make up their minds, but trust me, if they could they would. Non binary people, however, feel like no gender, and will always feel like they belong outside the gender binary. Science has yet to provide an insight into the non-binary identity and whether there’s any scientific basis to them.

    Some people say that transgender and non binary individuals are just feeling gender dysphoria, and they can overcome it. Gender dysphoria is actually just a name for how transgender and onbinary people feel before they come out: feeling that your emotional or psychological identiy as male or female to be opposite to your biological sex. Gender dysphoria is a strong desire to be rid of your sex characteristics because you feel like they don’t belong to you. It is a strong desire for the sex characteristics of the other gender, or no sex charecteristics at all. It is a strong desire to be treated as another gender. It is a strong conviction that you are not the gender you were born as.

    Some people believe that gender dysphoria for transgender and non-binary people can be solved by therapy. However, researchers analyzed survey responses from more than 27,000 transgender adults accross the US with a roughly even mix of transgender women and transgender men. People who had undergone conversion therapy at some point in their lives were twice as likely to have attempted suicide than someone who had not. About 70% said they had talked to a professional at some point about their gender identity and of those 70%, 20% had undergone conversion therapy. All of the aforementioned people are still transgender.

    In addition, many medical associations and academies have spoken out against conversion therapy. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry “finds no evidence to support the application of any “therapeutic intervention” operating under the premise that a specific sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or gender expression is pathological. Furthermore, based on the scientific evidence, the AACAP asserts that such ‘conversion therapies’ lack scientific credibility and clinical utility. Additionally, there is evidence that such interventions are harmful. As a result, ‘conversion therapies’ should not be part of any behavioral health treatment of children and adolescents."

    The American Academy of Pediatrics says “"Confusion about sexual orientation is not unusual during adolescence. Counseling may be helpful for young people who are uncertain about their sexual orientation or for those who are uncertain about how to express their sexuality and might profit from an attempt at clarification through a counseling or psychotherapeutic initiative. Therapy directed specifically at changing sexual orientation is contraindicated, since it can provoke guilt and anxiety while having little or no potential for achieving changes in orientation."

    Since the beginnning of the non-binary movement, it has gathered skepticism, critisism, derision, and even violence. Many non-binary people (and transgender people too) are accused of being “special snowflakes” or “drama queens” and “attention whores”. However, this criticism ignores the fact that gender identity is largely personal. In addition, something as simple as the way you wish to be identified tends to cause hatred to be sent your way. There is little critisim towards non-binary people that can be directed towards them in a constructive matter. If a non-binary person is in fact “just doing it for attention” the name calling and hatred would just be feeding into their desire for attention and giving them exactly what they want!

    Finally, if exploring your gender identity is a “trend” as some have called it, then isn’t it better than the previous trend of feeling isolated and alone and having absolutely no way to be who you are and say what you feel? In light of the current lack of any scientific evidence as to the biological nature of non-binary transsexuality, it is best to act in the same way as any situation where there is a phenomenon yet to be proven by science: doubt, skepticism, and open-mindedness, which accepts the potential for truth, but does not assume it.

    Some people are against the idea of calling a transgender or non-binary person their chosen pronouns because they disagree with the way that said person identifies themselves, and they reserve the right to their freedom of speech. Dr. Jordan Peterson is one of these people.

    Dr. Peterson is a psychology professor at the University of Toronto. He released a video lecture series taking aim at political correctness. He was frustrated with being asked to use alternative pronouns requested by trans and non-binary students and staff. “I’ve studied authoritarianism for a very long time, for forty years,” Dr Peterson told the BBC. “It starts by people’s attempts to control the ideological and linguistic territory. There’s no chance I’m going to use words made up by people who are doing that, not a chance.” Dr Peterson is concerned proposed federal human rights legislation will elevate his refusal to use alternative pronouns into hate speech. There is currently a bill in Canada that prohibits discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act on the basis of gender identity and expression. Under this bill, Dr. Peterson is not guilty of hate speech, but he could face sanction under Ontario’s human rights code which extended protection to trans people in 2012.

    Conservatives like Dr. Peterson have conjured up images of good people being dragged off to jail for not calling a person by their chosen pronouns. To the contrary, as legal scholars like Brenda Cossman and Kyle Kirkup have patiently explained, the bill in Canada cannot lead to anything remotely like this. But the milk has been spilled, and rants have been recorded, and the subtext is that there is a segment of society accustomed to others accommodating their freedom but not the other way around.

    Some people are confused as to why calling someone by their chosen pronouns constitutes as human rights, but I am confused about something else: In what kind of society does the question of whether we should respect people provoke a major debate? In what kind of society does the sentiment “you can’t make me” constitute a compelling argument?

    In conclusion, there’s no reason to discriminate against non-binary people or transgender people because contrary to the popular belief, you’re not being morally or intellectually superior, you’re just being rude. Use their prefered name and pronouns. I promise it won’t kill you.

#transgender #non binary #social issues #transgender essay #non binary essay #LGBTQ rights

[star-anise]

why would your social environment affect if you identify as a woman or nb?

I don’t know if you meant it to be, but this is a delightful question. I am going to be a complete nerd for 2k+ words at you.

“Gender” is distinct from “sex” because it’s not a body’s physical characteristics, it’s how society classifies and interprets that body. Sex is “That person has a vagina.” Gender is “This is a blend of society’s expectations about what bodies with vaginas are like, social expectations of how people with vaginas do or might or should act, behave, and feel, the actual lived experiences of people with vaginas, and a twist of lemon for zest.” Concepts of gender and what is “manly” and “womanly” can vary a lot. They’re social values, like “normal” or “legal” or “beautiful”, and they vary all the time. How well you fit your gender role depends a lot on how “gender” is defined.

800 years ago in Europe the general perception was that women were sinful, sensual, lustful people who required frequent sex and liked watching bloodsport. 200 years ago, the British aristocracy thought women were pure, innocent beings of moral purity with no sexual desire who fainted at the sight of blood. These days, we think differently in entirely new directions.

But this gets even more complicated, in part because human experience is really diverse and society’s narratives have to account for that. So 200 years ago, those beliefs about femininity being delicate and dainty and frail only really applied to women with aristocratic lineages, and “the lower classes” of women were believed to be vulgar, coarse, sexual, and earthy, which “explained” why they performed hard physical labor or worked as prostitutes.

Being trans or nonbinary isn’t just or even primarily about what characteristics you want your body to have. It’s about how you want to define yourself and be interpreted and interacted with by other people.

The writer Sylvia Plath lived 1932-1963, and she said:

“Being born a woman is my awful tragedy. From the moment I was conceived I was doomed to sprout breasts and ovaries rather than penis and scrotum; to have my whole circle of action, thought and feeling rigidly circumscribed by my inescapable feminity. Yes, my consuming desire to mingle with road crews, sailors and soldiers, bar room regulars–to be a part of a scene, anonymous, listening, recording–all is spoiled by the fact that I am a girl, a female always in danger of assault and battery.”

She was from upper-middle-class Massachusetts, the child of a university professor. A lot of those things she was “prohibited” from doing weren’t things each and every woman was prohibited from doing; they were things women of her class weren’t allowed to do. The daughters and sisters and wives of sailors and soldiers, women who worked in hotels and ran rooming houses, barmaids and sex workers, got to anonymously and invisibly observe those men, after all. They just couldn’t do it at the same time they tried to meet the standards educated Bostonians of the 1950s had for nice young women.

Failure to understand how diverse womanhood is has always been one of feminism’s biggest weaknesses. The Second Wave of feminism was started mostly by prosperous university-educated white women, since they were the people with the time and money and resources to write and read books and attend conferences about “women’s issues”. And they assumed that their issues were female issues. That they were the default of femaleness, and could assume every woman had roughly the same experience as them.

So, for example, middle-class white women in post-WWII USA were expected to stay home all the time and look after their children. Feminists concluded that this was isolating and oppressive, and they’d like the freedom to pursue lives, careers, and interests outside of the home. They vigorously pursued the right to be freed from their domestic and maternal duties.

But in their society, these experiences were not generally shared by Black and/or poor women, who, like their mothers, did not have the luxury of spending copious amounts of leisure time with their children; they had to work to earn enough money to survive on, which meant working on farms, in factories, or as cooks, maids, or nannies for rich white women who wanted the freedom to pursue lives outside the home. They tended to feel that they would like to have the option of staying home and playing with their babies all day. 

This is not to say none of the first group enjoyed domestic lives, or that none of the second group wanted non-domestic careers; it’s just that the first group formed the face and the basic assumptions of feminism, and the second group struggled to get a seat at the table.

There’s this phenomenon called “cultural feminism” that’s an attitude that crops up among feminists from time to time (or grows on them, like fungus) that holds that women have a “feminine essence”, a quasi-spiritual “nature” that is deeply distinct from the “masculine essence” of men. This is one of the concepts powering lesbian separatism: the idea that because women are so fundamentally different from men, a society of all women will be fundamentally different in nature from a society that includes men.

But, well, the problem cultural feminism generally has is with how it achieves its definition of “female nature”. The view tends to be that women are kinder, more moral, more collectivist, more community-minded, and less prone to violence. 

And cultural feminists tend to HATE people who believe in the social construction of gender, because we tend to cross our arms and go, “Nah, sis, that’s a frappe of misused statistics and The Angel In the House with some wishful thinking as a garnish. That’s how you feel about what womanhood is. It’s fair enough for you, but you’re trying to apply it to the entire human species. That’s got less intellectual rigor and sociological validity than my morning oatmeal.” Hence the radfem insistence that gender theorists like me SHUT UP and gender quite flatly DOESN’T EXIST. It’s a MADE-UP TERM, and people should STOP TALKING ABOUT IT. (And go back to taking about immutable, naturally-occuring phenomena, one supposes, like the banking system and Western literary canon.)

Because seriously, when you look at real actual women, you will see that some of us can be very selfish, while others are altruistic; some think being a woman means abhorring all violence forever, and others think being a woman means being willing to fight and die to protect the people you love. As groups men and women have different average levels of certain qualities, but it’s not like we don’t share a lot in common. The distribution of “male” and “female” traits doesn’t tend to mean two completely separate sets of characteristics; they tend to be more like two overlapping bell curves.

So, like I said, I grew up largely in rural, working-class Western Canadian society. My relatives tend to be tradesmen like carpenters, welders, or plumbers, or else ranchers and farmers. I was raised by a mother who came of age during the big push for Women’s Lib. So in the culture in which I was raised, it was very normal and in some ways rewarded (though in other ways punished) for women to have short hair, wear flannel and jeans, drive a big truck, play rough contact sports, use power tools, pitch in with farmwork, use guns, and drink beer. “Traditional femininity” was a fascinating foreign culture my grandmother aspired to, and I loved nonsense like polishing the silver (it’s a very satisfying pastime) but that was just another one of my weird hobbies, like sewing fairy clothes out of flower petals and collecting toy horses.

Within the standards of the society I was raised in, I am a decently feminine woman. I’m obviously not a “girly girl”, someone who wears makeup and dresses in ways that privilege beauty over practicality, but I have a long ponytail of hair and when I go to Mark’s Work Wearhouse, I shop in the women’s section. We know what “butch” is and I ain’t it.

But through my friendships and my career, I’ve gotten experiences among cultures you wouldn’t think would be too different–we’re all still white North Americans!–but which felt bizarre and alien, and ate away at the sense of self I’d grown up in. In the USA’s northeast, the people I met had the kind of access to communities with social clout, intellectual resources, and political power I hadn’t quite believed existed before I saw them. There really were people who knew politicians and potential employers socially before they ever had to apply to a job or ask for political assistance; there were people who really did propose projects to influential businessmen or academics at cocktail parties; they really did things like fundraise tens of thousands of dollars for a charity by asking fifty of their friends to donate, or start a business with a $2mil personal loan from a relative.

And in those societies, femininity was so different and so foreign. I’d grown up seeing femininity as a way of assigning tasks to get the work done; in these new circles, it was performative in a way that was entirely unique and astounding to me. A boss really would offer you a starting salary $10k higher than they might have if you wore high heels instead of flats. You really would be more likely to get a job if you wore makeup. And your ability to curate social connections in the halls of power really was influenced by how nice of a Christmas party you could throw. These women I met were being held, daily, to a standard of femininity higher than that performed by anyone in my 100 most immediate relatives.

So when girls from Seven Sisters schools talked about how for them, dressing how I dressed every day (jeans, boots, tee, button-up shirt, no makeup, no hair product) was “bucking gendered expectations” and “being unfeminine”, I began to feel totally unmoored. When I realized that I, who absolutely know only 5% as much about power tools and construction as my relatives in the trades, was more suited to take a hammer and wade in there than not just the “empowered” women but the self-professed “handy” men there, I didn’t know how to understand it. I felt like I was… a woman who knew how to do carpentry projects, not “totally butch” the way some people (approvingly) called me.

And, well, at home in Alberta I was generally seen as a sweet and gentle girl with an occasional stubborn streak or precocious moment, but apparently by the standards of Southern states like Georgia and Alabama I am like, 100x more blunt, assertive, and inconsiderate of men’s feelings than women typically feel they have to be.

And this is still all just US/Canadian white women.

And like I said, after years of this, I came home (from BC, where I encountered MORE OTHER weird and alien social constructs, though generally more around class and politics than gender) to Alberta, and I went to what is, for Alberta, a super hippy liberal church, and I helped prepare the after-service tea among women with unstyled hair and no makeup  who wore jeans and sensible shoes, and listened to them talk about their work in municipal water management and ICU nursing, and it felt like something inside my chest slid back into place, because I understood myself as a woman again, and not some alien thing floating outside the expectations of the society I was in with a chestful of opinions no one around me would understand, suddenly all made sense again.

I mean, that’s by no means an endorsement for aspirational middle class rural Alberta as the ideal gender utopia. (Alberta is the Texas of Canada.) I just felt comfortable inside because it’s the culture where I found a definition of myself and my gender I could live with, because its boundaries of what’s considered “female” were broad enough to hold all the parts of me I felt like I needed to express. I have a lot of friends who grew up here, or in families like mine, and don’t feel at all happy with its gender boundaries. And even as I’m comfortable being a woman here, I still want to push and transform it, to make it even more feminist and politically left and decolonized.

TERFs try to claim that trans and nonbinary people reinforce the gender identity, but in my experience, it’s feminists who claim male and female are immutable and incompatible do that. It’s trans, nonbinary, and genderqueer people who, simply by performing their genders in public, make people realize just how bullshit innate theories of gender are.. Society is going to want to gender them in certain ways and involve them in certain dynamics (”Hey ladies, those fellas, amirite?”) and they’re going, “Nope. Not me. Cut it out.” I’ve seen a lot of cis people who will quietly admit they do think men and women are different because that’s just reality, watch someone they know transition, and suddenly go, “Oh my god, I get it now.”

Like yes, this is me being coldly political and thinking about people as examples to make a political point. Everyone’s valid and can do what they want, but some things are just easier for potential converts to wrap their minds around.. “I’m sorting through toys to give to Shelly’s baby. He probably won’t want a princess crown, huh?” “I actually know several people who were considered boys when they were babies and never got one, and are making up for all their lost princess crown time now as adults. You never know what he’ll be into when he grows up.” “…Okay, point. I’ll throw it in there.” Trans and enby people disrupt gender in a really powerful back-of-the-brain way where people suddenly see how much leeway there is between gender and sex.

I honestly believe supporting trans and enby people and queering gender until it’s a macrame project instead of a spectrum are how we’ll get to a gender-free utopia. I think cultural feminism is just the same old shit, inverted. (Confession: in my head, I pronounce “cultural” with emphasis on the “cult” part.) 

I think feminism is like a lot of emergency response groups: Our job is to put ourselves out of a job. It’s not a good thing if gender discrimination is still prevalent and harmful 200 years from now! Obviously we’re not there yet and calls to pack it in and go home are overrated, but as the problem disappears into its solution, we have to accept that our old ways of looking at the world have to shift.

#staranise original #lgbt discourse

[seyesnyl]

Critical analysis of a Comic book

During my search for books and articles to aid my practice-based research, I came across the text “Critical Approaches to Comics: Theories and Methods”. This book offers a look into the critical analysis of books and the theories and methods their authors employ. It focuses on four essential aspects of a graphic novel/comic which are: Form, Content, Production, and Reception. In each of these parts, contributors with comic criticism expertise discuss their methods of analysis and put into practice these methods on selected comics or graphic novels.

It is an insightful book and going through it made me understand different ways a comic could be analyzed and further understood. I had recently purchased a comic book called X-Men Red (Fig. 01) and wanted to try out the procedures that some critics had employed in their analysis.

Peter Coogan in Chapter 15 Genre: Reconstructing the Superhero in All Star Superman, discusses the superhero genre and its characteristics. He offers a guide towards analyzing the superhero comic book and its context. His procedures entail multiple readings to properly critically analyze.

First reading: Familiarize yourself with the events and characters of the story.

Second reading: engage with the text at a deeper level, note the conventions (heroes, villains, love interests, etc.). Note how are they used; seriously or comically or problematically? Observe structural pairs (events, characters, icons, and settings) that reflect and comment on each other.

Third reading: attend to the sequential artistry of the comic book. 

After these three, the analyst should assemble their notes and try to identify patterns in the story, using conventions, and the sequential artistry that leads to discovering the thematic concerns of the authors.

He mentions that superhero comics are usually intertextual in that they reference other texts and those should be watched out for. He also says to consider the general tendencies of comic books produced at the time the text you are analyzing was published.

Lastly, it should be noted how the characters represent oppositional attitudes (both semantically and syntactically) and how these oppositions are mediated. Then determine what you have to say about the story and how the text supports and reveals the points you want to affect.

(Smith and Duncan, 2012)

Fig. 01  Cover of Taylor, T., Alixe, P., Lee, S., Kirby, J. and Asrar, M., 2018. “X-Men Red - The Hate Machine”. New York: Marvel Worldwide.

After three readings and making notes, I assembled this analysis on two chapters of X-Men Red (1 and 2). 

The comic starts with a one-page introduction of Jean Grey back into the comic universe, back from the dead. It’s a sequel to her actual resurrection chapter, but this first page helps bring the reader to speed with synoptic text and imagery (Fig.02). “I was the Phoenix”, “I burned so brightly”, “And then I was dead”, “And everything was dark”, “I’m alive again”. She is pictured in the last panel of the page recollecting this and reflecting on the events straight after her resurrection.

Jean’s death as the Phoenix is a famous story in the X-Men universe, and just last year, a second live-action movie adaptation was released in theaters worldwide. The first was released in 2006 and there have been many adaptations in comics and animated programs over the decades since the story of her death was first introduced in 1980.

Fig. 02- Excerpt from Taylor, T., Alixe, P., Lee, S., Kirby, J. and Asrar, M., 2018. “X-Men Red - The Hate Machine”. New York: Marvel Worldwide.

From the first page to the following pages of this chapter, Jean acts as the narrator of the events that happened just before she died, and after she came back to life. This is done through green text boxes in the chapter. She catches up with the rest of the X-Men team, and we watch her move from here with her blue-skinned teammate Kurt, to another setting where we get the first glimpse of intolerance towards mutants that will be the focus of this story. Kurt is the target of discrimination by a passer-by and through this, we also get to see a glimpse of Jean Grey’s strength as she deals with this situation. It is revealed throughout the book that Jean can use her powers to its extent without fear of the Phoenix entity taking hold. The extent is yet unknown to her, but she knows she was being held back before.

This theme of intolerance towards mutants (people with abnormal abilities and sometimes appearances) is a topic frequently explored by the X-Men franchise more popularly and taken more seriously compared to any other comic in the superhero genre in my opinion. The seriousness is similarly conveyed in this comic book.

There are similarities in the discrimination mutants face with what minorities in our real world go through. In this instance with Kurt and Jean, it is indirectly shown that even though they are both mutants; Kurt is singled out by a normal white-passing man because he outwardly presents to be different with his blue skin and long tail while Jean is overlooked because she appears like a normal human. Likewise, in the real world, the more obvious your difference is, the more bigotry you are likely to face. Darker skin, non-Eurocentric features, gender-queer appearances, disabilities, etc.

Fig. 03-  Excerpt from Taylor, T., Alixe, P., Lee, S., Kirby, J. and Asrar, M., 2018. “X-Men Red - The Hate Machine”. New York: Marvel Worldwide.

It is obvious Kurt faces this all the time, and he seems to brush it off, but Jean is coming back into this world as sort of fresh-eyed and is appalled the hatred has become more emboldened since she had been gone. It is an added effect she is a mind-reader and reveals the hateful man is scared and does not understand half of the things he professes to hate, which is a common belief about bigots. She also alludes he is among the infamous internet trolls that write bile to strangers from the anonymity and safety of his room. It is fair to say that the “internet troll” in recent times is one of the most prominent social bullies. This man is a clear representative of today’s social and digital hate culture

The first chapter concludes by panning back to the image of Jean in the setting of the first page’s panel, narrating the story of her coming back to life and what she has faced so far. It is from here and the following chapters that the story moves into the present. Jean says that with her new life she will ensure to change this hateful world.

The art of this chapter is a bit unusual to me. It tends to be abrasive. I haven’t paid much attention to western comics recently so that might be a factor in my unease. The artist Pascal Alixe uses short dark lines that don’t flow together for shading and this gives the character’s faces and bodies a rough appearance. The art also doesn’t follow the regular pin-up styles for female characters that comics are famous for. They appear stockier and more muscular than the typical comic representation which, realistically, makes sense for the jobs they take on.

In chapter 2, since Jean has been revealed to be a strong mutant, and we are following her quest to save the world, it is curious to witness how she goes about it. A fascinating way she does this is by using her telepathy to link the brilliant minds of others to solve a specific problem. She does this when she invites distinguished thinkers from all over the world for a meeting and links their minds with her powers to develop an idea to make the world better. She pulls a similar feat later in the comic when she uses Black Panther’s neurological knowledge and the powers of Trinary, a new teammate, to remove an item from a person’s brain. Doing this passes across the message that complicated problems can be solved by bringing together the skills and talents of different people. A telepath might not be realistic, but someone with empathy and good interpersonal skills may achieve this.

In a United Nations meeting, Jean pleaded her case to the world ambassadors. Referencing Professor Xavier’s intent for ‘mutantkind’ – who believed mutants could win normal humans over by being heroes when needed and being invisible when not – she says mutants should not need to be heroes for acceptance. This is a fascinating sentiment as she (or rather the author) could be referencing other superheroes in the superhero genre and the terms of being accepted. This calls upon the intertextuality of the superhero genre. Superman, Spiderman, and other heroes with powers have often had complications with public acceptance until they proved they are useful to society by using those superhuman powers to save their citizens. This also translates to real-world issues. For example, how black people often need to be exceptional before they are thought of separately from stereotypes.

In an examination into ‘homo-normativity’ in children’s literature, Lester (2013) posits that in most queer literature for children, there is an emphasis on the queer or gender non-conforming character to earn approval as opposed to being entitled to it. She states in the article that “This motif of having to prove oneself means the main characters are accepted only after those around them learn to appreciate their differences, the implication being that there is ultimately something unacceptable about gender nonconformity for which young male characters must compensate”… “These cases of privileging individual exceptionalism as the only way of gaining acceptance still maintain that gender nonconformity is unacceptable and should be avoided”.

Fig. 04 -  Excerpt from Taylor, T., Alixe, P., Lee, S., Kirby, J. and Asrar, M., 2018. “X-Men Red - The Hate Machine”. New York: Marvel Worldwide.

Unfortunately, this chapter ends with Jean being framed for the murder of an attending ambassador by the villain of the story, Cassandra Nova. Even though Jean had made some progress during the meeting, the situation has now become worse than before as it is publicly witnessed a mutant has murdered someone that appeared to have opposed her. Before the frame job, a message from Nova was passed to Jean informing her that she had upset the status quo with her actions and would face the consequences. Taking this back to the real world, this alludes to what many social activists and minorities discern, which is that systems have been put in place to ensure that the oppressed remain oppressed for the benefit of the oppressors.

In the subsequent chapters, the story develops further; however, it is noticeably told from an intriguing point of view. More common superhero stories find their heroes playing a more passive role. They live their lives until an accident happens nearby or a super-villain wants to take over the world or rob a bank before they act. In X-Men Red, Jean could have waited for the anti-mutant tensions to rise and actual conflict to ensue before she acted, but she takes on an assertive role and is seeking to achieve a goal and is now being thwarted by the villains.

I researched on remarks from the author, Tom Taylor, about the comic, and he states “this book is Jean Grey coming back to life, but not coming back to the life she left behind. She doesn't want to come back to that life either. She's seen that the world has moved on. It's changed and she doesn't like everything she's seen. She's very empathetic and she feels so much of what's going on around her that she wants to make an actual change to the world. Not just for ‘mutantkind’ or humanity, but for everybody”. He doesn’t out-rightly mention the subliminal social commentary and that is likely because it speaks for itself and is not heavily nuanced.

I find this book pertinent to current times and it is thought-provoking without losing too much on the entertainment factor. As a consumer of superhero entertainment, it is usually difficult for me to grasp how a really powerful protagonist can lead an engaging story, but when faced with the seemingly insurmountable problem of bigotry, discrimination, and changing the hearts of people, it is a worthy challenge and I can’t wait to see how it culminates.

This has been an insightful task for me and the text that assisted my analysis has expanded my outlook on comics and the different facets of it that I never paid attention to. This will undoubtedly help me in my practice to be more intentional about the choices I make in the comics I create in the future.

References

Lester, J.Z. 2014, "Homonormativity in Children's Literature: An Intersectional Analysis of Queer-Themed Picture Books", Journal of LGBT youth, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 244-275.

Smith, M.J. & Duncan, R. 2012;2011;, Critical Approaches to Comics: Theories and Methods, Taylor and Francis, Hoboken.

Taylor, T., Alixe, P., Lee, S., Kirby, J. and Asrar, M., 2018. “X-Men Red - The Hate Machine”. New York: Marvel Worldwide.

[bearwithglassess]

Two People Share One Heart. A Theory Solves It.

I was with my mother while watching a tv drama. Not an avid fan of tv drama, but my mom summarized all the episodes that she had watched. Something caught my attention when she mentioned the woman got a heart transplant, and how she became attracted to the donor’s husband which she never had feelings for him before the surgery. In the end, the woman cried after she saw the donor’s husband was with another woman.

Scriptwriters tell cliche stories about heart transplants: the nonstop romance between the leading actor and the donor’s lover, shows strange events surrounding the actor, and his character develops when the donor tried connecting with him.

What I observed in this particular story, it displays the presence of the donor still exists in the receiver’s body after the heart transplant; whether it’s a good ending or a bad one, the leading actor portrays two different people in one body. As the result, I decided to gather information on how the scriptwriters got this idea for their TV series, and where it was started.

To my amazed, there are several postings on the internet, discussing the explanations to the mystery of the heart transplant. On YouTube, there's one video talking about the person who inherited the donor’s traits after the heart transplant. In spiritual explanation, they believed that the new heart serves as a bridge between the donor’s soul to the heart receiver. Thus, researchers investigated with several patients who underwent the heart transplant. It reveals that few heart receivers acquire some characteristics of the donor such as selections to food, music, and talent that are not preferable to them before. They can also visualize the donor’s life regardless of their connection.

WHO DISCOVERS IT?

The phenomenon was known in 1988, when a 70-year-old female named Claire Sylvia suffered from Primary Pulmonary Hypertension. She received both heart-lung transplant from an 18-year-old boy who died from a motorcycle accident. After the surgery, she had a sudden craving for beers, and her selection of clothes got changed into cool colored clothes. She claimed that she also had dreams of a tall, thin teenager whose name is TL.

In her book entitled, “A Change of Heart: A Memoir” stated that “The mysterious new entity within her body reminded her of pregnancy, when she felt she embodied something "foreign and beyond my control, yet terribly precious and vulnerable [as if] a second soul was sharing my body". And that soul was stereotypically masculine, making her more aggressive and confident” 

Later, she found out those strange dreams and behaviors came from the donor named Tim when she decided to visit the boy’s parent. Sylvia contacted the scientists to understand herself better regarding her experiences after the organ transplant.

WHAT CAUSE OF IT?

The phenomenon is called the Cellular Memory Theory. It is a neurobiological hypothesis that the heart can send memories to other parts of the body besides the brain. Cell memory is commonly emotional, kinesthetic, and long-term memory which performs certain tasks that we are not aware of. Strong memories like traumatic events can cause an involuntary reaction to the person. This theory involves with patients who underwent heart transplants and acquire the qualities of the donor afterward.

Two medical professionals, Schwartz and Pearsall, conducted the study at the University of Arizona. They gathered approximately 80 respondents who undergone with the heart transplant, sharing their odd experiences relating to their new heart; they also collected information from the families and friends in both parties while audiotaping their conversation.

In their case studies, a 56-year old professor who was diagnosed with Atherosclerosis and Ishemic Heart Disease received the heart transplant from a 34-year old police officer, attempting to capture the drug dealer.

According to the patient, he usually dreams of the face of Jesus Christ and a flash of light to his face, sometimes he felt a slight burn coming from the light. He reported to his doctors about the unusual dream, but he only told them about the white light. The doctors explained that it was the side effect of the medication that causes weird dreams, until the donor’s wife verified how her husband dies and the appearance of the culprit. 

The donor’s wife said "What really bothers me, though, is when Casey (heart receiver's wife) said offhandedly that the only real side-effect of Ben's surgery was flashes of light in his face. That's exactly how Carl (donor) died. The bastard shot him right in the face. The last thing he must have seen is a terrible flash. They never caught the guy, but they think they know who it is. I've seen the drawing of his face. The guy has long hair, deep eyes, a beard, and a real calm look. He looks sort of like some of the pictures of Jesus.”

 Another case study, where a 47-year old male worker diagnosed with Aortic Stenosis received a heart from a 17-year old black student, a victim from a drive-by-shooting. He was found dead on the street while hugging his violin case. His mother told us that he loved classical music and played the violin well.

During the interview, the heart receiver mentioned that he was not fond of classical music. He was more concerned about his new heart coming from a black guy. Afterward, the receiver’s wife reported his behavior after the heart transplant.

She said “For the first time he's invited his black friends over from work. It is like he doesn't see their color anymore, even though he still talks about it sometimes. He seems more comfortable and at ease with these black guys, but he is not aware of it. And one more thing I should say. He's driving me nuts with the classical music. He does not know the name of one song and never, never listened to it before. Now, he sits for hours and listens to it. He even whistles classical music songs that he could never know. How does he know them? You'd think he'd like rap music or something because of his black heart.”

 The study concluded that donated heart can transfer memories to the organ receiver. Researchers believed that a network of neurons in the donated heart stores the memories of the donor and sends it to the heart receivers. The heart receivers will either inherit the donor’s trait or recall the past memories of the donor’s life. Although there are no sufficient tools that can identify for better understanding the cell memories, researchers provided a theoretical hypothesis which it shows shreds of evidence supporting their theory. 

DOES ANYONE CAN EXPERIENCE IT?

Not everyone can experience the Cellular Memory Phenomenon, only a few patients who are sensitive to their new heart can experience the phenomenon. In their research, there are only 10 out of 80 patients who experiencing the phenomenon while the other patients verbalize that they did not feel different after the surgery. Pearsall explained that immunosuppressant drugs might inhibit the transmission of cell memories that other patients are unaffected after they received a new heart. 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Other conducted research 

Stories of heart transplant patients

Schwartz and Pearsall's research’ 

Research on sea slugs related to cellular memory theory

The Story of Claire Sylvia

Cell Memory in Organ Transplant

#memory #body memories #heart transplant #organ transplant #heart donors #heart receivers #organ donors #organ receivers #health #research paper #article #content writing

[comrade-meow]

LYNNE WALSH looks ahead to the biggest radical feminist conference in Europe, FiLiA, which takes place over two days in October

SOME of us have cynical definitions of “conference”: interesting people talking about boring things or boring people talking about interesting things — or the worst combination of those two.

You get the picture. Let’s face it: we’ve all been there. There are conferences where you leave more exhausted than energised; there are events which turn out to be uneventful, there are summits which plummet.

And then there is FiLiA.

This is a two-day event, the biggest radical feminist conference in Europe, which delivers a breathtakingly fine series of speakers, as well as providing opportunities aplenty for women (and a few male allies) to plan, regroup, support one another, spark new ideas and action — and dance.

This year’s event, on October 16 and 17 in Portsmouth, includes sessions from journalists Jenni Murray, Julie Bindel and Joan Smith,lesbian feminist scholar Sheila Jeffreys, and Harriet Wistrich, founder and director of the Centre for Women’s Justice.

There are stalwarts of the women’s movement at every turn. Gill Hague, activist, practitioner and researcher on violence against women nationally and internationally since the early 1970s, is the professor emerita of violence against women studies at the University of Bristol.

She co-founded the Centre for Gender and Violence Research, School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol.

Her book, History and Memories of the Domestic Violence Movement, published in May this year, is a passionate and assiduous account of this arena.

Its strapline is “We’ve come further than you think” — just what we need, to encourage us to persist.

She tells it like it is. When she speaks about her international work, and perhaps especially that involving Uganda, Hague is uncompromising, though there is “honey in the rock”; she cares deeply about injustice towards women and girls, and that has clearly always fuelled her dedication.

She says of her work: “As I get older, I feel I can look back with pride; this is a fantastic way to spend the one human life we have.”

And so say all of us.

Choosing from the FiLiA conference agenda is no easy task. Here are only a few of the sessions: Misbehaving: Stories of Protest Against the Miss World Contest and the Beauty Industry; Not Dead Yet: Feminism, Passion and Women's Liberation; Political Participation of Migrant Women, and Police Perpetrated Abuse.

It’s no wonder that one woman attending the 2019 event said: “FiLiA galvanises women — it is without a doubt one of my lifelong conference experiences — and I have been to many.”

Lisa-Marie Taylor, chief executive officer, sums it up: “FiLiA is a place where local, national and global women come together to network, learn from each other, plot the overthrow of patriarchy and to party!

“We’ve received messages from women in Norway, Germany, Spain, the US and more saying they’ve heard about FiLiA and they are coming over — this is incredible to us, and a testament to global consciousness-raising around the rights of women and girls, as well as the desire to gather together wherever and whenever we can.”

These annual gatherings have always had a real international feel, and with good reason.

Delegates greeting one another may be social media mates, but that’s never all they are.

There are campaigns and actions linking women’s rights activists across the world, from Kurdistan to Latin America to Ireland, Israel, India and Ukraine. There are speakers from all these movements on the FiLiA conference agenda.

Typical of this ongoing, FiLiA-inspired, global campaigning is a project focused on a refugee camp in Kenya.

Lesbian refugees escaping violence and lesbophobia in their home country were sent by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to the Kakuma camp, in Turkana County, one of the poorest areas of Kenya.

It’s been a refugee camp since 1992, and currently has 160,000 displaced people. Those facts stand alone as a damning indictment.

As the women were seeking asylum due to their sexuality, they were put in the LGBT Block 13 — named with a grim irony.

This, of course, identified them to other refugees in the camp; they’ve suffered violence and abuse as a result.

The women have told FiLiA about a lack of food, constant physical and sexual abuse and lack of basic shelter for them and the other LGB&T refugees in Block 13.

Also recently announced as a speaker is Joanna Cherry, the SNP MP for Edinburgh South West since 2015.

She said recently, of LGBT+ history month: “…these days the L is very much an afterthought and many people have forgotten the contribution made by lesbian feminists of my generation to fighting homophobia and discrimination.

“At a time when the SNP was still undecided about Section 28, I was out on the streets campaigning against it. A large part of my career as a lawyer was spent standing up for women’s rights and prosecuting sex crimes against women and children. So it is particularly galling to be misrepresented by those who have come late to the field of the battle for equality.”

Feminist philosopher Jane Clare Jones speaks in a session called The Radical Notion: Female Class Politics / Founding The Countess, Advocating For Women And Children In Ireland.

The countess in question is Constance Markievicz, the first woman elected to the parliament at Westminster, in 1918. Then representing Sinn Fein, she did not take her seat.

Founder of “The Countess” Laoise UI Aodha de Brun points out that Markievicz “attended her first political meeting aged 41 — it’s never too late to effect change.”

The agenda promises this session will get to the heart of some tight issues: “Many people claim feminism is a form of ‘identity politics,’ but women’s oppression is not a matter of ‘identity,’ but of the material exploitation of women’s bodies and labour.

“This panel will explore why feminism is better thought of as a type of class politics.

“What are the implications for feminist activism and theory of understanding feminism as ‘female class politics’? How might this help us rectify some of the mistakes feminism has made in the past, and reimagine the future of feminism?”

In the session FiLiA Stands with Sex Trade Survivors, Yulia Dorokhovah will speak about the work she does as director of the sex workers’ self-organisation in Ukraine.

This is the NGO All-Ukrainian League “Legalife,” aimed at combating sexual slavery, human trafficking and violence against sex workers.

The two-day happening is to be Covid-compliant, with proof either of vaccinations or of a negative test. The extra regulations are not daunting delegates, many of whom registered as soon as they could.

Another delegate to the 2019 conference told organisers: “FiLiA is Radfem Glastonbury: you see all your mates, get to see the living legends, and it takes three weeks to recover.”

True, in some ways — though we can’t really afford that long recovery time. There is work to do. Thankfully, there are great women to work alongside.

Conference details: filia.org.uk/tickets. You can support the Kakuma refugees here: filia.org.uk/kakuma-campaign.

#Anglo.txt

[walterfilmmemorabilia-blog]

10 LGBTQ Performers in the 1970's

The Stonewall riots were a series of spontaneous, violent demonstrations by members of the gay (LGBT) community against a police raid that began in the early morning hours of June 28, 1969, at the Stonewall Inn in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of New York City. They are widely considered to constitute the most important event leading to the gay liberation movement and the modern fight for LGBT rights in the United States. Wikipedia

What followed in the 1970’s was a rising tide of LGBTQ performers that “came out” to express their unique take on music, theater and sexual (transgender) identity. Here are 10 of those performers and a brief look at what they contributed to the movement and to our culture. Click on the image to learn more about the performer.

JAYNE COUNTY

As rock’s first openly transgender singer, Jayne Rogers (born June 13, 1947), better known by her stage name Jayne County, is an American singer, songwriter, actress and record producer whose career spans five decades. While dressed in female attire from the beginning of her career, County transitioned to female in 1979, becoming Jayne (as the above poster illustrates).

She made her first performing appearances as Wayne County in Wayne County and The Electric Chairs. In 1969 she appeared in Jackie Curtis’ play Femme Fatale. County considered Curtis a major influence on her career and persona and County is widely considered an influence on David Bowie –– County’s Queenage Baby number was the prototype for Bowie’s Rebel Rebel. Even more notable was her play, World – Birth of A Nation, which was set in a hospital and dealt with male castration –– evoking both transgender surgery and her mixed feelings about men, both gay and straight.

After seeing the play, Andy Warhol cast her in his play Pork. She went on to appear in the film The Blank Generation (1976).  Back and forth between New York and London, she settled in Atlanta Georgia. In 2018, County debuted a retrospective show of visual art in the New York City gallery, Participant, Inc.

County’s life and art is considered an inspirational influence on John Cameron Mitchell’s transgender rock musical Hedwig and the Angry Inch.

JACKIE CURTIS

“Jackie Curtis is not a drag queen. Jackie is an artist. A pioneer without a frontier,” so said Andy Warhol. Andy was right. Jackie Cutis (1947-1987) was a true original. Long before he became one of the Pop master’s superstars. Curtis distinguished himself by appearing (alternately) as a James Dean-like male and a Jean Harlow-like female in Off-off Broadway plays of his own devise in which he and his friends appeared:

Glamour, Glory And Gold, co-starred Candy Darling, and Robert DeNiroin his first New York stage appearance;

Vain Victory, also starred Darling with Warhol and Jack Smith star Mario Montez;

Amerika Cleopatra featured a thin barely-known Harvey Fierstein;

Femme Fatale, starred Patti Smith, Jayne County and Penny Arcade; and

Heaven Grand In Amber Orbit toplined Holly Woodlawn. These were all makeshift, wildly tossed together affairs having little to do with plot and character but tons to do with exhibitionistic self-expression.

Outside of such Warhol films as Flesh (1968) and Women in Revolt (1972), Jackie’s most notable screen appearance was in Yugoslavia agant-gardist Dusan Makvejev’s W.R.: Mysteries of the Organism – a film about sex researcher Willhelm Reich, creator of the so-called Orgone Box. Makvejev felt Jackie presence in the film added a lot to his view of Reich’s sexual theories.

DIVINE

Born Harris Glenn Milsted in 1945, this life-affirming, overweight transvestite was re-named Divine (after the hero/heroine of Jean Genet’s Our Lady of the Flowers ) by the writer-director John Waters, who discovered her right down the block from where he lived. Through his films Waters turned a lonely overweight kid from Baltimore into one of the biggest (in every sense of the word) of all underground movie stars.

In Waters’ comedies, Pink Flamingoes, Female Trouble, Polyester and Hairspray, Divine redefined what it means to be a movie star. Waters called him The Most Beautiful Woman in The World and if you’ve seen Divine on stage of screen you’ll know why; for like his idol, Elizabeth Taylor, Divine was overwhelmingly sui generis.

While beloved for his films, Divine was a prolific LGBTQ performer on stage and in nightclubs. This above poster memorializes one of them . In this particular show — Vice— Divine appeared with many of the members of the legendary San Francisco drag troupe, The Cockettes.

Sadly, Divine (now a gay, transgender icon) died in 1988 of respiratory problems, days after the opening of his greatest acting success, Hairspray. Those lucky enough to see his club appearances also recall Divine for numbers like this —

CASSELBERRY & DUPREE

Mixing Reggae, Country and Gospel, Casselberry and Dupree are a dynamic lesbian duo who have performed with Harry Belafonte and Whoppi Goldberg, They appeared in the Oscar-nominated Art Is and the Oscar-winning The Times of Harvey Milk. The early 70s was a great time for Sapphic folk music, featured as it was at such venues as Lilith Fair. Jaqué Dupree and J. Casselberry offer a stellar example of it in: CASSELBERRYY AND DUPREE “TWO OF US”

CHARLES PIERCE

Charles Piece 1926-1999 was what might be called a female impersonator (he called himself a Male Actress) who found favor with audiences both straight and gay with his knowing impressions of Bette Davis, Mae West, Tallulah Bankhead and Carol Channing, Such impersonations were quite  traditional for a comic performer of this sort. But as can be seen and heard in this clip of his rendition of Katherine Hepburn, Pierce kept pace with the blossoming LGBTQ movement with many of his zingers evidencing a keen awareness of the difference the out and proud LGBTQ movement had made in  a straight-dominated world.

Headlining a production of Applause was a real tour de force for Piece as this musical version of All About Eve gave him leave to do Bette Davis (star of the original film) and Lauren Bacall (star of the musical remake) at the same time.

JUDITH ANDERSON

Stage and screen star Judith Anderson (1897-1992.) best remembered by the general public for playing the sinister lesbian “Mrs. Danvers” in Hithcock’s Rebecca (1940) and “Ann Treadwell” the socialite who’s keeping Vincent Price’s “Shelby Carpenter” in Laura  The latter was quite low-key in that the character was straight, whereas “Mrs. Danvers” was a full-force lesbian.

Despite the obvious she was married twice. Her first husband was an English professor, Benjamin Harrison Lehmann. They were married in 1937 and divorced  in 1939. Then, in 1946, she married theatrical  producer Luther Greene. They divorced in 1951. Of these marriages Anderson said. “Neither experience was a jolly holiday.”

While Sarah Bernhardt had famously performed  Hamlet in the late 19th century, few actresses have ever tried it. Taking it on at an advanced age, as Anderson did, was quite novel. Doing it when she did, put Anderson in league with the avant-garde gender-benders of the early 70s like Jackie Curtis and Holly Woodlawn.

CRAIG RUSSELL

Craig Russell, born Russell Crag Easie in 1948 in Toronto Canada, this female impersonator carved out a considerable career for himself doing such stars as Bette Davis, Tallulah Bankhead and Mae West — having come to know the last-mentioned personally as he briefly worked as her secretary in Los Angeles. Many LGBTQ performers of this genre did impressions of these stars. But there was an edginess to Russell’s work clearly influenced by the rise of the gay rights movement.

He toured widely, appearing in Las Vegas, Hollywood, San Francisco, Berlin, London, Paris, Amsterdam, Hamburg and Sydney, to the delight of a variety of audiences. But he won a special place in the hearts of the gay ones, as shown in the 1977 comedy-drama Outrageous in which he plays a character largely based on himself.

Interestingly, Russell — who always identified himself as gay — was bisexual. He fathered a daughter, Susan Allison, in 1973, and in 1982 married his closest female friend Lori Jenkins. The marriage lasted right through to the end of Russell’s life in 1990 when he died from AIDS complications.

SYLVESTER

Sylvester James Jr. (1947-1988) was born in Los Angeles, but first came to public attention when he moved to San Francisco and joined the legendary gay hippie performance troupe The Cockettes. A genuinely original singing talent  Sylvester showcased a high, shimmering falsetto and a variety of styles encompassing gospel, disco and cabaret. His look was utterly androgynous. While he sometimes appeared in “drag” he most often sported ensembles suitable to both genders.

Wildly popular in San Francisco he performed solo shows at the city’s opera house. When he died from AIDS complications the entire city mourned, along with everyone else who came to know the man and his music.

STEVEN GROSSMAN

Steve Grossman (1951-1991) a gay singer-songwriter of the early 1970s whose album Caravan Tonight (1974) is distinguished as being the first album dealing with openly gay subject matter released by a major record label, Mercury Records.

He died from AIDS leaving his Joni Mitchell-inflected songs, recorded much in the style of singer-songwriter Cat Stevens, opposed to the then-current glam Bowiesque fashion of openly gay artists. Among them, “Out” is a deeply moving coming-out song directed to his Father mother and brother.

OUR GUEST AUTHOR

DAVID EHRENSTEIN

Born in 1947, David Ehrenstein has been a film critic and political commentator since 1965, writing for such publications as Film Culture, Film Quarterly, Cahiers du Cinema, and the Los Angeles Times. His books include Open Secret: Gay Hollywood 1928-2000,  The Scorsese Picture: The Art and Life of Martin Scorsese and Cahiers du Cinema — Masters of Cinema: Roman Polanski .

Blog is originally published at: https://www.walterfilm.com/10-lgbtq-performers-in-the-1970s/

It is republished with permission from the author.

#LGBTQ #old hollywood #actors #actresses #hollywood #vintage movies #movies

[hellomynameisbisexual]

Dr. Lauren Beach was 14 years old when she/they first came out as bisexual. Beach revealed the truth to friends and curious classmates at her/their suburban Michigan high school. The reactions varied, but not many were affirming.

"I experienced a lot of people who eroticized my attraction to femme people. It's like, 'oh, you're bi. That's so hot,'" says Beach, who has a Ph.D. in molecular, cellular, developmental biology and genetics.

Other friends asked Beach if she/they were doing it for attention. Beach says only three people, including Beach, at her/their school were openly out as queer. Instead of being embraced by them, Beach received flak for her/their sexuality.

"One of the other people there who was queer was like, 'You're a fence sitter! You're a switcher. You can't be trusted, you might date men after dating me," recalls Beach.

This kind of biphobia, which perpetuates stereotypes, hatred, and prejudices about bisexual people, is not uncommon — even (or sometimes especially) within the queer community. Stigma against bisexual people stems from a larger culture of homophobia, Rory Gory, digital marketing manager of the Trevor Project, an LGBTQ youth suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization, wrote in an email to Mashable.

"Since bisexuals often move between straight and queer spaces, they are subjected to both homophobia and biphobia," Gory explains.

Bisexual people make up a sizable population within the LGBTQ community, given more than 50 percent of queer people in America identify as bisexual, according to the Williams Institute. The think tank does research on sexual orientation and gender identity to ensure stereotypes don't influence laws, policies, and judicial decisions. To be clear, bisexuality means a person is attracted to more than one gender. It doesn't mean bisexual people are more sexually active than others or going through a phase (two common myths).

As a teenager, Beach bought into stereotypes about bi people. But now 22 years later, she/they are a professor at Northwestern University where she/they focus on the health of bisexual people and works to dispel myths about them. Additionally, Beach co-founded the Chicago Bisexual Health Task Force, a coalition that advances the heath equity of bisexual people.

Mashable spoke with Beach, and representatives from advocacy organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), GLAAD, and the Trevor Project to learn about the unique challenges bisexual people face and how to be an ally.

1. View bisexual people as individuals

It's easy to lump a single group together but resist that trap. Like anyone else, bisexual people are individuals and their personalities and preferences vary. As Beach says, "there's not one single experience of bisexuality."

For example, Beach is asexual or ace. This means Beach doesn't experience sexual attraction, but she/they are romantically attracted to people across the gender spectrum. One can be both asexual and bi, with some asexual people preferring to identify as biromantic. Although many asexual people are not interested in having sex, some may choose to engage in sexual activity; asexual people can have varied preferences and experiences. Beach's experience doesn't mean all bisexual people feel the same way.

Getting to know more bisexual people can help scrub away your pre-conceived notions. You could already have friends who are bisexual and not know it. Be open about your intentions to learn so you can tear down your misconceptions about bisexual people, Beach recommends.

"You'd be surprised by how many people are like 'Oh, I'm actually bi. Let's talk," says Beach. "From understanding the breadth of experience, you personalize people."

2. Challenge negative stereotypes

As you expand your knowledge about bisexual people, speak up when you hear people perpetuating harmful misperceptions. Sometimes we don't even know we've absorbed negative stereotypes if we're not informed, says Mackenzie Hart, coordinator of GLAAD's Media Institute, which advises media, television, and film professionals on accurate LGBTQ representation.

An easy way to interject when you hear a myth about bisexual people is to say, "Actually, that's not true, my friend who is bisexual does not fit that stereotype," suggests Hart. It can also help to arm yourself with accurate statistics to further back up what you're saying, says Madeleine Roberts, HRC's assistant press secretary. HRC is a helpful resource for these stats.

"Barsexual" is a hurtful label often used to demean bisexual people. It refers to the incorrect belief that bisexual people will only interact with certain genders when they are intoxicated, explains Hart. It upholds the myth that bisexual women are actually straight as it implies they only flirt or make out with women when drunk. It also contributes to bi erasure, which GLAAD says happens when "the existence or legitimacy of bisexuality (either in general or in regard to an individual) is questioned or denied outright."

You should also push back against the harmful stereotypes that bisexuals can't be trusted to commit to a relationship, says Gory. "Embrace bisexuals as valid members of the [LGBTQ] community, rather than referring to them as 'allies' of the community."

Additionally, you can be an ally by understanding certain words and promoting proper usage. For example, you can clarify the difference between bisexual and bi+. Bi+ is an umbrella term inclusive of people who are pan, queer, fluid, and those who don't prefer labels. Use the full acronym of LGBTQ rather than gay as an umbrella term for queer people, explains Roberts. By taking these steps, you can "create spaces where people are hearing these words," says Hart.

3. Healthcare providers need to educate themselves

One time, a clinician asked Beach how many sex partners she/they had.

"I was like, OK, what do you mean by sex?" says Beach. The practitioner questioned why Beach would ask this. Beach told the clinician she/they are bisexual and, therefore, needed clarification about what sexual behavior she was referring to.

"She got really uncomfortable and said 'deep vaginal penetration,'" says Beach. "She started off guessing. She said, "you seem like a nice girl. So what is it, like one or two people?"" says Beach. The provider then said, “So, what you’re saying is more than 30 or 40 people.”

"It shows how someone [in a healthcare setting] can make this jump based on biphobic stereotypes of what my sexual behavior would be,” explains Beach.

After that encounter, Beach never went back to that doctor. To this day, Beach doesn’t have a designated primary care provider.

“I have to work up the emotional energy to want to go put myself through that potential experience," Beach says about seeking out healthcare.

Beach's experience isn't uncommon. Biphobia may discourage bisexual people from going to the doctor, with 39 percent of bisexual men and 33 percent of bisexual women reporting that they didn't disclose their sexual orientation to any medical provider, according to a 2012 study by the Williams Institute. Comparably, 13 percent of gay men and 10 percent of lesbians did not share their sexual orientation with a doctor.

Providers shouldn't presume anyone's sexual behavior because they know their sexual identity, says Beach. Hart echoes this advice. A doctor once asked Hart, "Are you seeing anyone?" Hart said no. She then asked, "If you were seeing anyone, would you be seeing a woman, a man, either, or other?" It wasn't perfect, Hart says, but asking open-ended questions that are inclusive of gender nonconforming people made Hart comfortable enough to see her again.

"Even if you aren't sure of certain words... you can make it clear you aren't going to be judgmental and you understand there's a wide array of experiences," says Hart.

4. Uplift bisexual people of color

Roberts recommends following prominent bi+ people of color on social media such as singer and actor Janelle Monáe, NFL player Ryan Russell, writer and transgender rights activist Raquel Willis, and politician Andrea Jenkins to become familiar with their lives. The next step is to share their stories with your friends and family.

At last year's Academy Awards, actor Rami Malek won Best Actor for his portrayal of British singer Freddie Mercury. Malek described Mercury as gay during his acceptance speech but Mercury was actually bisexual. Willis called out the bi erasure in a tweet.

Of the four people Roberts listed, two (Willis and Jenkins) are transgender. Just like one can be asexual and bi, one can also be transgender and bi. In 2015, the National Center for Transgender Equality surveyed 27,715 transgender people from every state and D.C., U.S. territories, and U.S. military bases abroad and 14 percent of respondents described their sexual orientation as bisexual.

To ensure you're not erasing transgender bi+ people's identities, always use inclusive language like "siblings" instead of "brothers and sisters," says Roberts, when addressing people as if they're family. This guarantees you're not assuming every bi+ person (or anyone generally) identifies as either male or female.

Taking into account the role intersectionality plays in the lives of bi+ people is important — especially when you're looking to amplify their voices.

#bisexuality #lgbtq community #bi #lgbtq #support bisexuality #bisexuality is valid #lgbtq pride #bi tumblr #pride #bi pride #bisexual education #bisexual nation #bisexual ally #ally #bisexual advocator #bisexual erasure #bisexual injustice #bisexual info #bisexual community #bisexual #bisexual rights #respect bisexual people #support bisexual people #bisexual justice #bisexual representation

[flash-impact-for-good]

“You’ve come a long way, baby”

This slogan, “You’ve come a long way, baby”, was splashed across the glossy magazines of my youth, vaunting women’s progress – via their rights to consume products that had once been reserved for men only. The issue of women’s progress in the business world is another debate entirely: the proverbial glass sometimes seems to be filling gradually (e.g. , according to the French secretary of state in charge of equality between men and women, women held 45,2% of positions on SBF120 management boards in 2019); but the glass moves slowly at the top (21,4% of positions in Exco or equivalent). And these broad numbers hide huge disparities. As mentioned by Guy Le Pechon, MBA INSEAD 69, head of Gouvernance et Structure, and a data specialist on equality between men and women, three corporations among the CAC 40 don’t have any woman at their Exco; and only one reaches the ratio of 40% for this entity.

Yet forward movement is undeniable. I would like to offer here a random walk through some 15 years of experience designing, delivering, and observing initiatives to strengthen the representation of women in companies. Along the way, the useful question I hope to explore is what we have learned about fostering gender balance, and how these insights may help us move further down the road towards greater gender balance. 

When several large French companies signed the “Charte de la Diversité” in 2004, our Head of Human Resources asked me to develop a program that would support women’s career development in the organization. I looked at the market to see what was available and was struck by the way that many training firms seemed to assume that women had to be “fixed”, taught to overcome “weaknesses”, or trained in more masculine behavior. This did not feel right – how could we “strengthen” our pools of female talent by focusing on what women might be “doing wrong”? We chose instead to tackle the issue indirectly: I set up a training program led by a specialist in career management for high potentials – a brilliant older man. “Female issues” were never addressed directly in the program – it just so happened that all the (very interesting and carefully selected) participants in each session were women. (What we didn’t know then was that in this way successfully avoided triggering a dangerous unconscious bias about women’s competence, sending instead the message that anyone, and of course women, could benefit from enhancing their career management skills). My first learning: don’t “fix” people who aren’t “broken” – build their strengths. 

Interestingly, it was a member of what one could call the “old guard” – a highly successful gentleman in a very powerful job – who made another significant contribution to levelling the playing field. “We have lots of women entering the pipeline,” he told me, “but after a first role, the men all ask to lead a sales team, while the women want to move into marketing – jobs do not give them line management responsibility and credibility.” To counter this, he carefully mapped and measured something which had previously been intuitive: what were the key career steps that opened the way up the corporate ladder, and where relative to those steps were the pools of female talent? The corporate “ladder” actually looked more like a vertical maze; often several steps along a same level were necessary before one could climb to the next rung on the ladder. But like any maze, it was easy to get lost. Second learning: By providing clear experienced-based information about the critical steps on any given level, this gentleman basically “injected information” into the career management process – not to tell women what to do with their careers, but to offer more effective advice, starting early on. 

Driving for more women in management eventually began to provoke some pushback: some male colleagues would quietly ask me, “Do I have a future in this organization? Will there always be a woman ahead of me on the promotion list?” Hearing men share such concerns troubled me: if you are promoting a worthy idea and yet generating a sense of unfairness, then the idea needs to be reviewed – not rejected or reduced in ambition, but re-examined. This is when we clearly understood that we had to change not only the way that women looked at themselves in the organization, but also how the organization looked at its people. 

A conversation at a conference on diversity with a woman who held a very senior position in her organization gave me additional insight. Asked about her success, she pointed to the “pairs of eyes” that had watched her work over the years and could vouch for her. It was as though her capabilities had to be cross-checked – which was of course equally true for her male colleagues, who intuitively moved around and got themselves “seen” by several potential sponsors. Long before “sponsorship” became a popular concept, she had realized that it was easier for one person to say, “She is ready for the next job!” if someone else could back up the statement. 

Waiting for this to happen through multiple-year job rotations, we realized, would take much too long. Then I encountered a talent manager in a small financial services organization who had crafted a clever process to respond to precisely this issue: he organized “walkabouts” for talented individuals, setting up a series of meetings for each with high-level executives who might never meet that young woman (or man) until it came time to make a key staffing decision – which was too late. By putting rising potentials in front of senior management, this talent manager was transforming them from names on a CV to real humans whom the senior executives could get to know. Again, this practice plays to our human nature – no amount of data on a page can replace the power of what we learn from interacting with someone. This learning could be called, “you have to be seen to be believed”. 

Despite the value of all these approaches, these actions remain focused on shifting individual mindsets. At some point, on a topic as complex as gender balance, institutions, not just individuals, need to change. And I still did not have the answer to my vague discomfort, my concern that some people felt our efforts to level the playing field were potentially unfair. 

Interestingly, it was ideas from INSEAD research, adopted into our organization, that gave us some of the keys. Most INSEADers are familiar with Kim and Mauborgne’s work on “fair process” – the concept that a fair, well-run decision-making process will lead to better acceptance of the outcome, even by those who do not obtain what they want. This work made its way into our organization: the “fair process”, in which all the voices relevant to a decision were heard and considered before that decision was made, became institutionalized as an essential feature of our people management. A fundamental part of the fair process is feedback: because it embraces the full variety of perspectives on a topic or a person, the process makes it possible to provide feedback to the person, so that the individual can continue to learn and grow. Next learning: good process and good feedback confirm that both your intentions and your decisions are fair. 

In 2018, INSEAD celebrated 50 years of women at the school and hosted a Summit to showcase research from its Gender Initiative. One presentation by Ivana Naumovska, Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship, particularly caught my attention. She had performed meta-analysis of multiple diversity initiatives across companies and sectors and had teased out lessons about what did and did not work. 

The two areas identified as having greatest positive impact were mentoring programs and network-building initiatives: mentoring because it enabled the participants to understand the rules of the game, how their organization really worked (this was true for both mentees and their mentors), and network-building because it cultivated awareness in the individuals of what opportunities – for jobs, projects, useful partnerships, and even just information sharing – were available across their organizations, especially outside their silos. I was pleased to see these conclusions: they were an academic validation of the intuition which had led us to set up mentoring and networking for communities (not just individuals). In other words, by creating groups of mentors or mentees and getting them to coach each other on how to take up these roles, we let people see that this was simply part of “how we do things around here”. Next lesson: if you want to change institutions, not just individuals, give people shared responsibility to build something new together. 

Beyond creating “institutions” that support diversity, what has emerged over time is a culture shift. In the way we pursue gender balance, we are really striving to make good use of the organization’s talent to adapt to changing organizational needs. There are ongoing challenges: how well do all these changes resist a major economic crisis, or a corporate reorganization? As we move out of a public health crisis and towards a difficult economic situation, we need to remain vigilant about topics like diversity. Looking further ahead, I wonder how the “recipes” described above will stand the test of time. Traditional management is being replaced by agile tribes, collectively-managed feature teams, and networked organizations. Millennials have shifting expectations about the meaning of work. What will be the secrets to career success for women (and men) in the organizations of the future? Time will tell, but it is a safe bet that attention to individual mindsets and corporate culture will remain key.  

Jocelyn Phelps, MBA INSEAD 93D Program Director, Leadership and Organization Development at Société Générale

#INSEAD #INSEADFORGOOD #BusinessForGood #WomenInBusiness

[thesilverheroineproject]

Kate Zambreno’s Heroines is a hard book to read. Every page is a reckoning with the unbearable phallocentrism of Writing as An Institution, and for the reader who’s also a marginalised, struggling writer and/or female, it’s a memory trigger. There’s a thread running through Heroines that memory-work is political. That the literary canon is “a memory campaign that verges on propaganda, that the books remembered are the only ones worth reading.” It’s impossible to review the book dispassionately. Zambreno’s style invites personal recollection; it’s affecting, and in order to get what she’s doing with this book one has to be able to feel it.

Heroines is part literary criticism, part literary history, part memoir, part feminist polemic. In its form and in its writing, Heroines is what the author is trying to rescue and reclaim: to use Zambreno’s favourite words, it's messy, girly, and excessive. It’s also sharp, finely-structured, and meticulously (voraciously) researched. Heroines grew out of Zambreno’s blog, Frances Farmer is My Sister, or more precisely, the blog grew out of ideas for a book. In an interview with The Rumpus, Zambreno talks about her earlier plans to write a fictionalised notebook titled “Mad Wife”—and is comprised of many things, but is most clearly made up of equal parts rage and reflection.

Zambreno began blogging after her partner took up a university job in Akron, Ohio, and the early sections of Heroines record much of what Zambreno finds stultifying and destabilising about being The Wife in a new place: “I have become used to wearing, it seems, the constant pose of the foreigner.” Like Helene Cixous in “Coming to Writing”, Zambreno begins to form an invisible community—communing with the women writers and the “mad wives of modernism”—a community borne out of invention, yes, but also need. The brutal honesty with which Zambreno recognises her particular condition—“I am realising you become a wife, despite the mutual attempt at an egalitarian partnership, once you agree to move for him”—is both disruptive and comforting to the reader. Here is a truth alongside other truths and someone is finally speaking it, but here is the truth and we must now face it.

At the end of reading Heroines, I had accumulated about 17 pages of handwritten notes. Heroines brought into clear view for me names that had only circulated vaguely around my head from an undergraduate survey course in Modernism in Literature. Perhaps my professors had mentioned Zelda Fitzgerald and Vivien(ne) Eliot’s writing, but then why didn’t I remember any of it? The result is that I read the early sections of Heroines with a kind of numb shock. As Maggie Nelson writes in her blurb for the book, “if you didn’t know much [about the “wives” of modernism], your mouth will fall open in enraged amazement.” Vivien(ne) and Tom’s troubled and troubling marriage; Vivien(ne)’s writing cast aside, T.S. Eliot the writer winning the Nobel Prize a year after her death—after he left her, after he hid in bathrooms allowing his secretaries to calm his “mad” wife, after using her lines, her typing services, and disregarding her worth as her writer. Vivien(ne) with her female maladies, staining the bedsheet red. Zambreno tells us of what Vivien(ne)’s brother said to Michael Hastings, the British playwright who wrote Tom & Viv: “Viv’s sanitary towels always put a man off.”

Dear reader, I read that and saw red.

These “wives” of modernism didn’t just suffer at the hands of various men, including their husbands, but were also negated or ignored, made invisible or an object of derision by other women, particularly women writers like Virginia Woolf who had to slay their own demons both in life and on the page. Woolf, who so memorably and wittily describes Vivien(ne) as “this bag of ferrets … Tom wears around his neck”. Zambreno writes: “I think of Viv as the mad double Virginia both identifies with and wants to disassociate herself from.” And this is perhaps also something that infuses Elizabeth Hardwick’s critical writings of other women writers.

Hardwick’s essay on Zelda Fitzgerald in Seduction and Betrayal is curiously committed to omitting the recognition of gender and patriarchal norms; she talks of Zelda and Scott as being twins, and how “only one of the twins is the real artist”, seemingly complacent in her acceptance of the accepted notion that F. Scott Fitzgerald was the real artist while his wife was merely mildly talented, but more of a dilettante. It seems like a neverending senseless loop, this question of artistry, genius, and legitimacy: only a real artist like F. Scott Fitzgerald would be acclaimed; thus, because F. Scott is acclaimed, he is the real artist. Nowhere in this interrogation does Hardwick devote much attention to how phallocentrism structures the creative output of men and women, and how it structures how those works are received. As Zambreno points out, even while Hardwick seems sympathetic to Zelda’s situation, she seems keen to distance herself from that kind of “mess”, to render a particular form of female experience as sick, perhaps, and dysfunctional, and therefore something to be pitied but not common or predictable or in any way relatable.

But then I think of Linda Wagner-Martin’s biography of Zelda, and how she writes that “Zelda’s crack-up gave [Scott] both alibi and cover.” If men’s wives are officially mad—diagnosis confirms it!—then men are never to blame. Badly-behaving, outright misogynist husbands can be forgiven, excused, comforted, and indulged. But as Zambreno points out through all her meticulous research of these ignored and sidelined women, all Zelda wanted to do was whatever she needed to do at the time: write, using her own life—herself—as the material. This made the Real Writer of the marriage, the husband, really, really angry. Scott tells Zelda, “You were going crazy and calling it genius.” Hardwick seems to buy this assessment in her essay. Zambreno explains: “In a way, Hardwick’s essay reads as an elaborate defense of the supreme rights of (male) artist.” Wagner-Martin, in her biography: “The irony of the Scott-Zelda relationship from the start, however, was that Scott regularly usurped Zelda’s story.”

Heroines is thus also a meditation on writing and the act of creation: whose lives count as “material”, and who gets to use and shape the material into the story? Whose hand guides the words? When it’s women who are mining their own lives for both material and meaning, it’s all-too easily seen as easy, lazy, unreflective, unworthy work. “The self-portrait, as written by a woman, is read as somehow dangerous and indulgent,” Zambreno writes, and asks, “Why is self-expression, the relentless self-portrait, not a potentially legitimate form of art?” For me, these questions bring up attendant questions about writing and accountability, about how the need to create can be an almost-parasitical hunger that feeds on people’s lives, even (or perhaps especially) their own.

Zambreno takes exception to Toril Moi’s aversion to a certain type of women’s confessional writing in Sexual/Textual Politics, where Moi dismisses it as a kind of “narcisstic delving into one’s own self”. Yet these are questions that trouble me, and I can’t oppose them as clearly as Zambreno does, to see all objection to narcissism (or even the use of the term narcissism) as a form of censorship that attempts to silence women’s writing. Clearly the fact of sexism structures how writing and publishing operate as an institution, and Zambreno certainly makes a fine case about just how openly and covertly patriarchy attempts to silence women’s voices that do not fit its image of “good woman”.

But I also wonder about the dangers of looking inward, the idea of the self that might harden and become its own kind of hegemony. The danger when one starts to believe that one’s condition doesn’t reveal a particular human condition, but is the human condition. Can looking inward feed upon itself so thoroughly that it, does, in fact, become a form of narcissism? Where you’re so attuned to your own pain that you’re unable to recognise the pain of others, or worse, imagine that your pain is the pain of others?

I recognise that a big part of Zambreno’s project in Heroines is its effort of reclamation: as such, she tells the stories of the neglected, abandoned, derided writers and writer-wives of literary history in order to project a different, erased history. As such, her perspective is clear and focus is sharp: these women are rescued from formerly patriarchal narratives and given new forms of being in the pages of Heroines. Still, all of these women are white, and most of them come from a background with roots in bourgeois respectability, and so I recognise that while another story is being told, the whole story is, perhaps, still unclear.

Heroines is a record of how these women were wronged, and it’s a necessary intervention into both literary history and criticism, but we don’t hear anything about how these women may have used their class and social position and their whiteness in order to get ahead, how they may have exploited other people, people who were economically, politically, and socially positioned as middle and upper class white women’s lesser others. (I think of Toni Morrison’s 1989 interview in Time magazine, quoted in Nina Power’s One Dimensional Woman, where Morrison talks about the old-boys network and the “shared bounty of class.” Although many of the women writers Zambreno writes about were often deprived of independent income, and some even fell into poverty, I still wonder about the class networks and social connections that may have worked in their favour, even when patriarchy stood in the way.)

As such, these women tend to come off uniformly victimised, wholly victims of patriarchy and nothing else. And while I recognise Zambreno’s need to record instances of “girl-on-girl” crime, it also makes me somewhat uncomfortable—as though all writing by women, then, is somehow necessarily above criticism. This is a grey and complex area, obviously, but I can’t help but wonder if this lets women writers off the hook a little too easily. Criticism from other women critics can often stem from internalised sexism, no doubt, but other forms of criticism take to task certain forms of confessional writing by women writers because it stays silent on issues of race, class, and sexuality, or worse, considers those issues unimportant in relation to one’s own work. Zambreno writes:

"This idea that one must control oneself and stop being so FULL of self remains a dominating theory around mental illness, and, perhaps tellingly, around other patriarchal laws and narratives, including the ones governing and disciplining literature."

This is certainly true, but I would rather not see it as an either/or option: either write, FULL of self, or suppress the self and suffer. The problem of writing the self is that the self can become all-encompassing, preventing the writer from hearing the stories of others. Being full of self can work as a form of self-care and self-preservation, and this is necessary, but sometimes the self needs to be shattered open into recognising and accepting other possibilities. So there is a danger, perhaps, in not interrogating statements like “The subaltern condition of being a literary wife,” when literary wives may at least get a stab at writing and giving voice to their thoughts on the page, while the true subaltern (may speak, write, shout, scream) and remain unheard by ears that are trained only to listen to the voice of the self or voices that sound similar to the self. There is a form of power in writing, despite how it’s received—and perhaps this is a power that is all too conveniently ignored by those of us who do write.

And Zambreno does exhort her girl readers/writers to write—“to write and refuse erasure while we’re living at least”—and is ecstatic about the proliferation of Tumblrs, blogs, and Livejournals by girls and young women that are at turns “emo, promiscuous, gorgeous, dizzying, jarring, irreverent, cinephilic, consumed, consuming, wanting, wiity, violent, self-loathing or self-doubting”, to quote just some of her adjectives, I’m also wondering about the attendant tyranny of these forms of social media and blog platforms that demand and require the personal. If we’re writing on the internet we’re using some if not most of this technology, and all of us are daily exhorted to share, divulge, like, favourite, promote, or take a gpoy or a selfie.

While it’s true that many subvert the rules of engagement on social media and blog platforms—by posting deliberately unappealing selfies, for example, or selfies of the ungroomed self—the internet is also run by corporations who try to exploit, in increasingly covert and “creative” ways, users’ personal information. And the young, pretty, wayward girl is now profitable data in a still (still!) sexist society. So much of girls’ writing online, like in the case of Marie Calloway, is (still!) used against them. One thinks about the problem of encouraging girls to write and also to be responsible and accountable to themselves and to each other; the problem of how to use oneself and one’s loved ones as material or content with care in a culture of increased surveillance, especially when the technology we use for writing and performing is also the technology that enables the surveillance and scrutiny.

In her earlier works of fiction O Fallen Angel and Green Girl, Zambreno gave us devastating yet finely-wrought portraits of girls in distress—portraits of acute suffering, where the girl in question (Maggie in O Fallen Angel, Ruth in Green Girl) is unable to consider the world outside of her because she is, in some ways, trapped inside. This, I think, is a testament to Zambreno’s intelligence and artistry—and a cultivated sense of empathy—and also a searing portrait of the fractious and unstable female self and its relation to mental illness. An important theme in Heroines is the institutionalisation and medicalisation of women—how the same misogyny that brings about or catalyses the splits in self in the female subject is the same misogyny that is applied to treat and “cure” it, and it is in these passages that Zambreno is particularly acute, sensitive, and moving. As she points out, language is itself complicit: “I’ve always found the language of borderline personality diagnosis, a label assigned to women almost entirely, compelling in that it’s an identity disorder which is defined almost exclusively by not actually having an identity.” Zambreno writes about always having had a “tremendous fear of being institutionalised”—and relates this to how works and canonised:

"(She was institutionalized, as Mad Woman, as Bad Wife, and he was institutionalized, as the Great American Author.)"

Institutionalisation is also a memory campaign, where the man-artist is generalised and the woman-artist individualised. I’d like to think of Heroines as a cure for this wilful, institutionalised amnesia. It’s a book that has lodged itself in my mind and likely to stay there for a long time, despite, or maybe even because of some of my problems with certain sections of the book. It seems fitting to let Zambreno have the last word:

"Fuck the canon. Fuck the boys with their big books."

#silver heroine #thesilverheroineproject #women are mad men are geniuses bs #female tropes that need to die

[kayincolwyn]

Trying To Find My Way In This Weird And Wild World

So it's been over a year and a month now since I've written a post for my blog... or my blarg, or my bleh, or whatever this is that maybe only a handful of people will ever read, and that I mostly just write for myself to get things out and try to process them. I guess you could say I’ve been putting it off for different reasons until now, and sure, I've had some ideas on what to write, and have had a lot that I've wanted to say, but, well...

Maybe I could explain it like this: I was listening to this guy on Youtube recently who was wondering if anything he had to say had any real weight, if he really had any right to say whatever he had to say, and he said something about how your words and ideas and beliefs may not have much value if they can't create real change, whether in your own life or in the lives of others. Or the proof is in the pudding as they say. I can relate to those reservations about what I have to say, here or anywhere else really, and I wonder how much real change my words or ideas or beliefs create, if any, and I guess that's part of why I've been putting this off, and is it even worth it to try to say something, when my words may have only very little, if any, power behind them? I've written a few things here and there over the last year, the occasional poem or reflection, mostly shared on my Facebook page, and I’ve wondered about those things too, if there was any real weight or value to them, beyond a few likes or a couple comments of affirmation from a friend or two about my writing.

And looking back on some of my older writings, like when I was in my teens or twenties, or even looking back on more recent writings, I sometimes barely recognize myself, the way that I thought and felt at the time, and there are times where I feel as though I come off in those writings as, well, kind of pretentious, or even arrogant (and especially further back), as though I am saying in them that I know and understand more about life than I actually do, which has been, and I have little doubt continues to be, not very much, or at least not with any real degree of certainty. The truth is I mostly use my words in writings like this not so much to speak truth (and how much truth do I really know for sure anyway, except the truth that I don’t know everything?) so much as to try to reach for the truth, to make sense of things, to try to hammer down the fluttering pieces of the puzzle of life, or at least of my life, to at least give me enough of a foundation to keep me from imploding or going crazy. I write partly for my own sanity. And I believe many of my words in writings like this are built on fragile hope more than solid confidence, meaning I am trying to point them in the direction that I want to move in, but that doesn't mean my actions always follow (if they follow much at all), or that I really live up to the vision of a path in life that I sometimes think about and talk about or try to lay out in writings like this. I may try to live up to it in fits and starts, but know that I fall short, and probably always will as long as I live.

I write about love for example, but love, at least for me, more often feels like some grand concept bouncing around in my head than something that I actually practice, or practice well anyway, that I genuinely manifest in my day to day life in the way that I wish to. It's like I can talk the talk with more confidence than I can walk the walk. The love that I show and give to others seems to be at best awkward, limited,  half-hearted, and more often than not selective (directed mostly towards those that I like but not much at all towards those that I don't like). Again, I fall short, struggling to practice what I preach. Because of this, this disconnect between what I try to express in my writing on the one hand, and then my everyday life on the other, sometimes I feel pretty disingenuous and fake. That said, even if I am at least in some part disingenuous and fake (and maybe all of us are more or less, as that may just be part of being human), I still feel like there is at least some part of me that is genuine and real, some spark within me that is reaching for something more.

I remember reading that the Catholic saint and theologian Thomas Aquinas once said, presumably after having some profound mystical experience, something like "I can write no more. All that I have written seems like straw.” After this, from what I understand, he held to that statement for the rest of his life and didn’t write anything else, or at least nothing with any seriousness. I'm not a Catholic so may not be able to relate to the context of his experience, whatever it was, but I can relate to the sense maybe that there is something more that would make all your words, and no matter how eloquent or heartfelt, like straw.  And I wonder if in embracing that something more, or being embraced by it, there would then be no more motivation to write, no more need to use my words to try to reach for the truth, or to try to make sense of things, or hammer them into some shape I can recognize as meaningful.  Maybe it would be something like what Saint Paul says in 1st Corinthians 13 in the New Testament:  ‘For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.’ If I could come face to face with such a truth, or a Truth with a capital T, and know it or be known by it, then maybe there would be no more words for me, or no need of them anyway... and maybe then I could truly be at peace, down to the core, balls to bones (as the Oracle would put it in The Matrix). That said, while maybe there have been moments in my life where I’ve glimpsed images or have heard whispers of that something more, that truth, I'm still left searching and reaching for it... And so I continue to write, or try to, words being what I have to work with here, and even if my words may only be like straw in the final analysis.

So for now, well, here's some more straw for you...

So I've had a lot on my mind over the last year, have had a lot of ups and downs. There have been times over the last year that were painful, and other times that were joyful, times where life felt meaningful and other times meaningless, and everywhere in between, as has been true of every other year of my life, but of course I can't, nor would I really want to, try to chronicle or reflect all that has happened or has been on my mind, but I can at least touch on some highlights, or try to grasp a few of the fluttering pieces of the puzzle and lay a foundation as best I can.

At 37 now and coming up on 40 in a few years I find myself wondering more and more about the direction of my life, about who I am and what my place in this weird and wild world is, what my path, my way, is or should be. I guess I’ll try to write about some of what’s happened, some of whats been on my mind, and try to give some idea of what my wondering looks like, so from here on I'm gonna jump around, between the highlights and fluttering pieces, though I will try to tie it all together in the end as best I can.

So, I guess I’ll kick things off by diving into some stormy waters right off the bat, by going into one of the things that has got me thinking more about my life over the last year, that being my discovery of Jordan Peterson. For those who haven't heard of him or don't know much about him he's a pretty controversial and divisive figure at least in some circles, mostly among those on the far left or the far right of the political spectrum from what I can tell. I admit I haven't really opened up much on social media about my interest in Peterson and his work for this reason, as I've been kind of afraid I might be jumped on for it by those who disapprove of him for whatever reasons, but then here I am I guess. I had run across some warnings about Peterson online before looking into him myself, and had some negative assumptions about him for a little while, but then I have learned from some experience, like I did with Harry Potter or Rob Bell back when I was in church for example, that if a lot of people talk about how dangerous something or someone is, about how you shouldn't read this book or listen to that person or whatever, then it's more likely than not worth checking out for yourself so you can make up your own mind about it rather than letting others decide for you what to think. I was still a bit hesitant, but fortunately a friend of mine coaxed me into finally checking out Peterson for myself by sharing one of his interviews on the popular Joe Rogan Experience podcast with me, and I was intrigued and impressed by much of what Peterson had to say in the interview, so my interest in Peterson and his perspective went from there.

The reason most of those who don’t like Peterson don’t like him is because of some of his political or social views I think, which is the reason why he really came into the public eye in the first place. Just to try to get some of the controversy out of the way and swim through some of these stormy waters, Peterson was a professor and psychologist in Canada who first really came to prominence when he spoke out publicly against this human rights bill in Canada called Bill C16 that, part of which, from what I understand, would legally require the use of certain gender pronouns for people who are transgender or non-binary or others who fall outside the typical dual identifiers of male or female. From what I can tell, getting a clearer picture of the kind of man Peterson is over the last year, I don't think Peterson protested this bill because he is just some bigot who doesn't care at all for transgender or non-binary people, but rather because it really bothered him that his government would try to pass any law that required the use of any kind of speech, not only telling people what they shouldn't say but what they should say. In short, from what I can gather this was more about free speech for him than anything else, or at least that’s his claim anyway, which some may disagree with. Of course the whole thing is no doubt more complicated than the little that I have written about here, and I am sure there is still much debate about all of this, whether on the bill itself or Peterson's take on it and his protest of it, but this is my understanding of the basics of it at least.

Peterson does seem, having listened to him a fair bit, to have mixed feelings about the whole transgender and non-binary thing. I don’t believe he would want to give the time of day to anyone who was transgender or non-binary if they accosted him on the street and started screaming and yelling at him, calling him names or throwing accusations at him (which I’ve seen in a few videos), as that doesn’t generally inspire empathy or understanding from anyone, but I do believe if anyone transgender or non-binary tried to connect with him one on one just as a human being to share their story he would more likely than not be willing to listen and I think would try to empathize and understand, as he honestly strikes me as a fairly empathetic and understanding kind of guy (even if he does have a bit of a temper, which he himself admits) someone who cares about the struggle and pain of others, and I believe that would include people who identify as transgender or non-binary. I mean, heck, the guy is a trained therapist after all, so you would think he would be willing to listen as long as you weren’t putting him on the defensive. That said, I think he has questions or concerns about it, and like many people is trying to understand in what ways society should (or shouldn't) shift in order to accommodate those who don't identify in ways that are different from what most are used to or consider the norm. I admit to having mixed feelings myself about this, though partly, I admit, because I don't know or understand much about it, though I would be open to learning more. I admit I have some reservations about things like children transitioning (because I worry that children may not yet be mature enough to make these kinds of decisions, and that they may regret making such decisions later on because they weren’t as fully informed as they would have been as adults) as well as transgender women playing in women's sports, or transgender men playing in men's sports for that matter (because I believe in those cases there is an unfair physical advantage or disadvantage because not everything can be completely changed biologically in a transition, including things like muscle mass and bone structure, at least from what I understand), just as a couple examples. My heart tells me to live and let live and that it’s really none of my business, which is mostly how I feel about it, but my head sometimes wonders if going about these kinds of changes in society without thinking them through may end up having some unforeseen consequences. Of course I'm not above setting aside such reservations if others could convince me to do so, and by that I mean by making convincing arguments to support such things that make sense to me, rather than trying to shame or bully me into changing my mind, which some may be want to do, but trust me I’ve had enough experience with that kind of thing in my life, red flags go up all over the place when people try that with me, whether it’s in the realm of politics or religion or any other realm... let’s just say when I encounter people who are dogmatic and ‘my way or the highway’ in their thinking and want to evangelize and convert me to their position, well, I’ve learned to just walk away... not sure if that will keep people who disagree with me from just stopping here and passing judgment (even though from here I talk about empathy and understanding for transgender and non-binary people among many other things) and then going after me with torches and pitchforks, but hey, at least I’ve tried... and this, by the way, applies to everything else that I may write here that you may disagree with. Friendly or at least civil discussion about difficult topics is good and constructive in my opinion, but rage or personal attacks or a dogmatic insistence that I conform or else be put into your out-group (as I have experienced to some extent with), well, not so much. Anyways, despite those reservations I want to be empathetic and understanding  towards transgender or non-binary people, as I don't really know what it is like to be in their shoes or what they go through. Sure I can use my imagination some, i.e. watching shows like Sense 8 (great show, still bummed it was canceled) or even Supergirl (as cheesy as it is) that include transgender characters and some of their struggles, gives me some inkling of what it might feel like, but I honestly don't really know. I admit I've only interacted (or at least knowingly interacted) with one transgender or non-binary person, a co-worker of mine who was born male and now identifies as female. I call her her, and am okay with doing that, but it takes some getting used to I admit. I was a little uncomfortable around her at first, as it felt weird for me, and I still do to some extent I admit, but then having worked with her a little bit more recently, I can see that she's not a threat to me in any way and there's no reason to be afraid of her, and she's just another human being like me, who deserves a little respect and wants a little love and acceptance just like anyone else. Sure, like Peterson I would feel uncomfortable with being legally forced to use certain pronouns (in the same way I would feel uncomfortable if I was legally forced to salute the US flag, just for example), but that doesn’t mean that I’m opposed to it if it was something I could choose to do freely. Like Peterson (and many others) I’m not really a fan of thought police (which I have seen in religious circles and political circles and all kinds of circles), but I am open to changing how I think and feel for the sake of others and if it makes sense to both my head and my heart. I imagine that just as I used to be a little uncomfortable with gay people but have since learned to be more comfortable with them in spite of our differences, and now even have a couple of gay friends, in time I believe the same will be true of transgender and non-binary people or anyone else in those categories, who at the end of the day are just fellow humans. I just need some time to adapt and get used to it I think, and hopefully all of us will be able to adapt and figure this out (adding this to the excruciatingly long list of things that humanity needs to figure out), as it would be good to live in a world that is a little more inclusive and accepting of those who are different, and even if we may need time to figure out all the particulars and where to draw the lines and what the boundaries should be and all of that, which of course is complicated just as people are complicated. Bottom line is I think there should be some room for questions and concerns about this whole issue but it should always be in the context of trying to be more empathetic and understanding, because we're all human beings at the end of the day.

I won't go any further into this though as I'm not here to talk about the whole transgender and non-binary debate (though apparently I’m talking about it a bit, but hopefully not in a way that will get me crucified by those who disagree with my mixed feelings about it), which is very complicated and multi-faceted and has a lot of strong feelings about it on all sides, but I just wanted to at least touch on Peterson's stance (at least as I far as I understand it) about it as it was what brought him into the limelight originally, and my stance as well, at least to try to get it out of the way before I go any further.

Peterson strikes me as a bit right of center in some ways (although he identifies as a classical liberal), open-minded in some areas but a little old-fashioned and traditional in other areas, whereas I think of myself as a bit left of center I guess. Peterson talks about the value and place of both the left and the right politically and socially fairly often, like when he points out that those on the right are there to maintain structures and boundaries and keep things running (he also adds that conservatives tend to be better managers) but that those on the left are there to update structures or boundaries or push for change as it is necessary (he also adds that liberals tend to be better entrepreneurs), and there needs to be a dialogue between the two sides on when things should be kept the same or when they should change, and how.  That said, maybe Peterson at times seems to contradict this way of thinking when he focuses a little more on the problems of the left and doesn't focus quite as much on the problems of the right, which may be a sign of some biases towards the right on his part, even if at other times he seems to be trying to find that balance between the two. To be fair if he’s not completely consistent then neither am I, and it’s probably fair to say that not many of us are. Anyways, Peterson's tends to equate the far left, and things like identity politics and postmodernism, with communist or Marxist ideology, and I admit he does come off as a little paranoid at times when it comes to that, sometimes going on rants about communists and Marxists in a new disguise on college campuses and branching out from there into society. I can somewhat understand why he might feel as he does though when he immersed himself heavily for years in studying totalitarian regimes in the 20th century, including communist regimes like those in the Soviet Union and China, wanting to understand them on a psychological level. He sees equal horror in the history of both Nazism (more equated with the right) and communism (more equated with the left) in the 20th century, but perhaps he focuses on the threat of communism more because he feels that people don't talk about it as much as the threat of Nazism nowadays? Maybe, but I don’t know for sure. I recently saw a little note plastered on the inside door of an elevator in one of the buildings that I clean in downtown Portland that said ‘Fuck Nazis’ among other things, which is a message I would concur with, as I’m no fan of Nazis either, even if I’m not really sure how helpful such notes would be in dealing with the problem of Nazism. I wonder though if I will ever find any ‘Fuck Commies’ notes plastered in elevators in downtown Portland, if there are those who feel communism is just as much of a threat. I think I might have even seen a protester flying the hammer and sickle flag when I was going past on the max train the other day, which I found a bit weird to say the least. I wonder sometimes when listening to Peterson’s concerns if there really is as much concern about communism as there is about Nazism, even though both have had horrific and bloody histories that involved the suffering and death of millions.  I mean, isn’t there just as much of a dark history of violence and death behind the hammer and sickle as there is behind the swastika? To be fair though, maybe some on the right aren’t as concerned about Nazism as they should be, just as maybe some on the left aren’t as concerned about communism as they should be, as it’s much easier to focus on the potential craziness on the other side rather than the potential craziness on your own. Anyways, maybe when you immerse yourself in that kind of dark history it's no wonder you might come out feeling a little paranoid and would worry that history might repeat itself. Maybe a little too paranoid? Sure, you can always be too paranoid, like Joseph McCarthy Red Scare witch hunt kind of paranoid, in which case you might need an Edward R Murrow to come along and knock some sense into you, but then maybe a little paranoia is understandable or even healthy. That said, while I'm not really a big fan of identity politics (or political correctness as some would call it) myself and have mixed feelings about the deconstructive nature of postmodernism (I’m all for questioning things and for holding them to the fire but not so much a fan of completely pulling the rug out from under yourself so you have nowhere left to stand or of leaving yourself with nothing to hold onto), still I’m not sure about Peterson’s equating all of that with communism/Marxism, maybe a little paranoia is okay but not too much... though all in all this is really lower on the list of topics that Peterson goes into as far as my level of interest or even agreement goes, so I’ll just leave it at that. Peterson sometimes points out that people are complex, but also says that people can be beholden to their ideologies (their ideas and beliefs), and says that ideologies can have people rather than people having them (he references psychoanalyst Carl Jung on this point), and I would agree on both points, but would add that those who are beholden to their ideologies always have more to them than whatever ideology they may ascribe to, and there’s a spectrum to how beholden people can be to their ideas or what they believe in, and whether that be in the realm of politics or of religion or in any other realm, and of course people can change and can learn and grow, and they need to be given room to do that. I know I’ve certainly changed and learned and grown in different ways over the years.

I have known people from all walks of life, the religious and the non religious, liberals and conservatives, and everyone in between, and while there have been a few who were too radical and extreme in their ideas or beliefs for my taste, most people that I’ve known seemed to be more or less sane and reasonable, more or less decent people trying to live their lives as best they can while not having a 'my way or the highway' attitude towards others, not wanting to evangelize and convert others to their position but just wanting to get along as best they can and agree to disagree agreeably. Anyways, my guess is that Peterson would agree to this assessment, as I have often heard him encouraging nuance and dialogue between people of all kinds, though perhaps there are times when he falls into the trap of focusing too much on those who are a little radical and extreme, who are the minority, if the loudest voices in the room, and not as much on those who are more sane and reasonable, who are the majority, if a comparatively quiet majority ... But then again perhaps all of us sometimes fall into the trap of focusing too much on the loudest voices in the room, and not as much on the quiet majority of everyday people who can have meaningful conversations even in spite of their differences.

Anyways, for a little more context to all of this, and to focus in on another part of my journey over the last year, one of the things that led me to become interested in Peterson and his philosophy was watching a documentary called The Red Pill, which was made by Cassie Jaye, who once identified (but no longer identifies) as a feminist. I first heard about the film when a friend on Facebook shared this video of Cassie’s TED Talk called Meeting The Enemy, and I found the video to be pretty powerful and appreciated Cassie and her empathetic attitude, so I wanted to check out her film. In the film she explores the men's rights movement, a movement claiming to fight for the rights of men (much as feminism is a movement that claims to fight for the rights of women), initially planning on showing how misogynistic and absolutely nutters these men (and those women who ally themselves with them) are when she began making the film, but overtime found that some of what they had to say was thought-provoking and compelling and so she began to gradually change her mind about the movement and her own feminist ideas and beliefs, even to the point of no longer labeling herself as a feminist by the end of the film, though not taking up the label of men's right activist either, but instead letting go of such labels and simply wanting to care for the struggles of both men and women equally and encourage more empathy between men and women.

Much like Peterson, Cassie Jaye's film has been controversial and divisive, and while I felt the film was itself thought-provoking and compelling in some ways, thinking on it now I would say it wasn't a perfect film. For example maybe Cassie didn't look at the darker and more negative side of the men's rights movement as much as she could have, though in her defense, perhaps her goal in the end was to try to look at the other side of the movement in order to give a more balanced view, as the media generally only focuses on the darker and more negative side of things when it comes to this. I think the film’s limitations though may be mostly due to the fact that such broad and complicated issues as gender relations and gender rights, and more generally human relations and human rights, can't really be covered to the fullest extent in a two hour documentary. That said, I think Cassie's main underlying message in the film was that men deserve empathy as much as women do, because men are human beings as much as women are, and seeing men as less important or worthy of empathy is no better than seeing women as less important or worthy of empathy, and if we all really want to move forward and end the ongoing battle of the sexes then we need to learn to have empathy for one another, and I appreciated that message, both as a man and as a human being.

I admit though after watching this film I fell into the men's right activist mindset for a little awhile, losing some focus on that central message, and while I didn't dive in completely I definitely put my feet in the water, whether through listening to men's rights podcasts or watching men's rights videos on Youtube or reading men's rights articles online here and there, and for awhile I was very antagonistic to feminism, even arguing with some of my more feminist friends, seeing feminism not so much as a pursuit of equality between the sexes as it claimed to be but rather as a destructive ideology that sought to, whether consciously or subconsciously, divide men and women rather than bring them together. But after a little awhile I pulled myself back from that mindset, recognizing that men's rights activists, while having some valid points about men's issues, can sometimes be self-righteous and overly critical of women but not critical enough of men, just as I felt (and still feel) that feminists, while having some valid points about women's issues, can sometimes be self-righteous and overly critical of men but not critical enough of women. I think there are some radical and extreme people in both movements but also think there are a fair number of sane and reasonable people in both movements as well, and I hope the latter, those who care about the other side as much as their own side, get the microphone more in the long run. I believe now that neither movement really has a complete picture of the shape of things, and wonder why sometimes they don't just team up to try to hash things out and balance eachother out, try to find ways to move society forward for both men and women without demonizing one another or trying to one up one another's suffering, as though suffering were a contest, and who wants to win a contest like that anyway? It’s like when my sister and I would argue as kids about who had it harder or got bullied more in school when the truth was school kind of sucked for both of us, even if it sucked differently for both of us. Again, not a contest you want to win anyway. Do men have it harder than women? Do women have it harder than men? Yes and yes? Maybe it just depends on the situation and circumstance, or maybe it comes down to the level of the individual, but then all I really know for sure is that being human is hard for pretty much all of us in one way or another, so why not just try to empathize with one another as best we can instead of arguing about who has it worse? Easier said than done I know, but I suppose we could at least try.

I guess much like Cassie I have settled with neither identifying with feminism nor with men's rights activism, feeling that both feminists and men's rights activists have their valid points but also their blind spots, and feeling that both women and men have their problems and struggles, and also feeling that both deserve some measure of respect and empathy.

I've followed Cassie Jaye a little bit since watching her film, and I still admire her empathetic attitude, and her bravery in making a film that I'm sure she knew would ruffle some feathers (and it did), and she continues to be brave through sharing some of her own personal journey including some of her struggles on her online blog and elsewhere, even opening up about the turmoil and grief of having had two miscarriages in the last couple of years, which led her to abandon plans of doing a documentary on postmodernism (which would have included Peterson himself) and instead is considering doing a documentary about miscarriage, a difficult topic that is rarely discussed openly in society, and I hope she does as I imagine it would speak to a lot of women out there (as well as their partners) who have suffered through miscarriages. Reading about her own personal, and painful, experience with her miscarriages was a reminder to me that women struggle with things that men don't (or at least don't as much or in the same way), and are deserving of empathy, just as her film was trying to point out that men struggle with things that women don't (or at least don't as much or in the same way), and are deserving of empathy.

I admit for sometime after watching The Red Pill and diving into the insane world of gender politics, I was planning on doing a blog post where I would try my best to tackle gender relations and being a man (with the tentative title of Measure Of A Man) as I had tried to tackle race relations and being a white man in my post White Man about a year ago. I even began writing a couple of rough drafts, but then the more I dug into things the more complicated and hard to unravel it became, and I just didn't feel confident enough to really dive into the whole thing (and I didn't really feel confident enough to dive into the issue of race either in White Man, to be honest, but then I I tried my best I suppose, though I'm sure I only scratched the surface on that issue, and I may even go back at some point and try to revise it some as since then my views on race have shifted a bit, though they are mostly the same as when I wrote that).

I suppose going down the rabbit hole somewhat on this post (which is appropriate as Cassie used that metaphor, of being like Alice in Wonderland going down the rabbit hole, in her film) by touching on the whole transgender and non-binary debate (though I definitely only scratched the surface on that) and bringing up Cassie Jaye's documentary and touching on gender issues, will have to suffice for that, and as with Cassie the main message I want to put forward here is one of empathy and understanding, and on all sides, and as hard as that may be, as hard as it may be to back up these words with actions, because I believe that's how we will all move forward...

If this was just a post about gender relations and being a man as I had originally intended it to be, I could have talked about Peterson and his effect on many men throughout the world, and that would certainly fit. A lot of young men around the world, and men of all ages really, look up to Peterson, some seeing him as a kind of father figure, and I can kind of understand that appeal even if I may see him in a more complicated and nuanced way myself. I will say that Peterson’s core message of the importance of the individual and finding meaning through responsibility resonates with me a fair bit. I agree with him that the individual rather than the group is the level to really look at as it is really our individual choices that make or break our society (though to be fair some individual choices may impact society more than others, depending on the power and influence of the individual), and we shouldn't only focus on rights but also on responsibilities, because your rights are my responsibilities and vice versa.  And I agree that there is something about individual responsibility, whether that is in the realm of relationships or work or creativity or spirituality or pursuing some other passion or cause (or picking up a cross and carrying it as Peterson would put it, referencing Jesus) that can give you a sense of meaning and purpose that you otherwise may not have. In other words, while carrying too heavy of a load can crush you, and carrying too little of a load can make you feel aimless, carrying a load that is the right size for you can help make you into who you are meant to be. Not that I have found a way to apply that to my life as much as I would like, but at least it rings true to me. Of course that doesn't mean that groups don't matter, as we are all interconnected more than we can imagine, or that rights aren't important at all, as Peterson points out that rights give us room to exercise our responsibilities, but I wonder if Peterson sometimes doesn't focus enough on how that interconnectedness can positively or negatively effect our individual choices, or on how the system can hold people back from moving forward, from being who they could be, because sometimes no matter how hard you may try you can still be held back not so much by yourself but by your environment or your culture. That said I would agree that the level of the individual is the most important one because that is what you need to build up from, the seed blossoming into a tree, so responsibility shouldn't be forgotten or set aside, that and sometimes it isn't so much environment or culture that is holding you back as it is yourself. But of course the makeup of our lives is no doubt always some combination of both of these things, it is some combination of our own choices as individuals, and the choices of others around us and how they may complement or conflict with our choices, and the limits of nature both internally and externally which effect us all.

But beyond his message of the importance of the individual and of responsibility and how we can find meaning in it, I resonate with Peterson most of all when he he seems to be reaching for that something more, that deeper truth, which I was talking about (or trying to talk about) earlier in this post. I may only go along halfway with Peterson on his political and social views, which he admittedly does get a bit ranty on at times (though many of us do, including myself, so maybe we don’t have much room to judge), and I don't agree with him on everything in that area or any other area, but when he delves into the territory of psychology and philosophy (which he says he is more interested in anyway, and so am I) and religion and spirituality I find more common ground with him, and also find what I appreciate most about him. Peterson is something of an existentialist thinker (he is especially fond of existentialist Christian thinkers Fyodor Dostoevsky and Alexandr Solzhenitsyn) and is fond of Carl Jung and Jungian theory as well as well as other psychologists, like Freud and Carl Rogers among others, and believes in evolution and evolutionary biology, so he often speaks of religion and spirituality in those frameworks and contexts, but I can resonate with much of that, as both a former atheist and a former evangelical Christian who is trying to find his way.

I watched a recent interview with Patricia Marcoccia (on the Youtube channel Rebel Wisdom), director of the documentary The Rise Of Jordan Peterson, and she said she initially became interested in him for much the same reasons even before he was really in the public eye, and she like myself describes herself as left of center and has mixed feelings about his political and social views, so I guess I'm not the only one. As the saying goes, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, and in the case of Peterson I honestly feel that there's a baby in all the bathwater of controversy and drama that surrounds him.

Over the last year or so I have listened to (mainly via podcast while working) probably hundreds of interviews with and lectures from Peterson, as well as reading his book 12 Rules For Life, and while there's a lot of his stuff that I haven't gone through yet (like there's a lot more interviews and lectures of his on Youtube that I haven't listened to yet and I haven't gotten hold of his harder to find first book, Maps Of Meaning) I feel like I have gotten a pretty good idea of the kind of man Peterson is and how he thinks and feels, at least from hearing what he has to say.

I believe Peterson is, like anyone else, just a human being with faults and flaws, who has his weaknesses and blind spots and can make mistakes and get things wrong like anyone else, but there are times in his interviews or lectures when you can see (or hear if you are listening in a podcast as I often do) him reaching, trying to gather the fluttering pieces of the puzzle and build a foundation, and you can see or hear the emotion well up in him when he is trying to find words for something that words maybe can’t quite describe, something that would make your words seem like straw.

Peterson describes himself as a pessimist for the most part, and he says that life is in large part suffering tainted by malevolence, but he also says that underneath that pessimism is a faith in humanity, a faith in that divine spark within us that enables us to overcome and persevere in some amazing ways, and he has a faith in the power of love, which he describes as the sense that life truly matters and is worth living in spite of all the suffering and evil in the world, and as a desire that things would be the best that they can be, that things would be truly good, for you and for others and for the world, and individual responsibility is in part acting on that sense and that desire in whatever way you can to bring that vision into reality (or at least in my case to connect what I write more with my day to day life). At bottom I think Peterson believes, as he tries to say this himself when he is reaching for words to describe it, that the darkness in the world and in ourselves is powerful, very powerful, so powerful that he feels it unwise to deny its power and not talk about it openly, but even so the light in the world and in ourselves is even more powerful, and in the end is greater than whatever darkness there may be... and I can resonate with that belief.

And I believe Peterson is, even with whatever faults and flaws he has, a decent human being, or he is trying to be one anyway. As an example of this, when Peterson was at Liberty University, a well known evangelical Christian college run by Jerry Falwell's son, a young man who was struggling with mental and emotional issues and was off his medication, ran up on stage trying to approach and talk to Peterson, and when he was restrained by security he fell to his knees crying, having a breakdown. Peterson was confused by what was happening at first, but once he realized what was going on he came over to the young man, knelt down, and tried to comfort him as the other men on stage prayed over him. I honestly don't know for sure how much the other men on stage truly cared for this young man or how much they were at least subconsciously using him to promote their religious beliefs (I only say that, as insensitive as it may sound, because I was in the evangelical Christian world for a number of years so I know that kind of thinking is often somewhere under the surface, though not always to be fair, because again people are complex), but with Peterson I think it was just plain and simple compassion on his part, which I found moving. You can also see how passionate he is about others improving their lives and finding greater meaning and purpose in them, like when you see him with tears in his eyes when he talks about how people just need a little encouragement and he just wants to offer them that to them if he can, and you can see that that is what he really wants to do, and even if you may disagree with him on some or many of his views you can’t really fault him for wanting to help people. And of course it's pretty clear, at least to me, that he loves his wife and children, his family and friends, etc.

But even decent men still have their faults and flaws or struggles and problems, and recently Peterson checked himself into a rehab to try to get off of an anti-anxiety medication that he had started taking after his wife Tammy had been diagnosed with cancer (and from what I understand the whole situation with that was and is very complicated), which needless to say caused him a great deal of anxiety, which only added to all the anxiety he no doubt has had to deal with over the last couple years since coming into the limelight. I can't say that I blame him for turning to medication to try to take at least some of the edge off, and maybe that was a mistake, but it was an understandable one as far as I can tell. Sadly a number of his detractors or former supporters have been using this against him, berating him or expressing disappointment in him for seeking treatment, accusing him of being a drug addict and the like. Even if you're not really a fan of Peterson at all or disagree with him on most everything, I think it's kind of shitty to kick a guy when he's down like that, to berate a guy who was already struggling with anxiety for taking anti-anxiety meds when finding out the woman he loves has cancer (and I can kind of empathize with that having lost a good friend to cancer recently, though I will talk about that later in this post), or for trying to do the responsible thing by getting off of it when he realized it wasn't good for him (even if it could perhaps be reasonably argued that trying to quit cold turkey like he did may have been unwise, as some have been saying, but hey, no one is perfect, and that’s no reason to kick him when he’s down).

Sure I could understand if those who put Peterson on a pedestal might be disappointed that their idol had shown such human weakness, but after following Peterson for about a year now I realize that he's just a man and shouldn't be put on a pedestal (not that he would want to be anyway), and should be cut some slack for only being human.

If anything I find it somewhat encouraging that even the messenger struggles sometimes to apply their own message. As Christian minister and author Frederick Buechner once said (paraphrasing this here), 'I preach to myself my own sermons', meaning the message applies just as much to the one giving it as the one receiving it, and I am sure that Peterson is well aware of that, and would not deny that making good choices as an individual, that taking on responsibility, that tapping into that inner light, that walking the way of love, is just as difficult for him as it is for anyone else. The same is true of my writings here. I write to myself as much as to anyone else who may be reading this.

I empathize with Peterson and his struggles, and hope that others will as well rather than judging him too harshly, as we all have our faults and flaws and struggles and problems in life.

Recently I joined a Meetup group here in Portland where they discuss Peterson and his ideas, or better yet use him and his ideas as a springboard for wider and deeper discussions about various topics. It's a pretty cool group, with an interesting assortment of different kinds of people with different perspectives, and I've gone to the group a few times now, though only when the timing is right and the topic is interesting to me. In the most recent meeting I went to we actually talked about Peterson's checking himself into rehab and the flack he has gotten for that, and how being in the limelight and being something of a lightning rod for the current culture wars has taken a toll on him and his family, and we used that as a springboard for a deeper discussion on empathy and understanding. It was a really good discussion that ran all over the map but focused mostly on the importance of empathy and understanding in moving forward both as individuals and as a society. I think Peterson’s personal struggles are just a reminder that we should all try to be kind to one another for each of us may be fighting a hard battle, and even if others may not see it or know about it.

My dive into Jordan Peterson and his philosophy on life has led me into thinking more about things like this, and has got me thinking more about my life in general, and I see a bit of a kindred spirit in Peterson sometimes when I can see (or hear) him struggling to find words (words that seem like straw) to describe, at least in his own existentialist and Jungian and evolutionary way, something that may be, well, for lack of a better word, mystical.

Jumping out of the frying pan of politics and into the fire of religion here, I think one of the things that bothers some of Peterson's detractors, or even some of his supporters, is how he dances around the question of God's existence.  Peterson says he gets kind of annoyed with the question because he thinks it’s not a simple question to answer (and I think he may have a point there if you really think about it), but he tries to address it as best he can, and more or less says that he acts as though God exists, because it's how we act rather than what we think or feel that ultimately shows what we believe, and that's certainly a valid point I think. But I can definitely relate to the desire to dance around that particular question, as it's a question I have wrestled with a great deal throughout my life, and continue to wrestle with.

Of course I have written about the question of God in other posts here, and will no doubt continue to write about that question, but as far as it concerns finding my way in life, it's an important question. Is it up to me to decide what is the best path for me to take, or is there some other force that can or should decide that for me, or that could at least help me figure it out? Is there some deity, some guardian angel, some spirit guide, or some other higher power beyond this world or myself that can help me on my way, or am I on my own, do I need to figure this out on my own, maybe with a little help from other people who are trying to find their way too, but essentially alone in this?

Outside of a wedding or a memorial service I haven't been to a church in years, but I still pray (or I try to pray anyway) nearly everyday (and usually when I take a shower after I get out of bed, I guess you could say it's kind of a prayer closet) usually focusing on four areas, namely my relationships, work, creative life, and whatever my spiritual path is, or in my head going through this prayer written by Dietrich Bonhoeffer (while he was in a Nazi prison of all places) which I have memorized:

In me there is darkness But with you there is light I am lonely But you do not leave me I am feeble of heart But with you there is help I am restless But with you there is peace In me there is bitterness But with you there is patience I do not understand your ways But you know the way for me

When I get to the end of that prayer in my mind I sometimes kind of internally hold my hands up, hold my heart out, reach out, without really knowing or understanding, but with hope that something or someone is listening and does know the way, or at least knows it better than me, and can help me to find it.

As I said earlier in the post I feel like I have at times in my life glimpsed or heard whispers of something more, of some deeper truth, or Truth, and perhaps that Truth is some higher power, or God, that can help me find the way, though I don’t know for sure.

One of those times within the last year where I felt I connected with that something more, that truth, whatever it may be, was when I was at a concert for the wonderful Norwegian musician Aurora Asknes when she came here to Portland back in February. I wrote about Aurora Asknes in the last post that I wrote (titled Mad World) before my year long hiatus here, and if you haven't checked her or her music out yet I highly recommend that you do so, as she’s a real gem. Anyways, I went to the concert by myself, and I felt a little lonely there I admit, and I was feeling a little down too as I was trying to emotionally prepare myself for the following day when I was going to help put down my sister's beloved cat Smokey, who had been in our family for a number of years, but then when Aurora came on stage I found myself enraptured by her warmth and playfulness and humor and charm and surprising wisdom as so many of her fans are. What really hit me hard though was at the end of her concert she stopped and got kind of quiet, a hush falling across the crowded room, and then she dedicated her last song of the night to everyone out there who feels different or sad or broken or alone, and while I can't remember everything she said (sometimes I wished I had recorded it on my phone, but before the concert I had promised myself I would try to set aside my phone for most of the concert so I could really focus on it and take it in, which I did), I do remember that she spoke with such tenderness and sincerity and caring that I was moved to tears standing there in a crowded room, and after that she began to sing what may be my favorite song of hers, Through The Eyes Of A Child, which I reflected on in my Mad World post. Hearing that song in the earbuds of my music player as I’m walking home from work at night is one thing, but hearing her sing it on a stage maybe only 30 or so feet away was something else entirely, and the emotion in the room was palpable, and even as messy and awkward and weird as I felt standing there leaning against a wall (like a true wallflower, I know) crying alone in some crowded room in Portland, the moment still felt somehow holy and pure and real, and when she finished the song with the quiet but heartfelt line  'please don't leave me here', it felt like a cry from her heart, and it was a cry from my heart too, a cry that has been there so many times in my life, a cry to not be left here in the dark, to be loved, to not be alone, to be free...

I remember when I was there there was this young woman nearby me who really wanted to give Aurora a package with Aurora’s name on it, presumably with some long letter or series of letters addressed to her, or perhaps some other gift or offering, but she wasn't able to as Aurora wasn't doing meet and greet, and I saw her crying on the floor when she found out she couldn't connect with Aurora in a more personal way. I could at least partly sympathize with her as I too would love to meet and connect one on one with Aurora (much as I would love to meet and connect one on one with Peterson, or really any other public figure out there that I respect or appreciate in some way), as she seems like a wonderful human being, but then on the other hand I was kind disturbed as this lady seemed to have an unhealthy fixation on Aurora, like Aurora was some idol she was placing on a pedestal, or some goddess that she worshiped. There was also a message on Aurora’s Facebook page that I saw sometime after the concert about that particular concert where someone was trying to defend Aurora’s honor in some very weird and uncomfortable way, having felt that the venue somehow disrespected Aurora, to which I was like, um, okay... I can't say that I would really blame anyone for having a worshipful attitude towards someone like Aurora, or for even wanting to try and defend her honor (well okay that’s, um, okay), as Aurora is a very unique and magnetic person, and you can probably see some of that in how I or many of her other fans out there talk about her, and being in that room that night I could feel the power that that lovely young woman who seems like someone straight out of a fairy tale or some kind of fae queen had over her audience, could feel the love and admiration that people there felt for her, but just as with Peterson or any other thinker or musician or other public figure that I respect or appreciate I can still recognize her humanity, and am sure that she too has her own share of weaknesses and shortcomings, her own faults and flaws, and am sure that she sometimes makes mistakes or gets things wrong, that she too struggles in life. For example she is ironically something of an introvert who gets drained meeting a lot of people, even though she is also deeply empathetic, which is a difficult combination to be sure. I haven’t had a chance to watch it yet, as it hasn’t yet been released in the US, but apparently this aspect of her life is delved into in a documentary about her called Once Aurora. I’ve heard fans who have watched it were sobered by getting a better idea of how much of a drain Aurora’s fame has been on her at times, as much as she loves and appreciates her fans. And I’m sure she has other struggles as well, because even if she is a truly wonderful human being, she may still have some darkness within her that she has to contend with, as is the case with all of us, and I imagine it's no more easy for her to live out the message of love and kindness that she shares with her many fans (whom she affectionately refers to as Warriors and Weirdos) than it is for them. I'm sure she sings her songs to herself as much as she does to anyone else.  

Anyways, listening to Peterson sometimes, in those times when he is reaching for that something more, that deeper truth, there is something in that that seems holy, pure, real, or whatever you may call it, like a poet trying to find the words to describe the indescribable even if those words seem like straw, but then at Aurora's concert it felt overwhelming. It's not because Aurora is a goddess (well, maybe she is metaphorically speaking, though not literally speaking, well, you know what I mean, hopefully... hey I know she’s only human but that doesn’t mean she isn’t great), anymore than Peterson is a god, but because as a human being she opened up and welcomed her audience of fellow human beings into that reaching, her own reaching for that something more, that deeper truth, and I think we all, or at least many of us there, could feel that in some way. It honestly felt in some ways like taking communion at times felt for me in church (or at least in those times when the pastors or the elders leading in prayer weren't laying on the religious guilt too thick... yeah not helpful guys), individuals coming together, messy and awkward and weird though we may all be, to try and reach out, hold up our hands, hold out our hearts, in the dark, hoping that something or someone can see us, hear us, and can help us find our way, can somehow help us, heal us, lead us, guide us, through the dark and into the light. (By the way, the next day when I had to help put down my sister’s cat Smokey, including being there in the room with him when he was put to sleep, was definitely still a difficult day for all of us in the family, but then Aurora’s concert the night before encouraged and strengthened me somehow, which helped me get through it, and I am thankful to Aurora for that.)

In Through The Eyes Of A Child, Aurora sings about seeing the world through the eyes of a child, which leads me to another place where I felt a touch of that something more, of that deeper truth.

In the summer I read a book called Boy's Life by Robert McCammon, which is easily one of the best books I've read in a long while, and it is one that has stuck with me since reading it. The book follows a year in the life of 12 year old Cory Mackenson in 1960, where Cory is trying to solve a murder after he and his father witness a stranger in town, already dead with his throat slit, having his car, with him strapped naked in it, sunk into a local lake. While this murder mystery helps drive the story, there is much more to it, as you read about Cory and his three friends and their adventures over the course of the year, adventures that seemingly blend fantasy and reality, and at the core of the story is this sense of magic, of a world behind or beyond the one that we live and breathe in, that many of us experience more when we are children, and how that sense can easily fade away as we get older if we don't hold onto it, but also at the core of the story is the message that at least in some sense none of us ever really grow up, or at least not completely, as deep down there is a child in each of us still, beneath all of that jadedness and cynicism that can build up over the years.

In one of my favorite scenes in the book Cory has a dream where he encounters in her classroom one of his school teachers, Mrs. Neville, who had passed away only a few days before the dream, and in the dream she tells him a secret, which is this:

"No one ever grows up. They may look grown-up, but it's just a disguise, it's just the clay of time. Men and women are still children deep in their hearts."

Mrs. Neville goes on to say that the clay of time can hold us back from playing as we once did as children, and that we would like to come home to a mommy and a daddy who can love us and take care of us and keep us safe but can’t anymore when we are adults, and there is a sadness in wanting something that we can no longer have because of the passage of time, but I think what she tells Cory is on some level also hopeful, as it means that the magic is somehow still there in us, that we are still connected to it. On the one hand that we are still children deep in our hearts is a sobering truth, as I think it means that we are all more or less clueless and scared and uncertain at the end of the day, at least on some level, just as we often were as children, but then again it's also hopeful because we all still have the ability to see the world, as Aurora would put it, through the eyes of a child.

We still, even with the clay of time, have the ability to sense the magic, to see or feel the world behind and beyond the one we live and breathe in, because it's still there, and we're still connected to it somehow.

There was a dream that I had not too long ago that I can't remember much of aside from the final image, which was of a little girl with vibrant and shining red hair running ahead of me and then turning as I was on the edge of waking and saying 'don't give up'. For some reason that image has stuck with me. An acquaintance of mine who is a professional medium, the British Claire Broad (who actually did a reading for my wife Kaylyn and I back in December, though more on that later), told me that perhaps this was my spirit guide trying to communicate with me, and maybe appearing in the form of a child to remind me of that child within me, which may represent that divine spark that Peterson talks about sometimes, or that lens of a child’s eyes that Aurora sings about, or that sense of magic that Robert McCammon talks about, and maybe appearing to me as a little girl because I need a little more tenderness and gentleness and kindness in my life, maybe I need that same kind of feminine energy that I felt coming from or through Aurora while at her concert just a few months back.

(Just as an aside, I remember Peterson once sharing a story about a woman who had a psychedelic induced vision where she asked about him during that vision where she apparently encountered a being or beings, and was told that he was a representative or channel of the divine masculine, a story which Peterson found quite amusing but also kind of wondered about. I remember this coming to mind for a moment while I was at Aurora's concert, and found myself wondering if Aurora could perhaps be a representative or channel of the divine feminine as Peterson could perhaps be a representative or channel of the divine masculine, keeping in mind that the representatives, or channels, or messengers, need the message just as much as those they are sharing the message with. Maybe there is something to this, my making weird connections in my head in some strange Jungian archetypal way in order to say that we all need to try to find a balance between our masculine and feminine sides, that the divine spark within us or the magic in us is both masculine and feminine [which reminds me that towards the end of Boy’s Life there’s a passage where McCammon says that this is also a girl’s life, and that’s something us boys need to keep in mind] and to be whole we need to embrace both within ourselves... or maybe this is all just crazy talk... but whatever the case, I would love to see these two, Peterson and Aurora, as different as they are, get together and have a conversation, just to see what happens... heck, I would even pay money to see that.)

Sound a bit woo? Yeah, maybe dreams of little red-haired girls running around is a bit woo, but I don't know, and possibly I don't care as long as whatever it is is something good that can be trusted and can bring more of that divine spark or sense of magic into my life, can bring me closer to that something more, that deeper truth, whatever it may be. Maybe it was a message from beyond, and that message was ‘don’t give up’.

Speaking of woo, I remember this lady named Amy telling me something along the same lines, about my inner child and being embraced by feminine energy, when giving me my first ever tarot reading at this annual campout of mostly down to earth and laid back aging hippies (said with fondness) that my friend Keith and I went to over the summer called Feast Of Madness (which was a lot of fun by the way), and I remember her saying that I need to tap into that inner child more and not be afraid to get out there and play in the sun. Maybe that little girl in that dream was in part encouraging me and reminding to do just that, to wake up and seize the day and not give up on life, I don’t know. For someone who spends so much time in his head maybe I need to remember to not just think about living but to also, well, live. Maybe the little girl was in part telling me to not give up on life, life which is in large part suffering tainted by malevolence, but also a divine spark and magic, and full of sorrow no doubt but can also be full of joy, which can be, in the words of J.R.R. Tolkien, as poignant as grief.

And speaking of dreams, there was another dream I had in the last year that stuck with me, where our family friend Bryan, who had passed away from cancer a couple years ago, seemed to appear to me. It was the first dream I can remember Bryan appearing in since his death, and I haven't had a dream about him since. It wasn't particularly vivid (as I’ve heard ‘dream visitations’ tend to be) and it felt  vague and weird as most dreams do, and I don't think I even saw his face. I just remember giving him a hug and saying I was glad to see him, and all I can remember him saying to me was something about Troutdale, which is a city here in Oregon. I asked my mom, who knew him better than me, about it, but she didn't see any connection between him and Troutdale, and for a couple months I had this knocking around in the back of my mind, wondering about it, until one day while at work it hit me to look up if there was any connection between Bigfoot (which was, for anyone who really knew Bryan, his favorite thing in the world) and Troutdale, and was amazed to find that in just a few weeks time the Oregon Bigfoot Festival was going to be taking place in Troutdale.

I took this as a sign from Bryan, and a few weeks later Bryan's youngest son Kyle, Keith (who like me thought of Bryan as something of an uncle while growing up) and Keith’s 4 year daughter Sophie went to the festival. We all had a good time and I think it was a great way of remembering and honoring Bryan, even as simple and silly as it may have seemed, and we even talked about maybe trying to go every year, and we may do that if we can.

I suppose some might call the dream I had and the connection that I made because of it a coincidence, just some random fluke, others might think of it as some kind of precognition, and still others might indeed see it as a sign from someone who has passed on. I honestly don't know what it was for sure, but I know I felt compelled to act on it when I found a meaning in it, and I know that some good came out of it, and that all of that happened at all makes me wonder what might be going on behind and beyond this world that we live and breath in.

(Claire Broad ^^^) I also wonder about my reading (my first ever reading with a medium, have had a few weird firsts over this last year, that’s for sure) with Claire Broad back in December (which we did via video online since she lives in the UK), where Kaylyn's maternal grandma, who had passed about a year before Kaylyn and I met, and her aunt, who had passed a couple years ago, seemed to come through for Kaylyn, and where, strangely enough, my paternal grandpa (and part of me had wondered and hoped that my maternal grandpa, who had passed only a couple years ago, would come through for me, but no such luck), who had passed at least two to three decades before I was even born and when my dad was just a boy, seemed to come through for me. I admit I was pretty skeptical of mediums up until recently, or up until connecting with Claire anyway, but I am more open now, because while some of what Claire shared didn't seem to fit or make sense, a lot of other things did, including some things she couldn't have known or guessed, or at least not as far as I can tell anyway.  That and I’ve known Claire for awhile now and have gotten a feel for what kind of person she is, and even if some so-called mediums out there may not be legit, she doesn’t strike me as being among them and I think she’s genuine and not just some bullshit artist or huckster or whatever, that and she strikes me as intelligent and kind and I believe she just wants to use her abilities, whatever they may be, to help people. I still don't know what to make of all of it honestly, especially what she shared about my paternal grandpa who I never knew, but I do know that it gave Kaylyn some comfort on her end and some food for thought on mine, and I suppose that is something, and again it makes me wonder. These and other strange experiences make me wonder.

(The late great Art Bell ^^^) As I've said in other posts I have always been fascinated with the paranormal, ever since I was a kid, and have always had an interest in metaphysical and spiritual things as well, and most specifically the strange personal experiences that people have. Over the last year I've been listening to a lot of paranormal podcasts. One of my favorites is one called Strange Familiars with host Timothy Renner, who aside from being fascinated with the paranormal like myself also has a love for history and folklore and delves into that sometimes. I've also enjoyed listening to old episodes of Coast To Coast AM with Art Bell (who I found sadly passed away sometime last year), a radio show that my dad's cousin Cliff, who was into all things weird, often talked about and referenced in our conversations when I was a kid, although I'd never listened to the show myself up until recently. Anyways, one of the things that gets talked about in these shows and others that I listen to is that perhaps all of these things, whether they be cryptids (Bigfoot being one example) or ghosts or UFOs or shadow people or strange lights or time slips or synchronicities or out of body and/or near death experiences or miracles or whatever they may be, are somehow all interconnected, and maybe the true nature of reality is both more terrifying and more wonderful, and more just plain weird and wild, terrifyingly and wonderfully weird and wild, than any of us can imagine, and maybe there is a kind of magic in the world that you can only see through the eyes of a child, magic both dark and light.

I think part of what draws me to these topics is wondering what if, what if these things are real, what if these things are true... sure, I have little doubt that many strange experiences that people claim to have, or even that I have had, could be explained away through some natural or scientific or mundane means, but then I really have a hard time believing that all of them can, including some of my own, and even if just some of these things are real and true, then what does that mean for my life, and what are these strange or meaningful experiences that I and so many others have saying to us, if anything? Maybe one thing they are saying to us is it’s good to keep an open mind because even with all of our knowledge and understanding of the world gained through observation and exploration and experimentation there is still room for mystery, and as difficult as it may be for us to admit there is probably still more that we don’t know than what we do know. Whether it’s through the words of thinkers like Peterson, who in between debates about politics and philosophy have moments when they are are trying to find the words to describe something that may be indescribable, or whether it’s through the music of artists like Aurora who invite others into their reaching and their longing and their aching for a better life and a better world and to try to see the world through the eyes of a child, or through magical stories like Boy's Life, or through magical dreams like that of the little redheaded girl who turned to me and said 'don't give up', or through Bryan seeming to give me a sign, or through thought-provoking tarot or medium readings, or through other strange or even seemingly otherworldly experiences that I and so many others have had, I sense that there is something more, some deeper truth, or Truth, just behind and beyond the veil, and perhaps touching this reality, this deeper underlying reality, is somehow key to finding my way in life, as many others believe.

Of course there are different ideas about what this something more, what this deeper truth, is, if there is any such thing at all Some would say that it is God or some other higher power or powers, some would say that it is the higher self or some collective unconsciousness, while others would say it's none of the above or there really is nothing more, no such truth, and on top of that just about everything that I have said here is pretty much bullshit anyway and really who the hell cares and instead of trying to search for any universal meaning or purpose just try to make the most of your short and miserable life before you find yourself in the grave.

Well hey, I honestly don't know for sure who's right about this, if anyone is, and don't know for sure what is behind and beyond this world that we live and breathe in, if anything, I don't know what or who might be listening when I pray, or try to pray, when I hold up my hands and hold out my heart, or when I look for help to find my way in life, or to keep walking if I am already on the path, if there is any path at all... Maybe I am on my own, in trying to figure things out, or maybe I’m not... I suppose only time will tell what the case may be.

(My friend Erin ^^^) I wonder if my friend Erin McCarty, who passed away from cancer just a few weeks ago, knows better than I do now, and I hope she does, I hope to whatever or whoever may be listening that she does. Erin and I were friends for about eight years or so, and we never met in person, never even talked on the phone or Skyped or anything like that, our friendship was exclusively via Facebook Messenger and email and the occasional package back and forth, but we were good friends nevertheless, and I remember Erin and I would sometimes talk about things like this, the deeper mysteries of life. Erin herself was a devout and committed Christian, albeit a pretty open-minded and non-dogmatic one (the best kind), and her faith was important to her, but even she sometimes struggled with questions and doubts about the nature of reality, as most of us do at some time or another, though I believe she generally had more faith than myself. I would guess that she had very little fear of death in the end, and maybe there was part of her that even looked forward to it, wondering what was waiting for her beyond and behind the veil, including loved ones who had passed on before her. Knowing how adventurous in spirit she was that wouldn’t surprise me. But for me the very fact of Erin's death is a struggle to understand and accept as a part of reality, as it lead to questions and doubts on its own, with someone so kind and generous in spirit as she was dying so young, at only 38 years old, only a year older than myself, when she had so much more that she could have offered to the world (although in her 38 years she gave so much). I mean I don't really get it, and neither does anyone else out there who knew and cared for her I can imagine, but I will cope with the reality of it as best I can, and hope that someday I will get it, that someday things like this will make some kind of sense, that suffering and death will make some kind of sense, or at least hope that I can be at peace with the reality of them more or less in the end.

My last exchange with Erin was just a couple days before she died, after reading her dad's post about how she was going into hospice care and she probably didn't have much longer, and I shared with her in Messenger this Youtube clip from The Return Of The King where there is this exchange between Gandalf and Pippin in the midst of a siege by the forces of Mordor on Minas Tirith:

PIPPIN: I didn't think it would end this way.

GANDALF: End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it.

PIPPIN: What? Gandalf? See what?

GANDALF: White shores, and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise.

PIPPIN: Well, that isn't so bad.

GANDALF: No. No, it isn't.”

All she said was 'Thank you Matt <3, that is one of my all time favorite movie moments.' and I didn't hear any more from her after that. I suppose with her and I both being nerds, who enjoyed nerdy things such as Lord Of The Rings, and who often liked to discuss philosophical and spiritual things as well, this last exchange seems somehow appropriate and feels right when I think about it, and is even, at least to me, another one of those glimpses or whispers of something more, of some deeper truth.

I shared this and some other thoughts on Erin in a post on Facebook, and towards the end of my post I said this:

'Erin, in spite of her own struggles with doubt from time to time, had more faith than me I think, but even so I do believe, with whatever faith I may have, though a flickering candle it may be, that there is something more behind and beyond this life, that death isn't the end, and I don't say that in denial of some cold and cruel reality that we all must face to simply try to comfort myself or others at that heavy thought of a wonderful person such as Erin no longer being in this world, but because my heart tells me it is so.

I don't know what it is like, what it consists of, what the metaphysics are, or how it all relates to God and everything else that human beings have argued and debated about for millennia, but I do believe that there is something more beyond death, that death is just a gateway to something else, that it is a night that is followed by a new day, and my hope is that it is something like what Gandalf was talking about, and if anyone should be able to step foot on white shores and walk into a far green country with a swift sunrise, it should be Erin.'

I think Erin found her way in life, a way of kindness and generosity, and she went down her path (or up her path) like a lightning bolt, and maybe now, I hope, on the other side of the veil she has answers to whatever questions she had in life, or at least whatever answers she needed anyway, answers that may even be beyond words or the need of them, that may make all of our questions and doubts, like our words, seem like straw... And I hope that she has found a joy as poignant as grief, including the grief of her family and friends that remain here on Earth missing her, and I hope that someday all of us who knew her and cared for her will know the joy of seeing her again (or in my case, for the first time)...

On Halloween night I was rewatching one of my all time favorite films, 1982's Poltergeist, with my friend in Kenya, Annie (whom I've mentioned in other posts), who was watching it with me on her laptop as I watched it on mine and while we commented on it back and forth on our cellphones. Annie hadn't seen it since she was a kid, being terrified of it then, and had been too scared to watch it again since then, but she was willing to give it a go with me being there at least virtually for support. She was of course still pretty terrified, but she also enjoyed it, and enjoyed sharing the experience with me. One of my highlights for the year for sure.

Anyways, perhaps my favorite scene in the film, even above all the spooky goings on, is the one where Dr. Lesh, a parapsychologist who is trying to help this family, the Freelings, to bring their daughter Carol Ann back from the astral realm after she was dragged there by an evil spirit that they call the Beast (if you haven't seen the film you're missing out, it's great), and in the scene she is talking with Diane, Carol Ann's mother, and Robbie, her brother, about her understanding of the nature of life after death, with Jerry Goldsmith's brilliant and beautiful score playing quietly in the background, and one of the things she says to them is this:

'Some people believe that when people die, there's a wonderful light -- as bright as the sun. But it doesn't hurt to look into it. All the answers to all the questions that you ever want to know are inside that light. And when you walk into it, you become a part of it forever.'

My heart stirs sometimes when she says this in this scene, perhaps another example of one of those glimpses or whispers of something more, of some deeper truth, and in this case nestled somewhere in a classic 80s horror film. I hope that something like this is true when we die, I hope something like this is true for Erin and will be true for all of us, that there is a wonderful light waiting to embrace us all...

I imagine that some who read this will wonder what kind of weird brain I have, jumping from talking about Thomas Aquinas and words like straw, to talking at some length (maybe a good third of this post at least) about a popular but also controversial Canadian professor and psychologist that liberal media outlets sometimes equate with the 'alt-right' (if unfairly so I believe) who nevertheless in between his political rants says things that really resonate with me spiritually, going from touching on gender (including transgender) issues and rights and relations and more generally on empathy and understanding, to a 23 year old Norwegian musician who made me cry in a crowded room in Portland, going from a murder mystery/coming of age story about the magic of seeing the world through the eyes of a child, to strange dreams that might be from spirit guides or from the dead, as well as touching on all things weird or paranormal or that are behind and beyond what we know and understand, from the death of a friend who I will miss and who so many will miss and whose death I really can't understand but hope to understand someday, to a classic horror film that came out the year that I was born and in between the scares has moments that speak to me. What is it all of these things have in common, what ties all of these things together?

I don't know, or at least I'm not sure, but I can throw some more straw at it anyway.

I had initially intended on trying to write a post about gender and being a man about a year ago, and maybe I gave you some idea of what that might have looked like in the first half of this post, but then strangely enough trying to delve into that complicated topic helped in some ways to lead me into deeper issues of humanity and what it is to be human, much as Cassie Jaye's own experience with suffering and loss through her miscarriages has led her away from wanting to talk about something that is more political and abstract and towards wanting to talk about something that is more personal and raw, and looking into someone like Peterson who is known in the mainstream mostly for some of his more controversial and divisive political and social views, and who is mocked and disparaged by all sides, led me to finding something of a kindred spirit in someone who, even if I may disagree with him on some things, is trying to walk a path, and lay out that path for others to try to help give their lives more meaning and purpose, and who, in between his political rants, is trying to reach for something more or for some deeper truth in his own imperfect human way, just as I am... Going from something that is more on the surface, to something deeper, from something in the realm of ideology and the games that people play, down into the soul...

I had initially planned on ending that blog post, whatever it might have been, on the note that whatever gender we are, whether male or female or transgender or non-binary or whatever, we are all of us human beings under the skin, and we all share this world and are in this together, and whether we may like it or not, so perhaps it is best to try to learn to empathize, and to understand one another as well as we can so we can move forward, even if that may be much more easily said than it is done, but again we can at least try.

And maybe that is one of the things that connects all of these seemingly disparate things... moving forward, even with all our faults and flaws and struggles and problems, or in the words of C.S. Lewis, further up and further in.

Jordan Peterson often talks about our aim, what we are aiming for, that we should aim for a better life and a better world, even if it is only incrementally, just one step at a time. He uses as an example the story of Pinocchio, where Gepetto wishes on a star for a son, and Pinocchio wishes to be a real boy, looking to the blue fairy, where he dives into the belly of the whale to rescue his father, and all the archetypes and symbols and metaphors and dreams that may be lying underneath stories like these.

This reminds me of one of my favorite passages in one of my favorite books, The Neverending Story (a scene that sadly wasn't in the film) where Bastian had to go down into the depths of the land of Fantasia (or Fantastica in the book), which is literally built on the dreams of humanity, into a mine full of glass images of dreams, to find a dream of his father's, and he finds this image of his father trapped in a cage, where he is in sorrow and pain, and he needs rescuing and above all love, which in the end Bastian is able to offer his father when he returns to his own world, which sets his father free to live again after being crushed by grief after losing his wife, the mother of his son, sometime before.

And why am I reminded of that, what is the connection? Why does it mean for the father to reach for the son, or the son to reach for the father? The mother for the daughter, the daughter for the mother? The masculine and the feminine, culture and nature, the old and the new, intertwined in symbols one after another in dreams that speak in a language we only rarely if ever understand? Why do we reach for the stars, and why must we dive into the dark to find what we're looking for? Why does grief crush us and can love free us? What is my aim in writing all of this? Again I'm not sure, but here again is more straw. Maybe in our art and our poetry, maybe in our words like straw that we aim in the direction we want to move in, maybe in the archetypes and symbols and metaphors and dreams, maybe in the conversations and the music and stories and experiences and in our lives and in our deaths and maybe in our lives again, maybe we are reaching, reaching up, or reaching in, or down, or out, reaching in every direction, or in the words of the poet Walt Whitman:

'A noiseless patient spider, I mark’d where on a little promontory it stood isolated, Mark’d how to explore the vacant vast surrounding, It launch’d forth filament, filament, filament, out of itself, Ever unreeling them, ever tirelessly speeding them.

And you O my soul where you stand, Surrounded, detached, in measureless oceans of space, Ceaselessly musing, venturing, throwing, seeking the spheres to connect them, Till the bridge you will need be form’d, till the ductile anchor hold, Till the gossamer thread you fling catch somewhere, O my soul.'

Maybe on some level many of us, perhaps all of us, are digging, digging, digging (like a boy digging through a mine of dreams), through all of these things, through all of the philosophy and politics that we argue about, and all of the art that we enjoy and appreciate, and all of the experiences that we remember and struggle with and hold onto, and all of our beliefs and the questions and doubts surrounding them that we wrestle with, and everything that we think about and talk about and wonder about and feel, so we can find a bridge to walk across, so we can find something to hold onto, so our souls, like noiseless patient spiders, can catch something firm, something solid, something holy and pure and real, so we can find a way forward, a way further up and in and down and out, and with no need for words... maybe.

Well now... Ground Control to Major Matt, take your protein pills and put your helmet on... I get carried away sometimes, so back down to Earth I go...

(Krissy Lynn in her mirror video ^^^) Another one of the things I discovered over the last year was the Youtube channel of Krissy Lynn, who is a porn actress of all things. And yes I have also seen some of her, um, other videos online. Full disclosure here, bringing things well and truly back down to Earth: I have watched a lot of porn throughout my life, and I still watch porn (though fortunately I have steered clear of the really twisted stuff, like child or rape porn). It’s a long story of the hows and whys and it’s not a topic that I want to really get into here, partly because it is such a sensitive topic, both for me and for society, but suffice to say that I have mixed feelings about it, about the whole industry of porn itself as well as all of my experience with it since I was a kid. And any shade that anyone out there may want to throw my way because of it isn't anything I haven't already thrown at myself at different times in my life, and trust me shame is an emotion I know all too well, especially when it is combined with religious guilt which I had in the past when I was an evangelical Christian. That said, one thing I've learned over the years is it does me no good at all to hate myself or berate myself for it as I have done in the past, so if you feel at all disposed to you could judge me all you want about it but you aren't going to be able to push me to hate or berate myself as I've done that plenty myself, and I know it never did me any good (and a real big surprise there, as that seems to be the case in any situation, that hating and berating yourself never really does any good, and it usually just makes things worse). There are those who wrestle with a weakness for drugs or alcohol, others for gambling or gaming, still others for food or shopping or you name it, just about anything you can think of can become a weakness or something you can feel shame about, but for me one of my weaknesses has been and continues to be pornography, and it is what it is and it's something that I wrestle with and that's just part of me and my life, and I'm not afraid to admit that here. Is it a sin (if sin is even the right word here, sin meaning missing the mark)? There’s debate about that (though certainly no debate about certain forms of porn like child or rape porn, which I think most would agree are vile and evil) and I’m of two minds about it myself, but I will say this: May he (or she) who is without sin cast the first stone. Anyways, with that out of the way and out in the open... Krissy Lynn has been one of my favorite porn actresses as she is, um, very attractive to me, but when I discovered her Youtube channel I admit it really surprised me. Even though some would find her career choice to be contradictory to this, in her Youtube videos I found that she is actually a pretty thoughtful and kind and even spiritual person at her core, or at least she seems to be someone who really wants to learn and grow spiritually and in general as a person. Some might assume that everyone who works in the porn industry is pretty shallow and surface level, but then in some of Krissy's videos she shares about her journey in life and how she is trying to learn and grow and better herself. Sure she has the occasional video where she dances around sexily and shows off her admittedly gorgeous body (which I enjoy, not gonna lie), but then in many of her videos she shares about her journey in life and shares from her heart in meaningful ways. I don’t think she’s ashamed of what she does for a living, or at least she doesn’t give that impression, and she doesn't let the nature of her career keep her from exploring deeper things or trying to find ways to feed her soul, and I can respect and appreciate that. One of her videos that has really stuck with me was a video where she talked about and demonstrated this exercise she called 'mirror work' where you stand in front of a mirror and talk to yourself, telling yourself what you are proud of, what you forgive yourself for, what you commit to for yourself, or anything you want to say to yourself. In her demonstration of the exercise when she got to the part where she forgives herself for something, she was in tears when she forgave herself for how she hid away as a kid because she was afraid of connecting with others. That really spoke to me having had a similar experience when I was a kid.

I've since been trying to do this mirror work exercise myself, usually when I get out of the shower. I tell myself (in my head though as doing so out loud feels weird for me) as I look at myself in the mirror, for example, that I am proud of you for getting out of bed to face the day today or for being kind to a friend or for working hard, or that I forgive you for watching porn or for getting pissed off about stupid things or for making an ass of yourself or for being a scared kid yesterday or today, or that I commit to trying to move forward one step at a time... that sort of thing. And I got the inspiration to do this from a porn actress of all people, a porn actress who is, even if she may to some extent objectify herself and let others objectify her, also a human being with a soul like you and me. I admit in a strange way it feels more real to me to be getting life advice from someone like Krissy Lynn, someone who is probably seen as an object of scorn by some (as much as she is seen as an object of desire by others) because of what she does for a living, than it does receiving it from some spiritual teacher or guru living in some cloistered space. Also there is something meaningful to me about receiving a message of healing from someone who works in porn, which has been a source of shame for me throughout much of my life, there’s something about that that speaks to me for some reason, I don’t know, like it’s a light coming out of the dark, or perhaps whatever sexual wounds I may have are like cracks where, as Rumi would put it, the light gets in.

Jordan Peterson, who I agree with on a number of things but not completely here, has a pretty low view of pornography, as many people do, which is understandable I guess, even if my own feelings about it are more complicated and nuanced (partly because I have listened to a lot of podcast interviews with those who work in porn, on podcasts like Holly Randall Unfiltered for example, and they have diverse perspectives and experiences within the industry, some negative for sure but others positive, or some combination thereof), but I wonder what he would make of someone like Krissy, who is trying in her own way to better herself and improve her life and dig deeper to find meaning and purpose, and even while she basically gets paid for having sex on camera.

John Green once said that we should understand people complexly (going back to the point that people are complex), and Krissy, with her career in porn, and also me, with my weakness for porn, are really no exceptions to that rule I think, as we can both stand in front of mirrors and sometime have a hard time saying something like 'I love you' to ourselves, but then we should be able to because we are still worthy of love I believe (even though I admit to having my doubts sometimes, and don’t we all), even as messy and awkward and weird as we may be, as are we all.  

In Krissy Lynn's most recent Youtube video she talked about loneliness and how the answer to it is loving yourself, accepting yourself, even admiring yourself, more than it is looking to others for validation. I wrote a post on Facebook recently where I reflected on loneliness and isolation and towards the end I included that thought, that learning to love ourselves may be part of answering loneliness, though I also acknowledged that people being able to connect more may be part of it too, as there seems to be a real disconnect in some ways between people these days. Maybe there is more of a kind of connection via the internet and social media over the last twenty something years since the dawn of the internet, which can be valid and meaningful in its way (my friendship with Erin or Annie being examples of this), but face to face and one on one connection seems to be harder to come for many people nowadays, which is ultimately more important and more needed than any other kind of connection, as hard as that may be to accept in this world of social media, tweeting, texting, and virtual reality. So I think it's both, we need to love ourselves but also need love from others, as it's all intertwined I think. There was another video I watched recently by a lady named Savannah Brown who also talked about loneliness, as well as the difficulty in connecting with others in meaningful ways, and in the video she shared some of her struggles, but ended on a poignant note of hoping that, even if she can’t read the minds of others or step into their shoes completely, she can still understand and can be understood in some way, even with all our limitations and the walls between us. I share in that hope.

(tired and disheveled and kind of sad me while writing this ^^^) I wrote a poem about loneliness (which is somewhat revised here) back in August that I think captures some of what loneliness feels like, at least for me: Loneliness is a weight That settles in my bones Is it right to walk alone Or to be only one With the deep sky above And the abyss beneath That I gaze into And gazes back at me Oh I wonder, I wonder Surrounded by the crowd People who love and hate But the weight remains And the bones still ache The deep sky calls to me And the abyss cries out My fingers in the air My toes in the water Oh I wonder, I wonder But to combat loneliness maybe like Krissy Lynn says I need to learn to love myself more, and even with all my faults and flaws and weaknesses and shortcomings and limitations and everything else.  When I look in the mirror I see a scared kid behind those eyes, behind the clay of time, a soul within a body that is slowly but surely aging, a bit more weathered and tired than I was as a boy or in my teens or twenties, a little more jaded and cynical and pessimistic, or as the late great George Carlin put it in an interview with Art Bell that I listened to recently, like a disappointed idealist, and sometimes feeling, as Frederick Buechner would put it, like a man who, when he looks in the mirror, sees at least eight parts chicken, phony, and slob... But underneath it all is still that scared kid, who feels he doesn’t really know or understand much for sure, who feels like love is something he’s not very good at actually practicing, who sometimes feels he is too pretentious and arrogant or disingenuous and fake, but who may yet have a spark of something genuine and real in him, a spark that reaches for something more, for some deeper truth with a capital T, that will set him free and bring him peace, and who is still learning what it means to be a man or a human being in this world.

This scared kid is still trying to find a way, a path, through the darkness and towards the light, maybe towards the wonderful light that will embrace him, or perhaps already does...

I've listened to debates (which were really more discussions) between Peterson and popular atheist thinker Sam Harris where they talked about truth and fact and their value and the differences between them, which were in some ways debates between science and religion, though not exactly as neither of them are overly dogmatic about their positions, or not as far as I can tell anyway. Anyways, something that gets brought up by Peterson is the danger of nihilism, which a non-religious worldview can lead to (or at least more readily), and something that gets brought up by Harris is the danger of fundamentalism, which a religious worldview can lead to (or again at least more readily). Having been both non-religious and religious at different times in my life, and now being in some weird place in between those two poles, I can attest that both concerns are valid as I have put my feet in the water of both.

To me nihilism (which is usually found in non-religious contexts but perhaps can be found in religious ones sometimes) is basically a worldview in which life has no meaning or purpose or value save what we may impose upon it, which is arbitrary at best. This worldview can leave you feeling lost and aimless and empty, with no real sense of identity or value that is intrinsic and objective, and you are just some speck in a cold and impersonal and uncaring cosmos, believing that life is either some sick joke, or just a spectrum of pleasure and pain to choose from without much consideration for any morality or ethics outside of those we may choose to invent for ourselves, because they don't really matter anyway, and nothing really matters, and life is basically just suffering and loss and madness all the way down mostly, with only brief and transitory pleasures that may give some semblance of meaning and purpose and value but all of it being only an illusion, and (at least in those non-religious contexts that have no belief in an afterlife) followed by our inevitable death, the grave, and finally oblivion, and in time probably the death of the sun, the implosion of the universe, and then nothing.

On the other hand, to me fundamentalism (which is usually found in religious contexts but perhaps can be found in non-religious ones sometimes) is basically a worldview where there is a strict and inflexible and narrow meaning and purpose and value to life that is imposed upon us by someone else or by some tradition or expectation that cannot be questioned at all or if at all very little. This worldview can leave you feeling trapped and like you're in a straitjacket (maybe in a padded room, or maybe in a room with brick walls) and at best only conditionally loved or accepted, your identity and value tied tightly to whether or not you remain devoted to your belief system and everything that goes with it, only a servant to some higher order or principle that cannot be reasoned with, and life becomes a set of do's and don'ts, rules to be followed, or else you will be punished, perhaps even (at least in those religious contexts that have some kind of belief in an afterlife) punished eternally after death, burning in fire or banished into darkness forever and ever, pick whatever literal metaphor strikes your fancy, in which case you would probably be wishing for oblivion.

I've experienced both of these extremes at different times in my life, and there is a danger of falling into either of them whether you are non-religious or religious, and I suppose one of my aims in life now is to find a way or a path between these two extremes.

Peterson often talks about a balance between order and chaos, the masculine and the feminine, the yin and the yang, which is a balance that is often talked about in Taoism. I admit I don't know much about Taoism (I have a copy of the Tao-Te-Ching but haven't read it yet, though I plan to), but I am familiar with the yin-yang symbol and what it means at least roughly. The symbol is a circle of black and white, the black half of the circle, or paisley, being yin, representing darkness and chaos and feminine energy and moving inward, and the white half of the circle, or paisley, being yang, representing light and order and masculine energy and moving outward. (Just as another aside, from what I can understand the black paisley, yin, doesn't necessarily represent evil, nor does the white paisley, yang, necessarily represent good, or at least not in any traditional sense, or I think it's much more complicated than that anyways. Just wanted to touch on that as I know that some women are understandably bothered about the feminine being equated with darkness and chaos [and this is sometimes brought up when Peterson talks about things like this as well], which are often seen in a negative light, but I think in the case of yin it is more representative of what’s hidden and unknown and of mystery and creative forces [whereas I think yang would be more representative of what’s seen and known and of answers and structural forces], and with women bearing children, who are for a time hidden and unknown and a mystery and a product of creative forces, this would make some sense symbolically and I think there is a beauty in this symbolism and I believe women can take pride in it, being the bearers of mystery and having a creative force within them. Of course this doesn't mean at all that women only have value as bearers of children, far from it, but I think this is an aspect of the feminine that is unique to women and should be a source of pride rather than shame. And hey, this is all coming from a guy who apparently needs a little more yin in his life, going by what I said above about feminine energy and all, so there's that.) In the black paisley, there is a dot of white, and in the white paisley, there is a dot of black, as there is a bit of yin in the yang, and a bit of the yang in the yin, and they are interconnected. In other words, darkness can come out of light, and light out of darkness, chaos can come out of order, and order out of chaos, the feminine is in the masculine and the masculine is in the feminine, sometimes in order to move inward you need to look outward, sometimes to move outward you need to look inward, etc.

To give a couple real life examples of this principle of the yin being in the yang and the yang being in the yin. For the first example, during the summer because of some complicated financial struggles my family had our electricity shut off, and we weren't able to get it back on for two weeks. It was only through the generosity of family and friends that we were able to pay our huge electric bill and finally get our power back on. The experience was painful for us, and one of both literal and figurative darkness, but the light in it was the generosity of others who helped us, and we wouldn't have been able to experience that generosity if we hadn’t lost our electricity. Also this experience has helped us to maybe not take things like electricity so much for granted. The yang in the yin, light in darkness, and the light was even more meaningful in that darkness. For the second example, towards the end of the summer my wife Kaylyn and I went to the beach up in Washington for our five year anniversary. All in all I think we had a good time, whether it was shopping around or eating Chinese food or watching the Lord Of The Rings trilogy in its entirety, but then on the day before we returned home Kaylyn lost her cellphone to the ocean when we were walking out on the beach together, and needless to say Kaylyn was upset and it kind of put a damper on the rest of our trip. But even this was a reminder to us to try to make the most of things even when they don't go the way we want them to, that sometimes, well, shit happens and we have to roll with it as best we can. The yin in the yang, darkness in light, and the darkness reminded us to appreciate what we still have.

And earlier this year I wrote a poem inspired by the concept of yin and yang, as well as using imagery from some real life experiences of mine, which I tentatively titled Yin and Yang: In the light of darkness In the darkness of light I remember crying to The silent stars And climbing stairs to Caress the shadow of heaven Tearing at the fresh grass When I wouldn't grow And sitting in silence with peace Drawn in the rock and the dust Numbers and letters Blending into fading miracles The hope of an embrace Holding me in my pain Pictures and poetry and names Lighting my way in the dark Bargain with demons in the day Wrestle with angels in the night

The Tao (or the Way), is about finding a balance between the yin and the yang and moving forward as you try to keep that balance, at least as I understand it. And perhaps this applies to finding a path or way between the extremes of nihilism (which one might describe as extreme chaos, where there is really no or very little solid ground to stand on, like an open ocean that drowns you) and fundamentalism (which one might describe as extreme order, where the ground is just too hard and packed and there is no or very little fertile soil to allow for things to blossom and grow, like a barren desert that leaves you dry and thirsty).

I've been in the open ocean of nihilism and the barren desert of fundamentalism at different times in my life (mainly dealing with the former in my teens and then the latter in my 20s), and while it was painful and difficult on both accounts, I feel like I learned from my experiences, for one learning the lesson, in the words of Walt Whitman (who put out better quality straw than mine for sure by the way) that I should 're-examine all I have been told, and dismiss what insults my soul', and that is what I have been trying to do through my 30s thus far. Both extremes told me that I as an individual human being had no intrinsic or objective value, that my life was either meaningless full stop or that my worth as a human being was dependent upon meeting certain standards, and I'm finding that neither extreme is right, whether about that or any number of things, and that I don't have to believe or accept either anymore, I don't have to believe or accept those insults to my soul anymore. Sometimes it feels like a tightrope act, avoiding these extremes on either side, trying to find a middle ground that offers some kind of foundation to stand on but also room for change and growth, but I think this is the way that I need to go, or the path that I need to find.

Maybe it's like trying to hammer down just enough fluttering pieces to have something to stand on, but not so many pieces that there are none left to fly, if that makes any sense... I remember one of the quotes I was thinking of using in the post I had planned to write called Measure Of A Man was this quote from a film called, of all things, Measure Of A Man, about a teenager coming of age during one summer, and this is something that an older man (played by Donald Sutherland) who ends up becoming a kind of mentor to him, tells him at one point:

I think this applies not just to men but to women as well, and people in general, and the storms of our lives that need to be navigated are of course both external and internal, both the difficult circumstances of our lives that we have to struggle with and the choices of others that are at odds with our own, and the inner turmoil and unrest that we must deal with within ourselves on a day to day basis as well as the weight of our own choices and how those choices may impact those around us.

And the measure of who we are may be in our ability to find the proper shore through all of this, through all of these storms ... though, then again, maybe there is some power or presence around us, with us, in us, that can be help us through the storms, or at least I hope there is.

One of my favorite prayers (which I also have memorized and sometimes recite in my head while taking a shower) is the Breton fisherman prayer:

'Dear God, please be good to me, for the sea is so wide, and my boat is so small.'

I often feel like my boat, this youngish but still aging body with this little scared kid of a soul in it, is so small, and the sea, this life and this weird and wild world and this universe, is so wide, so I pray, I hope, that I'm not alone in all of this, that I'm not alone in the sea or in my boat.

Sometimes when I imagine myself there, there in some small and frail boat out in a vast open sea, I imagine Jesus there in the boat with me, yes that Jesus, who I admit I rarely think of these days, though there was once a time when I thought of Jesus just about every day back when I was a Christian, or when I was trying to be one anyway. But when I think of Jesus now I don’t think of Jesus so much as some vague and mysterious historical figure that legends have been built around along the lines of whoever may or may not have inspired the legend of King Arthur, nor some mere composite of doctrines and dogmas of the church that exists simply to get as many theological ducks in a row as possible, or even as the enigmatic and paradoxical figure in the Gospels that seemingly claimed divinity and was crucified for it and came back to life a couple of days later at least in part so some skeptical guy like me could put their fingers in his scars and believe. ... Not any of those but more, well, the Jesus of my own imagination, and not imagination as in something that is completely made up off the top of my head, but more from some place deep down where dreams come from, that substrata or mine of dreams that we sometimes tap into.  And this Jesus takes on something of that classic image of him, wearing a robe and sandals, strong and sturdily built like a man who works with their hands, with the deep tan of a man who spends plenty of time in the sun, with long and somewhat brown hair (though not the cascading perfectly combed luscious locks that are sometimes given to him in films about him), and a ruggedly handsome though somewhat weathered face (that of someone who has known struggle and pain) with deep brown eyes that are somehow both penetrating and kind. And this Jesus is simply there with me, sometimes holding my hands, just reassuring me with no words that I’m not alone. And this Jesus in the boat with me, much like the red headed little girl in that dream of mine, tells me to not give up, and not so much with words but just with his reassuring presence. I’m reminded of the beautiful classic song Suzanne by Leonard Cohen, which I sometimes find myself listening to in the middle of the night, and that strangely beautiful second verse about Jesus: And Jesus was a sailor When he walked upon the water And he spent a long time watching From his lonely wooden tower And when he knew for certain Only drowning men could see him He said "All men will be sailors then Until the sea shall free them" But he himself was broken Long before the sky would open Forsaken, almost human He sank beneath your wisdom like a stone   And you want to travel with him And you want to travel blind And you think maybe you'll trust him For he's touched your perfect body with his mind I don’t know what Cohen meant by all of that, what was going through his head when he wrote that, but I wonder... Maybe there is a reason we are in these boats, why we are sailors out on this sea that we call life, but maybe true freedom will only come when we are no longer afraid of the sea, the sea of life... perhaps God is the sea, and Jesus, being a human symbol of God in the minds of many, is like the sea in that boat encouraging me not to be afraid, because the day will come when the time for being a sailor will be over, when it will be time to jump out of this small and frail boat of mine and dive into the depths, and perhaps rather than drowning in those waters I will be able to breathe in those waters and be embraced by them and call them home, and perhaps in this case the proper shore isn’t on land, but in the sea itself... 

I'm also reminded of one of my friend Erin's favorite songs by one of her all time favorite bands, Simon and Garfunkel, Bridge Over Troubled Water:

When you're weary, feeling small When tears are in your eyes, I'll dry them all I'm on your side, oh, when times get rough And friends just can't be found Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down When you're down and out When you're on the street When evening falls so hard I will comfort you I'll take your part, oh, when darkness comes And pain is all around Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down Sail on silver girl Sail on by Your time has come to shine All your dreams are on their way See how they shine Oh, if you need a friend I'm sailing right behind Like a bridge over troubled water I will ease your mind Like a bridge over troubled water I will ease your mind

Is there some power or presence, like the Jesus in my imagination, like the sea that I need not fear and will not drown but rather embrace me, that is beyond us but also with us, that will dry our tears, be at our side, comfort us, take our part, and sail right behind and ease our minds, that can somehow help us navigate to the proper shore, even if that is in the sea itself, at least until that day that we are no longer sailors but will be freed and embraced by that which we need no longer fear? Maybe... I hope so... because I would rather not be on my own having to figure this out on my own, and I would rather dream of freedom and being embraced... but one way or another, I will have to keep moving forward as best I can, trying to find my way.

Earlier last week I had a breakdown, crying alone in my bed for different reasons, partly because of my feelings of disappointment in myself, disappointment because of how I relate, or fail to relate, to others, disappointment in not really doing much with my life, being a janitor who cleans toilets for a living and who can’t drive and who still lives with his mother (and with his wife and cat, but you get the idea), disappointment in being an aspiring writer who has all of these ideas for books but has yet to publish one because of a general lack of motivation and confidence, disappointment in myself for being kind of aimless and lost and not being able to imagine my life beyond 40, wondering if I will die young like my friend Erin but unlike her that my life will not amount to much at all in the end. I felt like a failure, felt that I’m just not loving enough or mature enough or successful enough or grounded enough... I felt worthless in those moments, like I’m just not good enough... which unfortunately is far from being my first time to feel that way in my life, and I am sure it won’t be the last. The following night when walking home after a difficult day at work, feeling tired and drained and alone, I was thinking about these things again, and was even thinking about death, dancing around the idea of suicide, part of me wishing that no one cared for me (I could lie to myself and say that no one does but I’m not at that point yet thankfully) so I could opt out without hurting anyone, wrestling with those thoughts and others in my mind. I was listening to music in my earbuds on my music player as I was walking, and the beautiful Corrs cover of R.E.M.’s Everybody Hurts came up on my playlist and started playing, and when Andrea, their lead singer, got to the part where she sings  no, no, no, you’re not alone’ it broke me, and I began weeping while I was walking, partly because I was afraid it wasn’t true, and partly because I hoped that it was. I hoped that those beautiful words backed by soaring violins were true, and that maybe God, if he (or she, or both combined) was listening, or whoever was listening that cared, was saying that to me through that song in that moment... And this week has been really rough for me too, in large part because of a deep and complex problem in my life regarding a relationship of mine (a problem that I don’t feel comfortable sharing about here), and all in all I’ve been pretty shaken up and depressed. I had another breakdown (this many breakdowns in such a short period of time is kind of unusual for me, at least these days) while lying in bed, crying out to God or whoever was listening for help, after which the number 145 started flashing in my mind, which led me to this big book of religious and spiritual poetry that I have that has thousands of poems that are numbered and categorized, and turning to page 145 I found a poem about Jesus as a child that ended with a reference to Gethsemane (where Jesus apparently sweated blood because of how much anguish he was in, which I can really relate to), which kind of said to me that God truly understands (in the same way that Savannah Brown in her video hopes that we can understand one another)  what I am going through in my life, and then when I turned to poem number 145, it was one that talked about the haunting presence of God, and beneath that, poem 146, there was an excerpt from Alfred Lord Tennyson’s poem In Memoriam that really jumped out at me: That which we dare invoke to bless;      Our dearest faith; our ghastliest doubt;      He, They, One, All; within, without; The Power in darkness whom we guess; I found Him not in world or sun,      Or eagle's wing, or insect's eye;      Nor thro' the questions men may try, The petty cobwebs we have spun: If e'er when faith had fall'n asleep,      I heard a voice `believe no more'      And heard an ever-breaking shore That tumbled in the Godless deep; A warmth within the breast would melt      The freezing reason's colder part,      And like a man in wrath the heart Stood up and answer'd "I have felt. "No, like a child in doubt and fear:      But that blind clamour made me wise;      Then was I as a child that cries, But, crying, knows his father near; And what I am beheld again      What is, and no man understands;      And out of darkness came the hands That reach thro' nature, moulding men. This excerpt of Tennyson’s poem said to me that in my crying that my Father (or my Mother, or my Creator, or whatever you may call it) was and is near, and that there is maybe some higher meaning or purpose (that moulding) to my whole situation in life, that I am not alone and one day I may understand, and all of this helped me to calm down and rest a bit. Since then I have still be struggling off and on, but I feel like I am beginning to level out somewhat, partly because of little encouraging glimpses and whispers like these, and partly through the encouragement and kindness of friends, and while I’m not out of the woods yet, I’m seeing a little more light and have a little more hope than I had before, though of course I will continue to have my ups and downs as all of us do... whatever the case, I will keep trying to move forward, will keep trying to find my way, will keep trying to hold on, hold on, believing with whatever faith and hope I have that no, no, no, I’m not alone, even, or especially when, I am crying in the dark.

I believe each of us is like a portal into another world, and through my words (which no matter how hard I try seem like straw at the end of the day) I try to open my portal so you can maybe get a glimpse into it, or hear whispers from it, and of course this world that you may call Matthew or some guy you know more or less, but that I call my life and my soul, is just one world among billions of worlds on this World, with a capital W, that we call Earth and that all of us share, and the Earth of course doesn't revolve around me anymore than it does anyone of course, or at least it shouldn't anyway. And of course your perceptions of me and your interpretations of what I have to say here will inevitably be different from my own perceptions or interpretations of myself and everything I've written here, that's a given and there's no way around that sadly. I've talked about empathy and understanding here but just because it's important doesn't make it easy, as maybe some of you reading this disagree with me or take issue with me on this or on that in all my weird and wild jumping around, whether it is on politics or social issues or philosophy or religion or my ideas or beliefs or perceptions or interpretations or experiences or whatever it may be, heck, maybe you even disagree with my taste in music or books or movies for all I know, and maybe some of you may find it hard to empathize with me or understand me for whatever reasons, and as sad as that might be for me I know that it's always a possibility. I can’t make everyone like me, let alone love me, anymore than anyone can make me like or love them. It’s always a choice for each of us. Not through my words or even through my actions could I ever hope to gain respect or love or acceptance from everyone that I come into contact with or comes into contact with me in whatever way, that hasn't happened and that's not going to happen, which goes back to the importance of learning to respect and love and accept myself, and of course having empathy and understanding towards myself isn't any easier than having empathy and understanding towards others, but hey you gotta try to start somewhere, right?

I remember in an audio drama that I was listening to recently called Olive Hill, in the last episode the main character said something about how it may be that life will never be completely satisfying, that we will always be searching or reaching for whatever it is we are longing and aching for, and as sad as that is maybe that’s okay, because maybe it is what keeps us moving forward, maybe hope keeps us moving forward, further up and further in (and down, and out).

I hope that my writing here, my blog or my blarg or my bleh, is better than some of my writings in the past, that it is less pretentious and arrogant, that it is not so disingenuous and fake, and that there is a spark of something genuine and real in these words like straw, and that they are aimed in the right direction, maybe towards a star. I hope that I can learn to be at peace, balls to bones, not knowing or understanding everything, and that I can learn to walk the ways of love with more confidence, and can learn to be more empathetic towards those who are different from me. I hope that I've gathered enough of the fluttering pieces to say something with some weight or value, to lay some kind of foundation, though perhaps leaving some fluttering pieces to fly, leaving a little room for mystery, perhaps the kind of mystery that will embrace me in the end, like a mother embraces her child. I hope I've been able to swim through all of the stormy waters here, and that there is a baby in all of this bathwater, and some proof in all this pudding. I hope that I will have it in me to carry my cross, but also hope that I will not be alone in carrying it. I hope that I have been able in some small way to invite you and include you in my reaching, my longing, my aching, as messy and awkward and weird as it may be, and that there is a kind of communion between us here somehow, holding up our hands and our hearts, as you read between the lines and as I write between them. I hope I and all of us can hold onto the magic, that in growing up we don't lose it entirely, I hope that even beneath the clay of time it is still part of us somehow, and perhaps we are a part of it. I hope that I will always have the strength and courage in me to not give up, and to remember that life is not only sorrow but also joy, joy as poignant as grief. I hope that I will continue to be able to see the signs and be able to follow them wherever they may lead, even if it gets a little weird and wild. I hope that one day I too, like my friend Erin, will set foot on white shores leading into a far green country with a swift sunrise, walking into a wonderful light, and will see face to face and will know even as I am fully known. I hope that I can find the dreams I need to find in the mines of my soul so I can carry them into the world, whether the world in me or the world around me. I hope that my soul can find somewhere to stand, that my threads can catch somewhere firm, even if they may feel like petty cobwebs sometimes. I hope that I can learn to respect and love and accept myself, even if I may still be a scared kid deep inside. I hope that I can find the middle path, or the way, between those extremes of open oceans and barren deserts, between darkness and light, chaos and order, yin and yang, that I can find the balance. I hope that I will somehow be able to navigate to the proper shore in the worst of the storms, even if it is in the sea itself, though also hope that there is something, or someone, with me here in this little boat of mine, holding my hands and letting me know to not be afraid and to not give up, and promising to help me along the way, sailing right behind. I hope that I can hold on, hold on, and remember that no, no, no, I’m not alone, and even when I am crying in the dark, believing that one day I will understand.

And lastly, I hope that, after having picked away at this post for about a month, that something here in all of this straw of mine speaks to you, encourages you, challenges you, or in some way or another helps you along your way. I hope that we can all stumble along the way together, here and now in this weird and wild world.

#finding the way #weird and wild world #thomas aquinas #jordan peterson #cassie jaye #men and women #empathy #understanding #god #prayer #aurora asknes #boy's life #tarot #bigfoot #claire broad #paranormal #erin mccarty #white shores #poltergeist #wonderful light #neverending story #walt whitman #krissy lynn #loneliness #yin yang #nihilism #fundamentalism #measure of a man #jesus #everybody hurts

[scifigeneration]

How fireflies glow – and what signals they're sending

by Clyde Sorenson

A firefly’s light is part of its mating strategy. Japan's Fireworks/Shutterstock.com

You might not really be sure you saw what you think you saw when the first one shows up. But you stare in the direction of the flicker of light and there it is again – the first firefly of the evening. If you are in good firefly habitat, soon there are dozens, or even hundreds, of the insects flying about, flashing their mysterious signals.

Fireflies – alternatively known as lightning bugs in much of the United States – are neither flies nor bugs. They’re soft-winged beetles, related to click beetles and others. The most dramatic aspect of their biology is that they can produce light; this ability in a living organism, called bioluminescence, is relatively rare.

I’m an entomologist who does research on, and teaches about, the ecology and biology of insects. Recently, I’ve been trying to understand the diversity and ecology of fireflies in my home state of North Carolina. Fireflies are found widely across North America, including many places in the west, but they are most abundant and diverse in the eastern half of the continent, from Florida to southern Canada.

Bioluminescent beetles

A chemical reaction in the beetle’s abdomen gives it its bioluminescence. Cathy Keifer/Shutterstock.com

Fireflies produce light in special organs in their abdomens by combining a chemical called luciferin, enzymes called luciferases, oxygen and the fuel for cellular work, ATP. Entomologists think they control their flashing by regulating how much oxygen goes to their light-producing organs.

Fireflies probably originally evolved the ability to light up as a way to ward off predators, but now they mostly use this ability to find mates. Interestingly, not all fireflies produce light; there are several species that are day-flying and apparently rely on the odors of pheromones to find each other.

Each firefly species has its own signaling system. In most North American species, the males fly around at the right height, in the right habitat and at the right time of night for their species, and flash a signal unique to their kind. The females are sitting on the ground or in vegetation, watching for males. When a female sees one making her species’ signal – and doing it well – she flashes back with a species-appropriate flash of her own. Then the two reciprocally signal as the male flies down to her. If everything goes right, they mate.

A good example is Photinus pyralis, a common backyard species often called the Big Dipper. A male flies at dusk about 3 feet off the ground. Every five seconds or so, he makes a one-second flash as he flies in the shape of a “J.” The female Photinus pyralis sits in low vegetation. If she sees a fellow she likes, she waits two seconds before making a half second flash of her own at the third second.

Some species may “call” for many hours a night, while others flash for only 20 minutes or so right at dusk. Firefly light communication can get much more complicated; some species have multiple signaling systems, and some might use their light organs for other purposes.

Some Tennessee fireflies put on a synchronized show.

While most male fireflies do their own thing and flash independently of other males of the same species, there are those that synchronize their flashes when there are many others around. In North America, the two most famous species that do this are the Photinus carolinus of the Appalachian Mountains, including in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and the Photuris frontalis that light up places like Congaree National Park in South Carolina.

In both these species, scientists think the males synchronize so everyone has a chance to look for females, and for females to signal males. These displays are spectacular, and the crush of folks wanting to see them at the most famous locations has made it necessary to conduct a lottery for permission to view them. Both species, however, occur over wide geographic ranges, and it might be possible to see them in other, less congested places.

Stinky chemical defenses

Many fireflies protect themselves from predators with chemicals called lucibufagins. These are molecules the insects synthesize from other chemicals they eat in their diet. Lucibufagins are chemically very similar to the toxins toads exude on their skins, and while they are toxic in the right doses, they are also extremely distasteful.

Birds and other predators quickly learn to avoid fireflies. I’ve watched a toad on my back porch eat a firefly and promptly spit it back out; the insect walked away, gooey but apparently unharmed. A colleague of mine once put a firefly in his mouth – and his mouth went numb for an hour!

Mating Photinus pyralis. Clyde Sorenson, CC BY-ND

Many other insects visually mimic fireflies in order to reap the benefit of looking like something unpleasant to eat and poisonous. Fireflies appear to produce other defensive chemicals, too, some of which may contribute to their distinctive smell.

Many Photuris fireflies can’t manufacture these defensive chemicals. So the females of these big, long-legged lightning bugs do something surprising: Once they’ve mated, they start mimicking the flashes of female Photinus and then eat the males that respond. These femme fatales go on to use the lucibufagins they acquire from ingesting their severely disappointed prey to protect themselves and their eggs from predators. They quickly transfer the chemicals to their blood, and spontaneously bleed if a predator grabs them.

Once fireflies lose a pocket of habitat, it’s unlikely they’ll come back. Fer Gregory/Shutterstock.com

No place like home

Most fireflies are habitat specialists, using woodlands, meadows and marshes. They rely on that habitat remaining undisturbed for the year or more it takes them to complete their lifecycles. These insects spend most of their lives as larvae preying on earthworms and other animals in the soil or leaf litter – most adults don’t feed at all. If that habitat is disrupted during their youth, populations can be extinguished.

Adding to this vulnerability is the fact that the females of many species – like the famous blue ghosts of the southern Appalachians and elsewhere – are wingless and can’t disperse any further than they can walk. If a population of blue ghosts is destroyed by logging or other disruption, there will be no reestablishment. Habitat destruction is therefore one of the greatest threats to fireflies. Other hazards include light pollution from artificial lights and perhaps insecticide applications for mosquito control.

There is much yet to learn about fireflies. Entomologists like me have identified about 170 or so species in North America, but it is clear that many more species occur here. Pay attention to the fireflies in your neighborhood; observe their flash patterns and behavior. Perhaps you’ll discover one of those new species.

About The Author:

Clyde Sorenson is Professor of Entomology,= at North Carolina State University

This article is republished from our content partners at The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. 

#science #biology #entomology #bioluminescence #bioluminosity #beetles #insects #zoology